A copy of the Homer News is seen in 2015. Newsroom employees at the News and the Peninsula Clarion submitted their resignations on Monday, Sept. 29, 2025, to protest the actions of the newspaper’s ownership. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Reporters and editors at the Homer News and Peninsula Clarion announced their resignations on Monday, citing a decision by the papers’ corporate owners to bow to political pressure to amend an article about a vigil for the slain far-right activist Charlie Kirk.
The resignations, which include two editors and two reporters based in Homer and Kenai, were scheduled to take effect in two weeks, but managers at Carpenter Media Group fired all four immediately.
Carpenter Media Group, an international chain, owns the News, Clarion and the Juneau Empire, as well as the Yukon News and hundreds of other newspapers in the Lower 48 and Canada.
The resignations follow a similar mass resignation at the Juneau Empire earlier this summer.
When combined, both actions leave Carpenter Media Group with a single in-state Alaska reporter among its three newspapers.
Mary Kemmis, senior vice president of Carpenter’s publications in Alaska and Canada, did not return phone calls seeking comment on Tuesday, nor did Chloe Pleznac, the reporter who authored the original article.
Jake Dye, a former reporter for the Peninsula Clarion and one of the people who resigned this week, said by phone that Carpenter’s handling of the story was “problematic in a lot of ways.”
Since his killing, conservatives, including many Republicans, have held rallies to memorialize Kirk.
After a vigil in Homer, Pleznac published an article describing Kirk as a “far-right political activist and Christian-Nationalist icon,” and went on to describe his “often racist and controversial views” before going on to detail the vigil.
Soon after the article was published, Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, published a letter on official state legislative letterhead that criticized the characterization of Kirk and the Homer News coverage and said in part, “If the paper continues to treat community events as opportunities for partisan spin, the consequence will be financial as well as reputational.”
After the letter, which was reprinted on her legislative Facebook page, Carpenter officials rewrote the article without consulting editors or reporters at the Homer News, according to the staff who resigned.
Vance did not answer a phone call and text message Tuesday asking about the incident.
In their resignation letter, Carpenter’s Alaska reporters and editors said they don’t have an issue with Vance’s perspective but “what we do have a problem with is Carpenter Media management changing a story at the behest of an elected official. We believe this destroys the credibility the public has placed in us as reporters and editors.”
The worry, the resigning staff said, is that having once caved to political pressure, Carpenter Media will invite further attempts to steer news coverage by political officials and people who are part of the story.
“We cannot do our jobs knowing that pressure from an elected official can mean our stories are edited without prior consultation with us,” the resignation letter says.
Vance’s letter to Carpenter Media comes amid nationwide pressure by Republican and conservative officials to clamp down on language deemed critical of Kirk. Some states have launched investigations of university officials and other public employees for comments made on social media.
The three publications were owned by Georgia-based Morris Communications until 2017, when they were purchased by New Jersey-based GateHouse Media. Later that year, they were sold again to Washington-based Sound Publishing, a division of Canada-based Black Press.
In Juneau, the entire reporting staff of the Juneau Empire — including seasonal interns — resigned simultaneously amid complaints about low pay, benefits and a lack of institutional support.
The former editor of that newspaper has since gone on to help start an independent, nonprofit newsroom for capital-city news.
Dye, by phone on Tuesday, said he’s not sure what’s next for either himself or the Peninsula Clarion. Journalism in Alaska as a whole is in a dim spot amid budget cuts to public media, he said, but he’s trying to stay optimistic.
“There’s not a lot of light at the end of the tunnel, but I guess I truly believe that somehow, things are going to work out for the state and for us,” he said.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, center, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, arrives for a closed-door Republican meeting to advance President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill, at the Capitol in Washington, Friday, June 27, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
By: Jennifer Shutt and Ariana Figueroa, States Newsroom
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, center, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
This report has been updated.
WASHINGTON — The federal government started shutting down early Wednesday after Congress failed to approve a funding bill before the beginning of the new fiscal year — resulting in widespread ramifications for hundreds of programs and giving the Trump administration an avenue to fire federal workers en masse.
The U.S. Senate was unable to advance two short-term government funding bills Tuesday when Democrats and Republicans deadlocked for the second time this month, with just hours to go before the midnight Tuesday shutdown deadline.
Senators voted 55-45 on Republicans’ bill that would fund the government for seven weeks and 47-53 on a Democratic stopgap proposal that would keep the lights on for a month and included several health care provisions that they said were needed for their support. Neither had the 60 votes needed to advance.
Nevada Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman and Maine independent Sen. Angus King voted with GOP senators on their stopgap bill. Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul voted against it.
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said in a memo to departments and agencies Tuesday night after the Senate vote that “affected agencies should now execute their plans for an orderly shutdown.” Vought said federal employees should report for their next regularly scheduled tour of duty to undertake shutdown activities.
The consequences of a shutdown will be sweeping in the nation’s capital and across the country, where states are bracing for the impact. About 750,000 federal workers could be furloughed, leading to a $400 million impact a day, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported. All federal employees would go unpaid until the shutdown is over.
Additionally, the Trump administration plans to lay off thousands of federal employees, which would reshape the federal workforce. President Donald Trump again vowed Tuesday to undertake layoffs and a major government employee union filed suit in federal court in advance of such a move.
More votes on GOP bill planned
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said hours before the votes there wouldn’t be any talks with Democrats during a shutdown.
“The negotiation happens when the government is open. So let’s keep the government open and then we will have the negotiations,” Thune said.
“We’re happy to sit down and talk about these issues that they’re interested in,” he said. “But it should not have anything to do with whether or not for a seven-week period we keep the government open, so that this government can continue to do its work and that we can do our work through the regular appropriations process to fund the government.”
After the votes failed, Thune expressed his frustration with Democrats during a press conference.
“This is so unnecessary and uncalled for,” he said.
Thune said he plans to bring up a vote on the continuing resolution again. He said as soon as Wednesday the federal government can be funded if five Democrats voted with Republicans.
“Democrats may have chosen to shut down the government, but we can reopen it tomorrow,” Thune said.
Republican Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming said the “cracks in the Democrats are already showing,” noting that three Democrats voted with Republicans Tuesday night.
“There is bipartisan support for keeping the government open,” Barrasso said. “We’re happy to see that the Democrats are already starting to break from (Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer) and we’re going to continue to offer a clean (continuing resolution) on the floor of the Senate to open the government for the next seven weeks.”
Health care tax credits at center of standoff
The disagreement isn’t entirely about GOP lawmakers writing their short-term funding bill behind closed doors and then expecting Democrats to help advance it in the Senate, where bipartisanship is required for major legislation.
Democratic leaders have raised concerns for weeks about the end-of-year sunset of enhanced tax credits for people who buy their health insurance on the Affordable Care Act Marketplace, arguing a solution is needed now ahead of the open enrollment period starting on Nov. 1.
Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke, a New York Democrat, speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 30, 2025. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
Democrats have also grown increasingly frustrated with the White House budget office’s unilateral actions on spending, arguing Vought is significantly eroding Congress’ constitutional power of the purse. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the Republican chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, said Tuesday the Government Accountability Office should sue the Trump administration over its efforts to freeze or unilaterally cancel spending approved by Congress.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats need an agreement with Republicans to extend the enhanced tax credits.
Schumer said people will begin getting notices in October telling them how much the cost of their ACA plans will increase during the next year, which he expects will ratchet up pressure on Republican leaders to broker a bipartisan agreement.
“We’re going to be right there explaining to them it’s because the Republicans wouldn’t negotiate with us,” Schumer said, referring to consumers. “We’re ready to do it anytime. And there will be huge heat on (Republicans) on this issue.”
People who buy health insurance on the ACA marketplace and receive subsidies through enhanced ACA tax credits could expect to pay on average more than double for annual premiums in 2026 if the credits expire as scheduled at the end of this year, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF.
The analysis found premiums could increase from an average of $888 this year to $1,904 in 2026.
Claims about immigrants
Schumer also rebuffed GOP leaders saying that Democrats want to include people without legal immigration status in federal health care programs.
“They say that undocumented people are going to get these credits. That is absolutely false. That is one of the big lies they tell, so they don’t have to discuss the issues,” Schumer said. “The federal government by law that we passed does not fund health insurance for undocumented immigrants in Medicaid, nor the ACA nor Medicare. Undocumented immigrants do not get federal health insurance premiums.”
Immigrants in the country without legal authorization are not eligible for Medicaid, and neither are most immigrants with legal status, such as those with student visas or enrollment in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA.
Only immigrants with a “qualified status,” such as legal permanent residents, asylees and refugees, are able to get Medicaid benefits, and they usually have to wait five years before their coverage can even begin.
Democrats explain why they voted with GOP
Cortez Masto of Nevada wrote in a statement explaining her vote to advance the GOP stopgap bill that she could not support “a costly shutdown that would hurt Nevada families and hand even more power to this reckless administration.”
“We need a bipartisan solution to address this impending health care crisis, but we should not be swapping the pain of one group of Americans for another,” she added. “I remain focused on protecting health care for working families, and I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work together to tackle this problem.”
Pennsylvania’s Fetterman wrote in a statement of his own that his vote on the Republican bill “was for our country over my party.
“Together, we must find a better way forward.”
Collins said during a brief interview before the vote she is worried about the broad authority the White House holds during a shutdown and how the Office of Management and Budget has indicated it will use that power.
“I’m much more concerned about OMB sending signals that there should be mass firings of federal employees who have the misfortune to be designated as non-essential, when in fact they’re performing very essential work, they’re just not being paid,” Collins said.
North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven, chairman of the Agriculture spending subcommittee, said lawmakers will have to sort through how various departments implement their contingency plans as well as the possibility of mass layoffs during a shutdown.
“We’ll have to work through those things and figure out how we do keep things going as best we can during this Democrat shutdown,” Hoeven said.
West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said Republicans are “unified in the belief that this is an easy choice” to fund the government with a stopgap bill that doesn’t include any contentious or political provisions.
Capito — who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that funds the departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor — said there are several programs that will be “missed” during a shutdown.
“And that’s concerning. So I think the option is to keep the government open so we can avoid this pain,” Capito said.
‘I’m not optimistic that we’re going to get a path forward’
Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said he is worried about the possible impacts of a shutdown on his home state and that keeping the government open is the only way to avoid that.
“I’m sure the administration will do everything they can,” Hawley said. “But the solution is to not shut the government down. I mean, why would you punish working people because you’re not getting what you want on any issue, whatever it is.”
South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds said he doesn’t expect a shutdown will end until after Democrats have sent a message to their voters.
“I’m not optimistic that we’re going to get a path forward until they’ve had a shutdown,” he said.
Rounds, who negotiated a handshake agreement with the White House budget director this summer to preserve some funding for rural tribal radio stations after Congress eliminated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said that deal could be affected by a shutdown.
“They’re putting the administration in a position where they can pick and choose what they’re going to do, and a shutdown is not going to be beneficial to these Native American radio stations,” Rounds said.
Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan said she wants Democrats and Republicans to negotiate on health care provisions.
“I’ve been making the case constantly, that (it) is literally my obligation to try and fight for health care, and I’m willing to talk to anyone,” she said. “I’m willing to accept that I certainly will not get everything I want.”
Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois said that while Democrats agreed to help advance what’s known as a continuing resolution in March, they can’t now because of “what President Trump is doing to this country, particularly when it comes to health care costs for families.”
The shutdown will significantly affect the operations of the federal government as lawmakers have not passed any of the dozen full-year appropriations bills that finance agency operations. Oct. 1 is the beginning of the new fiscal year for the federal government.
Shutdown plan for national parks
Departments began releasing updated contingency plans this weekend, detailing how many of their employees would work during a government shutdown and how many would be furloughed.
The Interior Department, which includes the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, posted its updated plans late Tuesday.
The National Park Service plans to furlough 9,300 of its 14,500 workers.
The Trump administration will allow several activities necessary for the protection of life or property to continue, including fire suppression for active fires, permitting and monitoring First Amendment activities, border and coastal protection and surveillance, and law enforcement and emergency response.
The contingency plan says that roads, lookouts, trails, and open-air memorials will generally remain accessible to visitors,” but it adds that if “access becomes a safety, health or resource protection issue … the area must be closed.”
Union files suit
In anticipation of layoffs by the Trump administration, labor unions representing more than 1 million federal workers filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California on Tuesday to block the Trump administration from carrying out mass firings. The suit argues that there is no statutory authority to fire federal employees during a government shutdown.
“These actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious, and the cynical use of federal employees as a pawn in Congressional deliberations should be declared unlawful and enjoined by this Court,” according to the suit filed by the American Federation of Government Employees and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
Ashley Murray and Shauneen Miranda contributed to this report.
Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian people gather in Juneau for the opening of Celebration on June 5, 2024. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
A top official for the U.S. Department of the Interior has revoked a legal opinion that formed part of the legal basis for two new casino-like tribal gaming halls in Alaska, putting their future in question.
Writing in a memo to the head of the National Indian Gaming Commission and the top attorney at the Interior Department, MacGregor said that the Biden-era opinion “does not reflect the best interpretation of applicable law.”
The opinion overruled by MacGregor applied only to Alaska and declared that tribal authority applied under many circumstances to land allotments that were given to individual Alaska Natives by the federal government.
That’s a system similar to what’s in place in the Lower 48.
The state of Alaska opposed that view, holding to the position that the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 extinguished almost all “Indian Country” in Alaska and that the state holds primary jurisdiction over land owned by Alaska Natives, Alaska Native corporations and Alaska tribes, with the exception of the Metlakatla Indian Community.
Millions of acres potentially affected
The settlement act left almost all Alaska tribes with no federal trust land on which to exert sovereignty. There are, however, more than 17,000 parcels of up to 160 acres that have been granted to individual Alaska Natives since 1906 and are held in federal trust. Collectively, they represent as much as 5 million acres of land.
Until the Biden-era opinion, it was believed that most — if not all — of that land was outside tribal jurisdiction. After the opinion, the Native Village of Eklutna and the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska went ahead with plans to build casino-like facilities on allotments in their traditional territory. It was the first significant move to take advantage of the new interpretation of federal law.
The Native Village of Eklutna opened the Chin’an Gaming Hall in Birchwood, outside Anchorage, earlier this year. The Tlingit and Haida gaming hall, on Douglas Island, is under construction.
Now that the Biden-era opinion has been revoked, it isn’t clear whether the gaming halls are legal.
It’s still possible — albeit much more difficult — for tribes to exert jurisdiction over an allotment. But before the Biden administration’s opinion, Eklutna and the Tlingit and Haida Central Council had tried for decades to open casino-like gaming halls on allotments and had their applications rejected.
Before the Biden administration changed things, only Klawock and Metlakatla could operate casinos, and because of state laws regulating gaming, they do not offer table games like poker and blackjack. Instead, rows of slot-machine-like electronic devices fill their gaming halls.
That’s what can be seen in Birchwood and what is expected at the casino in Juneau.
MacGregor’s Sep. 25 memo says any action taken by the Interior Department or the National Indian Gaming Commission — which regulates gaming halls and casinos on tribal land — “should be reevaluated in accordance with this revocation.”
Birchwood gaming hall remains open
Aaron Leggett, President of the Native Village of Eklutna, said afterward in a written statement that its tribal gaming hall “remains open for our guests and continues to provide meaningful benefits to our Tribe, the surrounding community, and our state.”
Eklutna sought to build the gaming hall to provide jobs and an economic boost for tribal members and the local community, according to tribal leaders..
Leggett said the tribe is reviewing the new order.
A spokesperson for Tlingit and Haida declined to say whether construction will continue on its gaming hall, which is located on Douglas Island, on a road that leads to Juneau’s municipal ski area.
“Tlingit & Haida is aware of the U.S. Department of the Interior action to withdraw the solicitor’s decision. We also anticipated the action,” said Tlingit and Haida President Richard Peterson in a prepared statement. “We are reviewing internally and remain committed to exercising our Tribal sovereignty to preserve sovereignty, enhance economic and cultural resources and promote self-sufficiency and self-governance for Tribal citizens.”
State attorney general pleased by decision
The state of Alaska opposed the Biden-era opinion and has repeatedly fought the Native Village of Eklutna in court over its plans to open a tribally operated gaming hall.
Alaska Attorney General-designee Stephen Cox expressed support for the reversal in a written statement.
“We are encouraged that (the Department of the) Interior has returned to a position grounded in Alaska’s unique history. The Supreme Court has often said, ‘Alaska is the exception, not the rule.’ Today’s action respects that principle and restores the jurisdictional balance Congress intended and courts have repeatedly affirmed,” Cox said.
Asked to clarify whether the state believes that the Eklutna and Juneau casinos are now illegal, Department of Law spokeswoman Patty Sullivan said by email that MacGregor’s memo calls for a re-evaluation.
“Therefore,” she said, “it is for Interior to undertake the re-evaluation process and for the state to see the result of that re-evaluation process.”
It’s also not known how the new decision will affect two in-progress lawsuits that have challenged the Eklutna gaming hall. One suit, filed by neighboring landowners, is being considered by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals after a lower-court ruling went in favor of Eklutna.
A second lawsuit, filed by the state of Alaska against Eklutna, is on hold, pending the result of the Ninth Circuit case.
Tlingit and Haida’s gaming hall has not yet been the subject of lawsuits, but attorneys and other observers familiar with the issue say they expect that hall will be the subject of litigation as well.
NOTN- The State of Alaska is preparing to continue essential services and minimize disruptions in the event of a federal government shutdown, Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s office said today.
Dunleavy has directed state executive branch departments to review federally funded programs and create contingency plans to ensure critical services continue wherever possible. Some programs, such as Medicaid and Title IV-E Foster Care and Adoption Assistance, are expected to continue without interruption due to existing authorizations or advance funding.
Other programs may face adjustments depending on congressional action and guidance from federal agencies, officials said. Historically, Alaska has been able to keep most federally funded programs running during past shutdowns, and the state expects to do the same using available funds.
If a shutdown lasts beyond a month, the state said it will reassess and prioritize programs most directly affecting Alaskans’ life, health, and safety.
Roughly 4,800 state executive branch jobs are at least partly funded by the federal government. Those employees are expected to continue reporting to work and receiving pay for now, while a small number of federal employees embedded in state departments will follow their agencies’ shutdown procedures.
According to States Newsroom, the Trump administration began posting plans over the weekend that detail how hundreds of thousands of federal workers will be furloughed during a government shutdown, while others will keep working without being paid.
A shutdown will begin Wednesday unless Republicans and Democrats in Congress reach agreement on a stopgap spending bill. Congressional leaders were set to meet Monday afternoon with Trump, but it was unclear if any agreement would result that would avert a shutdown.
States newsroom also published a list of the departments that have posted updated contingency plans in September:
Here is a list of the departments that hadn’t posted updated contingency plans as of Monday afternoon:
Agriculture Department contingency plan
Commerce Department contingency plan
Energy Department contingency plan
Housing and Urban Development contingency plan
Interior Department contingency plan
Transportation Department contingency plan
Treasury Department contingency plan
Veterans Affairs Department contingency plan
The Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development has developed a FAQ to answer Unemployment Insurance questions from federal employees who may be furloughed.
A hiker walks on May 30, 2018, on the trail to the Tongass National Forest’s Tern Island campsite in Wrangell, Alaska. (Photo by Xavier Rivera/U.S. Forest Service)
The Trump administration is planning to close some U.S. Forest Service offices in Alaska under a national reorganization announced this summer by the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.
The Forest Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, currently has offices in Anchorage, Juneau, Cordova, Valdez, Girdwood, Seward, Craig, Hoonah, Ketchikan, Petersburg, Sitka, Thorne Bay, Wrangell and Yakutat. It isn’t clear how many of those offices will remain open after the reorganization.
The status of the Forest Service’s tourist-focused visitor centers in Portage, Juneau and Ketchikan also isn’t clear.
Contacted for details, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Agriculture said by email on Friday, “Some aspects of the reorganization will take place over the coming months, while others will take more time. We will continue to provide updates as the reorganization moves forward.”
They added, “We recognize this may be difficult, but we are hopeful that affected employees will remain with us through this transition as we work to improve and continue delivering benefits to the people and communities we serve.”
In a July memo outlining the basic details of the plan, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said she intends to close the Forest Service’s nine national regional offices “over the next year” but “will maintain a reduced state office in Juneau, Alaska, and an eastern service center in Athens, Georgia.”
Research stations, like the Juneau Forestry Science Laboratory in Auke Bay, will be closed and “consolidated into a single location in Fort Collins, Colorado.”
Nationally, Rollins said she intends to scatter more than half of the Agriculture Department’s 4,600 Washington, D.C.-based administrators to five regional hubs; one each in Utah, Colorado, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana.
Serina Fast Horse, left,of Sicangu Lakota & Blackfeet Tribes, talks with Jacy Bowles, of Xicana and Diné descent, as they walk to the former Elwha Dam site during the 2023 Tribal Climate Camp on the Olympic Peninsula, Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2023, near Port Angeles, Wash. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson, File)
AP- A new report from Portland State University found that budget cuts under President Donald Trump’s new spending bill threaten nearly half of federal funding allocated to federally recognized Native American and Alaska Native nations last year.
Roughly $530 million of the $1.19 billion allocated to Northwest tribal nations in fiscal year 2024 — used to fulfill the federal government’s trust and treaty obligations to Native American and Alaska Native tribes — is at risk of being cut. The congressionally allocated funds serve myriad functions for tribes in the Northwest, including providing clean drinking water, affordable housing, schools, transit and land management. Funding is decided by Congress on a yearly basis and can be disbursed over a period of time that exceeds the calendar year it is allocated.
“All across the board tribes are worried about the funding cuts that are happening right now,” said Serina Fast Horse, who is Lakota and Blackfeet and serves as the co-director of the Northwest Environmental Justice Center, which provides grant application assistance and advising to Indigenous communities in the Northwest.
Fast Horse says there are serious concerns among Northwest tribes about further cuts to vital programs ranging from health and wellness to early childhood education. The report warns of vulnerabilities to programs and grants that tribes rely on for resilience in the face of climate change, like improving home weatherization, managing forestland and renovating aging homes. Federal dollars to help Northwest tribes bolster their infrastructure against the increasing threats from wildfire, drought and sea-level rise could also be slashed.
The Portland State report found millions in Clean Air Act funding could also go away — the Environmental Protection Agency earmarked nearly $2 million in 2024 for Northwest tribes in a series of grants for monitoring air quality and pollution. Much of the congressionally allocated funding has yet to be distributed to tribes and is now at risk of being cut altogether.
The report demonstrates how proposed major reductions across the federal government, including at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, could reverberate across Indian Country.
Tribal officials shared concerns that drastic cuts could cause the federal government to fall short of trust and treaty obligations that mandate the federal government support tribal services, uphold tribal sovereignty and protect tribal treaty resources — responsibilities that courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have repeatedly upheld.
“All the funding reductions addressing clean water, air and dealing with climate change have impacts on the Tribes’ culture and treaty protected resources,” said William E. Ray Jr., chair of the Klamath Tribes.
Researchers declined to disclose specific projects at risk of elimination for fear of retaliation, and a number of tribes and tribal organizations declined to comment to InvestigateWest, citing similar concerns.
“Trump and Congressional Republicans are wreaking havoc on Tribal communities with their ‘Big, Ugly BETRAYAL’ of a law that arbitrarily cuts many programs supporting folks in Indian Country, where chronic underfunding is already impacting services and exacerbating disparities,” said Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, a Democrat.
He added that the federal government plays an outsized role in funding essential services to tribal communities, including health care, education and public safety, and that the Inflation Reduction Act took important steps in advancing funding for water infrastructure and environmental programs for tribes.
In 2024, Clean Air Act related funds were used to fund 15 projects for 12 Northwest tribes. The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and the Tulalip Tribes are some of the Native American nations set to receive research grants for improving air quality and pollution monitoring. Among 12 tribes selected for funding, several of them focus on minimizing exposure to poor air quality and harmful pollutants to their elderly and medically vulnerable residents. Other tribes intend to study impacts of pollutants on important first foods — culturally significant staple foods consumed before colonization — that officials say are critical to improving health outcomes for their citizens.
Researchers at PSU examined 469 programs impacted by President Trump’s reversal of former President Joe Biden’s Executive Order 14008, which sought to address climate change and created a number of environmental justice initiatives. Sixty of the programs identified by researchers were specifically named in the Republican-led spending bill for cuts, and 17 of those provided funding directly to tribes. The programs accounted for roughly 35% of all federal investments in tribes in 2024. The report says not all of the funding will be cut, but a significant portion of it could be.
The cuts come at a time when Native Americans and Alaska Natives already have limited access to federal services and funds, according to a December 2024 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan congressional watchdog. It found when tribes had to compete with other entities for federal funding, they may receive a small portion of the total amount, and that limited access to federal services and funds contributes to known disparities for Native Americans and Alaska Natives compared to other Americans.
Of the $20.15 billion in federal funding that went to tribes between 2010 and 2024, tribes within the boundaries of Idaho received a total of $304.56 million, Washington tribes $1.81 billion, Oregon tribes $690.76 million, and Alaska Native tribes received $2.35 billion.
Other programs at risk of being cut include the EPA’s embattled Environmental Justice Government-to-Government Program, which funded initiatives by states, tribes and local governments to support activities that lead to measurable environmental or public health impacts.
Under that program, in 2023, the EPA awarded the Tulalip Tribes $977,000 to work in conjunction with the Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakama Nation to create a tool to detect which homes are at greatest risk from wildfire smoke infiltration and dangerously hot weather, which are growing issues affecting both communities.
While the federal government has repeatedly affirmed its obligations to tribes, actual allocations remain disproportionately small compared to population figures. In 2024, Native American tribes received just 1.7% of federal energy and environment spending, despite Native people making up 2.9% of the U.S. population.
Between 2010 and 2024, tribes within the bounds of Idaho, Washington and Oregon received roughly $2.81 billion in federal investments in energy and environmental infrastructure, which represents roughly 14% of the $20 billion in allocations made to tribes nationwide.
The researchers determined that programs funded under the Inflation Reduction Act, Biden’s 2022 climate, health and tax law, are at particular risk of being eliminated. The funding allocated to tribes under the IRA represented a historic investment in infrastructure in Indian Country, more than doubling energy and infrastructure investment from $1.51 billion nationwide to $3.94 billion in 2024, around .04% of total federal grant spending obligations for 2024.
“When you put them in the context of how much money the federal government actually spends on certain things, it’s pennies on the dollar,” said Sophie Lalande, a co-author of the PSU report.
Soon after taking office and without consulting Congress, the Trump administration suspended some grants that tribal communities used heavily, such as community change grants, distributed by the EPA’s Offices of Environmental Justice and of External Civil Rights Compliance during the Biden administration, to support climate resilience and clean energy. Distributed as a part of the Inflation Reduction Act, the grants were suspended as part of the Trump administration’s anti-diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.
The grants helped tribal communities in the Northwest tremendously, according to Fast Horse.
“They were providing hundreds of thousands of dollars to communities for infrastructure improvements, like access to clean drinking water and climate resilience hubs, just really essential pieces of community development for health and safety of communities,” she said.
The report stresses a multiplier effect from investments made in tribal communities. Infrastructure dollars invested on tribal lands often serve as anchors for broader local development, since tribal lands often share regional infrastructure like power grids, roads or water systems with non-Native communities, with the power of dollars rippling outward into surrounding rural towns and cities.
Bobby Cochran, a researcher with Portland State University and senior project manager at the National Policy Consensus Center, co-authored the report.
“We just haven’t made a major investment in infrastructure since the ’60s or ’70s, so this wasn’t fluffy,” he said. “It’s really important stuff that was just trying to play catch-up.”
___
This story was originally published by InvestigateWest and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
In this Sept. 23, 2024, image taken from video, a U.S. Air Force F-16 operating under the direction of North American Aerospace Defense Command, conducts a routine intercept of a Russian Tu-95 aircraft in the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) when NORAD said a Russian Su-35 aircraft conducts an unsafe maneuver directed at the F-16. (Department of Defense via AP)
AP- U.S. fighter jets scrambled to identify and intercept four Russian warplanes flying near Alaska, the North American Aerospace Defense Command said Thursday.
It’s the third time in about a month and the ninth time this year NORAD has reported such an incident involving Russian aircraft flying near Alaska. This latest incident happened Wednesday.
NORAD said in a statement issued early Thursday that it detected and tracked two Tu-95s and two Su-35s operating in the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone.
Nine U.S. aircraft — an E-3 Sentry command and control aircraft, four F-16s and four KC-135 tankers — scrambled to positively identify and intercept the Russian jets, NORAD said.
The Russian aircraft remained in international airspace and did not enter American or Canadian sovereign airspace, it said. Such Russian activity near Alaska occurs regularly and is not seen as a threat, it added in its statement.
Trump on Tuesday said NATO countries should shoot down Russian aircraft if they enter their airspace. Asked if the U.S. would back up NATO allies in such a situation, Trump said “it depends on the circumstance.”
Following a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska last month, Trump said he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. But Putin has shown no interest in meeting with Zelenskyy, and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine.
Alaska Republican U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan (Alaska Beacon file photos)
Alaska Republican U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan signed on to a letter with 10 other U.S. senators, calling on the U.S. Department of Education to reverse the decision to cut millions in congressionally approved grant funding for Native American-serving colleges and universities nationwide.
The letter, addressed to U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, argues that an estimated $36.1 million in grant funding already allocated under the Higher Education Act should be distributed to colleges and universities serving Native students nationwide.
Senators wrote the funds are already authorized and appropriated by Congress and should go toward its intended colleges and universities nationwide, “including dollars that are part of ongoing grants – projects, programs, and services that are already in motion and that are serving currently enrolled students,” they said.
“These institutions are statutorily authorized to receive federal support from the Department to strengthen their capacity to serve American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian students, and rely on this federal support to adequately serve enrolled students,” they said.
“The Department’s decision to reprogram this critical source of funding for these colleges jeopardizes not just their continued existence, but also undermines the federal government’s trust and treaty obligations to provide Native students an education,” they wrote.
Earlier this month, Sec. McMahon announced that $350 million in congressionally approved funding for minority-serving institutions, a federal grant category that includes funding for Black, Hispanic, Asian-American and Native American students, would be reallocated. McMahon cited “racial quotas” as discriminatory and unconstitutional. “To further our commitment to ending discrimination in all forms across federally supported programs, the Department will no longer award Minority-Serving Institution grants that discriminate by restricting eligibility to institutions that meet government-mandated racial quotas,” McMahon said.
The group of three Republican and nine Democratic senators rejected the claims, saying “to be clear, these grants do not impose racial quotas or restrict admissions based on race, but support institutions that deliver on the federal trust responsibility to provide an education for American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians because of their unique legal status and political relationship with the United States.”
In Alaska, University of Alaska officials say they are still reviewing the extent of the funding freeze, but University of Alaska Fairbanks officials report the grant elimination totals at least $8.8 million across campuses.
Senators argued that the funding cut contradicts the Trump administration’s expressed focus on career and technical education, and said the funds boost capacity for institutions serving not only Native students, but wider student populations.
“As such, we again urge you to reverse the decision,” the senators wrote, “to release these funds, as appropriated by Congress, so that the work these schools do to support the trust responsibility, as well as the next generation of leaders as part of our nation’s bright future, can continue.
The letter was signed by Murkowski, as the chair of the US Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and committee co-chair U.S. Sen. Brian Shatz, D-Hawaii; along with Sens. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska; Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii; Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina; Ben Ray Luján, D-New Mexico; Ruben Gallego, D-Arizona; John Hickenlooper, D-Colorado; Michael Bennett, D-Colorado; Mark Kelly, D-Arizona; Tina Smith, D-Minnesota; and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota.
A spokesperson for Murkowski said as of Wednesday they have not had a response from the department
“I do think it’s important to recognize that we should be seeing thousands of people likely lose coverage from this,” said Jared Kosin, president and CEO of the Alaska Hospital and Healthcare Association.
Speaking to a room at Juneau’s convention center, they said if federal subsidies end, the cost of health insurance would rise so much that many Alaskans will go uninsured, discouraging them from getting checkups that could prevent serious illnesses. Hospitals would see a larger number of emergencies from uninsured people, straining them. It might even lead to an exodus from the state, as people seek alternative options and cheaper places to live.
“I worry about that,” said Kim Champney, executive director of the Alaska Association on Developmental Disabilities. “Because I think people will decide to leave Alaska because we have the most expensive health care in the country.”
Anton Rieselbach, with the Juneau Economic Development Council provided an analysis of cost estimates for Juneau. In Alaska’s capital city alone, 1,389 people receive health care via insurance plans bought through the federal marketplace. Right now, those Juneauites pay an average of $124 per month. If those subsidies expire, that will rise to $1,008 per month, an increase of more than 700%.
The council, a nonpartisan organization devoted to economic growth in the capital city, is worried about what will happen if the subsidies expire.
“We want people to be working and spending money, generating economic activity,” Rieselbach said, “but this just places another huge burden on people’s ability to spend their money in other arenas besides health insurance.”
A problem years in the making
The upcoming problem stems from federal subsidies enacted by Congress in 2021 and extended through the end of 2025. Those subsidies, known as “enhanced premium tax credits,” were applied on top of subsidies included in the original Affordable Care Act, which established the federal insurance marketplace.
Now, almost anyone who buys an individual health care plan through the marketplace gets some kind of subsidy.
Generally, that includes people whose employers don’t provide health insurance, self-employed people, and people who retired early and aren’t yet eligible for Medicare, which insures people with disabilities and people 65 or older.
Subsidies helped expand the number of people on federal marketplace plans from 11.4 million in 2020 to 24.3 million this year, allowing millions of Americans to get regular health care.
They also came at a high cost to the federal treasury: Extending them for another 10 years would cost $335 billion.
But if subsidies end, Alaska would be exceptionally hard-hit. The state has the highest health-care costs in the nation, which means unsubsidized insurance rates are high.
Of the 28,736 Alaskans who have health insurance policies through the federal marketplace, 25,170 receive the enhanced subsidies, according to figures published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
If the enhanced subsidies expire, the poorest Alaskans will still see their plans subsidized. Middle-class Alaskans would be hard hit.
According to estimates published in March by the Alaska Division of Insurance, a single 50-year-old who earns $58,650 per year would see their monthly health insurance cost rise from $282 per month to $407 per month for a “silver” plan. If they have a “bronze” plan, their costs wouldn’t change.
But Alaskans who earn more than 400% of the federal poverty line — $78,000 per year for an individual — would see their costs skyrocket.
In 2023, 2024 and 2025, the average cost of a health insurance marketplace plan in Alaska rose by more than 16% each year. In 2023 alone, the cost went up by an average of 18.4%.
That same 50-year-old would go from paying $534 per month for a silver plan to $1,415 per month. Under a bronze plan, their cost would go from $9 per month to $890 per month.
Lori Wing-Heier, the director of the Division of Insurance at the time of those estimates, called the increase “pretty horrific” for affected Alaskans.
“It’s an insane amount,” said Rep. Genevieve Mina, D-Anchorage, talking about the increase.
This spring, Mina sponsored and the Alaska Legislature passed House Joint Resolution 9, a bipartisan letter asking Congress to extend the subsidies.
Across the state this year, the average monthly premium for Alaskans of all ages and all plans was $971.43, but the average subsidy was $866.28, the Division of Insurance said in March.
Kosin, of the hospital and healthcare association, said his group thinks it’s “really important” to extend the enhanced subsidies.
Insurance is based on the concept of sharing risks and costs. The more people in an insurance pool, the better it works. Subsidies encourage healthy people to be a part of the health insurance pool, he said. If people drop off, the cost of caring for any individual person is spread among fewer members, and rates go up.
An extension relies on congressional action
For the moment, Alaskans only have estimates of what will happen if the subsidies expire. Open enrollment on the federal insurance marketplace starts Nov. 1. There’s a “window shopping” period at the end of October that will give a sneak preview.
People must sign up by Dec. 15 to get insurance coverage that starts with the new year. Miss that deadline, and Jan. 15 is the deadline to get coverage that starts Feb. 1.
Kosin said he’s heard the argument that Alaskans could afford health care before the enhanced subsidies came into effect, and so there won’t be many people who drop their coverage.
That fails to take into account the way health insurance costs have gone up since 2020, he said.
In 2023, 2024 and 2025, the average cost of a health insurance marketplace plan in Alaska rose by more than 16% each year. In 2023 alone, the cost went up by an average of 18.4%.
“If there truly is a doubling or tripling of premiums, especially at once, I think I would have to guess it would be a higher percentage than a fifth of the population that would consider themselves priced out of the market,” he said.
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski knows plenty of those people.
“If you are a 60-year-old couple (earning about) $82,000 in Alaska, you would be looking at a premium increase … without enhancements, of $44,556. My husband and I are over 60. Now, granted, we’re not on the exchange, but I have a lot of friends are in that category, and I don’t know very many of them that could swallow an additional $44,000 a year to pay for their insurance if they’re on the exchange,” she said in a Sept. 17 phone call.
Murkowski is among the members of the U.S. Senate who have been trying for months, without success so far, to find enough votes to extend the subsidies.
Impending government shutdown
The issue has now gotten entangled with the impending government shutdown. Senate Democrats have demanded — among other things — a permanent extension of the health care subsidies, without changes, in exchange for their votes on keeping the federal government open.
Sen. Dan Sullivan also supports an extension of the subsidies, but “there’s no way I would ever vote for that,” he said of the Democratic plan.
“I do think there’s bipartisan support to get this done. We’ve just got to power through these different issues,” he said by phone.
He identified three hurdles for the subsidies.
“It’s how long you extend them; are there pay-fors (budget cuts to compensate for the cost of the extension) … but the most important and complicated — and we just did a deep dive on this, and I do think there’s bipartisan support on this, is reforms,” Sullivan said.
“We are looking at ways to reform the system to make it work for the people who need it and are using it honestly, but have a disincentive against those who have been abusing it,” he said.
“We’re getting there. It’s complicated. I think the reform piece is going to be the most complicated, but I’m hopeful, and I’m putting a lot of effort into it,” Sullivan said.
Murkowski is more interested in a straight extension without changes. She introduced a standalone two-year measure and voted against both Republican and Democratic proposals to keep the government open, saying one of her conditions was an extension of the subsidy.
Speaking by phone this month, Mina noted that an extension has the support of groups as far afield as the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce.
“I think if you’re directly on the insurance marketplace, you should be concerned. But also, if you care about economic diversification and startups, you should also be concerned,” she said.
If the marketplace doesn’t work, she noted, it would increase the costs of health care for everyone in the state because hospitals are required to treat people regardless of their ability to pay. If people can’t pay, that means their costs get shifted to people who can, increasing the health insurance rates of everyone, not just those on the marketplace.
“What I fear is that we’re regressing to the state that we were in (a decade ago) when we had all of these news articles about people paying like, $800, $1,000 a month for their health insurance, and we were able to stabilize that and find solutions to help people,” Mina said. “We’re just going backwards in that regard.”
Alaska’s sole U.S. House Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, voted in favor of a seven-week budget extension, but that measure died in the U.S. Senate when lawmakers were unable to garner the 60 votes needed to pass the U.S. House measure or an alternative proposed by Democratic members of the Senate.
U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, was absent from both votes. U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voted against both proposals.
“I voted against both measures as I felt that they were not serious (enough) to meet the situation that we are currently in today,” she said in a recording provided by her office.
The Republican-controlled House passed its stopgap funding bill 217-212, with one Democrat voting for it and two Republicans voting against it.
“The House did its job,” Begich said in a written statement afterward. “We passed a responsible, short-term continuing resolution to keep the government open and give Congress time to complete the appropriations process. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats chose obstruction over solutions, blocking this clean measure.”
Murkowski and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, voted against the House-passed plan, while Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, voted for it. Eight senators did not vote, and the measure died 44-48.
Murkowski said that counterproposal included “a Christmas list” of Democratic ideas, including items that would have reversed big parts of the Republican “Big Beautiful Bill Act” from earlier this year, which contained core tax cuts and spending policies of Trump’s second presidential term. Murkowski and Sullivan voted for that bill, which was later signed into law.
On the other side of the coin, Murkowski said the Republican plan failed to include an extension of subsidies for health care plans passed through the federal insurance marketplace, something that is critical for Alaskans. It also didn’t include additional funding for public broadcasting or opposition to President Donald Trump’s unilateral budget clawbacks, known as recissions.
“I’m going to be busy in the next 10 days, trying to build a level of consensus that keeps the government open, because there is no side — no Republican, no Democrat, the White House — nobody wins when there is a government shutdown,” she said.
“It’s possible that my proposal will equally annoy both sides, but maybe, just maybe, it will get the conversation going in a way that advances serious discussion and positive outcomes,” Murkowski said.
