Curious about how Alaska's future could change with new representation in Washington, D.C.? Join us for an illuminating conversation with Nick Begich, a House candidate for Alaska, who shares his vision for prioritizing American interests and robustly supporting resource development. We delve into his recent endorsement from Vivek Ramaswamy and his critique of the incumbent, Mary Peltola, for her inconsistent policies on Alaska's resource development. Nick makes a compelling argument for why strong, clear representation is essential for ensuring Alaska's vital contributions are effectively communicated and supported in the House, especially in the face of the Biden administration's restrictive energy policies.
We also explore the growing opposition to central bank digital currencies and the controversial climate change agenda, which many see as more about control than actual environmental concerns. Highlighting Nick Begich's potential to bring necessary change to our party and country, we emphasize the importance of electing leaders who can effectively represent both Alaskans and all Americans. Tune in as we unpack these critical issues and express our confidence in Nick's ability to be a transformative figure in Congress. Don't miss this insightful episode that underscores the need for robust leadership and clear representation for Alaska.
Curious about how Alaska's future could change with new representation in Washington, D.C.? Join us for an illuminating conversation with Nick Begich, a House candidate for Alaska, who shares his vision for prioritizing American interests and robustly supporting resource development. We delve into his recent endorsement from Vivek Ramaswamy and his critique of the incumbent, Mary Peltola, for her inconsistent policies on Alaska's resource development. Nick makes a compelling argument for why strong, clear representation is essential for ensuring Alaska's vital contributions are effectively communicated and supported in the House, especially in the face of the Biden administration's restrictive energy policies.
We also explore the growing opposition to central bank digital currencies and the controversial climate change agenda, which many see as more about control than actual environmental concerns. Highlighting Nick Begich's potential to bring necessary change to our party and country, we emphasize the importance of electing leaders who can effectively represent both Alaskans and all Americans. Tune in as we unpack these critical issues and express our confidence in Nick's ability to be a transformative figure in Congress. Don't miss this insightful episode that underscores the need for robust leadership and clear representation for Alaska.
Welcome back to Stand. We are here with none other than Nick Begich, candidate for the House here in Alaska, running against the incumbent, mary Peltola, to, and we're going to pick up where we left off and talk about now some of the endorsements that you've gotten, nick, including from somebody that many of us are very familiar with, a gentleman named Vivek Ramaswamy. Can you tell us a little bit about that?
Speaker 2:
Yeah, thrilled to have his support, thrilled to have his endorsement I was his first congressional endorsement in the country and, look, I mean Vivek is. What I really appreciate about Vivek is that he is an extraordinarily articulate defender of the America first set of policies and he communicates to a segment of folks who really want to dive deep into the sort of the underpinnings of why we should be putting America first. And look, I'm an America first candidate. I'm proud to say that I'm America first, because I think it's important. When we send people to Washington DC, we should expect that they put our interests before the interests of people of other nations, and that's common sense again.
Speaker 2:
But it's the sort of thing that has been lost in the shuffle in Washington DC politics for decades. And so it's coming back to the idea that, look, we're prioritizing Americans, we're going to prioritize the American taxpayer, we're going to prioritize voters, but not just tomorrow's voters in the next cycle, but voters for the next 20, 50, 100 years. We got to recognize that we are making decisions in Washington DC that for some politicians may be good for their next election but are terrible for the long term interests of our country, and Vivek Ramaswamy has highlighted that in a very compelling way. He continues to be out there supporting that message and, importantly, supporting Donald Trump, who was his competitor in the election and he has been fully supportive of since Iowa.
Speaker 3:
Yeah, we have that video for that endorsement, so I want to show that at the end of this segment. So viewers make sure to watch all the way to the end so that you can see Vivek's endorsement for Nick Begich. Let's jump in and talk about the incumbent's current record. Nick, I know that you're well versed on it. I have a lot of things that I would like to bring up as well, but let's start with you. What are some of your biggest concerns with the current incumbent, which is our sole representative for the state of Alaska?
Speaker 2:
That's right. We only get one. There's 435 members of the United States House and we get one. That's less than 1%. That's less than a quarter percent of the entire representation in the House. So it's important that that person carry a story, a message about what Alaska is, what Alaska can be and, most important of all, why Alaska is important to them. Remember, every single member of the US House is going there to represent their district and try to convince the other members of the House is going there to represent their district and try to convince the other members of the House that there are things in their district that are important.
Speaker 2:
If we don't have someone there that can communicate that compelling case for Alaska, alaska will be left out of the conversation in the House. And the challenge that we have with Mary Peltow, among many, is that she has an extraordinarily mixed record when it comes to resource development. She has been for it, then she's opposed to it, then she's not sure if she's for it or against it. And this flip-flopping activity that she has politically may be convenient for her because she is, after all, a member of the Democrat Party. She's someone who's voted for Hakeem Jeffries to be speaker nearly 20 times, but at the end of the day it's not good for Alaska and it sends a message to DC that Alaskans aren't sure what they want when it comes to resource development and maybe that Alaskans want to be told what to believe about resource development from people outside and that's just not reflective of people here in the state.
Speaker 3:
One of the biggest concerns, I think, based on what you're saying, is when she's home she actually runs on a strong pro-resource development campaign. So many of the reasons why she got crossover votes people who are moderates, people who are Republicans is she runs as largely a moderate who's a pro-resource Democrat. And it's hard to not support a pro-resource Democrat who you might just disagree with on some social issues but otherwise she lines up with the Republican Party. But the fact is she's actually not pro-resource. Like there was recently the Alaska's Right to Produce Act which overturned the Biden administration's anti-energy agenda. They've been pushing so hard they have dozens and dozens of executive actions against the state in their couple years in office to shut down and kill and destroy all kinds of energy production up here and fortunately Congress actually came to our defense.
Speaker 3:
Like you're saying, the hundreds of members of Congress said this has got to stop because it's not just hurting Alaska, it's actually hurting the entire country.
Speaker 3:
And for those across America who aren't familiar with what's going on, up towards the northern part of Alaska, there's two areas that are set aside by Congress Congressional Act for oil development and one is for oil drilling and production for America and then one is actually for almost like military reasons, set aside, like for our strategic petroleum reserve, that we would have oil reserve defense, that we don't have to go to our enemies for it. Okay, well, the Biden administration has just destroyed and overridden Congress and said we're not allowing any more leases or drilling in any of those areas, and so think of it as like shutting down a Saudi Arabia worth of oil in America. We can't touch it. Now this isn't happening in other parts of America. Other parts of America are totally open for business, but not Alaska, where we actually have more. We do it cleaner, greener, better, and it's just destroyed it. So they came to a vote on this. It turns out Nick, you probably know this even better than me.
Speaker 2:
Oh yeah, I'll tell you. Yeah, I met with. I met with the actual member who put this bill forward.
Speaker 3:
Tell us the story.
Speaker 2:
Yes, so I met with Representative Pete Stauber and his chief and I asked him permission to be able to tell this story. He's giving me the green light, but here's what happened In committee. On the House Resources Committee, representative Pete Stauber worked on this bill on behalf of Alaskans. Bear in mind he's a member of the Minnesota delegation. He's not an Alaskan but he's part ofan mining district. But he writes the bill Alaska's Right to Produce Act and Mary Peltola and committee votes for it says she's supportive of it. It hits the House floor and she sends a dear colleague letter to all the.
Speaker 3:
Democrats.
Speaker 2:
Yes and says, please, I urge you, vote no on the bill that she had just co-sponsored and voted for in committee. And then, when it actually came up for the vote she had just co-sponsored and voted for in committee, and then, when it actually came up for the vote, she didn't vote yes, she didn't vote no, she voted present. And that is a gutless decision, a gutless move from someone who is supposed to be supposedly her words, carrying on the legacy of our former Congressman, don Young.
Speaker 3:
It's a backstabbing move to say to say in committee I support this, which she can then send memos and radio ads home to Alaska I voted for this in committee and then to not have a record that anyone can point to on the floor, like all the time she has conveniently taken potty breaks during resource votes, and then to actually send a letter to hundreds of Democrats to say our position as Alaskans is against this bill, backstabs every Alaskan. That's the problem, because she will come home this year and run a pro-resource campaign which is just a lie.
Speaker 1:
Well, and that's the issue is, we need somebody who's going to take a stand for Alaska right, and that was a key, key situation in which we needed our representative to take a stand on one of the most important issues, not just for our country, but also, obviously, for Alaska and for our economy. And she didn't. She did actually the opposite.
Speaker 3:
Imagine how awesome it would have been if a Democrat, especially an Alaska native Democrat, knowing how many Alaska natives actually support responsible resource development If an Alaska native Democrat had had the courage in the middle of the beltway in DC to stand up and say we support, as Alaskans and as Americans, we support resource development in America and we challenge the Biden administration to do the same. I mean that would have been a mic drop right.
Speaker 2:
Yes, there's a message too, that a Democrat would be rather effective at carrying on resource development Totally Gas, mineral development and you touched on it a moment ago, Kelly. You said look the resources we develop in Alaska. We do better than essentially anywhere on earth. We're more responsible, we're more careful, we're more sustainable in the way that we develop the resources that we do have. And why, knowing that these resources will be developed around the world, why would you take the safest, most responsible jurisdiction for resource development off the table and trade it for developing world economies, for adversaries or even enemies, that don't have our best interests in mind, don't prescribe to our environmental practices in Alaska, in their home nations? They don't care the way we care. So why would someone on the left want to trade a responsible jurisdiction like Alaska for an irresponsible jurisdiction when it comes to resource development? That message was totally missed, yep.
Speaker 3:
And similar question. That confuses the heck out of me. Why would a Democrat or a representative from Alaska be OK with trading our voices for preemptive veto by the federal government or, in this case, the EPA? So the story I'm telling is we have a mine called Pebble Mine that could be developed in Alaska, but it's been a source of great controversy because there's some conflicting views over whether developing Pebble Mine would jeopardize a very, very lucrative and essential fishing area up here in Alaska. I'm trying to explain this to people in lower 48. And so there's just a lot of controversy over this mine.
Speaker 3:
Whether you're pro-mine or anti-mine, I understand. What I do not support is the federal government coming in with a preemptive veto, not listening to the voices of the natives who live in the region, not listening to the voices of the natives who live in the region, not listening to the voices of the people here in Alaska who've studied it, not listening to the voices of the people who understand the fish in Bristol Bay, not listening to any of them, and just imposing their decree as bureaucrats from Washington DC, without even stepping foot in the area, nick, and saying no, we know better, as Washington DC bureaucrats, as government officials from on high to decide what you're going to do with your resources in DC, and Mary Paltola just introduced an act to support permanent preemptive vetoes from the federal government on Alaska's development of resources. That is not pro-resource, nor is that pro-Alaska, nor is that pro-Alaskan voices, and that is extremely concerning, not only for Alaskans, but should be for all Americans 100%.
Speaker 2:
I couldn't have said it any better and I totally agree with everything you just said. And let me just add one additional piece to that. Our gubernatorial administration is actually suing the federal government because of this attempted preemptive veto of the project out in that region of our state. And they're suing for hundreds of billions of dollars because when the state selected these lands they did so at statehood because they recognized the mineral potential for this region and to preemptively take that off the table is a taking, that's a taking of the state of Alaska's resources from Alaskans. And so here we are. We're suing the federal government for monetary damages for doing this and at the same time that lawsuit is going forward, we have Mary Peltola trying to take it off the table. She's trying to take hundreds of billions of dollars of opportunity to take that to be rectified with the federal government because they're taking those preemptive actions and saying no, we don't need that.
Speaker 3:
We don't need that. Our people don't need that. Our people who are in poverty in that region, who are a lot of Alaska Natives, don't need that and we don't need to be restored for more land that the federal government has taken, mostly from Alaska Native peoples. That's what her vote is saying.
Speaker 1:
We need to move on to the next segment. We'll continue this discussion on the other side of the break.
Speaker 3:
So we also want you to watch this endorsement video for Nick Begich from Vivek Ramaswamy.
Speaker 1:
We'll be right back, stand by.
Speaker 4:
I'm proud to endorse Nick Begich for Congress. He's in Alaska. One of the things I found is that you know who loves the environment more than most people you've ever met is somebody who lives in Alaska and you want to know who understands the importance of drilling in Alaska the Alaskans. Nick Begich gets that. He's going to prioritize the interests of Alaskans. He's going to prioritize the interests of Americans. He has signed my American Truth Pledge, which I appreciate, shows that he stands for the right America first principles of the future. That's where our Republican Party is headed. He's also somebody who understands not just where the puck is but where it's going.
Speaker 4:
Opposition to central bank digital currencies something that I think more congressmen need to know about and be alert to. Alert to the threats of the climate change agenda, which absolutely is based on false premises and increasingly has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with power, dominion, control and punishment the same point as central bank digital currencies. So this guy's from Alaska. He's going to represent Alaska well, but he's going to represent us well, americans well, in the US Congress, and I do think it's going to take a fresh batch of leaders to drive change, not just in our party, but in this country, and so I'm going to encourage you all to vote for Nick Begich. I'm going to help him any way I can. He's going to be a great congressman and I have full confidence he's going to be doing a great job of representing the state of Alaska before long.
