Alaska Insight is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

And by viewers just like you.

Thank you.

How did candidates for Alaska's next governor, U.S. House and U.S. Senate seats answer questions related to the permanent fund dividend?

Arctic security, new revenue and other topics?

We'll highlight and break down their responses from a recent series of debates so you can decide how to cast your ballot in the upcoming general election.

That's coming up right now on this special one hour edition of Alaska Insight.

Good evening.

Election Day is next Tuesday.

So many of you are probably trying to educate yourselves as much as possible before stepping into the voting booth.

Tonight, we'll review candidate positions on a range of issues and talk with reporters who have been covering the campaigns.

But before we begin that conversation, we'll start off with some of this week's top stories from Alaska Public Media's collaborative statewide news network Division of Elections.

Officials were scrambling this week after concerns that as many as ten rural communities lacked staffing for Election Day.

Division director Gail Fenumiai now says all polling precincts in the state will be staffed for Election Day next Tuesday.

She added training time is tight but expects it to work out.

You can find your polling place at elections.alaska.gov Federal aviation regulators are directing carriers to inspect a popular model of Bush plane before their next flight.

In a directive published this week, the FAA says operators of the Havilland Canada DHC three otters must take a close look at the component that controls the horizontal portion of the plane's tail.

Crash investigators at the National Transportation Safety Board called on the FAA to mandate the inspections last week.

That's after an investigation into a crash in Washington state indicated the horizontal stabilizer actuator or jack screw had come apart before an otter plunged into Puget Sound.

The FAA says it's concerned other planes could have the same issue.

They encourage police department and the police officers union are still in disagreement over a policy for body worn cameras.

They now expect to move into arbitration early next year, bringing in a third party to help resolve the dispute.

Officials shared the update at an Anchorage assembly meeting safety meeting this week.

It comes more than a year and a half after Anchorage voters approved a $1.8 million tax levy to purchase and implement body cameras for police officers.

Frustration has mounted among community members over how long the process has taken.

Deputy Police Chief Sean Casey says the main issue holding up approval is when officers would be able to access footage from the cameras.

You can find the full versions of these stories and many more on our website, Alaskapublic.org or by downloading the Alaska Public Media app on your phone.

Tonight, we're taking an hour to examine the answers from the candidates running for statewide office provided during the recent series of debates for Alaska's governor, U.S. House and U.S. Senate seats.

Joining me this evening to help break down these positions is Alaska Public Media's Washington, D.C. correspondent Liz Ruskin.

Throughout this election season, Liz has been authoring a weekly politics newsletter, Alaska at Large, where she features all stories election related.

You should check that out.

Also here this evening is Andrew Kitchenman, and Andrew is the editor of the Alaska Beacon and previously worked as the state government reporter for Alaska Public Media and KTOO.

We also have Iris Samuels here for our discussion.

Iris covers politics for the Anchorage Daily News.

Welcome, all of you.

Thank you.

It's great to have you here in the studio, Andrew.

Wish you could join us, but glad you can be on hand as well.

You know, I just wanted to know, before we move into the discussions about candidates and debate that we found out today that former Governor Bill Sheffield died long time Alaskan and he'd been ill for a while.

So we wanted to note his passing.

Liz, I'm sure you covered him in the past.

Believe I did.

Sure.

Yeah.

All right.

Well, on that note, then, okay.

We're going to start with the governors debates.

All four candidates participated and gave answers to questions on the permanent fund dividend taxation policies, fisheries, political division, election security, climate change and a host of other topics.

So Andrew, what were your takeaways from the governors debate?

Were you surprised by any of the positions or did you hear anything new?

Oh, you're muted, Andrew.

The curse of Zoom there.

Now we can hear you.

I don't know if it was so much surprising.

I mean, they were returning to themes that we have heard throughout the election.

Obviously, a lot of criticism of Governor Dunleavy.

Both Bill Walker, the former governor and his predecessor, and and Les Garrett, the Democratic candidate.

And I and the Navy, of course, defending his record was, you know, pretty pretty, pretty, pretty consistent theme across the issues that they covered.

You know, Dunlap is very much been highlighting his record on crime and public safety.

That's been a big theme of his, you know, you know, the classic incumbent line, Alaska is better off today than it was four years ago was something we heard from him while less scary.

You know, definitely Return to Revisited 2019 when the governor proposed deep cuts to state funding for education, the university, some of which were enacted, and basically said that that would have been quite the biggest disaster in Alaska history if the governor's proposals had had gone through.

Gary's answer for the state's long term budget problems is reducing or eliminating the oil production tax credit, which he says will bring in more than $1,000,000,000 in additional oil tax revenue.

Well, Governor Walker also was deeply critical of that.

Maybe his approach to the budget, you know, basically saying that that he had made made progress on eliminating the state's structural budget deficit by beginning the process of drawing funds from the permanent fund to pay for state operations.

And I'll quote from Walker's You have literally taken a wrecking ball to our state is what Walker said to Dunleavy.

All right.

Thanks for starting yourself, Iris.

How about you?

Following up here from Andrew's comments.

Anything new that you heard on the campaign trail so far?

Not so much something new.

But I think my main takeaway is if you listen to Governor Donnelly, your takeaway would be that our state is doing wonderfully.

His picture of where Alaska is right now is a very rosy picture.

But then if you listen to Gara or Walker, both of them have a much more dire assessment of where Alaska is right now.

And that's both on the fiscal front, on the education front.

So it's really kind of on a lot of different issues.

And then in terms of record, Gara and Walker had a lot to say about of his record in his first term in office.

But Donnelly We had some pretty critical comments about Walker's record when he was governor.

So it really went both ways on that front.

It did.

And this idea, this notion that ranked choice voting would do away with people attacking each other, maybe has not come to fruition, at least not yet.

Okay.

Let's hear now from the candidates for governor about what they would propose for resolving the permanent fund dividend annual fight without gutting state services.

Candidate Charlie Pierce answers first.

And I think, you know, the this is an Alaskan, right?

I think there's a statutory formula that has been ignored for the last six years.

I realize there's been a court order issued on the the legislature appropriation of the left.

And I agree it's created a huge divide in Alaska, and it's been the one issue that we've been stuck on for the last six years.

And I think it goes back to building relationships.

There's 60 lawmakers that are going to need to resolve this issue.

And if it takes a constitutional convention to do it, I support that.

And my role as a governor will be to build bridges, build relationships, and build a consensus that focuses on the Alaskan right for a party.

Mr. GORE.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Gary, with your position on the.

I believe in a strong permanent fund dividend, the problem is this governor has turned Alaskans against each other.

He says you either get a dividend or you get education or you get a university or you get a marine highway or you get construction jobs.

But you can't have all of them because he's given away $1.2 billion in subsidies to the wealthiest corporations in the world, in the oil industry.

We get that money back and we can do all of these things.

A strong dividend over 20 $200 that grows every year.

This dividend was affordable given Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

We had one time money, but over his first four years, this gov average of 1200 $30 dividend.

And I don't think he actually believes in the dividend.

I do.

But it means that you have to have money.

Money to do it.

That means good schools.

You don't do a permanent fund dividend like this governor has done, which is permanent fund dividend and then create the worst school crisis in Alaska history.

That's how he's done.

The dividend.

So 1200 $30 dividend his first year, Russia invades Ukraine.

You get a dividend by the legislature.

That's good this year, which I would have supported.

But we can't keep turning Alaskans against each other.

Thank you, Mr. Garrett.

Mr. Walker.

The apparent fund dividend is critical to Alaska's economy, to people that are in need of additional cash.

So we need to maintain it and make sure that it's sustainable, that it's predictable.

We have a formula now that's 42 years old.

We need to look at that formula.

We need to look work collaboratively with the legislature to make that make that to come up with the right the right formula for that.

But it's really critical that it is something that you can depend upon, and we resolve it so we don't spend all the time we've been saying in the legislature the last several years on determining the size, the size of the pension fund dividend.

We've gone through $20 billion of savings in the last ten years.

My concern is with high dividend right now, we are we have been put on in the express lane for high taxes in Alaska, and that's what I don't want.

So higher dividends, no question, is the higher the dividend, the higher the chances of having high taxes.

And that concerns me a great deal because that's not not what we should be doing.

So it would need to resolve that first thing.

But take the governor working directly with the legislature to resolve it and working with those that are on all sides of that issue.

That's the first thing we would do in office.

We would resolve that issue so we can move on with Alaska's future governor.

Don't leave me one minute on the.

Please.

Yeah, thank you.

So let's remember when the dividend was broken.

That was under the previous administration.

Governor Walker's administration was the first time in history that occurred.

And since then, the legislature has been in turmoil as a result of that action, we're putting billions of dollars in savings this year on top of the dividend, the 3200 plus dividend, 30 $200 plus dividend that was issued to the people of Alaska in some of the worst economic times we've ever had.

In my visits to Alaska, both urban and rural people are very grateful for the fact that I worked hard for that and other legislators worked hard for that.

We've we've discussed ways to go about making sure that we can control our spending with a spending limit.

We've introduced constitutional limits on spending, limit on taxation and on the permanent fund.

It's our hope that we can continue to work with the legislature.

We're going to get a new legislature to make sure that we have a system and a formula that works for the people of Alaska, because that's what this should be about, the people of Alaska.

And later in the later in the debate here, we'll talk about the the potential for more revenue coming to Alaska's way.

So kind of going back to what you were saying earlier, Ira, about the Governor Dunleavy blaming Governor Walker, did you hear anything concrete in terms of what the solutions to this annual fight for the permanent fund dividend might be?

So there weren't a lot of specifics in the candidates answers this time around.

And Charlie Pierce really brought up something that I think will play into this question, and that's the Constitutional Convention.

That question on whether to have a convention is on the ballot this year.

If there is one, then obviously the dividend is going to be something that people are going to discuss at that constitutional convention.

And I think that Governor Dunleavy has made pretty clear that he would be open to changing the formula that is used to calculate the dividend.

But he really wants that question put to voters.

So whether that be through a constitutional convention or through an amendment to the Constitution, that remains to be seen.

But in terms of specifics that we heard from candidates, what we really heard is that they all see the importance of protecting the dividend.

They all see, to a certain extent, the importance of changing the formula that is used to calculate it in a way that provides certainty in future years.

But we really didn't get any specifics on what that formula should look like.

All right.

Thank you, Andrew.

As we noted earlier, Governor Dunleavy blamed Governor Walker for the turmoil in the legislature over the Fed.

Give us just a little snapshot of some of the history of the debate over it.

Well, I think the challenge has been that it is connected to other issues.

So if if it was only a matter of the dividend, then the state could have resolved it.

But what you do with the dividend has huge implications for state services and taxes or drawing down the permanent fund in an unsustainable way.

So those sort of four things that the dividend the rest of the permanent fund taxing and spending and spending and sort of services taxing is taxing on Alaskans or on oil industry that they're each each piece of it is is very complicated.

People are very passionate about it.

And generally speaking, if the attention shifts to any one piece, like the dividend reductions, the dividend, then the solution is massively unpopular and it's broadly rejected.

And so there has been this sort of circling around for four, seven years where it's long as as someone can sort of push through a complete opposition to any potential piece of a budget plan, then the whole possibility of a budget plan falls apart.

I mean, an issue with the dividend is that if the dividend was the only piece of the budget, that was locked in place and certain from year to year, then when oil prices fall dramatically, then the state would have to rely very suddenly on one of the other pieces.

So sudden deep cuts to public employee jobs, right?

So the taxes for the oil industry or on Alaskans or sudden large reductions in the overall size of the permanent fund, you know, it could be, you know, if the gap is more than $1,000,000,000 and well, more than $1,000,000,000 hit in any of those areas would either be felt immediately by Alaskans or would have a significant impact on, you know, the next hundred years of Alaska.

In the case of changes to the dividend.

So complicated and hard to resolve.

Yeah, unless people bring a spirit of compromise, I don't know how it will be resolved.

I think every side is always hoping that they'll have the political numbers in the legislature to just force through their preferred solutions.

Well, as we know, the permanent fund dividends future is tied to revenue, of course, and the candidates were asked during a lightning round whether they would consider new taxes as part of a balanced budget candidate.

Walker starts off.

I certainly hope not.

I certainly hope we don't do that.

I think there's other things we can do before that.

That should be the last the last tool in the toolbox to look for.

So I hope there's some other options we can you know, the legislature is the one who who does that?

I'll work with them, not against them.

So I'm I hope we don't have to do that.

Governor Dan Levy Well, that's in seconds.

I mean, in the last administration there was at least 9 to 11 taxes that were proposed.

So that's a good that's good news.

We don't need them right now.

We could get some of it all online that we're talking about with Peak Willow.

We just had a breakthrough in our business oil approach.

We'll have more resources.

We put billions of dollars in the savings.

We're in pretty good shape right now.

Thank you, Mr.

Beers.

No, I think taxation is regressive.

I'd look for cuts.

I always look for cuts first before I'd ever tax the people of Alaska.

All right.

Thank you.

And Mr. Mayor, 15 seconds.

How are any of you ever going to fix the schools that children don't have any opportunity and right now that are closing?

Governor Dan Levy So I guess you would just rather sacrifice children than do the right thing.

I believe that we should get a fair share for oil.

That's $1.2 billion in ending corporate subsidies.

We'll be able to fund schools and a permanent fund dividend.

Candidate Gary said.

End corporate subsidies to raise more revenue.

This isn't the first time he said that, of course, Andrew, as you know, from covering legislative sessions, new revenue and taxes, it's really hard to get traction on these proposals.

As you were talking about earlier, are there ideas of the candidates are putting forward for generating new revenue or other plans that would subsidize and stabilize the annual budget?

We heard the governor, the current governor mentioned, Willow, and and pick projects.

But what else to do have you been hearing?

Yeah, I don't think we have entirely clear plan unless you grant the kind of change in the oil forecast that was brought about by Russia, Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

I mean, you know, that that changed the numbers pretty dramatically, certainly for the next few years.

But even in the long term, as far as the futures market, which the state has used to project revenue and you know, when something that is probably very, very temporary changes the numbers that are being used to weigh policy options, that's an additional complicating factor.

Now, I think if if if this additional revenue was in place, then probably all their plans would balance the budget.

This that being the revenue that's that's caused by additional high oil prices from the the invasion of Ukraine.

So so once you take that away, it becomes difficult.

You know, the deficit very well could be more than $1,000,000,000.

And and LASCARIS says that that would solve the problem.

You know, oil taxes are a very complicated topic.

And and the industry very much says that changing them would change investment and the long term sustainability of the industry in the state.

You know, supporters of higher taxes discount that and that that's been a raging debate for Governor Walker.

He definitely once the permanent fund dividend to be in place in the long run but he he may be more willing to to lower it unless he sees a clear willingness for for higher taxes.

Governor.

Doug, maybe.

You know, I think he very much likes to talk about the possibility of new revenue from more oil production.

But but that would be, you know, a very big change from the last 35 years of Alaska's experience, where we've seen largely decrease in oil, some increases in recent year, in part due to new technology.

But, you know, the factors that go into long term oil company investment in in any particular field are complicated.

And and one of those is whatever the current price of oil is, it becomes a piece of that.

So and then appears I mean, is basically running it's sort of similar to what Governor Dan Levy said four years ago, that all of the balancing could be done through cuts and governor down maybe saw a attempt at a recall after he proposed those cuts, right?

Yeah.

It quickly, I want to move to the House debate next, but do you see clear distinctions between the positions, especially the two Republicans that are running and then the dependent, the Independent and Democrat?

Yeah, I think that Charlie Pierce has not done a lot to set him apart from Governor Donnelly.

He's sort of, as Andrew was saying, running kind of similarly to how Governor Dunleavy ran when he was running for his first term, arguing for a large dividend, arguing for cuts to two state services in order to balance the budget if needed.

And I think it's notable that Donnelly has sort of changed his tune maybe from last time around.

He's recognized the backlash that he faced to the proposed cuts that he made after he was first elected.

He's not running on similar intense cuts to state services.

He's instead making the argument that we don't need such cuts because we're in a strong fiscal position, which, again, as Andrew mentioned, that's kind of up for debate at this point.

And then from Gura and Walker's direction, they're both pointing out the deficiencies in Governor Dunleavy's approach.

They have different strategies for solving it.

Jerry's is kind of a purist.

He basically says, all we have to do is get rid of these subsidies for oil companies and all of our problems will be solved.

I think that Walker's approach is a little bit more realistic in terms of what might be achievable in the state legislature, acknowledging that there's a lot of different viewpoints in the legislature, and you need to get something that all legislators can or enough legislators can agree on for it to pass.

But he hasn't really been specific.

And I think the loss of the sorry, the lack of specificity coming from Walker is really kind of an effort to keep himself open to whatever might be amenable to the legislature if he's elected.

MM Yeah.

The finding consensus has been the big rub for quite some time.

Liz, thank you so much for your patience.

Let's move to the U.S. House debate.

All four candidates on the ballot were in attendance.

Incumbent Congresswoman Mary Paul Tola, Republican challengers Sarah Palin and Nick Begich and libertarian Chris.

Bye.

So let's hear from them now.

Concerns over diminished salmon runs and future allocations was an early topic in the debate.

Candidates were asked how they would ensure the resource is available for generations to come.

Congresswoman Pelosi gave the first answer.

I think that we have to urge or managers at both the federal and state level to really invest.

And I want to be part of making sure that we have adequate funding to do research and surveys to see what really is going on.

But we can't just wait.

We've got to take precautionary management.

We cannot allow metric tons of bycatch, of juvenile salmon, crab and halibut to be thrown overboard every year.

This has led to a very devastating collapse of not only salmon, but halibut.

And now we're seeing it in the crab industry as well.

We've got to get a hold on our bycatch as well as find out some of the reasons why we're having such low productivity in the Bering Sea right now.

Thank you, Mr. Package.

45 seconds on the salmon.

Well, I think it's important to understand that we had a record year in Bristol Bay this year.

And so when we see these dramatically declining runs in areas of our state, we see other areas of the state that are succeeding very well.

So we need to look at those areas that are succeeding and and see if we can draw some lessons from that.

I think trawl bycatch is a big issue and that's something that needs to be addressed immediately.

I think that we need to be careful about how we go through our Magnuson Stevens Act reauthorization and making sure that we're putting precision language into the act that is actually going to demonstrably improve the sustainability of these fisheries.

We have a mandate under the state constitution for a maximum sustainable yield, and every fishery in this state needs to be managed with that objective.

Thank you, Mr.. By 45 seconds.

You know, I'm a fishing guide.

And on the Kenai I saw three king salmon this year, three total and I spent 50 plus days on the tuna.

I agree with Ms.. Pitolo on the bycatch, but just throwing it back doesn't solve the problem.

I honestly think we need to get industry more involved in reducing their catch, otherwise it's not going to be there.

It's only a renewable resource until it's all gone.

And I think just like what Mr. Nicholas said about the Max and Stevens act, Ms.. Patel has decided that we're going to use race as a as an increase for the seats, allocations on the Council.

I would say it needs to be done by regions so that it prioritizes all Alaskans for the for for salmon renewal.

Ms. PALIN 45 seconds answer resources.

Near and dear to my heart.

The fish issues having for years setting ended on the Nushagak and Bristol Bay.

And as your governor, knowing that our state is doing a good job fishing game, we do maximize our resources and this is a renewable resource.

The fish are we we manage it for maximum sustained yield in perpetuity is the ideal.

It's the feds who lack the enforcement, the bycatch laws that too many people are getting away with, especially foreign trawlers.

They're not allowing those salmon to get back to where they need to be to spawn.

We need to bust these people who are doing these illegal activities.

You take their vessels, you take their gear, you take their permits, and we start teaching them a lesson.

Liz, are there distinctions between ideas?

We've heard a lot about bycatch.

Yeah.

And Mary Pell Taylor really owns this issue.

This is the issue that really compelled her into the race and she's all about it.

She went first and, you know, to some extent the others were stuck sort of saying, oh, yeah, me too.

Name checking some of the important terms and entities around it.

But the other thing that really stood out to me was Nick Begich suggesting the problem might not be so bad because some river systems had a banner year.

Well, that's a very macro view.

If you're living in a community on the Yukon, it's just not much comfort to know that the Bristol Bay watershed had a great year.

Yeah, candidate Palin said.

Bass.

The vessels that are that get the bycatch, take their license in their gear and teach them a lesson.

Are foreign vessels a big problem in this?

Well, she seemed to be conflating a few issues.

I mean, most people, when they talk about the problem of bycatch in those fisheries, we're talking about the there are no foreign vessels in the trawl fleet.

It's a domestic trawl fleet.

There's also an issue of illegal fishing that she seemed to be conflating.

But bycatch is legal and people like Balto are saying it shouldn't be and it's a problem.

But it's not that they're illegally catching fish.

And it's not like, as Chris said, that anyone's calling for them just to be thrown back.

I mean, they want to avoid the bycatch, but it's not illegal.

There's I don't know who would be busted for legal.

She seemed to be conflating the issues.

Sarah Palin did.

All right.

There's so much to discuss today, but I want us to keep moving here so that we can get through some more clips of this debate.

So let's go on to another part of the House debate.

The candidates were asked how big the threat of political division is to American democracy and what Congress can do to address it.

There has clearly been an uptick in threats against elected officials.

Last weekend, a violent attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband.

Let's listen to the candidates answers, starting with libertarian Chris by.

I it's absolutely a travesty.

And unfortunately, both the parties are on the same team.

I mean, you've got the Republicans over here and you got the Democrats over here and in the middle, they're swinging a wrecking ball back and forth, back and forth.

And down here below is people like me, people who who are just normal Alaskans.

And we get we get pulled in one direction by one bully.

And that that Republican drops the wrecking ball and it goes through and it smashes us.

And then it goes up to the next side and the Democrats are they increase it and they smash back through.

And at the end, all we do is lose freedoms and liberties.

That's why I'm running, because I'm tired of both political parties ruining it for us.

I mean, the evidence is clear.

You can't trust either one of them.

$31 trillion in debt.

The Patriot Act.

Now, the Freedom Act.

There's no freedom in it.

It's frustrating.

And I represent the 70% of Alaskans that didn't vote because frankly, neither party put candidates that relate to them.

You know, we're trying that's all we can do, right?

We can try to make it better.

Ms.. Palin, one minute, please.

I'm the one candidate up here with experience, especially in an administrative role that has had to reach across party lines in order to get things done for those whom I served.

Local level City Council Mayor.

Those are nonpartizan positions you learn to put partizanship away and the goal is to serve the people.

It's really quite simple.

On a federal level, it's really quite simple.

You follow the Constitution and we need common sense, which is an endangered species in DC nowadays.

We need common sense, constitutional conservatives elected who have that experience, or at least the wherewithal to work with others as a team now.

Lincoln had said President Lincoln, he had said no foreign power will ever crush America.

They have no chance against us, especially against our military.

However, we should be cognizant of this.

We would be crushed from within if the division gets any more rancorous, if it gets any worse than it is, we need to protect our foundation.

Thank you, Representative Pitolo, you have one minute.

Thank you.

I do believe that Partizanship is the number one threat to our country, both in terms of foreign policy and domestic policy.

We've got a formidable enemies now.

We've got Russian and Chinese ships in formation practicing outside of Alaska and in our waters.

We are.

The list goes on and on.

In terms of new foreign aggression, I really feel like I'm back in the Cold War again.

And worse.

We've got domestic policies like domestic issues like we haven't seen in 40 years that we really need to coalesce and work together on.

I think that we have a tradition now in America of tearing one another down just to get into office, and this is just so normal.

We take it for granted.

When I was coming up in politics in the nineties, this was not par for the course.

This is not the foundation that our country is built on.

And we need more peacemakers so that the day after the election, half the country doesn't feel like they lost.

We all going to win.

We're all in this together.

We're all Americans.

Mr. Baggage, one minute, please.

Well, I think that sounds great, but I think the reality is that you've got two very different visions for this country.

You've got the Democrats who are about control, control of your freedoms, control of your actions, centralize authority, the federal government telling you what to do.

And you've got the Republicans that are about decentralized control, local, local control, control with the states and giving you the authority to make the decisions that you want to in your life.

This is the basis this is the genesis for the political division that you see.

The political division is an emergent property, is an outgrowth of these very different base philosophies that we are in a very robust conversation in this country.

We having this conversation on social media, on mainstream media, on alternative media over the dinner table.

And these it's good to have these discussions.

It's good to have these discussions.

It's part of our freedom of speech.

And we need to exercise that speech.

And I'm a full supporter of it.

It seemed, Liz, that there was a lot of finger pointing parties back and forth at each other, kind of a lack of answers.

Did you hear any?

Well, I heard some answers.

She said solutions.

Guess Sarah Palin, you know, said that her experience and love of local government shows that, you know, she learned to put partizanship away then.

And that is a good answer to just put partizanship away.

But if that was a.

Lesson she learned, she has definitely unlearned it over the years.

Tola style is about, you know, being nice and.

BRIDGES Yeah consensus and she's I guess she's not so much offering a solution as sort of setting an example.

But the most eye opening response I thought was baggage.

Who says he just doesn't see a problem with hyper partizanship?

As he describes it, it's a robust conversation involving competing ideologies.

I don't know many Americans who look at what's going on in political discourse in America today and see it just as healthy, robust conversation.

Yeah, that was an interesting note.

The idea that, you know, democracy is messy and that's okay and people can disagree.

But what we're seeing in the country today is not just political disagreement anymore.

It's very concerning.

Iris, your thoughts here?

Yeah, I think the context that I'd like to add on the baggage front, something that caught my attention was the day after we all found out about the attack on the Pelosi home.

I saw he posted on his campaign social media an attack ad that his campaign has produced against Mary Paul Tola that sort of says that she is part of or bolstering the Nancy Pelosi agenda.

So even though there was this major attack that was kind of alarming to a lot of people in the country, regardless of political party, he did not back down from kind of painting Nancy Pelosi as this enemy of the people.

Mm hmm.

Anything to add there quickly, Andrew?

No.

All right.

Well, let's move on, then.

Our final debate in the series was the debate for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by incumbent Lisa murkowski, Republican challenger Kelly Chewbacca and Democrat Patch Hasbro were also present, although his name will still appear on the ballot.

Candidate Buzz Kelly dropped out of the race and did not debate.

So, Liz, before we go to this first clip, what were your main takeaways from this debate?

Well, mostly it was just how tense it seemed to be between Murkowski and Chewbacca.

Senator Murkowski seemed quite grim through most of it.

KELLY Chewbacca seemed brittle.

And I think that that both of those kind of natural responses, given the tension, but I think it cut into the images that they both want to project.

Yeah, I there was clear tension there, although they shook each other's hands.

They were cordial.

But, yes, there's there's definitely some tension.

All right.

Well, let's let's move on.

And we asked the candidates about faith in the election system and its importance to the future of democracy.

The question was what needs to happen to ensure that voters trust our electoral system?

Republican Kelly Schumacher gave the first answer.

I had the honor of being able to audit our division of elections in 2019, before the nation saw what we saw in 2020.

It's clear that we can identify best practices and vulnerabilities, election systems, and I truly support state based systems based on rooted transparency and accountability, where we know that we have one Alaskan that can vote and that that vote is counted.

I don't support federalization of our election systems where we let Washington, D.C. tell us in Alaska what to do and how to do it.

However, there are some things that we could get support from from the federal government, like funding for signature verification authority, where we can get machines that tell us that the signatures match rather than having people at the Division of Elections carry that burden.

That would give us more confidence that the election results are coming out the way that the voters intended.

Instead of resulting in discrepancies in the system.

Thank you.

Mr. Hesburgh, you have one minute.

I voted yesterday, and I am I continue to be impressed with the people who are at the voting polls and their efficiency and their willingness to help anyone who is trying to vote.

I am wary of the things we hear around the country of people that are intimidating people.

The system cannot be safe if everyone does not have access to it, and we all are responsible for making sure that people are not intimidated when they go to vote, that the voting systems are correct.

I live in Mat-Su and now they've just decided it's going to be safer to hand count things than to use machines.

I think that is kind of going off the rails here.

We really need to have our elected officials have confidence in the election and we need to check.

We have ways to check.

But I have faith and I think we need to make sure that people have faith in the system.

Senator Murkowski won.

Elections.

Must must be a really a cornerstone of what we believe in.

We cannot govern without the consent of the governed.

Correct.

So everything that we can do to make sure that our electoral systems are fair, transparent, free and accessible, anything that would work to prohibit that, I think causes into question the fairness of your elections.

I have been the only Republican that has over the years came forward and said the Voting Rights Act, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, has been that template that has urged us in the right direction to make sure that our election laws are fair to all, that we do not discriminate against our Native people through literacy exams.

I've also been engaged with a rework of the Electoral Count Act, a bipartisan effort to ensure that not only are elections free and fair, but that when we count.

Your time.

It is fair.

Liz It was really interesting to hear candidate Chewbacca talk about being against federalizing elections.

That's never been a consideration, has it?

States run their own elections.

Right.

States run their own shows.

I think I've heard in conservative circles fears raised about federalization.

But the division of elections here decides how to run elections, and they're bound by state statute.

It's not federal.

I did hear Ms.. Chewbacca discuss signature matching machines.

That was a specific solution.

Just, you know, the the division of elections does not match signatures.

So that is that wouldn't relieve a burden on the division of.

Election and looking for a problem.

Well.

Maybe we should be comparing signatures every once in a while, but they're not doing it.

So the idea that it's relieving a burden placed on the division, that's, you know, not the case.

Before we move on to the next debate clip here, when it comes to election denialism, candidate Chewbacca says she'll trust the results of the election as long as she believes it was okay, saying if we think the election was done in a way where we don't believe there was something that went super wrong, absolutely.

What has she said about the 2020 election?

She noted something in this past answer about she'd audited the Division of elections in 2019.

And then we saw what we saw in 2020.

Any idea what she meant by that?

Well, she about 2020, she has repeatedly said that there are unresolved questions and she raises issues that Donald Trump and his allies have raised before.

None of them have been proven true.

None of them have resulted in evidence that holds up in court.

So I recently talked to a national group that tracks election denialism, and they've labeled Miss Chewbacca an election denier, as.

Well as Canada.

Palin.

Oh, sure.

Yeah.

Her case is sort of more straight forward.

Sarah Palin just says, no, the election was was not fair.

I mean, both of these candidates, Chewbacca and Palin, are endorsed by Donald Trump.

And I it seems that sort of the price of admission, you can't it can't be endorsed by Donald Trump if if you're.

Unless you believe the lie that the 2020 election was stolen.

Right.

Anything you'd want to add there?

I researched and I think Liz covered it pretty well.

Andrew.

Anything else or we'll move on.

Okay, let's move on to another question to Senate candidates was in reference to the recent storm remnants of typhoon Murdoch that hit the bering sea coast.

Candidates were asked what congress can do to help Alaska prepare for a changing climate.

Senator Murkowski started this round of answers.

I wish that there was one quick, easy answer.

I was out there less than a week after Typhoon Mir back devastated that coastline and the devastation in terms of of damage to the land, the erosion, but also to personal property, just it breaks your heart.

The question is, is what can we do?

There are efforts that have that are underway not only through the infrastructure bill that we have advanced, but the energy Act of 2020 that I had put into law.

We do focus on what we call climate resilience there.

It is really hard to do to protect a coastline like we have in Alaska.

But I can tell you that the people of unil equate, the people of Stebbins want that barrier protection.

Thank you.

Mr. Abarca, you have 45 seconds.

Typhoon Mirrorball is obviously devastating and we are at risk for having more of this kind of damage.

I don't think we take an either or approach, though, to those of us who want clean air, clean water and clean land.

And we also understand that we need traditional resources in order to develop renewable resources.

Unfortunately, this is the approach of the Biden administration, the radical environmentalist nominees that have been confirmed by our incumbent, that have shut down our industries here in Alaska.

And it's not a healthy approach for us.

We can take an all of the above solution so that we can invest in renewable energy, energy innovation for cleaner and more efficient, traditional, reasonable and responsible uses of our development of energy up here in Alaska, so that we can take an all of the above approach as we move forward in renewable energy and clean energy development in Alaska, innovation is important.

Mr..

Zero 45.

Seconds And obviously we need to look at the housing of the people that have been affected by this and not just their housing.

I'm sure other places along the coast, I think we have the capacity to develop ways of building housing in rural Alaska that are more resilient, warmer, better, better, energy efficient.

I think the other thing we have to remember is the first thing is we have to help people when they're destroyed like this.

We have to get to them fast.

We have to make sure they have enough food because food stores were destroyed.

We have to help people and we have to move fast to do that.

All right, Liz, did you hear and this candidate answers to really address stabilizing for the future?

Well, it was kind of a lot to ask them in a short period of time to solve climate change.

Senator Murkowski did mention a barrier protection that was kind of you know, I was kind of struck by how they saw the scope of this problem from huge to small.

And Kelly Chibok is answer seemed to focus more on what she didn't want which was to cut fossil fuel production to alleviate climate change and patch Hasbro really chose a specific practical immediate concerns housing and food.

Exactly.

And so those were excellent answers as far as addressing immediate concerns.

But the longer term, we didn't get to that.

We know much about their overall positions on climate change.

Iris, have you talked to them about that?

I think that climate change is not something that Kelly Shibata has really emphasized in terms of something that she wants to address.

I thought it was pretty interesting that she took the opportunity with this question to talk about how important she sees resource development.

And I think that regardless of where candidates stand, we can all agree that even if we continue resource development for the people and the communities that were affected by this storm, they may want resource development, some of them, but they also want their communities to be protected.

So I thought it was pretty telling that she used her time on this to talk about resource development, but not so much to talk about protecting communities that are already being affected by climate change.

All right.

Thank you, Andrew.

Anything you'd like to add or should we move on there?

Well, I would say that it reminded me a little bit of the fish question earlier where this hasn't come up.

But but while we don't know what's causing that, the problems with fish in western Alaska, the scientists who are studying it, their biggest theory is that it's caused by climate change and it's just extremely difficult for Alaska to face this when the consequences would be completely devastating.

On the most vulnerable, some of the most vulnerable Alaskans and that there aren't easy answers.

And so, you know, none of the answers related to fish had anything that no one talked about, climate change related to fish.

You know, barriers might work in some communities, but there are other communities where you can spend, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars on barriers.

And then a few years later find that the water has gotten around the barrier.

Exactly.

Yeah.

It's a as we know, it's an enormous problem that's going to take a multi-pronged approach for many years.

All right.

Let's move to one more clip from the Senate debate timely after the worrisome hoax shooter calls to two schools in Alaska this week.

Thank God they were hoaxes.

The candidates were asked about banning assault style weapons.

The ban on those weapons expired in 2004.

And the question was, do you support or oppose a ban on the sale of those types of firearms and why.

I do not support banning those weapons, I think that's a ban should say expired.

I support the Second Amendment.

Again, proud to have the highest rating from the NRA and the endorsement of Gun Owners of America.

When we make these guns, illegal criminals still get them and law abiding citizens are deprived.

Constitution, just Hasbro.

I think we should ban the sale of them.

I think it worked before.

I think there's no purpose of them except for killing people.

And I having a family member who is personally been murdered.

I really am.

I'm against murder.

Senator Murkowski.

I do not support a ban on assault weapons.

I think we recognize that with today's technologies, use support.

If you were to ban one, one model, one platform, those who would do destruction would find another way to, attempt it.

Liz.

I don't imagine you heard anything surprising here or are these positions fairly consistent?

Yeah, I would say that they are.

I think this gets into, you know, culture war issues as much as anything.

Yeah, I was going to think and.

Yeah, I think that the question of the Second Amendment is something that Kelly should Barkha has actually tried to kind of to a certain extent weaponize in her campaign against Murkowski.

She's been running a lot of ads that are attacking Murkowski's record on guns and gun control because Senator Murkowski has indicated her support for certain measures to curb gun violence in this country.

And Kelly Schubach, his approach is, I think you could call it more purist kind of support, Second Amendment rights, no limits, just she's really gunning for that A-rating from the NRA.

Yes.

Andrew, anything like a follow up there?

I mean, she's she's been criticizing Murkowski and saying the issue of red flag laws which would basically they're they're temporary prohibitions on gun possession by by people who have domestic violence restraining orders and basically saying that that Murkowski will cause Alaskans, law abiding Alaskans, to have their guns taken away from them.

You know, there's maybe a little nuance like lost.

But but it's a it's a pure position.

Well, we haven't had much chance yet to.

We'll have an attorney chance actually to talk about campaign spending.

We only have a couple of minutes left here.

One of the groups spending money here is promoting Lisa murkowski, a Republican, and Mary Peltz, a Democrat on the same signs.

Never have seen that before.

Liz, you wrote about campaign spending in Alaska at large, the newsletter that you've been offering.

What are some of the big differences, the way groups are spending in this race as opposed to past races?

Well, it is interesting, since for years now the a lot of the money has shifted into independent expenditures that the candidates don't control.

And so now we're seeing unusual things like ads that promote both Senator Murkowski and Representative Paul Toll on in the same ad and those are outside groups.

And I just find that really interesting because the candidates may or may not want that, but that's how outside groups have decided to pitch it.

And we've heard some of those complaints from the candidates themselves like, well, I'm not responsible for this attack ad or that attack ad.

Right.

Well, that's a nice thing about independent expenditures, is that they can be the attack dogs while the candidates own campaigns can, you know, project rosier.

Nicer images.

Mm hmm.

Well, I wish we had more time to get your thoughts.

Ira said yours, Andrew, but I'm afraid we're out of time, even though we took an hour today.

Thanks so much for being here, all three of you.

And thank you for joining us for this special edition of Alaska INSIGHT.

We hope it helps you feel better prepared to cast your ballot on Tuesday.

To see more answers by Alaska candidates for statewide office, check out the candidate comparison tool and other election related content at our Web site, Alaska Public Dawgs Elections.

And please join us on election night.

That's next Tuesday evening, November 8th, where we'll be live on Facebook, YouTube, Katie oh 360 TV and on your local Alaska public radio station from 9 p.m. until 11 p.m., we'll open the phone lines and be talking to reporters who are covering the races throughout the evening.

So join us.

Alaska INSIGHT returns next week.

Thanks for joining us.

I'm Lori Townsend.

Good night.