Kaskanak Creek in the Bristol Bay’s Kvichak watershed is seen from the air on Sept. 27, 2011. The Kvichak watershed would be damaged by the Pebble mine project, the Environmental Protection Agency has determined. (Photo provided by Environmental Protection Agency)
Developers’ efforts to overturn the cancellation of a vast gold and copper mine planned for southwest Alaska are getting a boost from national mining and pro-business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
On Nov. 24 and Nov. 25, the Chamber and the National Mining Association filed separate friend-of-the-court briefs in the lawsuit brought by the developers of the proposed Pebble Mine against the Environmental Protection Agency, which vetoed the mine.
Neither group has intervened in the case against the EPA, but the briefs represent the groups’ support for the proposed mine and offer legal arguments that Judge Sharon Gleason could consider as she debates whether to move the project forward.
In 2023, the EPA invoked a rarely used “veto” clause of the Clean Water Act to say that there was no way that the proposed Pebble Mine could be developed without significant harm to the environment. The large mineral deposit is located at the headwaters of Bristol Bay, the most abundant sockeye salmon fishery in the world.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case directly, which has left the issue in front of Judge Sharon Gleason in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska.
Another lawsuit filed by the state claims that if the veto is upheld, the federal government will owe Alaska $700 billion, the state’s estimate for the value of the mine if built as planned. That case has been put on hold until the District Court rules.
In July, the administration of President Donald Trump indicated that it might try to settle the suit and withdraw the veto. If that occurs, it could come before Jan. 2, when the EPA is slated to file a written response to the plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment.
If the EPA continues to fight the case, the last written arguments are scheduled to be finished by the end of February. Any oral argument would take place afterward.
If the federal government drops the case, it doesn’t mean a free path for Pebble: Several environmental organizations, fishing groups, tribal organizations and Bristol Bay locals have also intervened in the case and intend to fight in court.
The Alaska Legislature is also expected to consider a bill that would block both Pebble and any successor projects that might emerge.
In its brief, the National Mining Association — joined by the American Exploration and Mining Association and the Alaska Miners Association — call the EPA’s veto “overly broad” and say that if it is upheld, the act “will almost certainly chill investment in domestic mining activities” because other proposed mines could also be subject to a veto.
The Chamber of Commerce, which has backed the Pebble Mine project since at least 2022, said that if the veto is upheld, it has the potential of encouraging other vetoes, which would “disrupt important industries in which many of the Chamber’s members participate.”
The Alaska headquarters of Prudhoe Bay operator Hilcorp in Midtown Anchorage is seen on Feb. 7, 2024. The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission assessed a fine of $695,900 against the company for activities at a Prudhoe Bay satellite field. Hilcorp has the right to appeal the fine. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
Alaska regulators have assessed a $695,900 fine against Hilcorp for violations at two wells in a North Slope oil field that is a satellite of the giant Prudhoe Bay field.
Hilcorp violated regulations for up to two years when it injected enriched gas into the reservoir at the Polaris Oil Pool, which is part of the Greater Prudhoe Bay Unit, the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission said in a Nov. 24 decision and order.
Hilcorp is a Texas-based private company that now operates the state’s largest oil field. It is the second-biggest fine for the company ever proposed by the AOGCC.
The highest proposed fine was $720,000, which the commission initially assessed against the company in late 2015 for violations that led to an accident earlier that year that nearly killed three workers at the Milne Point oil field.
Ultimately, the AOGCC in 2017 reduced the fine to $200,000, though the commission assessed other fines at about the same time for other violations at Milne Point. Those fines ranged from $20,000 to $80,000.
In its new enforcement action, the AOGCC said the fine for the Polaris field violations is justified by the company’s pattern of violations.
“Hilcorp’s repeated failure to comply with fundamental injection authorization raises the potential for similar behavior with more serious consequences. Hilcorp’s repeated failure to comply with AOGCC rules and regulations combined with ineffective corrective actions, warrant increased civil penalties to deter similar behavior,” the order said.
Also influencing the fine size is the duration of the offenses. At one well, the unauthorized injection continued for 759 days, the AOGCC said. At the other well, the unauthorized injection went on for 480 days.
Enriched gas is sometimes injected into oil fields to boost oil recovery.
The enforcement action has been in the works for several months.
The AOGCC said that in February, it formally notified Hilcorp that it was investigating the use of enriched gas at the two wells. Hilcorp then conducted an internal investigation, responding to the AOGCC in March with an analysis of the root cause and actions to correct the problem and prevent a recurrence.
Because of that response earlier in the year, the AOGCC said it is not requiring Hilcorp to submit any further written explanation.
Hilcorp has the right to appeal the $695,900 fine. If it does not appeal, Hilcorp must pay within 30 days of the decision, the order said.
A company spokesperson said Hilcorp itself brought the violation to light and that it did not result in any safety or environmental problems.
“This issue involved a highly specific and previously unrecognized authorization gap that neither Hilcorp nor prior Prudhoe Bay operators had identified. We discovered it through an internal review informed by recent AOGCC findings, and we immediately notified the Commission and self-reported all details,” Hilcorp spokesperson Matt Shuckerow said by email.
Shuckerow said the use of enriched gas is safe and permitted on many neighboring wells “as part of an effort to increase resource recovery, which results in increased royalty and revenue to the State of Alaska,” he continued.
“It caused no safety risks, environmental harm or impacts to resource conservation. We have completed a comprehensive review of all wells to ensure no similar gaps exist and will continue working transparently with AOGCC to uphold the highest standards of safety, conservation, and regulatory compliance,” he said.
Shuckerow did not address the question of appealing the fine.
Hilcorp entered Alaska in 2011, focusing first on the Cook Inlet basin, where it is now the dominant operator, before expanding to the North Slope in 2014. In 2020, when BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. sold its remaining Alaska assets to Hilcorp and ended its activities in the state, Hilcorp became the operator of the Prudhoe Bay unit. Prudhoe Bay is now co-owned by oil companies ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Hilcorp.
Since it began operating in Alaska in 2011, Hilcorp has been the subject of 20 AOGCC enforcement orders, including the latest order, according to the commission’s website. Eleven concerned violations on the North Slope and nine concerned violations at Cook Inlet sites, according to the website.
Five of those orders were issued in 2024, including one that assessed a $452,100 fine for unauthorized injections at Prudhoe Bay of a type of gas used to enhance oil recovery.
Different type of enhanced recovery technique gets OK
Although the AOGCC faulted Hilcorp for its unauthorized use of enriched gas at Polaris, it has approved Hilcorp’s plan to try out a different type of enhanced recovery at the field.
The commission on Nov. 25 gave the go-ahead for Hilcorp to use polymer flooding at a different Polaris well for a 12-month test period.
The approval is unrelated to the Nov. 24 order and decision on the enhanced gas violation.
Polymers are natural or synthetic materials, such as cellulose and nylon, that consist of chains of molecules arrayed in a repeated pattern.
Polymer flooding in oil fields injects water-soluble polymers into reservoirs to increase oil recovery. The injected polymers blend with water to better sweep out oil. Polymer flooding is considered an effective technique to boost oil production, but it does not work in all types of reservoirs, according to scientists. The technique is most appropriate for enhanced recovery of heavier oils, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Hilcorp pioneered the use of polymer flooding on the North Slope, starting in 2018 with a test project conducted at Milne Point in collaboration with the University of Alaska Fairbanks and the U.S. Department of Energy.
The pilot project was deemed successful, and Hilcorp now uses the technique more widely at Milne Point, where polymer flooding has allowed for much better recovery of the thicker oil that is within that field.
Hilcorp in 2014 acquired 50% ownership in Milne Point from BP and became the operator that year. Hilcorp took full ownership in 2020, after the acquisition from BP was completed.
The company has for years considered expanding some of the practices that have improved production at Milne Point to the parts of the Greater Prudhoe Bay Unit, which also holds some heavier oil. The now-authorized 12-month test at the Polaris well is part of that strategy.
U.S. Forest Service workers clear a fallen tree from a trail in the Tongass National Forest. (U.S. Forest Service photo)
It was no surprise that everyone on the timber panel at this month’s Alaska Resource Development Council conference had the same message: The industry needs a larger supply of trees to cut.
And a steady, bankable supply, said Joe Young, of Tok, who started Young’s Timber in Alaska’s Interior more than 30 years ago.
Without long-term timber sales to supply a mill, “bankers will laugh you out of the room” when a mill owner asks for a business loan, Young said.
The Nov. 13 industry panel at the annual conference held in Anchorage also talked about demand for their product and the challenges in meeting that demand.
Juneau attorney Jim Clark, who has spent much of his life representing timber and wood pulp companies, said the Trump administration’s move to rescind the Roadless Rule, which has been around since 2001, could help open areas of the Tongass National Forest to logging.
The ban on road building has bounced between presidential administrations, like a ping pong ball, Clark said. “We’ll see if we can get this over with,” he said of the U.S. Department of Agriculture effort to rescind the rule, which will require an environmental impact statement.
In addition to the Tongass, the Roadless Rules affects tens of millions of acres of national forest lands in western states.
The lack of timber sales, financial pressures and opposition from conservation groups have knocked down Alaska timber industry jobs from almost 4,000 in 1990 to about 700 in 2015 and just 360 in 2024, according to Alaska Department of Labor statistics.
The timber industry in Southeast is getting only one-third of the log supply it needs, said Sarah Dahlstrom, public relations manager for Viking Lumber, which has operated a sawmill in Klawock for about 30 years.
Viking, the second-largest employer on Prince of Wales Island, needs more timber sales on federal, state and municipal lands, she said, contending that the U.S. Forest Service has failed to meet its commitment under a 2016 land management plan.
The mill cuts Sitka spruce, hemlock, red and yellow cedar, Dahlstrom said, and is a leading supplier of wood for piano soundboards and guitars.
“Steinway pianos would not exist if not for old-growth timber from the Tongass,” she said.
In addition to supplying the prized, tight-grain wood to Steinway & Sons’ factory in New York City, Viking supplies piano makers Kawai and Yamaha, and guitar manufacturers Gibson and Martin.
Steinway is worried enough about its wood supply that the company has written Alaska elected officials to advocate for the mill. “We use the top 1% of the top 1% of spruce,” company Chief Executive Ben Steiner told The Wall Street Journal this summer.
Dahlstrom said there are other small operators on Prince of Wales Island, cutting wood for pianos and musical instruments. And they all have the same problem of insufficient and unpredictable supply.
Viking also supplies manufacturers of doors, trim, fences, staircases, railing and window trim nationwide.
She complimented efforts by Wrangell Borough Manager Mason Villarma, who has been working to coordinate timber sales on the island between the state Department of Natural Resources, Alaska Mental Health Trust land office and the borough.
“I was born into a timber family,” she said of her dad and uncle, who built a mill in Hoquiam, Washington, more than 40 years ago, milling timber from the Olympic National Forest. She said she was not happy when her family moved to Klawock in 1994 and her dad and uncle took over the bankrupt mill.
In addition to lumber and boards, Viking sends wood chips south to be used in making corrugated boxes and supplies chips to the Craig School District which burns the wood waste to generate electricity and heat the swimming pool.
“Growing up, I didn’t know how cool it was,” she said of the industry she now calls home after resisting it when she was younger.
The U.S. Capitol on the evening of Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025, just hours before a federal government shutdown. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski denounced the Trump administration’s targeting of Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly on Tuesday, saying on social media that its actions are “reckless and flat-out wrong.”
“Senator Kelly valiantly served our country as an aviator in the U.S. Navy before later completing four space shuttle missions as a NASA astronaut,” Murkowski said. “To accuse him and other lawmakers of treason and sedition for rightfully pointing out that servicemembers can refuse illegal orders is reckless and flat-out wrong. The Department of Defense and FBI surely have more important priorities than this frivolous investigation.”
It has become unusual for elected Republican officials to speak in defense of elected Democrats, particularly when it places them at odds with President Donald Trump, who remains popular among Republican voters, even if his approval overall is low.
Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan previously expressed concerns about the possible politicization of the military during the presidency of Democrat Joe Biden.
Asked about the situation with Kelly, Sullivan criticized the Democratic video and the administration’s response to it.
“The Democrats in the video have offered no explanation of what they considered to be an illegal order, sowing confusion and politicizing the ranks in a way that risks undermining military discipline, lethality and readiness,” his office said in a written statement.
The statement went on to say that “he does not believe it is a good use of the Pentagon’s time to investigate Senator Kelly” because “such an investigation has the potential to turn into a major distraction for our military.”
The office of Rep. Nick Begich, R-Alaska, did not return a text message or email seeking comment.
Sullivan’s office requested that his statement be printed in full. Because it has not been published elsewhere, we think there is news value in reprinting it, so it is published below.
“Senator Sullivan strongly disagreed with many actions taken by the Pentagon under Presidents Obama and Biden — such as President Biden’s use of enlisted Marines as political props standing behind him in a very partisan speech in Philadelphia in 2022. But he would never have put out a video — like the one released by Senator Mark Kelly and five other Democratic lawmakers — implying that troops should question orders from their superiors. The Democrats in the video have offered no explanation of what they considered to be an illegal order, sowing confusion and politicizing the ranks in a way that risks undermining military discipline, lethality and readiness.
Instead of using our troops as political pawns, members of Congress should press top Pentagon officials directly on issues over which they have concerns. Senator Sullivan does this regularly in Senate Armed Services Committee hearings and in meetings and phone calls with top Pentagon leaders regardless of which party controls the White House.
While Senator Sullivan believes the message in the video was irresponsible and politically driven, he does not believe it is a good use of the Pentagon’s time to investigate Senator Kelly — who served honorably in the Navy — under the UCMJ, particularly given that the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause would likely take precedence over any UCMJ provision. Such an investigation has the potential to turn into a major distraction for our military. After four years of Biden’s woke military, the Department of War needs to stay laser focused on lethality and war fighting.”
Fresh produce is seen at the Alaska Commercial Company grocery store in Bethel on Oct 15, 2025. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ call for a close reexamination of the 42 million people who receive federal food aid has befuddled advocates and lawmakers, coming mere days after recipients began to see benefits that had been stalled during the government shutdown.
Details remain scant a week after Rollins during an interview on the right-wing Newsmax network first publicly broached the startling idea that every beneficiary would have to reapply for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, often called food stamps.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, asked for an explanation, referenced existing requirements and suggested more changes in SNAP rules could be in store.
“Secretary Rollins wants to ensure the fraud, waste, and incessant abuse of SNAP ends,” a USDA spokesperson wrote Wednesday. “Rates of fraud were only previously assumed, and President Trump is doing something about it. Using standard recertification processes for households is a part of that work. As well as ongoing analysis of state data, further regulatory work, and improved collaboration with states.”
The 2008 law governing SNAP leaves states responsible for administration. Part of that role includes periodically making sure that the low-income people in the program meet the qualifications for inclusion, but the law allows states to determine how often that occurs.
“It’s not clear what she would be proposing that is different from what is already happening,” said Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst for food assistance at the left-leaning think tank Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
One interpretation of Rollins’ comments is that she would remove all 42 million individuals from SNAP’s rolls and ask them to resubmit applications. Bergh said that would lead to people losing money they need for groceries. About 40% of those enrolled in SNAP are children.
“If she’s suggesting that they’re going to somehow redo that process for more than 40 million people who already demonstrated their eligibility and who already have to periodically recertify their eligibility, that would be pretty duplicative and would likely create pretty significant paperwork backlogs that would cause people who are eligible to lose the food assistance that they need,” Bergh said.
Administration critics have suggested that, while the comments are unlikely to lead to policy changes, they introduce even more confusion for a program that was used as a political token during the record government shutdown that ended this month.
Making people reapply would underscore the Trump administration’s opposition to the nearly $100 billion program, which accounts for 70% of federal nutrition assistance. USDA says the average SNAP household in fiscal 2023 received a monthly benefit of $332, or $177 a person based on the average SNAP household size of 1.9 people.
“Secretary Rollins and the Trump administration have cut food assistance for 42 million Americans multiple times this year,” U.S. House Agriculture ranking member Angie Craig said in a Wednesday statement to States Newsroom. “Now, they’ve once again shown that they do not understand the program.”
What did Rollins say?
In the Nov. 13 interview on Newsmax, Rollins said SNAP was beset by widespread fraud, citing data that 29 mostly Republican-run states submitted to the department. Acquiring data from the 21 other states would give the department a way to wholly remake the program, she said.
“Can you imagine when we get our hands on the blue state data, what we’re going to find?” she said. “It’s going to give us a platform and a trajectory to fundamentally rebuild this program, have everyone reapply for their benefit, make sure that everyone that’s taking a taxpayer-funded benefit through SNAP or food stamps that they literally are vulnerable, and they can’t survive without it. And that’s the next step here.”
In an interview Monday on Fox News, host Maria Bartiromo asked Rollins about the move to have recipients “reapply.”
“Business as usual is over,” Rollins answered in part. “The status quo is no more. We know that the SNAP program is rife with fraud.”
She added that guarding against fraud would help those the program is meant to serve.
The comments touched off widespread confusion about what specifically Rollins meant.
Asked about the initiative during a Thursday press conference, Craig, a Minnesota Democrat, said she was unclear about how it would work and predicted that Rollins would take credit in the future for the existing low rate of fraud.
“We’re hearing off the record that, you know, maybe people don’t know what the hell they’re talking about,” she said. “In fact, I think they’re trying to take credit for the already very strict standards and the actual low fraud rate in the SNAP program … So we can find no real plan there. Not even sure there’s concepts of a plan there.”
In response to a States Newsroom request this week for details about the initiative, USDA provided the statement that did not answer how the department would proceed or under what authority, but said Rollins was seeking to reduce fraud in the program.
Spokespeople did not respond to follow-up questions, or a request to respond to Craig’s remarks Thursday.
Low fraud rate
Program experts say fraud is not a widespread problem for SNAP.
An April report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found that retailers illegally trafficked about 1.6% of SNAP benefits from fiscal 2015 to 2017.
Fraud by households applying for SNAP, which appear to be the main target of Rollins’ proposal, is even lower.
According to a USDA report, about 26,000 applications were referred for an administrative review or prosecution on suspicion of fraud. That number accounts for about 0.1% of the 22.7 million households enrolled in the program, according to the Pew Research Center.
“Long-standing data sources indicate that intentional fraud by participants is rare,” Bergh said.
At Thursday’s press conference, Craig called Rollins’ comments “bullsh*t” and “propaganda.”
“Secretary Rollins goes on TV and talks about all the fraud,” she said. “This most effective anti-hunger program in our history has a fraud rate of 1.6%. It’s actually one of the most effective, well-run programs in the country … The bullsh*t this administration is peddling is egregious.”
More targeted reforms
Even experts who advocate for reforms to SNAP say eligibility fraud is not a major issue.
Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said high-net-worth individuals can receive SNAP benefits, but aren’t committing fraud by doing so.
“Some of the issues with SNAP … aren’t because of fraud or abuse, but they are because of bad program rules,” said Boccia.
Boccia also cited an “incentive misalignment” inherent in the state-federal program. States have little incentive to control payments because the federal government funds the program, she said.
Forcing all beneficiaries to reapply would likely reduce the cost of the program by reducing the number of its beneficiaries, including by forcing out higher earners who may not consider the benefits they don’t actually need to be worth the onerous reapplication process, Boccia said.
But it would also result in a percentage of low earners dropping off the program, as well as many who would be affected by the administrative backlog that would come with processing tens of millions of new applications, she said.
Shutdown, the big beautiful bill, and confusion
Bergh said Rollins’ comments “add insult to injury” because they come after congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump signed a major tax cuts and spending law that is expected to shrink federal SNAP spending by $187 billion over 10 years. The law added work requirements for many SNAP recipients and shifted some costs to states.
That was followed by the six-week shutdown that saw a dizzying back-and-forth over whether November SNAP benefits would be paid.
“There has been huge amounts of chaos and confusion and disruption for both states and participants in recent weeks, largely due to the shutdown, but also because simultaneously, the administration has required states to implement many of the reconciliation bill’s SNAP cuts,” Bergh said.
Craig, in her statement, also said Rollins’ comments would hurt the people who need the program.
“I am astounded by the secretary’s careless disregard for the hungry seniors and children who can afford to eat because of this program,” she said.
Sara Naomi Bleich, a public health policy professor at Harvard University, said in a phone interview the confusion from Rollins’ comments compounded hardships produced by the Republican reconciliation law, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
“Big picture with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is that there’s basically this tidal wave coming to families that have low income,” Bleich, who worked at USDA during the Obama and Biden administrations, said. “They’re going to lose Medicaid. They’re going to lose SNAP. There could be collateral impacts on the school meals. This is going to be a really hard time for families to navigate.”
Homes are surrounded by debris in Kwigillingok, Alaska, Monday, Oct. 27, 2025, after being damaged earlier in the month by Typhoon Halong. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson)
AP- Storms that battered Alaska’s western coast this fall have brought renewed attention to low-lying Indigenous villages left increasingly vulnerable by climate change — and revived questions about their sustainability in a region being reshaped by frequent flooding, thawing permafrost and landscape-devouring erosion.
The onset of winter has slowed emergency repair and cleanup work after two October storms, including the remnants of Typhoon Halong, slammed dozens of communities. Some residents from the hardest-hit villages, Kipnuk and Kwigillingok, could be displaced for months and worry what their futures hold.
Kwigillingok already was pursuing relocation before the latest storm, but that can take decades, with no centralized coordination and little funding. Moves by the Trump administration to cut grants aimed at better protecting communities against climate threats have added another layer of uncertainty.
Still, the hope is to try to buy villages time to evaluate next steps by reinforcing rebuilt infrastructure or putting in place pilings so homes can be elevated, said Bryan Fisher, the state’s emergency management director.
“Where we can support that increased resilience to buy that time, we’re going to do that,” he said.
Many Alaska Native villages are threatened by climate change
Alaska is warming faster than the global average. A report released last year by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium found 144 Native communities face threats from erosion, flooding, thawing permafrost or a combination.
Coastal populations are particularly vulnerable, climate scientist John Walsh said. Less Arctic sea ice means more open water, allowing storm-driven waves to do damage. Thawing permafrost invites more rapid coastal erosion. Waves hitting permafrost bounce like water off a concrete wall, he said, but when permafrost thaws, the loose soil washes away more easily.
Wind and storm surge from the remnants of Halong consumed dozens of feet of shoreline in Quinhagak, disturbing a culturally significant archaeological site. Quinhagak, like Kipnuk and Kwigillingok, is near the Bering Sea.
Just four times since 1970 has an ex-typhoon hit the Bering Sea coast north of the Pribilof Islands, said Rick Thoman, a climate specialist with the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Preparedness. Three of those have been since 2022, starting with the remnants of Merbok that year.
The damage caused by ex-typhoon Halong was the worst Fisher said he has seen in his roughly 30 years in emergency management. About 700 homes were destroyed or severely damaged, estimates suggest. Some washed away with people inside and were carried for miles. Kipnuk and Kwigillingok — no strangers to flooding and home to around 1,100 people — were devastated. One person died, and two remain missing.
Some homes and buildings that were torn off their foundations and floated away are seen near the village of Kwigillingok, Alaska, Monday, Oct. 27, 2025, after Typhoon Halong hit the region earlier in the month. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson)
Options are limited and expensive
At-risk communities can reinforce existing infrastructure or fortify shoreline; move infrastructure to higher ground in what is known as managed retreat; or relocate entirely. The needs are enormous — $4.3 billion over 50 years to protect infrastructure in Native communities from climate threats, according to the health consortium report, though that estimate dates to 2020. A lack of resources and coordination has impeded progress, the report found.
Simply announcing plans to relocate can leave a community ineligible for funding for new infrastructure at their existing site, and government policies can limit investments at a new site if people aren’t living there yet, the report said.
It took decades and an estimated $160 million for the roughly 300 residents of Newtok in western Alaska to move 9 miles (14.5 kilometers) to their new village of Mertarvik. Newtok was one of the first Alaska Native communities to fully relocate, but others are considering or pursuing it. In Washington and Louisiana, climate change has been a driving force behind relocation efforts by some tribes.
But many villages, including Kipnuk and Kwigillingok, “don’t have that kind of time,” said Sheryl Musgrove, director of the Alaska Climate Justice Program at the Alaska Institute for Justice. The two are among 10 tribal communities her group has been working with as they navigate climate-adaptation decisions.
Kipnuk before the last storm had been planning a protect-in-place strategy but hasn’t decided what to do now, she said.
Musgrove hopes that in the aftermath, there will be changes at the federal level to help communities in peril. There is no federal agency, for example, tasked with coordinating relocation. That leaves small communities trying to navigate myriad agencies and programs, Musgrove said.
“I guess I’m just really hopeful that this might be the beginning of a change because I think that there is a lot of attention to what happened here,” she said.
Federal support is in question
With money from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act, the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs in 2022 created the Voluntary Community-Driven Relocation Program and committed $115 million for 11 tribes’ relocation efforts, including $25 million each for Newtok and Napakiak. In Napakiak, most of the infrastructure is expected to be destroyed by 2030, and the community is moving away from the banks of the Kuskokwim River.
That is not enough to move a village, and additional funding opportunities are scattered across other agencies, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.
Sustained federal support is uncertain as the Trump administration cuts programs related to climate change and disaster resilience. Trump in May proposed cutting $617 million from the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ tribal self-governance and communities programs but did not specify which programs.
The Department of Interior said in an email that new grant funding is “under review as part of a broader effort to improve federal spending accountability,” but that the Bureau of Indian Affairs was “helping tribes lay the groundwork for future implementation when funding pathways are clarified.”
Other federal money that could help Alaska villages has already been cut. Federal Emergency Management Agency awards to Newtok and Kwigillingok for projects related to relocation didn’t arrive before the administration in April halted billions of dollars in unpaid grants.
Trump has also stopped approving state and tribal requests for hazard mitigation funding, a typical add-on that accompanies federal support after major disasters.
The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building pictured on Nov. 25, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
AP- The Trump administration says its plan to dismantle the Education Department offers a fix for the nation’s lagging academics — a solution that could free schools from the strictures of federal influence.
Yet to some school and state officials, the plan appears to add more bureaucracy, with no clear benefit for students who struggle with math or reading.
Instead of being housed in a single agency, much of the Education Department’s work now will be spread across four other federal departments. For President Donald Trump, it’s a step toward fully closing the department and giving states more power over schooling. Yet many states say it will complicate their role as intermediaries between local schools and the federal government.
The plan increases bureaucracy fivefold, Washington state’s education chief said, “undoubtedly creating confusion and duplicity” for educators and families. His counterpart in California said the plan is “clearly less efficient” and invites disruption. Maryland’s superintendent raised concerns about “the challenges of coordinating efforts with multiple federal agencies.”
“States were not engaged in this process, and this is not what we have asked for — or what our students need,” said Jill Underly, Wisconsin’s state superintendent. Underly urged the Trump administration to give states greater flexibility and cut down on standardized testing requirements.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon said schools will continue receiving federal money without disruption. Ultimately, schools will have more money and flexibility to serve students without the existence of the Education Department, she said.
Yet the department is not gone — only Congress has the power to abolish it. In the meantime, McMahon’s plan leaves the agency in a version of federal limbo. The Labor Department will take over most funding and support for the country’s schools, but the Education Department will retain some duties, including policy guidance and broad supervision of Labor’s education work.
Similar deals will offload programs to the Department of Health and Human Services, the State Department and the Interior Department. The agreements were signed days before the government shutdown and announced Tuesday.
Inking agreements to share work with other departments isn’t new: The Education Department already had dozens of such agreements before Trump took office. And local school officials routinely work with other agencies, including the U.S. Agriculture Department, which oversees school meals. What’s different this time is the scale of the programs offloaded — the majority of the Education Department’s funding for schools, for instance.
Yet Virginia schools chief Emily Anne Gullickson, for one, said schools are accustomed to working with multiple federal agencies, and she welcomed the administration’s efforts to give states more control.
Where some see risk of upheaval, others see a win over bureaucracy
Response to the plan has mostly been drawn along political lines, with Democrats saying the shakeup will hurt America’s most vulnerable students. Republicans in Congress called it a victory over bureaucracy.
Yet some conservatives pushed back against the dismantling. U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, said on social media that moving programs to agencies without policy expertise could hurt young people. And Margaret Spellings, a former education secretary to Republican President George W. Bush, called it a distraction to a national education crisis.
“Moving programs from one department to another does not actually eliminate the federal bureaucracy, and it may make the system harder for students, teachers and families to navigate and get the support they need,” Spellings said in a statement.
There’s little debate about the need for change in America’s schooling. Its math and reading scores have plummeted in the wake of COVID-19. Before that, reading scores had been stagnant for decades, and math scores weren’t much better.
McMahon said that’s evidence the Education Department has failed and isn’t needed. At a White House briefing Thursday, she called her plan a “hard reset” that does not halt federal support but ends “federal micromanagement.”
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers union and one of McMahon’s sharpest opponents, questioned the logic in her plan.
“Why would you put a new infrastructure together, a new bureaucracy that nobody knows anything about, and take the old bureaucracy and destroy it, instead of making the old bureaucracy more efficient?” Weingarten said at a Wednesday event.
Schools fear the impact of lost expertise on education laws
The full impact of the shakeup may not be clear for months, but already it’s stoking anxiety among states and school districts that have come to rely on the Education Department for its policy expertise. One of the agency’s roles is to serve as a hotline for questions about complicated funding formulas, special education laws and more.
The department has not said whether officials who serve that role will keep their jobs in the transition. Without that help, schools would have few options to clarify what can and can’t be paid for with federal money, said David Law, superintendent of Minnetonka Public Schools in Minnesota.
“What could happen is services are not provided because you don’t have an answer,” said Law, who is also president of AASA, a national association of school superintendents.
Some question whether other federal departments have the capacity to take on an influx of new work. The Labor Department will take over Title I, an $18 billion grant program that serves 26 million students in low-income areas. It’s going to a Labor office that now handles grants serving only 130,000 people a year, said Angela Hanks, who led the Labor office under former President Joe Biden.
At best, Hanks said, it will “unleash chaos on school districts, and ultimately, on our kids.”
In Salem, Massachusetts, the 4,000-student school system receives about $6 million in federal funding that helps support services for students who are low-income, homeless or still mastering English, Superintendent Stephen Zrike said. He fears moving those programs to the Labor Department could bring new “rules of engagement.”
“We don’t know what other stipulations will be attached to the funding,” he said. “The level of uncertainty is enormous.”
Other critics have noted the Education Department was created to consolidate education programs that were spread across multiple agencies.
Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., the ranking member on the House Education and Workforce Committee, urged McMahon to rethink her plan. He cited the 1979 law establishing the department, which said dispersion had resulted in “fragmented, duplicative, and often inconsistent Federal policies relating to education.”
___
AP education writers Moriah Balingit in Washington, Bianca Vázquez Toness in Boston and Makiya Seminera in Raleigh, N.C., contributed to this report.
Aaron Christian Peterson appears in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary on Nov. 19, 2025, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Screenshot)
A confirmation hearing for President Donald Trump’s pick to fill a judicial vacancy in Alaska was largely uneventful on Wednesday.
Aaron Christian Peterson was nominated by Trump this month after getting support from U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, and on Wednesday, the U.S. Senate’s judiciary committee held a hearing on Peterson’s nomination and two other prospective judges bound for other states.
Senators’ attention largely focused on the other two men — David Fowlkes for a judgeship in Arkansas, and Nicholas Ganjei for a seat in Texas — and senators frequently used their time in the hearing to discuss their own views, rather than seek information about the nominees.
“Here I am asking the questions and giving the answers — it’s like the bar exam, except I’m giving the answers,” said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, at one point in the hearing.
Peterson, who lives in Eagle River, is a natural resources attorney for the state of Alaska and has extensive experience as a criminal prosecutor.
Speaking to the committee, he said he has “a deep familiarity with the laws that are specific to Alaska,” naming the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act as one example.
“I have a wide variety of experience in the arenas that are likely to come before the district court, and hopefully I’ll be able to preside over those matters if I’m fortunate enough to be confirmed,” he said.
Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, asked all three nominees if they had ever been accused of sexual harassment or made unwanted sexual advances toward someone.
All three said no.
Alaska’s most recent pick for the U.S. District Court, former Judge Josh Kindred, was appointed during the first Trump administration but resigned and was disbarred after an investigation found had committed significant sexual misconduct while in office.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California, asked all three nominees whether they believe Congress is prohibited from imposing a code of ethics on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Peterson, answering third, echoed his potential colleagues and said it would depend on the circumstances, but that he does have concerns about whether such a thing would violate the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.
Currently, the U.S. Supreme Court is closely aligned with President Trump, and members of the court have repeatedly accepted financial and physical gifts from people affected by issues before the court.
Republicans generally oppose new ethics restrictions on the court; Democrats generally favor them.
Hawley asked the judicial nominees whether they believe a district court judge has the ability to issue injunctions that can halt nationwide actions.
Sullivan, who does not sit on the judicial committee, read a prepared statement introducing Peterson.
“Aaron is a lifelong Alaskan. He knows and understands our great state and the federal laws that reflect on Alaska. I think he will be a great federal judge. I urge his nomination be sent to the Senate floor with positive votes from all the members of this committee,” Sullivan said.
Peterson was one of several people suggested to the president by a committee formed at Sullivan’s behest to consider nominees for two current vacancies on the federal bench in Alaska.
That committee deliberated in secret, and the list of applicants — and of proposed nominees — has never been revealed.
Murkowski used a more traditional process to propose nominees to the president, relying on advice from the Alaska Bar Association. Peterson’s name did not appear in that application process, and the Bar Association did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Nebraska and chair of the judiciary committee, said members of the committee will submit written questions to the nominees by Nov. 26.
After that, the committee is expected to vote on the nominees and send them to a vote of the full U.S. Senate for confirmation.
U.S. Army National Guard UH-60L Black Hawk aviators, assigned to the 207th Aviation Troop Command, transport supplies to Napakiak, Alaska, Nov. 19, 2025, while supporting Operation Halong Response efforts. (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Tech. Sgt. Daniel Robles)
Officials with the Alaska National Guard said they are preparing and training a response force of 100 service members to deploy to Washington D.C. and support civil authorities, as directed by the Pentagon and Gov. Mike Dunleavy.
The update on Tuesday from Maj. Gen. Torrence Saxe, Adjutant General of the Alaska National Guard and Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, was in response to a letter from state legislators on the Alaska Joint Armed Services Committee. The lawmakers raised concerns around the implications of a Pentagon’s directive to Alaska to prepare 350 National Guard personnel for rapid deployment for “civil disturbance operations.”
In his letter, Saxe said Gov. Mike Dunleavy requested that the force be deployed to Washington D.C. to join a joint federal task force in March of 2026.
A spokesperson with the governor’s office confirmed Thursday the request came from the U.S. Secretary of the Army and Dunleavy approved it.
“Governor Dunleavy approved the request because he wants to help the Trump Administration restore public trust and improve the quality of life in the nation’s capital,” said Jeff Turner, the governor’s director of communications, by email.
But the request may turn out to be moot, after a federal judge temporarily blocked the deployments to Washington D.C. on Thursday, declaring the use of troops is likely unlawful. There is a pause on the order until Dec. 11, which gives the Trump administration time to appeal.
Turner declined to comment on the federal ruling.
Saxe said in the letter that 100 Alaska service members are being trained to align with “national level requirements.”
“The team will consist of Alaska Army and Air National Guard personnel trained in mission sets that may include site security, roadblocks and checkpoints, civil disturbance control, critical infrastructure protection, and personnel security,” Saxe wrote. “All training activities are integrated into existing unit schedules and do not alter the organization’s operational commitments.”
The Alaska National Guard is currently active in the disaster relief effort after Typhoon Halong devastated communities of Western Alaska, with an estimated 200 service members deployed there, officials said.
Alaska Organized Militia members assigned to Task Force Bethel continue removing debris and waterlogged insulation from buildings at Tuntutuliak after ex-Typhoon Halong on Oct. 25, 2025. (Alaska National Guard photo by Capt. Balinda O’Neal)
Saxe repeated that the development of this “quick response force” is not new for the National Guard, and it will be structured to “respond quickly to protect lives, property, and critical infrastructure.”
“At the request of Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, members of the Alaska NGRF (National Guard Response Force) will activate to Washington, D.C., in March 2026 to support Joint Task Force–District of Columbia, a federally coordinated effort that brings together National Guard elements, civic leaders, and partner agencies to enhance safety, stewardship, and community engagement,” he wrote.
Officials with the National Guard declined interview requests on Wednesday and Thursday.
In August, officials with the governor’s office said there were “no plans” to deploy the Alaska National Guard to Washington D.C., as reported by the Anchorage Daily News.
The Trump administration’s deployment of National Guard troops to primarily Democratic-led cities has been challenged and repeatedly blocked as illegal in federal courts. On Monday, a Tennessee judge barred the National Guard deployment to Memphis, and said it was only allowable if there was a rebellion or invasion. On Thursday, a federal judge temporarily ordered an end to the monthslong deployment of National Guard to Washington D.C. to tackle crime, declaring the use of troops as likely unlawful.
Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage and co-chair of the Alaska Joint Armed Services Committee, said he was grateful for the commissioner’s response and additional information on the specialized force, but remains concerned about the capacity and purpose of such a mission.
Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage, speaks Monday, May 6, 2024, on the floor of the Alaska House of Representatives. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
“It’s important to note that the American taxpayer will be paying their salary while they’re on this mission. They’ll be paying for their room and board,” he said. “So when the National Guard does a mission like this, we just don’t have unlimited money. So we are redirecting money away from training and work here in Alaska.”
Gray said while the Trump administration may have the authority to call the National Guard to Washington, a federal district, he remains concerned at military service members being deployed against civilians and used for police or immigration enforcement.
“Are these police departments saying that they’re overrun, that they’re unable to perform their law enforcement mission, that they need to have their force doubled, tripled, quadrupled in numbers?” he said. “Because that’s what’s happening.”
There are currently 2,866 National Guard service members enlisted in the state, with 1,676 in the Alaska Air National Guard and 1,190 in the Alaska Army National Guard.
Gray, a veteran of the Alaska National Guard who deployed to Kosovo in 2019, said he also worries about the erosion of trust and regard for the military doing these kinds of missions, and deploying against civilians.
“I love the U.S. military. I am proud of my service in the Alaska Army National Guard,” he said. “I think this is going to hurt the military’s standing in the public’s mind. I think that this is going to cause folks to lose some of the admiration that has been so foundational in our country for the military. Our country has long admired, respected and praised its military, and the moves that we are seeing, directed by Secretary Pete Hegseth and the President of the United States are going to lose our military’s standing, not only internationally, but domestically as well.”
Gray said he has requested a meeting with Saxe, and is asking for continued public communication and transparency as the quick response force is developed.
Fresh produce is seen at the Alaska Commercial Company grocery store in Bethel on Oct 15, 2025. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Alaskans who qualify for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program received half of their benefits nearly a week late as a result of the federal government shutdown this month. Their full benefits were two weeks late, even though the state had emergency funds to prevent that.
Officials say the state never used the $5 million per week it set aside to keep people from waiting for food benefits because the state’s system had to be reconfigured to use state money rather than its usual federal funding source. SNAP is a federal food assistance program that is run by the state.
Division Director Deb Etheridge said the state is now prepared to react quickly if a similar situation arises in the future.
“We went through all the steps we needed to create an opportunity for a state-only benefit to be issued through our EBT contractor,” she said. “So in the event that anything like this happens again, we can move swiftly to issue that state-only benefit.”
Gov. Mike Dunleavy signed an emergency order declaration on Nov. 3, following a request by state legislators and similar action by other states.
Etheridge said information technology and system operations teams had to scramble to come up with solutions, but by the time they found a way to get money to Alaskans, the federal government had begun to partially fulfill its obligations.
She said the state was closing in on a solution when the federal government released 50% of the money for benefits on Nov. 4. She said that money was processed and ready for Alaskans to spend by Nov. 6.
Etheridge said the eligibility technicians that process benefits were not excessively burdened by the shutdown.
“Eligibility workers were doing business as usual, processing cases and managing, obviously, increased phone calls — people wanted to know where their benefits were,” she said. “The pressure came on our system operations and our IT.”
The shutdown delayed service in a state division with a history of slowdowns in recent years. The DPA has battled long backlogs in processing food benefit applications as a result of staff shortages and technology issuessince 2022. The division made progress against its backlog before slipping again in 2023. Paperwork slowdowns kept thousands waiting again earlier this year.
Etheridge says the division is currently working to make sure people displaced by the October storms in Western Alaska continue to receive benefits, even if they have lost access to critical paperwork.
