Rather than shame the pro-tax, anti-hospitality industry electorate, and policymakers, I’ll try to be thoughtful and positive.

The food, beverage, lodging, and transportation facets of the Alaskan hospitality industry are integral to the state’s economy. All totaled, our industry is likely the second-largest sector after natural resource development.

The havoc thrust upon employees by COVID-19 will cause irreparable harm in some cases – and severe business injury to nearly all others. This is pure devastation.

It’s time for the members of the state’s executive and legislative branches at all levels, from municipal to borough, state to federal, to rise to the occasion and actively support the hospitality industry.

Don’t even consider a tax (and preferably repeal the Anchorage alcohol tax just passed).

To all of the government leaders, please help our industry now. Allow doors to be open and services to be rendered!

To past, current and prospective customers, please buy from, shop at, and patronize hospitality services as much as you can afford to start our economic engine.

Solidarity in support of the hospitality industry is critical now, more than ever.

The havoc thrust upon employees by COVID-19 will cause irreparable harm in some cases – and severe business injury to nearly all others. This is pure devastation. 

It’s time for the members of the state’s executive and legislative branches at all levels, from municipal to borough, state to federal, to rise to the occasion and actively support the hospitality industry. Don’t even consider a tax (and preferably repeal the Anchorage alcohol tax just passed).

The post It’s Time to Support the Hospitality Industry appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

I suspect on the trip at some point you were asked if you knew, met or had details about Governor Sarah Palin. Perhaps a question surfaced on your journey from a wide-eyed Alaska admirer about her husband Todd Palin and racing snow machines for thousands of miles across harsh terrain or escaping death as a bush pilot and commercial fisherman. Maybe the interest is in Bristol Palin and her advocacy on behalf of mothers and children, or something about her siblings with the cool names (e.g. Track, Willow, Piper, Trig).

The Palins are Alaskan. They represent all of us in one sense or another. Their kids are bright, engaged in the community, and trying to earn a living and raise families (or attend school) just like yours and mine. The Palins give the rewards of their success back to charity and non-profits, and help more causes than I could name in this article. They exude patriotism, independence and an inherent sense of appreciation for and respect of Alaska.

When I was going through my federal case almost 10 years ago, and the days and hours and minutes were very dark for my family and me, I distinctly remember the people who overtly made an effort to be kind. The measure of a true friend is in times of adversity, not in times of plenty.

When it comes to the Palins, I remember a newly elected governor and husband who were compassionate to many, including me. I ran into Todd at the dry cleaning store in Juneau one afternoon, and he was as friendly and genuine as a family member. He was the real deal and inquired about my family. “How are you and yours holding up?” he asked, man to man and with a firm hand shake . A month later, I was on a plane with my son, who was an infant, and Governor Palin was coming down the plane’s aisle. She stopped where I was sitting, looked me in the eyes and asked “How are you doing Tom? I’m thinking of you and your family. Stay strong,” and reached for little Grayson and held him tight with the affection of his own mother in front of 100+ passengers.

After her warm greeting, Governor Palin continued walking to her seat, which was in the very back by the restrooms. And she didn’t blink about where her seat was on the plane. Remember her predecessor used a private contracted jet. She was just Sarah – one of us, with us and there for us. Alaskan to the core.

Over the years it’s not just been charisma the Palins emit, but also a very real love for people. They have passion and spirit that’s palpable.

As the general election inches close in Alaska, and across the country, FOX News, Breitbart, Politico, Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze” and myriad other online and radio news mediums will solicit Governor Palin’s opinion, and perhaps husband Todd’s too. They will continue their narrative about freedom, accountability, patriotism and a system of checks-and-balances that makes the United States a better place, not a door mat for other countries and internal strife.

I personally appreciate and value Sarah and Todd’s opinions. I may not always agree, but I respect the dialogue and analysis.

Alaska is the benefactor of the Palin family being so resolute in protecting our freedoms and way of life. We are blessed to have them championing liberty and sustainability, and not with sound bites, but with policies and vision that she demonstrated as a mayor, regulator and governor.

To those pundits and bloggers and commentators who take pleasure in tearing down prominent people, like the Palins, I hope you’ll look in the mirror and consider the damage you do with your schadenfreude. Don’t be jealous of their success. Whether you agree with every view and nuance the Palins espouse or not, they are well-intended, engaged Alaskans who have made a huge, positive difference for the state and its residents.

If you really think about fame and popularity, on a global scale, the Palins fit in with the likes of Michael Jordan, Muhammad Ali and Tiger Woods when it comes to notoriety and recognition. This popularity has helped, not hurt, Alaska’s image – from business investment to tourism.

Thanks to the Palins for what they’ve done for so many, and that includes Todd’s and Sarah’s parents. Alaska is the fortunate one to have such an endearing family that really cares about our prosperity.

The post Todd and Sarah Palin – Alaska’s Fortune appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

As candidate forums go, tonight’s CBS 11 and Alaska Dispatch News Debate between Republican U.S. Senate hopefuls Joe Miller, Dan Sullivan and Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell was instructive.

All men are proficient orators and skilled in rational based thinking and analysis. The majority of their answers were similar, so there is not really a true “stand out” in the bunch for policy direction. They all looked nice and no awkward facial expressions or body gestures fouled the play.

Joe Miller remains the strongest debater in terms of Tea Party flavored sound bites and grandiosity. He is sharp and witty with one-liners, and the ability to answer questions in volumes. The worry remains if he is a consensus builder or so dogmatic and zealous in his own philosophy that he’ll neglect the 750,000+ people in Alaska he would ultimately represent.

Dan Sullivan, though at times scoring with comprehensive answers and examples, lacked crisp, concise responses. He appeared uncomfortable formulating comments – and those he did muster to completely offer lacked in depth (or were laden in “ums” and paper shuffling). Sullivan, as in the last rural debate, simply does not answer questions as assiduously as Miller or Treadwell, speaking more in generality.

It should be noted that Alaska Dispatch News’ Nat Herz kept Sullivan in check on three occasions when avoiding answering questions, and news anchor Joe Vigil was exceptional in keeping the candidates reigned in from completely disrespecting time lines and end points.

Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell, after the rhetoric dust settled, was the winner on multiple fronts tonight. Here’s why:

 

• Treadwell gave the most cogent, concise and responsive answers.
  
  
• Treadwell was the most thoughtful and responsible in staying focused on questions and not straying into the periphery with diatribes (Miller) or answering with a question to evade an answer (Sullivan).

• Treadwell was honest when it came to tough questions like admitting smoking marijuana, writing Lisa Murkowski on his ballot in the 2010 General Election, and agreeing to support either Republican challenger should the others win the Primary on August 19th.
  
  
• Treadwell was fresh – he didn’t repeat the canned quotes and familial backgrounds that his opponents have used in past forums, and for which he would score the most points if he tried such debate tactic – having lost his wife to cancer and raising his kids as a single parent.
  
  
• Treadwell was the most courteous in his questions and looked the most senatorial. All men claim to be the best David and against the Begich Goliath. Treadwell appears to fit best in those shoes (OK – sandals to be exact).

Only Alaskan voters can decide who will be the Republican U.S. Senate candidate to challenge Democratic incumbent Senator Mark Begich in November, but if tonight’s debate is any indication, Mead Treadwell looks to have the best chance at the title.

The post Treadwell Takes CBS 11 / Alaska Dispatch News Debate appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

As the event concept came to fruition and was organized for launch in 2013 at Alaska Pacific University, it was Governor Sean Parnell who showed exponential support along with his wife Sandy to ensure the AWS 2013 would impact the state for the good of Alaskan women. Alaska’s First Lady become a keynote speaker, co-chair and advocate for the event. The Governor and the First Lady are equally supportive of this year’s Alaska Women’s Summit in October at the University of Alaska, Anchorage.

Actions speak louder than words in politics. Elections come and go, as do slogans and political spin. However the indelibility of true statesmanship manifests through the people a leader surrounds him or herself with, and by the policies and causes supported.

Did you ever notice from media reports or news coverage just how many females are in leadership positions in the current gubernatorial administration of Alaska? It may be a record within the list of governors who have managed our state.

Governor Sean Parnell’s cabinet includes:

Susan Bell – Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development Commissioner
Becky Hultberg– (former) Department of Administration Commissioner
Dianne Blumer – Department of Labor and Workforce Development Commissioner
Cora Campbell – Department of Fish and Game Commissioner
Angela Rodell- Department of Revenue Commissioner
Cindy Sims – Deputy Chief of Staff
Karen Rehfeld – Budget Director
Heather Brakes – Legislative Director

There are many more female directors, deputy directors and supervisors at the helm of important offices, such as the DMV. Amy Erickson, who was a staff member for U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski, replaced Whitney Highland Brewster after Brewster was notably chosen to run the state of Texas’ DMV offices. Two dynamic women who have contoured Alaska Division of Motor Vehicles into one of the best, if not THE best DMV in the nation, based on technology, staffing, short and efficient wait times and satellite office accessibility. Governor Parnell chose these amazing women. Give credit where it’s due.

Cathy Jorgensen is another example. She is the first female in the history of the Alaska Army National Guard to be promoted to the rank of general. As a brigadier general, Jorgensen oversees, prepares and commands the Guard’s 4,500 soldiers for deployment in Alaska and internationally. Governor Parnell saw Jorgensen’s capabilities and leadership qualities, cultivating them through promotion, and now Alaskans are the benefactors.

A professional who left the private sector to speak on behalf of the Parnell Administration is Parnell’s press secretary, award-winning radio news journalist Sharon Leighow. When it comes to public and media relations, and dealing with a governor’s head shed, working with a competent, reasonable press secretary makes all the difference in the world. Leighow meets that mark.

When asked about the Administration’s philosophy on hiring personnel to manage state bureaucracy, Leighow said “Governor Parnell hires people based on their qualifications, and that includes a wide band of knowledge, insight, and experience in policy, business, and the issues that matter to our state. He is proud to have so many qualified and capable women in his cabinet, serving in major capacities – from resource, commerce, finance and administration. Leadership encompasses hiring the very best people you can find, and bringing out the very best in them while advancing the greater good for all Alaskans.”

APE couldn’t have said it better!

Governor Sean Parnell’s strong administrative record will be recorded in history with many positive attributes. From stewarding responsible resource exploration and development to building university and public safety infrastructure statewide, he will clearly be viewed as a success. Yet – his greatest legacy may just be the support and championing he’s demonstrated towards Alaskan women.

It was Oprah Winfrey who said “I’ve come to believe that each of us has a personal calling that’s as unique as a fingerprint – and that the best way to succeed is to discover what you love and then find a way to offer it to others in the form of service, working hard, and also allowing the energy of the universe to lead you.”

The daughters and mothers and sisters and grandmothers and aunts who live and thrive in our state can thank Governor Sean Parnell for his respect of your personal callings. And not just his “Choose Respect” campaign to end domestic violence, but for the literal respect he pays to the vibrant, wonderful women of Alaska who have never gone unnoticed by a gender-blind governor who puts faith, fairness and accountability first.

The post Parnell Administration Remarkably Inclusive of Women appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

Consider how vital agriculture is to our society and how quickly it’s declining. In 1935, the number of farms in the United States peaked at 6.8 million, while the population was approximately 127 million. Farmers have continued to fade away while our population and demand for farmed resources escalates.  There are now over 313 million people living in the United States, tripling since 1935, but just one-tenth of 1% are farming as an occupation. There are now only 2.2 million farms in the entire U.S., and a small fraction of those in Alaska, yet the majority of us thrive on such produce and savor every farm fresh meal.

America has some of the richest agriculture soils in the world and we are paving over one million acres of these soils each year. It’s estimated that by the year 2050 the world food production must double to meet the demand. This will impact every American either positively or negatively depending on what we do today. If we continue to pave our agriculture soils – our grandchildren will struggle to feed their families, and I’m unsure Joe Miller understands this reality.

Closer to home, and for a perspective on Alaskan farming and government support, from 1995 to 2012 nearly 89 percent of Alaska’s farms did not collect a farm subsidy. Of the farms that did collect a subsidy, 80 percent received on average $134 a year. That’s about 1/10 of what Joe Miller was receiving.

The Department of Agriculture’s website states that “U.S. agricultural trade generates employment, income, and purchasing power in both the farm and non farm sectors. Each farm export dollar earned stimulated another $1.65 in business activity in calendar year 2006. The $71.0 billion of agricultural exports in 2006 produced an additional $117.2 billion in economic activity for a total economic output of $188.2 billion. Agricultural exports also generated 841,000 full-time civilian jobs, which include 482,000 jobs in the non-farm sector. Farmers’ purchases of fuel, fertilizer, and other inputs to produce commodities for export spurred economic activity in the manufacturing, trade, and transportation sectors.”

80 percent of the funds in the most recently passed national Farm Bill are for food stamp benefits and have nothing to do with farming – unless one blames farmers for providing the food that feed people. Only 20 percent of the funds in the Farm Bill are for farm programs, and some of these programs may actually be responsible for funding the construction of the home in which you live.

And when it comes to “subsidies,” every homeowner who took out a traditional mortgage received a federal subsidy in some form or another, such as artificially low interest rates, federal loan guarantee, etc. Is Joe Miller also an advocate for letting the free market decide what the interest rates will be? Are we ready for 18 percent home mortgage rates? Did Miller shop around for the lowest federally subsidized rate or did he seek a non-federally manipulated loan (is there even such a loan?)  Or did Miller pay cash for his home in protest of the federal subsidies provided to America’s homeowners?

When I first heard the bullet points of his “freedom and liberty” rhetoric he had my attention. But after listening more closely and examining the real message from Joe Miller, I’ve become troubled at the lack of integrity in his value system.  Or gently phrased, his lack of understanding of the agriculture industry. When he accuses American farmers of “not meeting the needs of this country,” I am baffled. Have Americans truly ever missed meals because of the lack of accessible food? If American farmers are guilty of anything, isn’t it of being too efficient at their job and providing an inexpensive over-abundance of food (and add to the menu: feeding the world).

I once heard Miller claim that it was the Republican establishment that cheated him out of his victory in his 2010 senate race, and that he won’t support either Mead Treadwell or Dan Sullivan, should they win the August Primary. The way I see it, it was Joe Miller’s hypocrisy that cheated him out of a seat in the U.S. Senate.

If you think it is good that Americans have access to inexpensive, safe food, and you believe exporting hundreds of billions of dollars every year in farm products is good for this country economically, then you should truly research political candidates when they speak in macro terms, generalities and impugning an industry they have little knowledge about.

In all honesty, I did not write this opinion article to defend farm subsidies (it’s a complex issue I hardly understand), but rather to point out the fact that the biggest problem with our current system is that an Ivy League attorney and land developer like Joe Miller, who lives thousands of miles away from a farm he owns, can still receive a farm subsidy for fields he doesn’t farm.

Joe Miller doesn’t understand the agriculture industry in Alaska, nor the country. I fear he shrouds himself in slogans and patriot spectacle, seasoned with hypocrisy, and is the wrong person to represent our state in the U.S. Senate.

Arthur Keyes owns Glacier Valley Farm in Palmer and is the founder of the South Anchorage Farmer’s Market. He was a produce manager for Safeway in Anchorage and has worked in produce all of his adult life. He’s currently on the Board of Directors for the Palmer Soil & Water Conservation District, and is the past president of the Mat-Su Farm Bureau, past director on the Alaska State Farm Bureau, and currently serves on Mat-Su’s Board of Directors. 

The post Joe Miller doesn’t understand the farm industry and is not the man for the job appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

We finally have a chance to open up areas of our Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Opening these areas, which contain a wealth of oil and natural gas, will allow us to continue to be a global leader in energy production. If we choose to keep them closed, we send a signal to the world that we are not committed to maintaining our energy leadership role.

Our administration is once again faced with a decision that can lead us towards greater energy and national security – or greater reliance on those countries who seek to harm us. I support the addition of the areas that have been closed for offshore development, such as areas in the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico and Alaska to the upcoming 2017-2022 Five Year Plan to maintain our energy and national security.

Developing these new stores of oil and natural gas will generate jobs, revenue and energy and help our country’s economic recovery continue to move forward. President Obama recognized the importance of energy in his State of the Union speech when he said, “One of the biggest factors in bringing more jobs back is our commitment to American energy.” BOEM can back his words with actions that would increase our domestic oil and natural gas resources.

If you support future revenue and energy, jobs and National Security, I encourage you to submit a letter, as I have, asking BOEM to include the the Mid- and South-Atlantic, eastern Gulf of Mexico and Alaska in the 2017-2022 five-year OCS Leasing Plan.

 

George Wuerch
Chair, Vets4Energy
LtCol, USMC (Retired)
Former Mayor, Anchorage, AK.

Submitting comments on the 5-year Plan RFI

Due date to BOEM: July 31, 2014

Commenting via Internet: http://www.boem.gov/Five-Year-Program-2017-2022/

Internet comments should be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. BOEM requests that commenters follow these instructions to submit their comments via this Web site:

(1)  In the search tab on the main page, search for BOEM–2014–0059.

(2)  Locate “Requests for Information: Preparation of the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program”(3)  Click on “Comment Now”

1. Enter “Comment” OR if, attaching a letter, click on “Choose Files” to upload a file (up to 10MB).
2. Enter the “Required” submitter information (note, any privileged or proprietary information.)

(4)  After typing /uploading the comment, click the ‘‘Continue’’ link to review (a Preview window will appear which shows what your comment will look like).

(5)  Once satisfied with the comment, click the ‘‘Submit’’ button to send the comment.

Mailing comments via hardcopy:

Ms. Kelly Hammerle
Five Year Program Manager
BOEM (HM–3120)
381 Elden Street
Herndon, Virginia 20170.

The post Our nation should continue to be an energy leader appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

In a rare offensive move yesterday, Lt. Governor and Senate hopeful, Mead Treadwell, released a direct challenge to opponent Dan Sullivan. Treadwell, typically seen as the reserved (read: nice) candidate, had yet to take a truly hard line against any of his opponents. His performance in debates and in interviews has left many voters with a view of a kindly, but extremely intelligent, policy-driven candidate who stays above the mud slinging. Unfortunately, Treadwell’s “niceness,” at times, has left him playing more defense than offense. Besides a few unsubstantiated rumors of a “whisper campaign,” the Treadwell office hadn’t sent any flak up at the other candidates- until yesterday.

Yesterday’s  press release from Treadwell was a measured statement, and not a “Whisper”. It seems Mead is making good on his promise to be honest and tough, but is it being tough to ask for honesty? The press release calls on Sullivan to give a clear explanation of his record on “Stand your ground” legislation. As Treadwell puts it in the release, “It’s time for my opponent, Dan Sullivan, to be honest, even if it requires that I’m tough on him.”

In the release, Treadwell called for an honest explanation of Sullivan’s recent radio ads, which purport that Dan fought to pass “Stand your ground.” In the release Treadwell calls for honesty because, he says “Our right to self-defense under the second amendment it too important.” In a confident, yet somewhat humorous, move, Treadwell promises that if Dan can “Produce one piece of credible, time-stamped evidence” that shows he did, in fact, fight to pass “Stand your ground” legislation as AG, Treadwell will put a Sullivan campaign sign in his yard. Unlike invitations to debate Treadwell, this is going to be hard for Sullivan to ignore.


Ready, Aim, Quagmire

Sullivan’s troubles with the “Stand your ground” issue began in June. The Sullivan campaign released a radio ad stating, “As Alaska’s attorney general, Sullivan successfully fought to protect our Second Amendment rights and passed ‘stand your ground.’ ” Unfortunately for Dan, the popular political fact-checking site, politifact.com, found the evidence of Sullivan’s “Stand your ground” support as  “dubious at best.” After researching the issue, politifact rated the statement in the radio ad as false.

If Sullivan’s continued rhetoric that he “fought” for “Stand your ground” legislation is false, then what is the real story? Well, the real story has been out for awhile- but few have paid much attention to it during this primary. In 2010, Alaska Rep. Mark Neuman authored HB 381. HB 381 proposed a self-defense policy in Alaska under which victims would no longer be forced to prove that they attempted to flee from an attacker(s) before defending themselves with deadly force. Representatives like Stoltze & Ramras cosponsored that original bill. At the same time that this “Stand your ground” legislation was being proposed, Dan Sullivan was the Attorney General.

There is no evidence to date of Sullivan’s alleged support of the legislation; in fact, there is little evidence of Dan’s involvement whatsoever. As far as time-stamped evidence that ties Dan to the legislation, there are only two: First, there is a 5-page letter, sent directly to the Chair of the Alaska House Judiciary Committee and Committee members, with Dan’s Signature on it. Secondly, was a fiscal note dated March 30, 2010 submitted by the Department of Law which was “Approved by: Dan S. Sullivan, Attorney General.”

Writing a letter may not be “fighting,” but hey at least he supported it, right? Wrong. Throughout the 5-page letter one can only find vehement objection to the passing of “Stand your ground” legislation. Some of the highlights include arguments that HB381 would promote violence and vigilantism, would “encourage the needless taking of human life”, and would be a “recipe for inviting gang violence on our streets.” Sullivan sure put up a fight, but it seems he’s forgotten which side he was fighting for!

If Sullivan has forgotten which side he was fighting for, there are plenty of people who can remind him. One such person is Annie Carpeneti. Carpeneti was one of Sullivan’s deputies in the Department of Law, she also testified against HB381. Having seemingly taken a cue from her former boss, Carpeneti argued before the House Judiciary Committee that “Stand your ground” legislation would legalize vigilantism and invite violence. After Carpeneti echoed Sullivan’s sentiment, Neuman withdrew the bill. He later reworked it with the National Rifle Association and re-introduced it.

Another person who may be able to jog Sullivan’s memory about his stance is Democratic Alaska State Senator Hollis French, who currently chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. In 2012, Rep. Neuman introduced HB80, a successor to the failed HB381. This piece of “Stand your ground” legislation did pass, though not without reservation from French. French, who was against the bill, accused the new AG and bill supporter, Michael Geraghty, of “abandoning the policies of his predecessor, Attorney General Dan Sullivan.” It seems that those who oppose NRA backed self-defense bills miss Dan in their corner.


Danny Boy?

Sullivan’s response to the mounting evidence is exactly what you’d expect from a DC lawyer; deny, deny, deny.

On Sullivan’s campaign website, they have an entire page rewriting Dan’s involvement on “Stand your Ground”. The page is misleading to say the least. It leads readers to assume that Dan supported “Stand your Ground”, the wording must have been written by a lawyer, as it seamlessly substitutes Sullivan’s name with the “Attorney General’s office”, and “The Attorney General”. This misdirects the less attentive as they’re led to assume that Sullivan is the Attorney General that is being referenced and not Michael Geraghty. There is also a link to a non-time-stamped constituent letter written by the bill’s author, Mark Neuman, which uses the same lawyerese to insinuate that Sullivan supported the bill.

The campaign is currently putting money into search engine optimization to make sure that their claim is among the first that comes up through a Google search.

As Amanda Coyne wrote earlier this month, “the Sullivan campaign calls Politifact’s false claim false.” Although very convincing, it’s going to take a bit more than a game of “Yes I did” and “Neuman-said” to sway the voters about this issue. Sullivan’s solution; he denies ever knowing about HB 381 or the subsequent letter sent from his office in the first place.

Even though Sullivan’s name is on the letter, even though it was printed on Sullivan’s letterhead, even though it came from Sullivan’s office, and even though the Anchorage Daily News reported the letter as his; the Sullivan campaign is stating that it was Sullivan’s Assistant Attorney General, John Skidmore, who authored the letter.

According to information obtained by Amanda Coyne, Skidmore has apparently confirmed Sullivan’s account. Skidmore added that, “he never spoke with Sullivan about the legislation, and to his knowledge, Sullivan didn’t know about the letter or have any information about it, which isn’t unusual.” (http://amandacoyne.com/politics/assistant-ag-who-penned-stand-your-ground-letter-confirms-sullivans-account/)

Stuck Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Let’s say, for a moment, that Sullivan is telling the truth; he supported stand your ground and his immediate subordinate sent a 5-page letter, with Sullivan’s name on it, opposing a huge piece of pro-2nd Amendment legislation to the House Judiciary Committee. This is incredibly telling. First, it’s clear that Sullivan can’t keep his house in order. If, as the AG, his assistant AG is sending out such incredibly important correspondences, without his knowledge, how is Sullivan going to run a Senate office? Second, even if it is proven that Skidmore wrote the letter, thus proving that Sullivan didn’t directly oppose the legislation on paper, where is there any proof that Sullivan supported stand your ground?

Sullivan said he fought to pass it, yet he’s claiming to know nothing about the bill. These two statements cannot co-exist.

There is, as previous mentioned, an undated letter from Neuman leading readers to believe that Sullivan aided the legislation in some way. However, as written by Amanda Coyne, “Neuman didn’t work directly with Sullivan, but he assumed that Sullivan was kept abreast of the discussions.” http://amandacoyne.com/politics/sullivan-stands-up-for-his-support-for-stand-your-ground/)

It’s a bit odd of Neuman to be thanking Sullivan for his effort, when Neuman himself had no idea if Sullivan even new about the “Stand your ground” legislation. To be fair, Neuman cannot be called a liar, as the letter was very carefully written and lets the reader fill in the gaps.

Finally, and perhaps most terrifying, if Sullivan is telling the truth, then as many sources have commented in his defense, he had no idea what was going on. How can Sullivan support a piece of legislation if, as his defenders assert, Sullivan didn’t know anything about it.

If Sullivan and his camp are to be believed, then Sullivan has effectively jumped from the frying pan into the fire. He may be able to escape allegations of flip-flopping and deceit regarding “Stand your ground,” in the Primary Election, but if he does, do you think that Mark Begich will let that die during the General when he gets an endorsement from the Non-Partisan NRA?

If Sullivan had just come clean in the beginning about his past position on the issue and explain why his views had changed since then, this wouldn’t be an issue. Instead, he chose to exaggerate to the point of deception. The stance of honesty and explanation is sure to resonate better with voters than outright deceit.

So far, Sullivan has either proven himself incapable of handling public office, or has shown himself to have a fundamental problem with honesty.

So Where Do We Stand

In this hotly contested Primary I mirror Gail Phillips’ sentiment in a Peninsula Clarion article titled,  Voices of Alaska: Who vets the candidates?” Gail wrote, “As a Republican, I want to know what measure of responsibility my Party is taking to make certain we send our best candidate forward to the General Election in November.” Whoever we Republicans put our support behind on August 19th is the man we want in D.C., but first he has to beat Begich. After months of mudslinging with Begich, Sullivan already has a target on his back. After problems like Sullivan’s residency have come up, and now this “Stand your ground” snafu, it’s hard to see Sullivan putting up a credible fight. This is only the Primary, all the dirty laundry needs to be put out there so Begich has nothing to attack. So I ask, have we seen all of Dan’s or is this just the beginning?

Stand for Something

Treadwell attacked what he saw as an inconsistency, he did not attack Dan on the administrations stance, he asked for honesty through clarification. Even when Treadwell attacks, he does so as a statesman, he does so honorably. Nobody can criticize somebody for seeking honesty, and this was a very smart stance to take.

I look forward to seeing a response to Mead Treadwell’s challenge that isn’t “Neuman said” and “Yes I did”, but I don’t think that will happen. Will Dan be able to clear up his “Stand your ground” mess, and more importantly; at this point, will it even matter if he can?

Written by Matt J. Beck a resident of the Matanuska – Susitna Borough

The post Sullivan feeling a “Duty to Retreat”? appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

While recent setbacks for Arctic oil and gas exploration will convince some Western companies to give up trying to develop the region’s potentially huge energy reserves, other energy firms are expanding their investments. Russia also is determined to press ahead with Arctic energy exploration.

The bottom line is that America needs better leadership and planning to deal with issues related to Arctic energy, trade and security.

The area north of the Arctic Circle holds an estimated 90 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 1,670 trillion cubic feet of gas, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Experts estimate that the Arctic accounts for about 22 percent of undiscovered technically recoverable energy resources on earth.

Norwegian firm Statoil last week announced it is delaying an Arctic oil production effort in the Barents Sea after drilling found significantly less oil than was expected in the Johan Castberg field, located off the coast of Norway.

In February, Statoil abandoned exploration of a nearby natural gas field after only a modest amount of gas was found.

Statoil, BP, and ExxonMobil pulled out of oil exploration off the Greenland coast over the last six months due to a failure to find any oil, a disappointing scientific report, and a need to develop new technology to tackle challenging conditions, including extreme sub-zero temperatures, icebergs and year-round ice.

Numerous problems have also delayed Arctic energy exploration in Alaskan waters. Royal Dutch Shell called off exploration scheduled for this summer in the Chukchi and Beauford Seas, located off Alaska’s northwest and northeast coasts, because of a court decision faulting a U.S. government assessment of the environmental risks to the region from oil drilling. Shell also called off energy exploration in 2013 after its 2012 efforts were plagued by a series of mishaps and mechanical failures.

Imperial Oil Canada, Exxon Mobil and BP plan to drill at least one well in the Beauford Sea off the coast of Canada’s Northwest Territories. The exploration will not begin between 2016 and 2020 due to the need to develop vessels and equipment that can operate in the region’s severe environment.

Other Western oil companies are pressing forward with Alaskan energy production and exploration. BP, which operates Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay oil field, is investing in technology to coax more oil out of the aging field, North America’s largest. ConocoPhillips, which operates the Alpine and Kuparuk fields along Alaska’s North Slope, is engaged in similar projects and plans to drill more wells in these fields.

ExxonMobil, BP, ConocoPhillips, TransCanada and the State of Alaska are working together to construct a liquefied natural (LNG) gas plant to ship Alaska’s huge natural gas surplus to Asian countries. The LNG project could cost $45 billion to $60 billon, far more than the $8 billion trans-Alaska pipeline.

This LNG project could be endangered if Alaskans vote next month to repeal Senate Bill 21 which eliminated progressive taxation on oil revenues. Oil companies argue that Alaska will be much less attractive for energy exploration if this legislation is repealed.

ANWR Again an Issue in Alaskan Elections

The debate continues over energy exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) which the U.S. Energy Information Agency believes holds between 5.7 billion and 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil. (By comparison, Prudhoe Bay’s total recoverable oil reserves are estimated to be 24 billion barrels, 12 billion of which are believed to be remaining.) Washington politicians and the Obama administration refuse to budge in blocking energy exploration in ANWR.

GOP Senate candidate and former Alaska Governor Dan Sullivan supports a lawsuit by the Alaska government against the Obama administration for rejecting its plan to explore for oil and natural gas in ANWR.

Incumbent Senator Mark Begich says he supports the Alaskan government’s ANWR exploration plan blocked by the Obama administration. However, Sullivan has accused Begich of not doing enough to get the plan approved in Washington.

Reflecting his opposition to Washington’s ban on energy exploration in ANWR, another Alaskan named Dan Sullivan, the mayor of Anchorage who is running to replace Treadwell as Lieutenant Governor, made news in May when he said “If I was governor today, I’d probably invade ANWR.”

In a related development, the U.S. House of Representatives on June 26 passed the Lowering Gasoline Prices to Fuel an America that Works Act, a bill that would open to energy exploration the 24-million acre National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, a region situated east of Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic Ocean. The bill would scrap the Department of the Interior’s existing management of this region and allow additional energy leases and off-shore exploration. It is unlikely to become law because of opposition from Senate Democrats and the Obama administration.

Russia Bets Big on Arctic Energy

While some Western oil companies have backed away from offshore energy exploration projects in the Arctic, Russia is aggressively pushing forward with them.

In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the first oil shipment from Russia’s Prirazlomnoye field, located in the Barents Sea, making it the first operational offshore oil field in the Arctic. Prirazlomnoye is estimated to have reserves of about 600 million barrels of oil.

The Prirazlomnoye platform was the site of an anti-drilling protest last September, which ended when Russian paratroopers boarded the Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise and arrested 30 crew and activists. The demonstrators were jailed for two months before they were freed by a parliamentary amnesty. Russia refuses to release the ship which remains in the port of Murmansk.

Russian energy firm Gazprom Neft will be engaged in oil exploration in a nearby Arctic Sea area known as the Dolginskoye field during the ice-free summer months of 2014.

ExxonMobil and Russian oil company Rosneft plan to spend up to $500 billion on Arctic oil exploration off the Russian Arctic coast. The two companies plan a joint project to explore for oil and gas in Russia’s Kara Sea this fall.

Russia is taking advantage of retreating Arctic ice due to climate change to step up offshore energy exploration. Alaskan Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell, a GOP Senate candidate, has raised related concerns over Russian President Putin’s plans to exploit retreating sea ice to develop a northern sea route through the Arctic that could ship over four tons of cargo per year.

Russia reportedly is planning to build naval stations for warships and other vessels in the Arctic situated along a northern sea route. Russia intends to station military forces in the region by 2020 to ensure economic as well as political interests.

Despite some setbacks, there are enormous energy and trade opportunities for the United States in the Arctic as well as security challenges. While some Western energy firms are proceeding slowing on Arctic opportunities, Russia is racing ahead. A May 2014 General Accountability Office report found that Washington’s Arctic policies are unfocused and bogged down in bureaucracy. Leadership is needed by elected officials in Washington and in Alaska to develop better U.S. policies to responsibly tap the Arctic’s huge energy reserves and to protect America’s security interests in the region.

Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst, is a Senior Fellow with the Center for Security Policy and Chief Analyst with LIGNET.com.

The post Recent Drilling Setbacks Will Not End Appeal of Arctic Energy appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

By Erick Cordero Giorgana

Looking at recent census data, the Hispanic population in Alaska is over 40,000 or about 6% of the general population. It is a low number when compared to the national average of 16%. However, when it comes to elections in Alaska, every single vote counts and Alaskans know that one or two votes can make the difference.

National candidates have spent considerable amounts of campaign funds reaching out to the Hispanic population. From social media, to radio and TV ads; they have pulled all the stop signs trying to get the Hispanic vote. For example, in 2013, gubernatorial candidate from New Jersey, Chris Christie, received 51% of the Hispanic vote after a big effort from his re-election campaign to reach out – almost 20% higher support than that of his previous election. Connecting with and appealing to Hispanics, a pool of over 23 million eligible voters according to the Pew Research Center, has been a steadily growing trend among Republican and Democratic candidates on the national stage.

The majority of Hispanics in the country are U.S. born or naturalized citizens, permanent residents, or refugees. According to the Pew Hispanic Research Trends Project, about 48% of Hispanics are U.S. born. A survey by that same agency showed that Hispanics are more socially conservative on issues like abortion, but more liberal on issues like same-sex marriage. The results also indicated that U.S. born Hispanics (30%) identified themselves as liberal in contrast with foreign-born Hispanics who identified themselves as conservatives (35%).

The majority of Hispanics in Alaska are concentrated within the Municipality of Anchorage; over 22,000 according to the most recent Census numbers. It is difficult to pinpoint how many Hispanics are eligible voters in Alaska, but despite that, some Alaskan candidates have tried to reach out to that community during campaign season.

Previous attempts by candidates have included ads directed to the Hispanic community in Anchorage through Telemundo; one of the major Spanish-language television broadcasting stations that can be viewed in Anchorage, or by participating in one of several forums that leaders in the Hispanic community have hosted over the years. Former U.S. congressional candidates Diane Benson, Ethan Berkowitz, Gabrielle LeDoux and Sean Parnell participated in one such event back in 2008. Senators Mark Begich and Lisa Murkowski have also made it a custom to participate in Hispanic-sponsored events when they are not working in their Washington D.C. offices.

During the Anchorage mayoral race of 2010, one of the candidates used large signs in Spanish that featured a local Hispanic community member to show his or her support of that candidate. State Representative Gabrielle LeDoux had a Spanish version of her website during her State House race.

In the current campaign cycle, the Mead Treadwell U.S. Senate campaign has plans to organize events with the Hispanic community. Attempts to contact the Dan Sullivan and Joe Miller U.S. Senate campaigns went without success, but it is possible that these campaigns will also reach out for the Hispanic votes. Democrat incumbent U.S. Senator Mark Begich has, and will continue, to reach out to the Hispanic community in Alaska in his re-election effort.

Does the Hispanic vote really matter in Alaska? Despite the low numbers of Hispanics living in Alaska, and the low turnout in elections, recognition every single vote counts has made it a fruitful demographic target by candidates. As seen by previous and current campaigns that have attempted to attract the Hispanic vote, and the increasing local polling trend in the Hispanic population, it would not be a surprise to see more campaigns reaching out to the Alaskan Hispanic community.

Erick Cordero Giorgana is one of the founders of the Hispanic Affairs Council of Alaska. He is an Alaskan Chamber of Commerce “Top 40 Under 40” winner and former member of the School Board for the Mat-Su Borough School District.

The post The Hispanic Vote; Does it Matter in Alaska? appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” – Sir Walter Scott

Indeed, the author of Marmion and Ivanhoe may be onto something beyond love and war. It would seem his quote is just as appropriate when used in politics, especially online.

I presented to the Palmer Chamber of Commerce a few weeks ago, discussing what my PR firm offers in the field of political communications. It was enlightening to observe the smiles, frowns and eye-rolls from the chamber members as I laid out the process through which a candidate or initiative is branded. Clearly, some adore campaign chatter, and others abhor it, while a swath of Alaskans just ignore it and have indifference for the political season.

Campaigns are percolating into the boiling mode now, while many people finish spring cleaning, dust off lawn mowers and weed eaters, and start pulling fishing gear from the shelves. The weather is gorgeous in the Valley, and that bodes well for barbecue fans and the lake-dwellers salivating over water play, all of whom candidates seek attention from.

Did I mention school is almost over? But you probably knew that one already.

For those of us in the political world, this is as critical a time as ever to fine-tune messaging and weave the most salient points to attract attention for clients. Our prize is the precious vote from each and every one of you.

T.V. ads and videos are not inexpensive to produce, and placement on air is no less costly. Radio ads are a bit easier to craft, yet buys on air remain a significant cost factor in the campaign budget.

Digital advertising is available, and far less expensive (the Frontiersman, by example, has a popular online website and digital messaging opportunities). The printed postal message is a dying method, but some still hold dear to the concept of receiving a political missive in the mailbox.

After T.V., radio, digital and print, and the occasional yard sign, what’s left is the free and high-traffic venue of online messaging. Think about blog sites, the comment section at the end of an article in a news source, social media portals like Facebook and Twitter, and video feeds like YouTube and Vimeo. All in all, and at negligible to zero cost, a candidate who posts messages and spreads his or her platform by comments online can capture attention and build visibility.

But what about reputation? Is it fair to say the most people online who read and post comments have good intentions. Do the comments you read on political blog posts and at the end of news columns on the Internet indicate public sentiment? Of course not!

Recently, my firm designed a thoughtful video message for a political client, and the response was instructive. The legitimate news sites that require an actual person (through Facebook) to post, absent avatars and fake profiles, seem to draw little ire and vitriol. People either lack the courage to publicly give their opinion, or they just don’t have the time or inclination to respond.

The Frontiersman is a prime and positive example of a news source that won’t let people post a comment if they don’t identify themselves. There is integrity in this rule.

However, there are other sites that do no sift through real vs. fake profiles, nor prohibit such mischief. What that translates to is a blog sites where hurtful, negative aspersions can be scattered along comment walls and article input line, and the public, if they even read the sources, has no idea who the person commenting is in real life.

I don’t give much credence to Internet trolls and campaign supporters and staff who don’t have the backbone to reveal who they are when posting Internet comments. In a way, perhaps attention, good or bad, is a form of flattery. In advertising circles, often times any attention is helpful because it resonates in the mind of the consumer or voter.

As the August 19 primary election nears, whether you adore, abhor or ignore all the political messaging, just remember not to base your decisions and votes on fake names and unsubstantiated allegations. Diatribes may be part of elections, but sources and accusers matter, and the purity of the process depends on honesty in journalism and transparency in opinion makers.

For those who want to file as a candidate, the deadline to file paperwork to become a candidate for a statewide or legislative office is 5 p.m. on June 2.

New voters and people changing their registration status have until July 20 – 30 days before the primary – to do so. But don’t wait until the deadline, which falls on a Sunday, when state elections offices may be closed.

The post Political Communications and Blog comments: Adore, Abhor, Ignore appeared first on Alaska Politics and Elections.