Alaska Senator Mark Begich said on Saturday that the Alaska Senate race is about Alaska’s future and not President Barack Obama.

But first Lady Michelle Obama insists the November elections are about her husband.  She said at a recent campaign rally in Illinois: “Because make no mistake about it. Barack’s last campaign wasn’t in 2012; the last campaign is this year, 2014.”

Funny how Senator Begich and Democratic senate candidates across the country don’t agree and are running from the president.

Begich along with Democratic Senate candidates Mary Landrieu (Louisiana), Mark Pryor (Arkansas), Kay Hagan (North Carolina), Bruce Braley (Iowa), and Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire) have distanced themselves from Mr. Obama and refuse to campaign with him.

In a recent debate, Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Allison Grimes refused to admit she voted for Barack Obama for president.

Senator Begich maintains he is not a rubber stamp for the president because he has opposed him on issues such as the Keystone pipeline, gun rights, the cost of living on military bases and rural education policy.  He also opposes the president’s plan to arm the Syrian rebels.

While many conservatives agree with Begich on these issues, he is sidestepping more important issues which I believe will lead to his defeat: how Begich’s reelection will help keep Harry Reid as majority leader, Begich’s vote to pass Obamacare, and the fact that if the Republicans take the Senate, Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski will become the Chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Removing Harry Reid as majority leader is the only way Americans can express their displeasure with President Obama’s failing presidency.  Reid has been abusing his power in the Senate for six years to block key bills and amendments that could have blunted the damage of Obama programs and force Democratic senators like Mark Begich to take public stands on them.  With the recent volatility in the stock market, the president’s ineffective efforts to contain the threat from ISIS in Syria and Iraq, the mishandling of the Ebola outbreak, and growing concerns about Obamacare, America needs a Republican Senate to hold the president accountable.

The handful of issues on which Senator Begich disagrees with the president are greatly overshadowed by these and other more important issues.  Re-electing Mark Begich would be a vote to keep Harry Reid as the Senate Majority Leader and to NOT hold Mr. Obama accountable.

Although Obamacare may be the most important issue for Alaskans in the U.S. Senate race, Begich is desperately trying to ignore it.  Check out the “priorities” page of his campaign website – healthcare is not listed as a priority issue despite the fact that Obamacare was the most important vote of his Senate career and growing anger in the state about how this program is causing healthcare costs to skyrocket.

According to an October 13 Politico article, Alaskans are facing “more extreme premium increases from some insurers” because of Obamacare.  In early September, the Alaska Division of Insurance announced that average premiums for health care plans available on the federal exchange will increase up to 37 percent according to a September 11 Alaska Journal of Commercearticle.

The Alaska Journal article also said Obamacare has caused Premera Blue Cross of Alaska to incur severe losses.

And then there is chairmanship of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, an issue which has received little attention in the Alaska Senate campaign.  The current Democratic Chairwoman, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, has used this powerful post to benefit oil and gas production in her state.

Alaska would gain a similar advantage if the Senate flips to Republican control and Senator Lisa Murkowski became the new chairwoman of this committee.

But there is another scenario for the Senate Energy Committee that would harm Alaska: if Landrieu loses but the Democrats keep control of the Senate, the new chair would be Washington Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell who is hostile to the energy industry.

Dan Sullivan, the Republican candidate for the Alaska Senate seat, is a good alternative to Senator Begich.  He is a moderate Republican who has been endorsed by the conservative Club for Growth and moderate Republican Condoleezza Rice.  He also has a deep understanding of national security issues from his 20 years of military service and high-level jobs in the National Security Council and the State Department.

Making Senator Murkowski the new Chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is a good reason to vote against Senator Begich.

But a better reason is that Alaskans and all Americans need to hold Mr. Obama accountable for his poor policies and lack of leadership by removing his key ally, Senator Harry Reid, as Senate Majority Leader.

Senator Begich, Michelle Obama was right – next month’s elections are about President Obama.

Fred Fleitz is a regular contributor to APE. Mr. Fleitz is a former CIA analyst and Senior Fellow with the Center for Security Policy.

The post Senator Begich: Your Senate Race IS About Obama appeared first on Alaska Politics & Elections.

This morning on KFQD 750 AM’s Bernadette and Berkowitz radio show, Republican U.S. Senate Candidate Joe Miller monopolized the attempted conversation in an effort to contrast himself from his Republican opponents. Miller’s incessancy to distinguish him from his Primary Election adversaries, particularly with the claim he lacks rhetoric or political spin, has had the opposite effect.

Joe Miller, in fact, is full of rhetoric.

Science and Reality

Joe Miller doesn’t disagree with Mead Treadwell or Dan Sullivan that the science on climate change is inclusive. Yet Miller continues to promote falsities about Treadwell and Sullivan by suggesting they are “climate change alarmists” and embracing “dubious scientific claims.” (May 17, 2014 article on Miller’s blogsite).

Miller’s demagoguery of science is unconstructive in solving the problems of pollution and society’s amalgamation to changing weather patterns, no matter the cause. The reality is that Treadwell and Sullivan oppose a carbon tax, which is levied on the carbon content of fuels (carbon is present in every hydrocarbon fuel – such as coal, petroleum, natural gas). Treadwell and Sullivan are also opposed to cap-and-trade, which is an environmental policy tool used to yield results based on a mandatory cap on emissions. Further, it’s unclear, as Miller alleges, where Treadwell and Sullivan have supported a “man-made global warming agenda” or “top-down federal regulation” relating to climate policy. Miller’s claims are erroneous of his two opponents in these contexts, and his weaving of the term “liberty” in the narrative makes no sense. It’s rhetoric and misapplied.

Joe Miller needs to recognize, as former Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard Admiral Robert Papp Jr. stated to the U.S. Senate’s Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard (chaired by U.S. Senator Mark Begich) on August 12, 2011: “The recession of the ice age continues to open new water in the summer months. While there is less ice and more water, the unpredictable movement of existing ice flows and uncharted waters beneath a previously frozen sea could present risks to ships that venture into these waters.” On July 16th President Obama selected Admiral Papp to serve as the United States’ special representative for the Arctic. Papp will be the U.S.’s top-level envoy for Arctic issues affecting our nation.

Alaska’s Arctic region is changing, primarily because of a warming of our climate. It’s fact, not hyperbole. While former U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) recently endorsed Joe Miller, recall DeMint was one of the few U.S. senators opposed to establishing policies that will afford the U.S. – and particularly Alaska, a seat at the Arctic policy table. This is a policy arena in which Mead Treadwell has the most expertise and leadership. This policy collective includes deepwater ports, ice breakers and enhanced Coast Guard patrols and presence. Miller has neither expertise nor credible insight on Arctic policy, only rhetoric.

Miller has also spoken the least about alternative energy options. While Treadwell and Sullivan have embraced and recognized wind, solar, hydro and tidal, and other forms of Earth-powered energy sources and uses in places like the Northwest Arctic Borough, Cook Inlet and Kodiak, Miller often evades the dialogue on renewables. From the continued leak of nuclear waste into the Pacific Ocean at Japan’s Fukushima Plant to the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, Miller should take note and seek remedies and alternatives or he won’t be representing Alaskan’s interests, particularly in the huge seafood and fishing industry. [A Gyre is a naturally occurring vortex of wind and currents rotating in our two hemispheres; five major Gyres are in the oceans worldwide and the Northern Pacific Gyre – the Great Pacific Garbage Patch – has an estimated 11 million tons of floating plastics over 5 million square miles.]

Alaskans need federal representation that embraces good science and real science. Ice has been melting long before the internal combustion engine, and yet – it’s still melting – and the Arctic is still warming. Humanity needs to address the current environmental weather cycle. It’s not a partisan issue, but rather societal. Alaskan communities and economies depend on policymaking champions who are proactive and reasonable. Joe Miller has a bag full of one-liners and finger-pointing claims against his opponents, but it is Treadwell who has been the Arctic policy champion and Sullivan who served as an attorney general and Natural Resources commissioner. Miller has no tangible record in this arena, nor scientific training in the field, to impugn his opponents.

When it comes to responsible and Alaskan-centric environmental and Arctic policies, Mead Treadwell and Dan Sullivan have the more rational approach. Better yet, they respect others’ opinions absent offensive attacks that Miller displayed this morning on air.

Can you even imagine going to Washington DC to visit a “Senator Joe Miller” and his reaction if you had any other opinion but his own regarding the plethora of science and climate and environmental issues? Open mindedness and courtesy matter in leadership and diplomacy.

Joe Miller’s consternation of rhetoric is ironically shrouded by his own pomposity, especially when it comes to the environment and Alaskan solutions vs. placing blame and assigning culpability.

The post Rhetoric on Climate Change and Policy – Joe Miller Style appeared first on Alaska Politics & 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 & Elections.

Two years ago the idea of an Alaskan Women’s Summit was bounced around by several lawmakers and women business leaders, initially envisioned and facilitated by State Senator Lesil McGuire.

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 & Elections.

Is there a self-appointed “patriot” on the list of U.S. Senate candidates? How about someone who incessantly refers to our Founding Fathers when it comes to their social policies (e.g. slavery, suppression of women’s rights, destruction of American Indian culture, rampant child abuse) with zealous reverence?

When it comes to supporting the farmer, is there one candidate from the myriad U.S. Senate hopefuls that stands out and has caught Alaskan farmers’ attention?

The answer is “yes” to all of the above. His name is Joe Miller.

I’ve listened to Mr. Miller on the radio, and in T.V. interviews. I attended the East High School debate in Anchorage with other Mat-Su farmers. I’ve engaged with him on air in the Valley on local radio talk show several times.

Over the months I’ve followed him, Joe Miller has been critical of farmers while claiming to be a fiscal conservative. Originally I thought Mr. Miller was an Ivy League educated attorney living in Alaska, collecting a farm subsidy for land he owned in Kansas. But according to our conversation on the Tom Anderson Show back in May 23^rd, Miller said he bought his farmland in Kansas and collected a farm subsidy while subdividing the farm. So if I’m correct, he was actually a developer collecting a farm subsidy. According to Miller, this wasn’t a big deal because he wasn’t actually collecting very much money from the federal government. In the conversation on air he said he was earning around $100 a month (I looked it up and he averaged $118 a month for over five years). Miller also denied collecting farm payments while he was in Alaska, yet his own U.S. Senate campaign admitted back in 2010 that he did, in fact, collect the subsidies while working as an attorney and residing in Alaska.

Granted, some voters may not like the idea of farm subsidies, but one-line sound bites by a pandering politician disparaging the program and the farmers who receive them is a betrayal of the men and women in my industry.

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 & Elections.

By Carl Nelson

It’s quite interesting what surfaces during election season. The microcosm of rhetoric and chest-pounding, cheap shots and personal attacks. In concert, it’s almost comical. Yet, when it comes to the direction Alaska will be headed on a national and international level, and considering our current federal representation, I fear that comedy is the last thing Alaskans need.

I’m a lifelong hunter and fisherman. My father was a Scout Master in East Anchorage growing up. I learned like many Scouts did, about fishing and hunting, and about honor and telling the truth.

As the August 19^th Primary Election gets closer in voters’ sights, I hope Alaskans who value transparency, particularly when it comes to hunting and fishing recreation, will consider all of the Republican candidates for U.S. Senate closely. Specifically, Dan Sullivan should be scrutinized beyond fancy radio and T.V. advertising and out-of-state PAC messaging.

Label me overboard, but I follow campaigns. Granted, I’m not political, don’t work in government, nor have I ran for office or worked for a politician. I follow what candidates say and do because it’s important to me both as an informed voter and to measure integrity.

Early on, the Democrats began running with the narrative that Dan Sullivan is not Alaskan. From owning a house in Maryland to having a non-resident fishing license in 2009, they’ve done a fairly good job keeping that message alive. Sullivan constantly refutes the claim by saying that he moved to our state in 1997, which is the first time he fished at his wife’s fish-camp on the Yukon River. His time fishing there appears true and is substantiated by his photos.

While the Democrats have asserted that Sullivan had a non-resident fishing license in 2009, it would be easy for Team Sullivan to refute their claims by showing his fishing license from 1997 when he was at his wife’s fish camp on the Yukon.

As an informed voter, and a guy who loves and thrives in the great outdoors, I don’t hang my hat on one claim or another in political posturing, but I do take offense to posers. Sullivan once spoke on a local radio talk show in Anchorage about the fact his opponents (Miller and Treadwell) wouldn’t know the dangerous end of rifle. This is a ridiculous kidney punch to men like Joe Miller, who owns and has hunted with multiple firearms all of his life, and to Mead Treadwell. When Treadwell and I spoke at Alaska Outdoor Council, NRA and Safari Club International events over the years, I certainly didn’t see Dan Sullivan in the room but for recently because of his candidacy.

Regarding Sullivan and fishing, the logical reaction to a questionable licensure claim would be to call the Alaska Department of Fish & Game and verify who was licensed when…since tags and licenses are public information. However, if you did that, you would find that Dan Sullivan never purchased a fishing license until 2009.

When Dan was fishing at his wife’s fish camp “every summer since 1997,” it appears to have been done with no fishing license. While the statute of limitations regarding the law has probably expired, that doesn’t mean accountability isn’t in play. Dan Sullivan, a Yale Law School graduate like President Bill Clinton, has no excuse to claim ignorance on the law.

Fishing regulations and boasting of being a “guy’s guy” and outdoorsman is disingenuous if you really are not, and you don’t even comply with the fishing regulations that govern anglers’ actions.

Dig a little deeper, and listen to the likes of the Alaska Democratic Party, Joe Miller, and Mead Treadwell, and the hornets’ nest buzzes a bit more. Dan Sullivan’s fishing license history is sketchy:

• In 2009, Dan Sullivan received a Non-Resident Fishing License.

• In 2011, Dan Sullivan claimed he had been a resident for 1 year, 9 months (indicating arrival 4/09).

• In 2013, three months before he declared his candidacy, he claimed he had been a resident for 10 years.

• Even if Dan had been in Alaska from 1997-2002 (a little over 4 years), and then again from late 2009-2013 (4 years) – he hadn’t been an Alaskan resident for 10 years.

A friend of mine recently contacted the Alaska Department of Fish & Game to determine if there might be a problem with Sullivan’s disclosure discrepancies. He asked a staff member to review the licensing history juxtaposed to his residency and intermittent times in Alaska. The staff member noted that the discrepancies are a problem and people are fined for such routinely. But not Dan Sullivan.

What excuse does the former Attorney General have for violating fishing regulations? Sullivan has responded that he was only completing the applications based on Fish & Game staff guidance. This time, Rep. Mark Neuman may not be able to cover for Mr. Sullivan, and it’s easy to blame staff but typically that doesn’t work for the common folk like you and me (e.g. try turning your PDF application in late or erroneously and blame staff).

With a five-minute phone call to F&G, it can be shown that Dan Sullivan has broken two regulations/laws and has shirked accountability.

Do you really think Senator Begich isn’t ready and eager, champing at the bit to pounce on Sullivan’s inconsistencies? If you think the Primary is a battle, just wait until the General Election and WWIII of Democrat vs. Republican carnage.

Disappointingly, this year’s Primary looks like 2010 all over again, and if something isn’t done now, Mark Begich has the ability to put a Republican hopeful in handcuffs (or at least publicly castigate and shame him).

Remember the lessons learned four years ago: Base your vote on proven leadership and consistent statesmanship; Don’t trust the rhetoric: Don’t invest your vote in an unvetted, unknown candidate with alarming out-of-state ties.

The Republican Party got lucky when they went against Scott McAdams (“Scott who”? you ask. The big guy from Sitka), but this isn’t a candidate as lack-luster as McAdams. The GOP’s choice will be challenging Mark Begich, who is arguably the best and most skillful campaigner the Democrats have ever groomed in Alaska. We saw what he was willing to do to our beloved Senator Ted Stevens in 2008. Do you not think Begich is willing to do that again, especially against Dan Sullivan?

For me, it’s about walking the walk. If a candidate says he loves to hunt and fish, then I hope he really does and is not claiming such hobbies to curry my vote. As for following the law, I do – and you do, when it comes to fishing and hunting. You’d expect someone running for U.S. Senate would comply the same way. If not, then it’s time for voters to reflect on their own values and lack thereof of some politicians who would do anything to represent them.

A charlatan is defined as a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill, or plain and simple: a fraud. If Dan Sullivan’s unsupported outdoorsman bravado and self-aggrandizement are based on improper fishing licensing, that doesn’t bode well for the Republicans against Mark Begich.

Perhaps it’s time to cut the fishing line on Dan Sullivan.

Carl Nelson is a U.S. Army veteran. He has lived in Alaska since 1972. Carl is an avid fisherman and hunter, and is a lifetime member of the NRA and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, as well as a member of the Alaska Outdoor Council and Safari Club International.

The post Beware of Outdoorsman Charlatans: It’s Election Season appeared first on Alaska Politics & Elections.

A Loud Whisper

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 & Elections.

By Fred Fleitz

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 & Elections.

Senator Mark Begich hopes to run for reelection this fall by making President Obama “irrelevant” in Alaska.  This translates to running away from Obamacare, the president’s dismal foreign policy record and several continuing scandals so Alaskans forget that he is the leading Democrat and most important Obama supporter in the state.

Begich is also trying to change the subject by attacking U.S. Senate candidate Dan Sullivan, who appears likely to win the August primary election.

Begich’s early attacks on Sullivan reflect how deeply Democrats are afraid of him.  Sullivan has attracted unusually broad support and may be able to unite the Republican Party and win over Democratic and Non-Partisan voters.  Sullivan is a Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserves with 20 years of service as an infantry and reconnaissance officer.  He served as Governor Sarah Palin’s Attorney General and as Alaska’s Commissioner of Natural Resources.

Sullivan also held high-level jobs in Washington DC with the National Security Council and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate to be an Assistant Secretary of State in the Bush Administration.

Sullivan is endorsed by the conservative Club for Growth, as well as centrist Republican Condoleezza Rice, the former Secretary of State.  He has a moderate position on climate change that will make it difficult for Begich to portray him as an extremist.  Sullivan has vastly out-raised his primary election opponents, generating even more money for his campaign than Senator Begich in the first quarter of 2014.

Begich’s main attack on Sullivan so far is that he’s not a “real” Alaskan.  Sullivan moved to Alaska in 1997, although he spent a significant amount of time out of the state between 2002 and 2009 because of his military service and senior jobs with the U.S. government.

If Begich’s argument is valid, Hillary Clinton never would have been a U.S. Senator.  Unlike Sullivan, who has held senior jobs with the state government and served for several years with the Anchorage-based Fourth Reconnaissance Battalion – the Marine Corps Reserve’s premier cold weather reconnaissance unit, Clinton moved to New York solely to be a senator from a state where she had never lived.

Begich is also attacking Sullivan by going after the billionaire Koch brothers who are regularly demonized by top Democrats as conservative outsiders trying to buy elections.  Although Sullivan says his campaign has taken no contributions from the Kochs, PAC ads have aired throughout Alaska on T.V., radio, and online mediums that Begich claims the Koch Brothers funded.  The paranoid Democratic complaints about the Kochs have become tiresome.  It’s also difficult to palate Begich’s fear mongering about a “new tidal wave” of out-of-state money buying campaign advertising when a Democratic super-PAC largely funded by Harry Reid’s Senate Majority PAC has already committed over $1.6 million for Begich’s re-election according to online’s RealClearPolitics.  Rest assured millions of dollars will also be spent to defend Begich by left-wing Democratic moneyman George Soros.

Dan Sullivan doesn’t have the Republican senatorial nomination wrapped up.  Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell may be down over 10% in the polls, but he has a good ground game, is respected throughout the state, and historically – Alaskan primary polls have been unpredictable.  Treadwell is a viable and worthy candidate, but is behind in fundraising. Often in large-scale state and federal campaigns, a sizable messaging and communications budget matters.  The third Republican candidate, Joe Miller, is far behind Sullivan and Treadwell based on recent national polling data and has a slim chance of winning the primary comparatively.

Mark Begich recognizes the major issue in his Alaskan U.S. Senate race will be President Obama and the growing unpopularity of the Administration because of failed policies and growing scandals (Benghazi and the Veterans Administration most recently).  As a Democratic Senator who has facilitated Obama’s policies – especially by championing and voting for Obamacare – Begich is desperate to change the subject.  That’s why he’s focusing on false issues about Dan Sullivan.  Yet – he remains inextricably linked to the president.

The fact that Begich and Las Vegas Democratic U.S. Senator Harry Reid began their attack on Sullivan so early is indicative of how fearful they are about Begich’s re-election chances, should he face a formidable candidate like Dan Sullivan. Sullivan will appeal to Republican, Democratic and Non-Partisan/Undeclared voter bases in the state (as will Treadwell), and whether Sullivan or Treadwell win, their top priority should be to continue directing voter attention to Mark Begich as Obama’s top guy in Alaska. A clear, legitimate difference in candidates will be visible for voters to consider once contrasted. No wonder Begich is scared.

David Frazier is a licensed Impact Strategist and President of DFA Benefits. He has over 35 years of insurance and healthcare industry experience in Alaska statewide.

The post Begich wants to change the subject with silly attacks on Sullivan – but he’s still Obama’s Top Guy appeared first on Alaska Politics & 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 & Elections.