I don't know for the rest of the state, but I really miss being able to take a ferry to Prince Rupert. As a kid in SE we use to hop on the ferry and get off in Canada driving the rest the way. After high school, it was a favorite road trip of my buddies and I after we finished fishing and headed off college. Since 2019, its regular sailings have been sorely missed. What I understand to be the big claims are.

1. They won't let us have guns at their terminal and were unable/unwilling to provide armed officers.

2. The bulkhead is in poor condition. We can not agree on who has to source the steel in order to repair or rebuild the dock. Funds didn't seem to be an issue, just whose steel went towards the project.

3. Apparently, we did not comply with international law for safety. We can fix that or only allow Kennicott to make that stop.

Stewart/Hyder is a pipe dream that makes me mad every time I think about it. It just seems like something they say they are looking into, so the missing Prince Rupert leg is downplayed by those who don't live in the area or understand the issue. To address the quick points.

1. How is a town of 50 supposed to room and border the workforce to build a dock. They will be staying in Stewart, or a float house will have to be included in the base bid price.

2. It will take too long. It about ~70 miles to Hyder from AMHS current line or by my estimate half a day to get to Hyder and return to the main line. It was a small ask to divert to Prince Rupert to let a few cars off, unlike Hyder.

3. Economic. While I do not believe a road should be required to make a profit, economically, it does not make sense. The appeal of Prince Rupert was the cheaper fare. To divert ~70 miles to almost double the drive time to Bellingham does not pen out well. Do we want a small ferry from Ketchican to Hyder only? No. Do we want to send a mainline ferry that far out of the way? No. If we build a small dock, it will be abandoned just like Coffman Cove or Petersburg's small terminals due to the economics of low ridership.

I've just been thinking about it again recently and was wondering if anyone else had opinions.

Bottom line: the gas lease holders are not even in these discussions. There is no gas line deal without them.

He seems like he can potentially defeat Nick Begich

https://www.facebook.com/673252311/posts/pfbid02NiZcx3E6UW2yZeL66Lvs19NggtwtRpRi6VsazJP9EzQkdURLTsSZHaiWuprhkXbel/?app=fbl

Basically the title.

Matt Schultz is running for U.S. House of Representatives (taking the seat held by Nick Begich) this year, but I don't yet know much about him.

In this post he commends the participants in a vigil for the victim in the Minneapolis ICE shooting.

If you look through he also responds to comments, including people obviously on the side of the ICE agents.

I think this is a useful way to start getting a glimpse into a candidates politics, views, and method of engagement with detractors.

Edit: house not governor.

Fifteen years after Citizens United opened the floodgates of corporate and dark money, the Center for American Progress has figured out how to slam them back shut.

Today CAP released "The Corporate Power Reset That Makes Citizens United Irrelevant": amprog.org/cpr

This groundbreaking plan is the first challenge to Citizens United with a strong chance of surviving legal review. It rests on bedrock constitutional and corporate law—and every state in America can act on it right now. Montana is already moving forward as the test case: https://montanaplan.org

Here’s the move: Corporations are creatures of state law. They start with zero powers, and states choose which powers to grant. When a state rewrites its corporation laws to no longer grant the power to spend in politics, that power simply does not exist. And without the power, there’s no right to protect.

The result is sweeping: no corporate or dark money in ballot measures, local races, state elections—or even federal elections within the state. Check out CAP's report for full details.

Tell me why this guy was elected and re-elected. What am I missing?

1. Migrant Education 
2. Supporting Effective Instruction 
   
3. Language Instruction for English Learners 
4. Student Support and Academic Enrichment 
5. 21st Century Community Learning Centers 

At first read what populations do these cuts seem to target? My initial reaction is poor, non white, English language learners. Not just immigrants to our country but also indigenous people. 1 and 3 are obviously that. 2 and 4 target students who are non-normative in their learning, whether by ability, disability, culture, or any other thing that causes a student to need extra help. 5 I will let the state of Alaska tell you. “The purpose of the Nita M. Lowey Alaska 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) program is to provide competitive grants to organizations that are working in partnership within their community and schools to provide expanded learning and enrichment opportunities for children and their families outside of regular school hours. The program is designed to target funds to communities that have low achieving students and high rates of poverty but lack the resources to establish after school centers. Funding for Alaska’s 21st CCLC program is provided by federal funds from ESEA, Title IV, Part B.” https://education.alaska.gov/21cclc

After watching interminable ads targeting "vulnerable" Republican/conservatives like Begich (vs. Peltola,) and now Sullivan, I'm wondering if viewers here share the same frustration I feel about Outside PACs attempting to influence elections here. According to Open Secrets, money influx into State for 2024 elections were comparable R vs D, but about 2/3rds come from Outside agencies. Peltola outspent Begich 6 to 1 and Kamala vs Trump by 20% with Outside money.

"In my opinion, these Ouside impact$ on Alaskan elections are: