Thursday 4/3/25 | Sarah Montalbano on AKLNG | Headlines, Discussions

Welcome to the party, pal. The Michael Duke Show. The greed and the entitlement. is astounding to me. What more could you want from a low budget radio program? This is a dumpster fire. It is time to get a new perspective. We know just what you need and we've got just the cure. Open wide and prepare for a steaming hot cup of freedom. I just don't fathom it.

The Michael Dukes Show, streaming live across the world. Live around the world on the Internet at MichaelDukesShow.com and across the state of Alaska on Bishop Favre Radio Station and or FM Translator. Hello, my friends, and welcome to the program. It is the Thursday edition of the Michael Luke Show. That's the day after hump day for those of you who are.

keeping track at home it is uh just another beautiful day in paradise and we are ready to dump into it here uh so much uh quick preview for tomorrow for firearms friday dr john lott is going to be joining us from the... author of More Guns, Less Crime, and the War on Guns, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, contributor to Fox News and the Washington Times. He's going to be with us tomorrow. We're going to talk with him. So that's just a little teaser.

for tomorrow. Wanted to give you the heads up on that just in case you were wondering. Today's program, we got a lot. We get to visit with one of our favorite people. Sarah Montalpano is going to be, it's not Monday. kind of screws up, but it messes up bad when she's not on Montalbano Mondays. But Sarah Montalbano is going to be joining us. She's got a piece out on Substack that's talking about

uh, AKLNG and more, uh, Alaska resources are back on the table is the title of the piece. And if you're not subscribed to her sub stack, you missing out baby. You're missing out. So we need to talk about that. She's going to join us here in the first hour. And then in hour two, we've got a lot of stuff to cover, including two new opinion pieces, one from State Senator Rob Myers and the other from State Senator Kevin McCabe. They apparently are.

doing a lot of writing of opinion pieces because it's the only place they can be heard because they're in the minority. They're trying to make the case. There's some good stuff in there, though. We're going to try and dissect that later on this morning. Plus the new thousand dollar BSA. They just came out of the Senate. A thousand. I have I have no words. Anyway, we're going to we're going to we're going to talk about that here. But first, we can't make her wait anymore because.

Otherwise, she'll get all that virtual chocolate donut stuff on her face from eating all my virtual donuts in the chat room. Let's get over to it and talk with our friend, Sarah Montalbano. who joined us this morning from Chris Chang's house. I don't know how she does it. She gets into his house every time and enjoys. Hello, my dear. How are you doing? How's things going?

It's going well. I woke up this morning and I thought I had something important today and I just couldn't place it, couldn't place it. And I thought, oh, I'm on Michael Dukes today. It's a Thursday. But that's okay. screws you all up and we don't do it on Monday. Right. I mean, you know, what the heck? I mean, you know, that's how she got the, she got the whole Montalbano Monday thing from doing the Mondays on the show because we loved having her on. So.

It's good. Well, it's good to see you and welcome to it, my friend. You know, it's... I mean, it's a good day. It's a good day for Alaska in a lot of terms. Now, you've been focusing on energy issues, mostly related to different parts of the U.S.

You know, coming from Alaska originally, I think your heart's kind of here, and this is a really good piece. So I wanted you to break this down for us and talk about all the potential for resource development. Obviously, AKLNG is one of the big things, but I'm sure that there are other components here. So let's get started. First things first, I guess I'll drop the link to the piece in the chat room.

And so folks, if you want to go take a look at it, you can. You can also, that's a place where you can. not only subscribe to Montalbano Mondays, but you can also help support her as well on Substack. But let's get started. I just dropped the link in the chat room. Sarah, they're back on the table. They're back! They're back on the table. What are we looking at here for Alaskan resources? And what's the good news? Give us the good news, kid.

Thank you. Yeah, I am just delighted to see that the Department of the Interior is implementing the day one executive order that Trump put out about unleashing Alaska's natural resources. And it's got some. really exciting stuff in here, actually. You know, we interior is intending to reopen the 82% of the national petroleum reserve in Alaska. That is open for drilling for, for leasing that actually. So they'll, they'll.

be able to reconsider that. And that's kind of the opposite of the way that the Biden administration was treating the petroleum reserve. They had set off, I think, about 40% as a special area. So there was no consideration. for any leasing whatsoever. So that's, I think, really encouraging. And they're reopening. Again, this is just the flip-flopping between administration. putting the 1.5 million acres of the big national wildlife refuge that

was available for leasing and is now going to be back on the table again. And so I think people are pretty excited about that. And then AKLNG is also going to. I think move forward here. And there's been some news on that since I wrote this piece. And then finally, the sections of land that would make the Ambler Road possible are going to have some restrictions. you know, pulled back so that that land can be conveyed to the state of Alaska and that might make Gambler Road possible.

So break it down for us. Maybe we'll start in reverse order here since the Ambler Road thing. I know that that's kind of contentious, but it opens up. And of course, one of the big points of concern that we've had across the country is... You know, critical rare earth minerals, right? I mean, that's one of the big things that's driving us. We get a lot of our rare earth minerals from China. It was one of the reasons, one of the bones of contention that Trump had with the...

uh with ukraine and some of the other things you know we're not just giving you uh aid for free now they were talking about uh doing some rare earth mineral trades with them as well but the bottom line is is that alaska has access to it or has the potential for it

But we just didn't have access to those minerals as well because we're huge and there's no roads. Right. And so this is one of the discussions. So talk me through what the Ambler Road entails, what the holdup has been and what the potential is.

for the future on this thank you yeah that's a fantastic recap of where these things are uh the ambler road access project um there's there's some old, old Carter-era law that, you know, obviously guarantees this to the state of Alaska, that they shall permit to get access to this mining district, whether that's a road or anything else. I think, should come down to the economics. But the Ambler Road is really...

you know, it would unlock this wealth because it's really hard to mine someplace where you don't have infrastructure to get there. So I think there's a lot of potential there. The Biden administration had denied this permit. And as you recall, really the only thing. that made it past the Biden administration was the Willow Oil Project. And only that for three of the five drilling pads that were requested, the minimal economic viability of that. And they paid for it with their public relations.

So I think a lot of these subsequent cancellations were in large part because they felt the need to appease the environmentalist left. But I think the Ampler Road Project could be done very safely and done. in a way that respects the environment. And, you know, I think that's what a lot of people near the project want to, of course. It's never unanimous consent to these kind of things, but I think there's a lot of potential there. Get a lot of community input and figure out how to do it right.

Well, and this has really been one of the standard problems at Alaska is because geographically we're so huge. And the one thing that the U.S. promised us at statehood and one of the reasons why I think many people. wanted to be part of the United States as a state was because they were promising this infrastructure build out because we have.

I mean, we've got a tremendous wealth of research. I mean, we've got 17 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the North Slope. We can't even use ourselves, right? So this infrastructure has been a huge deal. And yet we've seen this continual stumbling block be thrown in the way, usually to appease the environmental lobby, as you talked about. But if we start opening up roads out west towards the coast and Nome, et cetera.

There's it's more than just one. I mean, there's a whole bunch of mining opportunities out there. But, you know, it's like one of those things where maybe if you build it, they will come. Right. Yeah. And conversely, if you don't have this, it's going to be very hard. And that's one of the things that when I was writing about.

I discussed the Ambler Road in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal back when this was originally denied by the Biden administration. I said, look, the Department of the Interior is pointing to the fact that there's no mines in the area. to justify denying this project. They're saying, look, there's no mines. When I think that's a pretty obvious point that if there's...

no way to get the infrastructure out there. Of course, the infrastructure is not out there. So that really infuriated me when I read that. You can probably tell. So I really do think that there's, it goes both ways. You look so furious. I was so infuriated. Internally. Internally furious. Yeah, that's how redheads do it, right? They internalize that fury and then they suck your soul out because they're so mad about it. But you're right.

that's the thing. I mean, well, look, there's, you know, there's nothing out there that, well, because there's no road. I mean. This is the this is the chicken and the egg problem, right? I mean, we've got to have the ability to do it. Of course, we can't develop it without the roads. And you can't say you can't have roads because there's no development. Well, duh. I mean, that's the whole point, right? I mean, this is the whole transcontinental rail.

road thing all over again. You've got to build the infrastructure to get there. And this has been the problem. Alaska has been the speaking of redheads has been the redheaded stepchild of every environmental group out there for years. I mean, we've got to be able to get these things built.

And hopefully the Ambler Road will be the beginning, you know, just the beginning of those kind of projects where maybe we can develop some infrastructure and get some more relief to these different communities that are out there that are essentially at the mercy of. you know, having to be flown in or barged in or snow machined in instead of being able to have access to a basic dirt and gravel road to get to them.

Exactly. Yeah, I found the quote. The Interior Department under Biden said there are no active mines in the area and no mine plan proposals pending before the federal government. It takes a lot to get to that stage. There's a lot of. exploration that you need to do in order to ensure that a mine is going to be economically viable for you. So I found that really a frustrating part of this situation, the chicken and the egg, just like you said.

And it's really it's amazing. It's really amazing. I just I couldn't believe it when I read that. You're almost speechless. I mean, that's. That's typical bureaucratic speech, right? Well, you can't have it because there's nothing there and there's nothing there because you can't have it. Sorry. Right. I mean, that's the kind of the reaction. And you're like, but wait, this is the what?

I mean, you know, that's not how it works. They're supposed to work in the real world. So some good news there. Hopefully this will lead to more development and infrastructure. Hopefully that we can see, you know, not just in Ambler, but in other areas out west. And I mean, it will. you know, hopefully that'll be it. I want to continue on here. Sarah Montalbano is our guest, by the way, Montalbano Mondays. You can find her at sarahmontalbano.substack.com.

We're going to have to get her a website, Model Model Mondays, that goes straight to the sub stack. We're going to have to plug her into that and get her squared away. But she does some amazing writing out there, and you need to go check it out. I've got the links up in the chat room, but we are up against the break. And I want to come back and we're going to talk a little bit more about AKLNG and more. We will continue in just a moment with Sarah Montalbano, The Michael Duke Show.

Common sense, liberty-based, free-thinking radio. Back with more in just a moment. Don't go anywhere. We'll return. Running on 100% pure beard power. Oh, also some coffee. We dip our beard in coffee. Nice beard. The Michael Duke show. All right. Sarah Montalbano is our guest here on the Michael Duke show. We're in the break and we're ready to do it. Should, can you switch hats for me for a second, sir? I know you're not in it.

I know you're not an education analyst or a commentator now, but I just, this whole $1,000 per student funding boost and the... tropes that are coming out of this article i don't know if you read it or not from the adn from yesterday that came out yesterday i just want i just wanted to hit you with a couple of them so here here's just give me your give me your i want your gut reaction

Lisa Paraday, executive director of the Alaska Council of School Administrators, told a joint meeting of the House and Senate education committees on Monday that the state's public school system needs a major investment to be made whole. Quote, when I hear education is failing, I say no. Education is starving. It's not failing. It's starving. Right? That's not true. That is not true.

This is the narrative, right? It's no longer what we're saying. We need to talk about policy as well as funding, right? Well, we got to talk about policies because the kids are failing. No, no. The reason it's failing is because you're starving it. You're starving it. That's what we're hearing. I mean, and I've just, I mean, my mind, my brain hurts just trying to do the mental gymnastics on this. What was the thing? What was the other thing here that caught my attention? Oh, Kai Holland.

from the Kenai Peninsula School District. This may not affect you as much because this is more my hot button than yours. Kai Holland, who also serves as the head of the Alaska Superintendent, told Alaska Superintendent's Associations. told legislators Monday that the Kenai schools have a $400 million deferred maintenance backlog. He said the walls and roofs of the schools are crumbling, to which I went.

How is that the state's, you had the money, you deferred, you, you, you, as kind of a bystander now. give me your two minutes here give me your ultimate thought of this battle out over The $1,800, the $1,000 BSA, the $680 BSA. If you were queen for a day, what would your thoughts be ruling from on high with your scepter and your little crown? What are your thoughts on this? I would say that if $20,000 a year is starving, then I would love to receive that much.

truly do think we're well-funded. I think we are prioritizing the wrong things. And if we are eventually... You know, I think the politics about it is really astounding because the article I read the other day was that ASD is sending out its pink slips and, you know, it's warning teachers that there's going to be layoffs. And yes, that.

that could happen, but they're cutting in the places to make it hurt. And I think it's a really, it's embarrassing that administrators look at this and then make these decisions too. Do what? Of course, preserve the administrative staff. I think these are predictable consequences of a predictable incentive system. It's intentional pain points, right? They're intentionally cutting things that hurt. And I don't know which article you read, but was yours the article that mentioned?

Oh, by the way, they say they have to cut 400 teachers, but because of attrition, retirement, layoff or, you know, everything else that really most of those positions are empty. It's only going to affect about 40 teachers. Did you see that? i saw that yes and it was it was just amazing the comment sections on this this article on facebook was just no administrators we have enough money we have enough it was amazing there was not a single comment for enormous scroll that was actually

thinking, oh, we need more funding. We need more funding. So that's what I think legislators need to be thinking about. And it's a shame that the Senate and the House have gone forward with this $1,000 increase to the VSA without any accountability.

accountability for the outcomes and i mean i i i'm hoping that the governor won't stand for it i'm hoping that he's good and he because he said if he doesn't get some of his policy things that you know and and the thousand versus the 680 it's you know One-time funding, yes. Okay. Maybe we can talk. But again, how do we pay for it? We're out of- And it's inflation growing. Yeah.

Yeah, that's the dangerous part of that whole thing. All right, we've switched gears and I'll have to go back to energy. I just want to pick Sarah's brain all day. All right, here we go. The Michael Duke Show, common sense, liberty-based, free thinking radio. Let's do this thing. Public enema number one. Oh, wait, sorry. Enemy. Public enemy number one, which makes more sense. On the other hand, he's a little bit of a pin in the Michael Duke show. I'm not. I'm a perfect angel.

Just ask Sarah Montalbano, who is, of course, the author of Montalbano Mondays on Substack. You can find her at sarahmontalbano.substack.com. It's a mouthful, but like I said, we'll get her. We'll get her. It's a long name, but it's spelled exactly like it sounds. Montalbano. Just Google it and you'll find her out there. Sarah Montalbano. We're talking about Alaska's resources being back on the table. That's the title of one of her pieces here from just two days.

ago. And it's got a lot of stuff inside of it, talking specifically about a lot of what's happening with AKLNG and the various pieces. And of course, instituting... Trump's day one administrative or executive order. does more than that. Like you said, it opens up Ambler Road and more. Before we get to the big pipe, what else does it do? And let's talk about NPRA and some of the other potential investments there. What are we talking about there?

Absolutely. So again, Interior is intending to reopen the NPRA, at least the 82% of it that has been available for leasing in the past. That doesn't mean that... oil rigs are going to cover all 82 of the whole area it just means that they're going to be open for leasing and consideration which i think is a really positive step especially because it was established in part as a reserve and it's going to

be awfully hard to be able to draw on any of those reserves if you're not able to actually drill in the area and we all know.

permitting takes a while, quite a few years actually. So I think that's encouraging. And the other part of this is that a portion of the coastal plain in Anwar is going to be reopened for leasing again. And what I've seen in the news about this is really kind of funny because the Biden administration, day one for them, paused all of the leases and then eventually formally revoked them and then set up the

mandated congressional there was a law passed to require two lease sales during his presidency and set up one right as he was going out the door and it was designed to fail um and all of the news reports on this are saying, yeah, they're going to reopen Anwar, but it didn't get enough interest from oil companies last time around, which I found really funny because it's the same thing that they're pointing to at the Ambler Road is, oh, there's no mines there. Oh, there's no...

oil drilling. No one wanted to put in bids for leases. But when you actually look at some of the oil companies' statements, they're saying, look, we were waiting for the Trump administration to come around because we knew they'd be more friendly to this.

Yeah, really. I mean, do you want to walk into negotiation knowing that behind their back is a flamethrower and they're just going to burn you down, you know, once you get in the door, you know, when they set it up to fail and their stated mission is to put all of you out of business and. And cap all this and turn Alaska into a park. Do you really want to talk about investing millions and millions of dollars into a state where it's going to be hostile territory from day one?

Of course, there's not going to be any interest in it. I mean, that makes sense. If you get something that's friendly, could get things in, and you get beyond a certain point where future administrations can't deal with it, can't screw it up. then maybe you have an interest, which leads me to another question of now, even though Trump's first day executive order has gone in and he's established this and we're going to be friendly and we're going to open Alaska up again.

It's also important that we get Congress to backstop this stuff so that a future administration, we can't do this wiffle ball thing back and forth across the net, right? Yes. And that is exactly one of the points I wanted to make here. It's amazing what a friendly administration can do for Alaska. But I'm also concerned that in four years, we're going to go right back to the way it was potentially. And we'll really see back and forth.

point it could be that we're delaying things that are half built uh you know our permitting process is broken and congress needs to act on actually making this streamlined and giving certainty for investors um because permitting, you can actually raise challenges to

the environmental impact statements and things like that, you can do it within seven years of the agency issuing this. And then a judge can come along and look at this and say, yeah, I don't think the agency did this right and send it back. And the agency spends two years redoing. it all over again. And that's what I think we really need to worry about with this administration is what's going to happen in the next couple of years. All of these things have been

a Trump executive order and then the secretary is going forth and actually executing on these with their secretarial orders. They have a lot of rulemaking to do and a lot of discretion over that. But the same kind of discretion applies to democratic administrations or any other kind of administration. Anyone that isn't this administration, I think, risks having some of these projects.

reconsidered again just because we saw this happen with trump number one and then biden they he reversed all of the things that trump did Yeah. And again, we, you know, we were getting neck strain from going back and forth, you know, Across the watching the ball go back and forth and whipping back and forth. And I think, you know, Nick Baggage, I know, has talked about this and several other politicians have said, you know, we've got a finite window.

with the momentum that they have going on right now to get all these things done. We've got a finite window to backstop it. And I think that's important. We need to get those things. Alaska's got to be open for business. That's the whole point.

of why they took the subsurface mineral rights away from the citizens in Alaska to begin with. That was part of the statehood compact. Alaska, you can't pay for yourself, so you've got to be able to develop the resources. And then they proceeded to lock most of them up over the last four decades. been a very difficult time. Anything else on NPRA that we need to know before we start moving on to AKLNG?

I think that's about it. Again, I don't think it's going to lead to a massive inflow of interest in oil companies, but I also do think they will. have a better chance in actually getting things done and doing some leasing and exploration up there which would be very very positive Yeah, no, I would hope so. Again, we're open for business. Well, hopefully we can get it done, develop the resources and which is good for the country as well as it is for the state of Alaska. All right. So AKLNG.

Some good news. Now, I will be the first to say that I am not suspicious. It's got more of a negative connotation. Skeptical. There you go. Skeptical. I'm cautious. I'm not even cautiously optimistic yet that a big pipeline would be built, even though the president's talking about it. Again, he's a guy that.

Runs into a room, throws open the door and screams, I need a motorcycle when he really wants a bicycle, right? He's a maximalist. He always goes to the maximum. So he may be talking about it, but we're talking about a pipeline that could cost upwards of...

80 billion dollars, maybe 60 to 80. I mean, 44 is the number they keep throwing around, but that's from Bill. That's 10 years old. Trust me, that's a that's a 10 year old number. So, you know, we're talking about a pipeline that could cost 80 billion dollars. that doesn't have the economics behind it. So even if you were going to use it as a, you know, not nationalize it, but use it as a national security asset, strategic asset and say, we'll build it and then turn it over.

You know, again, I'm skeptical that it happened. I would love for it to happen. Don't get me wrong. I mean, I'd love to be able to burn Alaska gas. I'd love to be able to export Alaska gas. I'd love to be able to these things. But let's talk about this right now because I know Taiwan's in the mix now. There's been some, and everything kind of gets spun, right? Oh, Taiwan's inked a deal or South Korea's inked a deal. They're going to back the pipeline, but that's not.

The devil's in the details. That's not really what they said. So give us the details here on the Taiwan, LNG, Alaska, Trump connection here. You've done your research. I would consider myself cautiously optimistic about AKLNG. What I find, well, first, the recent news, Taiwan signed a letter of intent to buy Alaskan natural gas. So they would...

be committing to about six million tons per year, I believe, of liquefied natural gas and would potentially be an investor. The important thing about that is that is a non-binding agreement. So we'll really have to see where that goes um similarly the philippines and japan are interested but they to my knowledge have not signed anything uh let alone something that's non-binding or binding um so that that's

I think a good thing that we can see that there's some interest now in the investment. Again, the $44 billion, I expect that that will turn out to be higher if this is ever built. I think there's a lot of promise in it, and I believe they've selected a developer. Is that right? That's correct. Glenn Farn, who people went. Who? I mean, people in the oil and gas industry went, who? You know, exactly. And so, again.

God, I hate using the word skeptical because even that has some negative connotation. I don't want to be the negative Nelly, but I want to be realistic about this. I, cause I, I mean, I fought the LNG fight when I was up in the interior in Fairbanks. I fought the LNG fight for years. I was part of a group that helped try to push. We've got to get Alaska gas. We've got to do these things. We've got to make it happen. But I, you know.

I watched it and I understood and the deeper I got and over the years understood the metrics and the economics of it more and more. And I realized, oh, this is such a heavy lift. I just and now, you know, after watching Bill Walker and the whole it's just. I don't know how you would do it. I don't know how you make it pay. And so when you get this unknown, virtual unknown, who's only done smaller projects, now is going to try and tackle a project in the...

you know, whatever 50, $60 billion range. I'm, I'm concerned about it, especially when they use it, Sarah, as a political point, right? Don't panic. We're putting the gas line in. Well, wait a second. First of all, we should be panicking a little bit if the crisis in the Cook Inlet is real because... That happens in two years and any pipeline is going to take 10 years. And I'm sorry, but I've heard the you'll have gas in 10 years. I've heard that argument. How many times? Right. So.

This is part of it. This is part of the problem, right? Yeah, I think the reality we have to face with AKLNG is that it cannot be done in time to plug the natural gas shortage for, you know, NSTAR and all of these things to keep the lights on in your homes in Alaska. And I think we'll need imports either way. And what really concerns me about the timeline, and this seems to be maybe a little optimistic, although, you know, AKLNG got.

pretty much all of its permits under the first Trump administration. It got approved by FERC. It will have an updated permitting timeline out by, I think, May 11th. of this year so you know they're steaming forward on permitting but what news reports were saying is that construction could begin in 2026 gas would be flowing in 2028, and we'd have a conditioning plant and an export facility by 2030.

That seems pretty optimistic to me. And what I worry about with this permitting deal is 2028 is going to be a big year. We'll have to see who is actually in control, because when all of these things are under rules and, you know. executive branch departments, that means it's fairly reversible. And we would really not like to have a half built pipeline, $44 billion in.

uh and have anything re-yanked right right well and that's the thing we saw how easy it was to yoink it you know when trump came in and he pulled the 180 and you're like oh uh Okay. So yeah, nobody wants it. I agree with you. the 2028 timeline that I, when I looked at that, I almost spit my coffee out. I was like, have you, have you seen anybody try and build anything in this country in the last 30 years, eight years? Yeah. I mean, you know, or, or four years or whatever it was. I was like,

that's, that's crazy. I mean, I think when you start talking about an eight to 10 year timeline, now you're talking about something more realistic, but, uh, and they're like, and of course the argument is, well, they built taps in three years. Well, that was 1971, 72. You know, I mean, that was a whole I mean, that was like a different era. Right. I mean, go back to World War Two. How many I keep saying this, but.

How many airports did we build in three years across the country? We built something like, I don't know, it was like. thousands of airports across the country uh that are still in use today because we were on a wartime footing and they basically threw out the playbook on a lot of the regulation stuff and they just said build it we need it you know so you just can't compare it's an apples to oranges

Yeah. Yeah. And I really do worry about these assets because if it does take longer to get to construction than next year. which I think is very likely, but that's what they're projecting. It would be even more founded if a subsequent administration in 2028 wanted to... pull these permits again and say, oh, the Trump administration didn't do due diligence on these environmental impact statements. Go and redo them.

And that's, I think, a huge risk. And I do think there's a lot of promise to it. I hope that it happens. But I do. have quite some concerns. And the other thing I would note about this is I believe the federal government is probably going to give a loan guarantee. I am just as skeptical of those four.

natural gas and oil as I am for wind and solar. I think picking a lot of winners and losers isn't a good strategy for the government, especially the government that's farthest away from the problem and from the people that are going. to benefit uh so i'm i'm hopeful i'm crossing my fingers but i think this is going to take longer than anyone's really bargaining for yeah and again it this is all going to be is all going to be resting on whether or not Congress backstops this.

That's kind of the question here, because if they do, if they turn it into a national strategic asset like they did Pipeline One during World War Two, when the federal government built the pipeline in the. southeast uh united states because nobody else could build it nobody had the money and they needed to get that pot that stuff you know for wartime efforts and then they later on turned it over to a private uh company um

You know, that's the only way that I can foresee forward on that. I mean, do you see anything different? I mean, do you see it being private investment or do you see it having to be a national strategic asset? That's a good question. I'd prefer it to be a private asset. I think there's...

You know, I really want this to make economic sense for private investors. And I think we are seeing some interest now that they know that there's friendly administration and power for now and that they won't have their investments, you know, rudely. uh taken from them but um i do worry about the numbers on this. I would love to see updated cost estimates, and I would love to see where the state of Alaska's stake is going to be, as well as what the developer is going to get out of this.

you know just just how is how is the math going to line up i'm i'm very excited about it but um i I'm not an investor. I'm not sitting down with my millions and billions of buco bucks deciding on this. But I think the right people need to be looking at those numbers. Sarah Montabano is our guest. The Michael Duke show. We're going to continue here with her in just a moment. One final segment.

Dang, these things go fast. We're going to continue with her. Don't go anywhere. The Michael Duke Show. Common Sense, Liberty Base, Free Thinking Radio. Back with more after this. If you missed the show, you can listen to it on your time with Duke's On Demand. Oh, and it's free. Like America used to be. Streaming live every weekday morning on Facebook Live and MichaelDukesShow.com. I mean...

Isn't that the hard question, though, Sarah? I mean, really, you know, because if the economics, if the private economics don't work out, it's dead, essentially. Because no investor is going to want to touch it. Have you read the Wood McKenzie report? I think we discussed it before and I looked at it at that time, but I don't recall what the... profitability figures were supposed to be it had several different scenarios in there but one of the scenarios was the was was uh almost an 80 subsidy um

And at an 80% subsidy, it was producing gas at like $3 over spec. Wow. And whether those numbers are accurate now or not, I can't say. But that was kind of the when you looked at it and that was kind of like the rosiest case scenario of 80 percent subsidy and still were delivering gas at overmarket value. Yeah, it becomes difficult, you know. And so I too, I mean, your libertarian streak is showing when you're like, you'd rather not be a strategic asset. I too feel the same way.

But if it was to ever be built, I'm thinking that that might be the only real solution is that it would have to be. And, you know. In some ways, I can soothe my libertarian screaming in the background. I can soothe that kind of beast by saying, well, we were promised infrastructure in the state, which we've never really received much of it. We've gotten some, but.

Never to the extent that we were promised. If that was built and then turned over later on, it would benefit the state. It would benefit the nation. It would be, again, strategic. But it's really a... It's hard. This is hard. It's a conundrum, isn't it? It's tough. It is. And I am also very drawn to the national security argument and the foreign policy argument. If we want to be. influential on the global stage, then what we need is to be able to compete with these cheap natural gas from Asia.

um and the kind of stranglehold especially that especially applies to the ambler road and critical mineral stuff because if we're trying to do this green energy transition, which thankfully under this administration, we've pivoted away from that. But if you want the solar panels and wind turbines and battery storage, you need the critical minerals. And we're getting almost all of it from overseas.

right now, the very critical stuff. You know, copper demand is supposed to just skyrocket five times what it's... I just looked at this. I don't have it in front of me, but, you know, it's going to be really increasing and we don't have the domestic mining and we are getting it from places that are abusing the workers that work there.

harming their environment. If we care about these kind of environmental issues, we need to be thinking about it as a global skill issue, not just putting it out of sight, out of mind. And I think someone in the comments said this earlier, and I love it. You know, who better than Alaskans to take care of their environment? We know how to do these things right. We have strict environmental standards and we follow it. And I think we take a lot of pride in doing things right.

Right. No, absolutely. I mean, I think we, you know, above most people care about what's because we're living here. This is our place. This is, you know, us getting it done. And and you're right. If we want to take that, if we want to take that role in the world and we want to play on the global market, I mean. The amount of gas and oil that we have on our slope, it rivals Saudi Arabia. There's nobody else that can do it the way we can do it.

But because it's stranded and because we haven't done anything with it, and it's just, you know, I used to opine that I felt like we were being treated like a land bank. holding it in reserve for the day when stuff started to run out in Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, and then they could go, okay, now we can tap Alaska.

You know, which maybe that's great for future generations, but we should also be starting, you know, the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best is today, we should be planting that tree now to get things rolling so that in 20 years, it's easier to do all those things. Yeah, I agree. And I think, you know, the previous administration didn't want any oil and gas. They're trying to phase it out by 2035 and 2050. They want net zero carbon emissions, which is just.

Yeah, the Alaska Democrats said that's part of their stated goal. We need to get off of oil and gas. I mean, this is the state. Where's the economy? Yeah. What are you supposed to do? And where's the substitute, right? If you want to eliminate something, you've got to have something to fill that slot. Wind and solar ain't going to do it because those are non-continuous producers. All right. I mean, that's.

Okay, so are you telling me that you embrace nuclear now? Because that's really where we need to be going. as far as energy production in a worldwide scene. Because even if, you know, if oil and gas are diminishing, as some people have said, you know, in generations, there won't, I mean, we've got to do something. But no, you're right. This is 100%. Oh, we're going to get rid of it. With what? There is no plan. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it's...

It's, it's, it's kind of crazy, kind of crazy. All right. Sarah Montalbano is our guest. Um, I guess we'll summit on this and I don't want to drag you into an education debate since we're talking about energy, but we'll. You know, I want you so badly. We got to have Sarah on. Somebody else already said that. Why don't you have Sarah on more often? Well, she's busy.

I hate to impose, but I love talking to her. All right, here we go. Jumping back into it with the Michael Duke Show, Common Sense Radio. Let's do this thing. The Michael Duke show. Seriously humorous with a pinch of intellect. Pinch of intellect. Sorry. That is humorous. Here's Michael Dukes. Okay. Sarah Montalbano is our guest.

Michael Duke show. We're having way too much fun during the break, guys. All right. You just got to you got to tune in and listen or to the podcast afterwards because we have a good time. All right, Sarah. Well, let's summate on all the high points here. And let's, you know, kind of wrap this up.

And you described to me where you think things are going based on what you're seeing so far. So let's do the wrap up first and then we'll go. We'll have you pull out your crystal ball and prognosticate the future there. So hit me with the wrap up here. Excellent. Thank you, by the way, for having me on. The Department of the Interior has done some pretty awesome stuff in, you know, opening up a great deal of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, reopening the coastal plain of Anwar.

to leasing. So I'm hoping we'll see some interest in investment coming soon. In those areas, the Ambler Road, there's a section of land that will presumably the intent seems to be to turn it over to the state of Alaska to make that an easier time because that route really. crossed 20 something miles of federal land and that really drew in a

bunch of permitting at the federal level and things like that. So I think that's going to make Ambler Road more possible and unlock the wealth of critical minerals in that area. And also, you know, AKLNG seems to be moving on, you know, coming to a close to a.

fruition here. We've got investors that are interested. We've got a developer picked out. My chief concern with all of these projects is going to be that Congress needs to solidify a lot of these things because they are in the executive branch right now. of their rulemakings and executive orders that can be pretty easily flipped by a subsequent administration. And that's.

My chief concern with AKLNG is that they're not going to be able to come to construction quickly enough or meet their stated timetable, and then that could be reversed by a subsequent administration. And again, that's what we were talking about earlier, the wiffle ball going back and forth between administrations. And so that's why we need the backstopping of Congress to step up and solidify and codify some of the things that we're talking about.

about here so um what kind of future does this give you know what in your mind as you look at this Do you want to make some predictions based on what you're seeing right now? Do we think that we have a chance of putting this together? Give me your thoughts here, what it looks like. That's a good question. I think we have a... pretty good chance of making it pretty far in this process. The permitting process for this was

done during the first Trump administration. It got its permits from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, got legal approval. It had everything lined up for AKLNG. So I'm hoping that means the permitting timeline will be fast. this time around. But eventually we will see, I think May 11th is when we can expect to see some updates on the permitting front for AKLNG.

I'm hopeful that we'll see it. And I'm hopeful that 2028 brings good news for a friendly administration to these kinds of things. But, you know, I think it would be a really good thing to have happen. We have. power on the global stage when we are exporting these kind of goods. And natural gas is also responsible for US's declining emissions over the last, you know.

10, 20 years growing this fracking revolution. And I'm not saying that fracking is what's happening here. But, you know, natural gas consumption displaces coal, which has a lot more emissions, you know. US emissions are declining because natural gas is cleaner. So I really do think it would be a positive move for Alaska's economy, the environment, as well as our national security and foreign policy.

Yeah, I mean, I think it would be a great move for that. And I think it's inevitably going to happen, but can we make it happen sooner rather than later? now where it may happen during my grandchildren's time you know but what can we make it can we can we build the infrastructure that it requires right now so that we can all benefit in the meanwhile that's the worst part and i think that's what really gets people emotionally spun up about this is that here we are

Alaska, we've got all these resources and we can't use them. And I think that's what gets people upset and why they become so emotional on it is because they feel like they can't use their own resource. And this would be a good way, go a long way towards fixing that problem. I agree. And, you know, I think there's a great deal to be said for, you know.

Alternative sources of energy. I'm thinking nuclear, but I'm sure other people support other things. But the truth of the matter is that we need to find where the economy goes before we really be. considering these alternative options. And I think AKLNG is a good place to be for job creation too. I'm hopeful that those numbers would turn out the way the project developers predict.

there. So, right. Well, and I think when we talk about all, you mentioned alternatives and we got a couple minutes here, a couple extra minutes. So, I mean, when you talk about alternatives, I mean, we, we've been discussing this in the program for a while now.

But nuclear is obviously one of the big ones. Even the federal government is acknowledging that this is something. I mean, we just saw Three Mile Island come back online to power the Microsoft AI project, one of their reactors. You know, but now we have. of nuclear batteries. Now we've got thorium salt reactors. We've got all this newer technology that's been developing, even though it's been verboten, right? I mean, nuclear stuff is like, you know,

But it is coming. And then, of course, the other ones, the other standard alternative energy sources that are, I guess, considered renewable would be things like hydro. you know, hydro and geothermal. I mean, it's not like we have a shortage of volcanoes up here or, you know, areas that we couldn't dig into to make some of these things happen. We've got an ability to do those things. And those are constant power sources.

compared to wind and solar, right? Yeah, in general, they do a lot better with delivering power around the clock. You know, and I think it's also important for us to note that all sources of energy have trade-offs. The wind turbines and solar panels you might build will need to be replaced after 20 to 25 years max. And they use a lot of critical minerals in their construction. And those have to be mined, whether here in Alaska or overseas.

So that's just one of the kind of costs to think about when we're considering the system-wide costs, when we're thinking about how do we want to tool our energy infrastructure for the future. Because those will be recurring costs as well. Yeah. No, I mean, and I think it's the direction we have to go. We have to start looking at this with a more long-term eye.

being honest with ourselves. I mean, look at what happened when the Trump executive orders came out, the federal aid got frozen. How many projects collapsed? right around the world because they were just not economically feasible. They've been billions of dollars being pumped into them. And we had the huge solar farm here on the Kenai. I mean, they pulled out the next day. They're like, sorry.

Not no economics to it. If it's only being propped up by government spending, does it really does it really fit the bill for what we're looking for? Exactly. And, you know, frankly, I feel the same way about. oil and gas projects that might need to be propped up in the same way. But I frankly think that the playing field needs to be leveled on these things and solar and wind need to compete on their own footing. And when we have natural gas like this.

It's a shame not to use it because it will help displace coal worldwide and reduce emissions in the long term. We don't want them to displace Alaska coal, though, because that's clean. That's clean burning. It's the cleanest burning stuff. We want to get that stuff exported. We should send that to everybody. Burn this. This is cleaner. Anyway. It is. And forest coal doesn't fit the bill.

Yeah, no, absolutely. All right, Sarah Montalbano, Montalbano Mondays on Substack. You can find her over there, sarahmontalbano.substack.com. As always, it's fantastic to talk with you, and I appreciate you coming on board. Thank you. Yeah, I love talking. All right. Well, hold the line here for just a second. Folks, we're out of time. Hour two is dead ahead. We're going to talk about this new education bill that just came out of the Senate.

And we're going to talk about the opinion pieces from both McCabe and Myers. That's up next. The Michael Duke show. If only we were in charge, Sarah, we could fix all this, right? If only we were in charge. Pat, no one's listening to me. I know. What is the deal? I'm smart. You should listen to me. No, but it is astonishing that, you know, and it really is sad that because of the hysteria, I guess I'll say, surrounding nuclear power.

We are so far behind. If we had not had some of the scares and some of the outrage that came out about this, just think about where we could have been if there was, you know, basically pocket nukes in every... small community or every, you know.

major hubs or things like that, you know, self-contained units that, you know, couldn't melt down that, you know, I mean, all the things that we could have done, especially for like rural Alaska and things like that. It's, it's astonishing to think about. Yeah, I've written about that before. And I think small modular reactors and micro reactors would be the perfect use case at Alaska.

I really do love the idea, and I'm hoping that they'll really make some progress soon. But there's only one design that's been approved by the NRC. I think you'll find with the NRC is they do a lot of restricting of the innovation in this field. There's no easy way to talk about that or sugarcoat that, but that's the truth.

overbearing almost focus on the safety, which we all we all want these things to be safe. But I think there's just there's not a lot of innovation. And even the big nuclear reactors, you'll see a lot. argued that nuclear is very expensive, but all of that is regulatory costs. They have to resubmit all their paperwork if they want to put different bricks in a different place.

You know, it really does get overbearing and there's some good ideas and the thing takes space to reform the NRC and I'm not familiar with all of them, but it is. I think someplace that needs to be looked at. And we also have a very pro nuclear administration right now. So crossing my fingers.

Well, yeah, I mean, especially, you know, self-contained units that are basically plug and play. Anthony makes the point. We actually talked with one of the last year, year before this last year, I guess we talked with one of the. inventors and founders of one of these companies that's working with places like Ielson Air Force Base and others, the thorium salt reactors estimated cost to initial build around $1.53 billion.

but requires zero modifications to the existing grid, essentially, and will last around 50 to 80 years until a core replacement is needed, which only costs around $300 million. That's the thing when it's plug and play and you could ship it in, drop it in, plug it in. And it requires almost no maintenance and anything else. And just, you know, I mean, that that's that's the kind of stuff we need to be looking at. That's the science fiction that is the future.

But we've had so many stumbling blocks and hurdles. And again, there's so much hand wringing over the whole thing that, you know, it's. I think that's created a lot of problems for us. But I mean, I agree with you. I think that this could be clean and affordable for the future. And I think it's inevitable. We should probably be tacking onto it now. Yeah. If that's where we want to go.

civilization then nuclear is the way to do it and i would also note that i i think fears of radioactive waste are really overblown It's a really small amount of nuclear waste, first of all. All of the waste that the U.S. has generated from all of its reactors can fit on a football field that's, I think, 10 feet deep or something like that.

this is really well managed and well contained. And, you know, a lot of it could be recycled. It's not burned very far. And so, you know, there's a lot of possibilities in this field, and I really am an optimist about it. And I just if that's the way we're going to go for clean energy, that's where we should be going. I don't think wind and solar will make the make the cut. Yeah, no. Well, we appreciate you.

We appreciate you coming on as always. It's great to talk with you. And I would, I would love to pick your brain on the educational components here as you watch, you know, but I know that your brain is in. total in energy mode and you're just kind of probably watching the education thing from the sidelines but maybe one of these days

Well, it is. It's fascinating, right? I mean, it's fascinating. Some of these things that they talk about is the misnomers and the. I mean, that's not even the misnomers. That's soft selling it. It's lies. I mean, right. It's misinformation. Yeah. We're going to, we're going to work. All these teachers are going to lose their job. Well, wait, there's.

you're saying 400 positions, but there's only 40 teachers. So is it 400 or is it four? Well, it's 400, but you know, and of course it's the, it's the lie with the truth sandwiched in it there that gets you, you know, every time kind of thing. But yeah, we'd love to talk with you about that here sometime in the future as well. I keep threatening to do that, but I know it's, you've taken your education hat off and I hate to do that because you have had some knockout stuff. So I appreciate it.

Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Anytime, anytime. All right. Well, Montalbano Mondays, if you haven't gone out there to subscribe, why not? I get it in my mailbox every week. You can go check it out. Sarah Montalbano.substack.com. Thanks, Sarah. Appreciate it, hon. Thank you, Michael. Talk to you again soon. Talk to you soon. Thank you. Thank you so much for coming on board. Sarah Montalbano, our guest here on the program. All right.

Oh, God almighty. Sometimes you're just almost speechless when all this stuff rolls around, aren't you? I mean, I know I am sometimes just absolutely flabbergasted. with everything that's happening all right uh we are coming up on it hour two is dead ahead uh i got some things to talk about and then we're going to um we're going to continue

And I saw I saw I saw Kevin McCabe was in the chat room. Kevin, I'm going to talk about your article here. If you want to call and comment on it, my cell phone is connected to the thing. So if you want to talk about it, feel free to. to dial us up and we'll talk about this piece because I want to dive into your piece and I want to dive into Rob's piece. And I think that this is, uh, I think there's some good stuff there. So we're going to continue the Michael Duke show.

Common Sense Radio. Let's do it. Put that thing back in its holster. We haven't gone anywhere. I don't understand. Check out themichaeldukesshow.com for information on how to get access to the podcast. Welcome to the party, pal. The Michael Duke show. The greed and the entitlement is astounding to me. What more could you want from a low budget radio program? this is a dumpster fire sounds just bs it is time to get a new perspective

We know just what you need and we've got just the cure. Open wide and prepare for steaming hot cup of freedom. I just don't fathom it. The Michael Dukes Show, streaming live across the world. Live around the world on the internet at michaeldukeshow.com and across the great state of Alaska on this favorite radio station and or FM translator. Hello, my friends. Welcome back to the program. It is the Thursday edition of the show.

Hour two, we just finished up with Sarah Montalbano, who writes for Substack, and she's a... contributes to the Washington, to the Wall Street Journal and the different news outlets. And she's anyway, she's doing some great writing. We're talking about Alaska energy and that was in the last hour. So if you missed it, go back and.

Go back and listen to it on the podcast, which is wherever you find podcasts, including Spotify, if you want to find it over there or on Facebook or YouTube as well. So go check it out and enjoy. Some good conversations there with Sarah Montalbano. Hour two this morning, we've got some stories to cover. Tomorrow's Firearms Friday. Dr. John Lott will be joining us in hour one. And of course, Willie Waffle in the end of the show.

This morning, I want to talk about a couple things. I want to talk about the new education bill that just came out of the Senate. And also two opinion pieces that were over on Must Read, one from Rob Myers and the other from Kevin McCabe. And Kevin was in the chat room, so I invited him to join us to discuss this opinion piece. So let's see if my technology worked and the phones are all working. Can you hear me, Kevin?

And of course he can't hear me. Hold on a second, Kevin. I'm going to call you right back, Kevin. Hold on. Cause my phone was not doing, it's not cooperating. I'll call you right back. We'll see if we can. You know, you could send a man to the moon, but we can't get this damn thing to connect properly when it needs to connect. Isn't that the way it always is? Let's see if we can get this thing going on here. And there we go.

There we go. Good morning. Good morning. Hey, it works this time. So I don't know. It's always the second time's a charm, right? That's how it works. Yeah. So, Kevin, thanks for calling in. This piece, I thought, because this is the first time I've ever heard this, and I don't know if I need to disagree with you on this for what Kai Haaland was trying to say, but walk us through this opinion piece. You initially talked about...

Representative Kai Haaland standing up on the floor to sound the alarm about the so-called civic economy. He warned about federal job cuts, you know, the doge thing, crippling communities, et cetera, et cetera. And you go on to talk about the civic economy and. You took away something completely different than what I took away from his comments. But let's get your take on it here, and then I'll offer a counterpoint.

When he's talking about the civic economy, what, you know, or are you saying there should be a different definition? What are you saying here? Well, when he started talking about the civic economy. I maybe heard it different. There's no doubt I could have misconstrued what he was saying, but I thought that he was trying to say that the public...

You know, that the federal government, that the public money was the civic economy. In other words, he was trying to say if Trump makes all these cuts in the public sector. that we were all going to suffer. So he was trying to make the point, I thought, that civic economy and the public sector government, essentially, were one and the same.

And really civic economy is when you and I get together as business owners and decide that we're going to contribute our time and efforts into building something for the community. It's more of the volunteer economy. That's what the civic economy is. So those two things I thought were different, and he was trying to put them together, in my opinion, and say that Trump's cuts were going to create huge issues.

And I disagreed with that. So I did a little bit of research and, you know, there's the public sector, there's the private sector, and the civic economy is a subset, actually, of the private sector. It's sort of the volunteer aspect of it or the community involvement aspect of it was what I thought. And, you know, Kai's trying to do what Kai's trying to do. And I get that. And we have a disagreement.

Yeah. No, look, I see. I mean, I see where you're what your takeaway is from this for sure. And I think what you're what you're trying to say is that. what i took away from your opinion piece which is excellent by the way was this is what the civic economy should be and you go on to talk about

You know, again, people working together, co-ops, selling beef, you know, people pitching together to do a boat ramp together. Basically, regular folks, not government bureaucracies, improving the community. Right. I mean, that's. That's in your mind what a civic economy should be about. Sure. The civic economy, it has to flow from the...

from private enterprise, from the private sector. You don't see the DNR and the DOT getting together, the commissioners, and saying, hey, let's out of the goodness of our heart build a cabin in the wilderness that people can use or a boat ramp somewhere. But you do see people getting together. There's a group of people in Telkina right now that are getting together to build, finding funding on their own, grants and other, and raising money to build a skate park.

There's a group of people in Big Lake that are getting together, business owners and private people and everything that are trying to put money together to build a park in the middle of downtown Big Lake. Those are the civic economy, in my opinion. Right. And they flow from the private sector. So to have a robust civic economy, you must have a robust private.

economy private sector right right it doesn't civic economy does not flow from uh from the uh you know from the government right trump cut making cuts to the government is not going to affect the civic economy except for In past history, when Clinton did this, It affected the civic economy in the positive. People got together. Yeah, well, you get into that history, which I think is interesting, and I want to get into that in a second, the Clinton analogy, because I think...

Man, there's a lot of people out there that have a very short memory. But I want to get into that. But Kai also invoked the free markets. And I always find it a little laughable when we have somebody who is more politically progressive. talking and opining about the free markets, because generally speaking, that's held with disdain or loathsome from the people on that side of the aisle, generally speaking, kind of hold their nose at it.

But, you know, you make a good, valid point that the free market is separate from the economies themselves because it's simply about supply, demand and competition. Right. I mean, that's what it's about. Free market, you know, public economies, private economies, civic economies, they're all subservient. The free market is the overarching structure of any economy, I mean, in a free market society.

But it's really more about the broad strokes of supply and demand. Oh, 100%. It has to be. You know, if you've read any of John Maynard's... kings or adam smith or any of the uh even karl marx you understand that the free market economy has to drive everything It just has to. I mean, you've heard me talk about it on this show before. The multiplier of money in the free market is way different than the multiplier of money that comes from the federal government for a number of reasons.

I mean, even you and Sarah talked about it a minute ago. If the federal government would get out of the way, if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would get out of the way, we could have micro nukes. five, six years. The development would be there, but people are not developing these things because they understand that it's a 10 to 15 year process with the NRC. And, you know, it just, how do you, how do you. get rid of those or how do you amortize those development costs, you know?

Right. Exactly. No. And I agree. I mean, it you know, the free market is a much bigger discussion in the you know, in the whole process here. It's the overarching thing. Now, he makes the points that they're worried about the president maybe cutting 200,000 federal jobs. And they're all aflutter and they're hand-wringing and they're, you know.

But again, then you go back and say, I mean, Bill Clinton, he cut twice as many as that. And there were results from that. And it wasn't the sky is falling. It was something totally different. Give us the rundown.

yeah so and you know i've made that comment on social media and immediately got pushed back and from liberal folks, the Trump derangement syndrome folks who are saying, well, yes, Clinton did cut 450,000 jobs, but he did it over four years and it was done in a nice manner and they all got two weeks notice. didn't. They got an offer of 25,000 bucks and all but about 20,000 people accepted that offer. Make sure he cut a lot of vacant positions and

PCNs that were not filled like we talk about in the state all the time. But at the end of the day, Clinton did the same thing. It might have been over a longer period of time because... because he thought he had a longer period of time. He didn't continually have social media warriors and mainstream media that was not friendly hammering at him for doing this. Trump's just doing it faster. he's ripping the band-aid off and the pain is being felt today in the markets um it's the the markets are

Boy, buckle up. Yeah. Now's the time to buy. If you wanted to buy now, you know, wait a day or two and then buy. And then because you could you could probably see the rebound on this. But. Yeah, the market's down 1400 or something this morning already. So definitely difficult. But I mean, you're right. I mean, this has happened before. And the response to that, what happened after cutting those 400,000 jobs is.

You know, the private sector boomed. 22 million jobs added. Unemployment hits a 30-year low. The GDP grew by 35%. It's the first time we've had a balanced budget and budget surpluses. uh, in, you know, 30 or 40 years. Um, and the free market just jumped right up. I mean, and, and it, and then they said, well, but what about the, what about the, the, the. the nonprofits? What about the grants and all these other monies? Well, we saw the giving.

on the private sector side increased during this timeframe because the economy was booming and people were like, we're going to give back to the communities. And, and so they stepped up instead of having uncle sugar with his wallet open. The private sector said, well, yeah, we really need this. And they decided to do it. So there's positives in all those things. Right. A hundred percent. And that's, you know, I think as.

As humans, we tend to look at things in the negative and say, oh, this is really going to be bad and this is going to cost us. And that's why the market's doing what it's doing. They're looking at it.

face it, the market is a bunch of gamblers in a money area that are... making decisions usually based on a little bit anyways on emotions sure there's data in there but they're making decisions on what they think something is going to happen what's risky what's not risky and they're making these decisions on whether not to buy or sell. And right now, folks are worried. And I don't think they should be. I really think they should look.

a little bit deeper into this and into history a little bit and see what clinton did and see what's been done before and realize that it is it's the free market that drives us we've been saying that in alaska for years if we don't develop our resources we don't our private sector businesses and the free market, we're just going to be a government park up here for folks, the rich folks to come up.

and enjoy and we'll all you and i that want to stay here and live here we'll have uh service jobs cleaning hotel rooms and pumping gas right right Kevin, I really enjoyed the opinion piece. Now, let me give you my take when I listened to his comment and read what he had said. Your takeaway was the civic economy and you're looking for the, in your opinion piece, you're essentially looking for what the true definition of the civic economy is. Here was my take on it. Here's what my take on it.

His commentary on the civic economy was just a new, was a grab at the vocabulary, was a new term, trying to create a new buzzword for essentially the public economy. And he's trying to make it sound better to say it's the civic economy. That's how I took it. I took it as him saying the civic economy, i.e. the government jobs.

are the ones that are really going to be affected. And that's going to affect everybody else because that's the most important thing. That was my takeaway from his commentary. So I guess that's the only bone of contention I would have in this whole thing is that you're trying to show what the truth is.

definition of a civic economy should be. And in his mind, I think the civic economy is synonymous with the the public the government economy the private the public jobs the government jobs that's what he's worried about they don't he you know they didn't seem to care

When it was the private economy that was cratering through COVID and all the issues and the recessions and all this kind of stuff, they didn't care about that. But the second that the... government jobs are threatened, the government economy, what he's calling the civic economy, that's when the panic and the hand-wringing started.

Right, 100%. And you and I are in agreement on that. I think that's exactly what he was trying to do, was try to add a new term in there and get people worried by using the word civic instead of the... you know, big government economy. And, and I think, I think Kai struggles a little bit because he is an entrepreneur. He's, he's got that mindset, but he loves big.

big government being involved in the entrepreneurship and i've met a few business owners that are like that that have this idea that the big government will help their business, whether it be, I mean, Kai's got a new bill out that he wants to establish the Office of Entrepreneurship.

in the state of alaska and all i hear is oh great more government yeah no that's exactly what we need is just more government in all of those areas um and that's the challenge again you want to talk about free markets get government out of the way uh and we can do it and and you're right i think that this was just another way to try and buzzword

And cover up the fact that what they're really saying is we're worried about government jobs. Forget about everybody else. We're worried about government jobs. This is the crisis, you know.

and you know one of the things that we have failed to do as legislators and politicians is we have failed to properly educate i think um our constituents a little bit or or maybe that's the wrong way to say it we have allowed the other side of the issue whether it be um just consider abortion why are we pro-choice or why are we pro-life

and they are pro-choice i mean we should be pro-life and they're pro-death you know if you you know we have allowed uh the the other side to usurp terms like civic economy instead of big government And I just wanted to make sure that people understood what the civic economy actually was. If you look at it from an economic standpoint, it's a subset of the private economy. It's you and I. Yeah. Well, I mean, I like where your head is at on this.

But again, I think that we're talking about potatoes and potatoes or, you know, apples and oranges when we talk. Because I think Kai meant something totally different, but a good way to try and school him. All right. Well, Kevin, thank you for calling in and joining us on this. This is a great article over on Must Read. I'll post links up in the chat room for folks who want to read it. I think it's a good piece and appreciate all you do. Appreciate your fight out there and we will.

We'll talk to you again soon. You bet. And I just got to say, I sure enjoyed Sarah's discussion this morning as well as her Substack. So I'm starting to post a little bit on Substack just because. There's lots to post about. Oh, yeah. And more coming. Absolutely. Absolutely. All right, Kevin McCabe, our guest. Thank you, Kevin. Appreciate you being part of it today.

Hold on the line just a second. Folks, we're out of time. We got more coming up. Don't go anywhere. The Michael Duke show common sense, Liberty based free thinking radio. We return with more right after this. If you missed the show, you can listen to it on your time with Duke's On Demand. Oh, and it's free. Like America used to be. Streaming live every weekday morning on Facebook Live and MichaelDukesShow.com.

We're in the break right now. Kevin McCabe still with us for just a moment here. I think you did nail it for me because I know Kai Holland is a entrepreneur and I've always found it fascinating to see entrepreneurs who are. You know, who are pro-government in so many ways, because to me, it's just it's it's I mean, it's just it's a it's a dichotomy. It's internal conflict. How can you be?

entrepreneurial and free market. I mean, I can understand it when they're big companies and now they're in partnership with the government and they are involved in the crony capitalism and everything else. But when you're a small time entrepreneur. And you're begging for more government regulation on your small business or more government oversight on your small business. I'm just, how do you wrap your brain around that? To me, it seems like the frog with the scorpion on its back.

you know um you right you are giving the scorpion a ride and all of a sudden the scorpion stings you well he's a scorpion what did you expect right at some point small businesses that are are struggling, look around, and if they would step back a little bit, they would see, well, I'm struggling because I have to do this and this and this. Just look at HB1 from last year, the initiative that...

was ostensibly just a raise in the minimum wage. And the small business owners are like, ah, we don't really care. We're already paying more than that. Well, wait a minute. Look at the rest of the bill. Look at the vacation and the sick leave requirements in there. Right. Now they're really, really upset. And it's like, well.

you guys said okay you know you have the scorpion on your back and what did you expect yeah no exactly all right well kevin i appreciate you appreciate you coming on thanks for writing that that's a good piece and i think uh I think that, you know, it's it's really kind of that is should be the true meaning of the civic economy.

And I just keep all I can hear is a guy saying, you know, Venzini saying or Inigo Montoya saying, you keep using that word. It doesn't mean what you think it means. So I should. I should get a clip of that. Yeah. I think I said HB1. I meant ballot measure one from last year. Ballot measure one. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Well, Kevin, thank you so much for coming on board. Appreciate you calling in this morning. All right, Michael. Have a good day. All right. Thanks so much.

Kevin McCabe, um, our guest here on the program, um, as we, as we go through here. Uh, yeah, it's, uh, interesting, interesting stuff. Um, okay. um we're going to continue on here uh let me see where are we at uh i'm way behind on the chat room i'm way behind on the chat room um I saw that Rick and Anthony are actually talking about how far China is ahead of us on small-time reactors.

And especially Brian or Anthony said, because I made a comment about how it's the science fiction that is our future. And Anthony said, but it's not fiction at this point in China. The Wu Wei, the TMSR LF1 reactor, has been functional and running for about five years. It should be extremely concerning to us as a country that our rivals are so far ahead of the bell curve.

for energy independence compared to us, we will wind up at the mercy of our enemies to keep the lights and heat on if we don't keep up and start making real pushes away from these quote-unquote traditional methods of energy production. And I agree. I mean, I agree. I agree. Absolutely. I'm scrolling backwards here to see if there's anything else.

uh that i missed that was great uh good stuff farry says a fairbanks had a school board member on problem corner yesterday they said the decline in test scores was because of bad student teacher ratios what I mean, this is part and parcel of that argument of we don't want to talk about policy. We want to talk about funding. And the reason we don't want to talk about policy is the reason we have bad outcomes is because you've screwed us on the funding.

that's what the bottom line is on that. Um, and we're going to get into that here in a minute, but it's so much, um, yeah, it's, it's crazy. Rick says, yeah, get moving. You're way behind. I'm sorry, man. I'm just, I'm trying to get caught up here. I'm trying to, trying to caught up. All right, here we go. The Michael Duke show, common sense, Liberty based free thick and radio like, and share subscribe, ring the bell, do all the stuff.

Uh, don't forget tomorrow. John Lott is our guest. We're going to jump in with that. Let's do it. The Michael Duke show common sense radio right now. The Michael Duke Show. Proudly splitting the left versus right dichotomy. Yeah, I had to look that word up too. I don't think it means what he thinks it means. There he is though. That guy. Michael Dukes. The one with the show. Okay, welcome back to the program. The Michael Duke Show, Common Sense, Liberty-based, free-thinking radio.

Yeah, it's a little panic happening on Wall Street right now. Little, little bit of panic going on on Wall Street right now. The Dow is down 1,500 points. Um, everybody is, uh, everybody, everybody's in a, in a bit of a, a bit of a panic. I mean, it will rebound, right? But it's, uh, It's that it's that it's that pressure under pressure. That's what's going on right now. All right. What do we got to continue on here? A couple of things.

I still got the Rob Meyer article, which I think is a great piece. Rob Myers wrote this and it was published in Must Read Alaska on Monday. And he goes on to talk about the Alaska economy itself. And it says that we should prioritize prosperity over politics. And. He says the quiet part out loud. He says the part that we've been talking about on this program for many years.

many years and he goes goes back to talk about the economic turbulence here in the state um you know even prior to covid you know we had a we've had a we had a recession that we were just starting to come out of a little bit when COVID hit. You know, we've got volatility in the oil industry, ups and downs. But he points out that even with all that economic turbulence, that the real problem has been our spending. You know, he talks about the job market peaking in 2012 and has been sliding down.

since then that our state's economy and our GDP peaked at that point as well. And the reason why is because we're failing to build an economy that gives Alaskans enough hope to stay, invest, and raise families here. And the big part of that problem and what lies at the heart of it is government spending. We've got to get a handle on our spending. And this is what we were talking about yesterday with Shelly Hughes. That even she...

And it wasn't a criticism of her, but it's like nobody wants to use the word cuts. She said reduction. She said something. But again, nobody is like the C word is, you know, it's a. It's verboten. Nobody wants to say it. Rob goes on to talk about how any one piece of spending is pretty easily justifiable, right?

Oh, if we're only going to talk about education, then they have to be spent on it or capital projects or whatever. The problem is, is that all of those pieces coming together cumulatively is what's killing us. We have to start prioritizing our spending based on the results in the economy. Because otherwise what you'll have is this continued outflow. You know, you want to know why most people are leaving the state of Alaska? It's because that the economy, the private economy.

is not just an afterthought. It's almost treated with disdain in this state. As long as the public economy is propped up, As long as the spending goes to benefit that and to increase that, then we should be fine, right? Because we're not getting anything out of the private sector, yada, yada, yada. But when you're making the private sector unattractive for people. Nobody wants to come here, stay, invest, and raise their families here when there is no future in the private economy.

So Rob asks the question, you know, what do we need to do? Well, we've got to start prioritizing our spending based on the results in the rest of the economy, not just prioritizing our spending. based on what is popular politically at the time, which again, the education is a key point on this whole thing, which we're going to get into it in the next segment, this education thing.

How do we measure success of our spending and the impact of that spending on the economy, you know, rather than just by the dollar figure that we pour into it? Oh, well, we pour billions of dollars. You know, that's all they want. How do we measure the success? And this is the problem that we're having with education. Because the one metric that we have is the. you know, educational scores, right? The outcomes. But they want to measure it by the number of dollars that are poured into it instead.

What are we doing to send signals to business, you know, that is considering investing here, that we, the state, are partners instead of... predators, just waiting to pounce on them when the state coffers are in the red. Right? And then he goes on to talk about how the talk of new revenue is swirling. Now, we've had these discussions here on the program for a long time. And new revenue.

always essentially means taxes of one form or another, whether it's taxes on oil or a resource or the people, but it's basically avoiding the main problem. The main problem is, is that this is a spending problem. Anytime that I see and these politicians who jump in on this and start saying, well, we need to. You know, we're looking at new resource revenue. We need to expand our resource base and that'll generate new revenue. You're still not eliminating the problem. The problem is the spending.

If we got the spending under control, We would probably still have a revenue problem for now because spending has been so out of control for so long that it's now created both a spending and a revenue problem. But this has initially just always been a spending problem. So what do we do? Well, we've got to live within our means. We've got to do it. If we don't focus, this is Rob's words now. If we don't refocus on fostering a thriving private economy, there won't be anything left to tax.

We spent a decade talking about the importance of maintaining government service. What's the point of services if we have no one left to serve? Well, I think in some of their minds, it's a self-licking ice cream cone, because if there's only government forces left here, there's only government workers left here. And then whatever minuscule service economy is there to service their needs.

Some of them would be okay with that. Some of them would be like, that's fine. That's fine. Nothing to see here. Move along. He goes on to say people are leaving Alaska and the government services mean little if there's no population to benefit from them. To secure Alaska's future, we must prioritize results over rhetoric. Economic vitality over short-term wins. The private sector isn't just a resource to tap. It's the foundation of our prosperity.

Let's start acting like it. And again, this goes back to this discussion we've had about the divorcing of the public and the private economy in the eyes and in the minds of most legislators. It's a really good article. You should go over there and read it. I'll post the links up in the chat room for folks who want to go take a look at there, but it's over on Must Read right now. You can...

You can take a look at it there and read it. But this is a really great article, and it encapsulates all the things that we've been talking about. on this program for quite a while in regards to the public and the private economy. But it names the name. It points out the obvious, that we cannot, that we have a spending problem. That's the bottom line. We have a spending problem. We cannot spend more than we take in and expect that it's all going to work out in the end. Because.

just because we're great people and everything. We cannot expect it to work out in the end if that is the case. So you should go read this. It is a... It is a fantastic piece. Wow, it is a fantastic piece. Sorry, that was loud. All right, we're going to continue here in just a moment. One final segment dead ahead. We're going to talk about this new thousand dollar bill that has now come out of the Senate.

I'm just going to read you some of the comments that are quoted in this article and let you be to the judge as to how good this is or how bad this is. I mean, this is a hot mess right now. I'll be honest with you. We'll continue The Michael Duke Show, Common Sense, Liberty-based, free-thinking radio. through a series of tubes. Allowing all of these entities to provide streaming stuff going on the internet. Well, it's kind of hard to explain. Sorry.

Streaming live every weekday morning on Facebook Live and MichaelDukesShow.com Okay, okay. Let me go over here. inflation uh but the people who agree but the people in juno who agree with the cuts are not in the majority said jennifer i i understand what you're saying jennifer but that doesn't mean that we stop That doesn't mean that we stop pushing for it. That doesn't mean that we just, you know, yes, 100%. But we have got to keep pushing for it. Absolutely.

Let's see here. Prioritizing, Kevin says, prioritizing the core competency of the state, prioritizing the real functions of government. Yeah. I mean, yeah. I'm seeing here. The spending is the problem, says Fat Ray over on YouTube. Thus, we should deny new taxes. I mean, that's been my point.

Anytime we talk about the financial crisis here in the state and some legislator, including some of the Republican minority members on this program, have said, well, what we need to do is we need to get more resource revenues. That'll fix the problem. No, they'll spend all that too. I mean, that's, you know, that's the problem. All right. Doesn't measuring education outcomes via testing actually measure how well the teachers and schools are doing teaching our kids? I would think so.

I would think that that would be a good indicator of what's going on. Rick says. They'll keep spending till they get enough people to leave the state. Then the government can run off the PFD. I think some of them would be happy about that. I really do. I think some of them would be like, yeah. If there's only government workers and whatever service industries are around, they'd be like, okay, this is working well. This is what we want. Again, zero.

You know, zero thoughts given to the private economy at that point. Ben Carpenter. Ben, by the way, is the host of the Must Read podcast. If you guys haven't been listening to that, it's got some good stuff on it. OMB by law must establish and administer a state agency program performance management system involving planning, performance, budgeting, performance measures, and program evaluation. The office shall ensure that information generated under the system is useful for managing and...

improving the efficiency and the effectiveness of agency operations. My God, just the description in the law, it seems like it's totally inefficient, but you know, it's, it is what it is. Um... Um... Uh... Okay, poor people get hammered twice by the education system. Once when the system is so bad that it closes schools due to lack of enrollment, and then when their PFD is taken to further fund those schools. A law made by the legislature is a law not complied by with the legislature.

Ben is making a point. He's basically saying it's the governor's responsibility to improve the cost of government. I mean, I think we can all agree that so far the governor has not done a stellar job. Well, with anything, but improving the cost of government least of all, you know, that's, that's what's going on.

I'm just going through here to see if there's anything. There's a lot of doom and gloom in the chat room right now. A lot of doom and gloom with the markets dropping and the markets tanking and everything happening. There's a lot of doom and gloom. Everybody. Bye. Go get some toilet paper. We're going to have no toilet paper. We're going to have no toilet paper. It's going to be bad. I mean.

I mean, I've got my toilet paper. I mean, I stocked up already. I mean, aren't you stocked already to begin with just because? I didn't need a tariff war disaster to prompt me to get what I needed here. Okay, yeah, Dunleavy did such a good job that Mary Peltola will be our next governor, says Fat Ray. Maybe. Possibly. Potentially. Oh, hey, I got a doggy visitor.

I got a little doggy visitor here. All right, we're going to jump into this. Hi, girl. We're going to jump into this here in just a second. The Michael Duke Show, common sense, liberty-based, free thinking radio. Let's get to it. Like, share, subscribe, ring the bell, do all that stuff. Here we go. Oh, wait, sorry. Enemy. Public enemy number one, which makes more sense. On the other hand, he's a little bit of a pain in the Michael Duke show. Yep, that's me.

That's me. All right. Let's get down to it. The final segment of the show today. Don't forget tomorrow on the program that we will be joined. In hour one of Firearms Friday by Dr. John Lott from the Crime Prevention Research Center, who's going to come on tomorrow to talk with us about. The new proliferation of less than lethal options. And he's, he's got a piece that.

He said to me and he's like, yeah, I don't know if I don't want people to talk. He's getting some pushback on this article because he's talking about less than lethal options. Taser, pepper spray, yada, yada, yada. And, um, I just, I happen to be in a hundred percent in agreement with him on his take on this, but, um, we'll, we'll tomorrow will be a good show.

Tomorrow we'll do it. All right. But we'll do that tomorrow. That's all coming up tomorrow on Firearms Friday. So what's my final take here this morning here? What's the what's the final take here this morning? What's my final topic? The Alaska Senate Education Committee, which, again, chaired by. It's chaired by Loki Tobin. So, I mean, no surprise. No surprise here. Because there's been a lot of talk about, well, what's the Senate going to do?

With this $1,000 BSA boost, right? The bill that came out of the house. Because it had a thousand dollar BSA and it had a cost escalator, built in inflation proofing, all this kind of stuff. I mean, this is the bill that's going to cost us. You know, about a billion dollars over the next three or four years. And.

There's been some pushback in the Senate. I mean, you know, Gary Stevens and Bert Stedman even had said, well, you know, we don't know if that thousand dollars is going to. I mean, it's iffy. But no surprise, That the no surprise that the Senate Education Committee chaired by Tobin, who was a champion of not a thousand dollar BSA increase, but of an eighteen hundred dollar BSA increase.

No surprise that the Senate Education Committee yesterday advanced an amended school funding bill with a thousand dollar BSA increase. The question is, is it affordable? Some members of the Democratic-dominated Senate majority believe the school funding increase would be unsustainable.

Because it's an ongoing thing, right? So the House approved their own version of the bill with the same funding increase, and it included some policy provisions that were intended to prevent Mike Dunleavy from vetoing it. Because he basically said, if you put forward something on my desk without policy decisions, some of the policy things that I'm asking for, then forget it. I'll veto it. The House measure included limits on cell phones.

plans to make it easier for students to attend public school of their choice, regardless of where they live and other provisions. We recognize, says Loki Tobin, that we need to have a substantial increase in school funding. That's what she says. And by substantial, remember, she was the one that was pushing for a $1,800 BSA increase.

So there was a new bill that was the new version of HB 69 was unveiled on Wednesday in the committee. Its total cost has not been estimated yet. But if it's a thousand dollar BSA with that increase. It's pretty much what the House bill version of the bill was. Tobin's staff highlighted some of the new provisions. School districts would be required to set target class sizes and explain why they are unable to meet them.

This is what David Boyle was talking about with us the other day when he was talking about targeting the class sizes and setting limits. on the classes, or you're going to have to pay teachers more per student, like a per student more. So the school districts are required to set target sizes for the classes.

If three quarters of a class shows improvement academically, the school can get recognition or financial benefits, which is sounds a little bit like a meritocracy thing, which I'm not necessarily opposed to.

And provisions were added to make it easier for charter schools to appeal denials of applications, among other things. Now, on the surface, and without having to look into all the amendments, that... looks pretty good some of those look pretty good but then when rebecca himshoot says i'm really excited about it i think it's a good bill it makes me really want to dive down and dig into it deeper at that point you know it really makes me want to get in there

The measure advanced from the Senate Education Committee on Wednesday with unanimous support. The only person missing was Mike Cronk. He was not there at the time. So the, because then the story breaks off to talk about how it goes back to the $1,800 number. talking about that's what Ledge Finance says. And of course, they point out that Ledge Finance is nonpartisan. Nonpartisan Ledge Finance estimated that. But advocates have been calling for this $1,000 BSA.

And then, of course, it goes into talking about how the school district in Anchorage began informing educators this week that positions would be eliminated. And that it's all part and parcel of the problem. Some Republicans have said that a school funding increase must be tied to improvement in Alaska's bottom of the nation test scores. And this was a quote that I read to Sarah Montalbano earlier in the commercial break. And she just. She was almost as speechless as I was. Lisa Parody.

executive director of the Alaska Council of School Administrators, told a joint meeting of the House and Senate education committees on Monday that the state's public school system needs a major investment to be made whole. But we're coming to the argument of, but you've got to produce results, right? She said, when I hear education is failing, I say, no, education is starving. It's not failing. It's starving.

basically blaming the lack of educational outcomes on the money. Now, remember, we were the highest per... Pupil expenditure in the nation in 2015. And we were still at the bottom of the barrel. We were still scraping bottom. Is this a money issue or is it something deeper? So HB 69 is now out of education committee and headed to the finance committee where.

There's uncertainty as to whether it will remain at $1,000. The Senate President, Gary Stevens, said on Tuesday that his majority caucus remained split on the BSA. And of course, the one thing that they're going to balance this whole thing against is what is the PFD going to be? As you're well aware, he said in a Tuesday press conference, when we raise education funds, we sometimes have to lower the dividend amount.

It's not sometimes. It's like every time. What are you trying to soft sell this? So that's an issue that our caucus is dealing with that hopefully will come to a conclusion and be able to get some agreement with the House as well. The minority leader, Mike Schauer, said his caucus is not split on the BSA. He said by next Tuesday. He said by text on Tuesday, sorry, not next Tuesday, but by text, he said that the caucus could tolerate a $680 boost to the funding formula, but they want...

Again, some policy changes. And then they get into the whole discussion about what is the effect going to be on the various communities and everything else. And then Clayton, so they're quoting Clayton Holland from the KPBSD, the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District. He told lawmakers that a school funding increase of $680 would still see layoffs.

The district is set to send out warning notices to 160 educators that their positions could be cut with a $680 increase to the BSA. And then he had this quote. Holland also serves as the head of the Alaska Superintendents Association. He told the legislators on Monday that Kenai schools have a $400 million deferred maintenance backlog. He said walls and roofs and schools across the district are crumbling. How is that a state? You. You guys are the ones that have deferred the maintenance.

They're acting like this is something that's like baked into this whole deal. You guys are responsible for it. You're the one that put off the maintenance to the tune of half a billion dollars. And you. $400 million in deferred maintenance in the KPBSD. That's just the school district. This is just so maddening. Absolutely maddening. We're going to see where this leads us this week. Maybe we'll have some more discussion about this on Monday.

Anyway, we got to go. Tomorrow is Firearms Friday. Dr. John Lott from the Crime Prevention Research Center will be joining us. Author of the books, More Guns, Less Crime. We're going to continue then. Be kind. Love one another. Live well. Oh, man. $400 million. I mean. the 400 million bucks yeah melissa says it all any bill that him shoot is excited about must be questioned absolutely absolutely

All right. I think we're all, I think, I think, oh wait, Frank says, no, Mary Peltola will be governor because Republicans and independents will split the vote. It has nothing to do with Dunleavy. It has to do with Alaska voters. We want our CV. Is that really what we want, Frank? Or are you just saying that's what you think that they want? I'm asking for a friend. asking for a friend. All right. We got to go. We'll be back with more tomorrow for Firearms Friday, the Michael Duke Show.

Common Sense, Liberty Bay's Free Thinking Radio. Be kind, love one another, live well. We'll see you then, folks. Have a great day. Radio Skin. And now we are slimy lizard internet people. It's the Michael Duke Show.