On June 3rd, Alaska State Senator James Kaufman shared an optimistic message on social media:

“One of my top priorities is supporting responsible resource development in Alaska… Alaska has the ability to provide reliable, affordable energy not just to Alaskans, but to America and our allies. I am excited that we are once again taking meaningful steps in that direction.”

On June 5^th, Congressman Nick Begich started his opinion piece in MRAK:

“When we talk about Alaska’s energy potential – we are talking about more than molecules in the ground or development projects. We’re talking about a true cornerstone of American prosperity and a valuable tool for national security.”

These are the kinds of sentiments Alaskans have heard for decades. These sound bites are filled with promise, always met with public hope, and too often followed by disappointment. Despite rich natural resources and enduring public support for development, Alaska repeatedly fails to launch major projects that would secure energy independence, create jobs, and restore fiscal sustainability. The culprit isn’t a lack of federal interest or industrial potential. It is Alaska’s own state legislature and its unwillingness to eliminate bureaucratic entrenchment.

To fulfill its promise as a national leader in responsible resource development, Alaska must go beyond words. It must confront its internal inertia with decisive action. A new generation of legislators, united with the executive branch, must systematically dismantle the regulatory and administrative barriers that block progress.

Governor Dunleavy needs to start immediately to exercise constitutional executive control where applicable. A new 2026 legislature must do the rest, because the current state legislature won’t.

Alaska can become what it has always had the potential to be: a global model of responsible resource development, prosperity, and self-determination. But that future will not be handed to us.

Breaking Bureaucratic Entrenchment: A Five-Point Action Plan

Audit and Streamline State Regulatory Agencies

— Alaska’s Departments of Natural Resources (DNR), Environmental Conservation (DEC), and Fish & Game (ADF&G) have grown into overlapping bureaucracies that too often delay rather than facilitate development.

— Action: Launch a performance audit across these agencies to identify duplication, inefficiencies, and regulatory bottlenecks.

— Objective: Establish a unified, expedited permitting process for energy, mining, and infrastructure projects.

Assert State Sovereignty Under ANILCA and the Tenth Amendment

— Federal agencies – including the EPA, BLM, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – have exceeded their jurisdiction, imposing restrictions that undermine Alaska’s development goals.

— Action: Expand the Department of Law’s litigation capacity to challenge unlawful federal actions and to press RS 2477 claims for access and infrastructure.

— Objective: Reclaim state jurisdiction over submerged lands, navigable waterways, and resource-rich public lands guaranteed under the Alaska Statehood Compact.

Forge a Legislative-Executive Alliance for Permitting Reform

— No governor can reform Alaska’s development framework alone. Legislative collaboration is essential.

— Action: Introduce and pass legislation which clearly establishes Alaska’s state sovereignty to reform permitting laws, protect state authority, and fast-track responsible development.

— Objective: Ensure Alaska’s legal infrastructure promotes rather than obstructs economic opportunity.

Incentivize Private Infrastructure Development

— Large-scale infrastructure, roads, pipelines, terminals often face crippling delays due to litigation and red tape.

— Action: Create a public-private development model, similar to North Dakota’s, through a State Development Corporation, but avoid the missteps created by Alaska state NGO’s like the Alaska Industrial Export and Development Authority, the Alaska Energy Authority and other failing Alaska NGO’s.

— Objective: Attract private capital to build essential infrastructure quickly and cost-effectively.

— Rebuild Public Trust Through Transparency and Local Benefits

Years of delays, reversals, and litigation have left many Alaskans skeptical. Public support will require visible returns.

— Action: Increase transparency in permitting and revenue use. Implement revenue-sharing agreements with local communities impacted by development.

— Objective: Ensure Alaskans see and feel the benefits of the resources developed in their backyards.

— The Consequences of Inaction

If Alaska fails to confront bureaucratic inertia, the consequences will be immediate and compounding.

Permanent Loss of Resource Sovereignty

— Without state-level assertion of permitting and land-use authority, federal agencies will dominate development decisions.

— Result: Billions in untapped mineral, energy, and infrastructure potential will remain buried beneath federal red tape.

Economic Decline and Outmigration

— Without new development, Alaska’s economy will stagnate, and its working-age population will continue to decline.

— Result: High-paying jobs in construction, energy, and resource sectors will vanish or move out of state, further weakening the tax base.

Fiscal Crisis Under Low Oil Scenarios

— If oil drops near $40 per barrel and production lags, state revenues will collapse.

— Result: Alaska will face increasing pressure to impose a state income tax, further cut the Permanent Fund Dividend, or deplete the Permanent Fund itself.

Loss of National Influence

— Inaction diminishes Alaska’s credibility as a serious development partner in national energy strategy.

— Result: The federal government will bypass Alaska for states with stronger infrastructure and clearer permitting processes.

Entrenchment of Anti-Development Narratives

— When Alaska fails to act, environmental and anti-development lobbies fill the vacuum, entrenching policies that make future reforms even harder.

— Result: Alaska may permanently lose the legal and institutional tools needed to reclaim its economic destiny.

Conclusion: The Choice Is Now

Alaska can choose another decade of drift, rhetoric without reform, federal control over state destiny, or it can choose decisive action. With the right leadership and aligned will between the legislative and executive branches, Alaska can become what it has always had the potential to be: a global model of responsible resource development, prosperity, and self-determination. But that future will not be handed to us. It must be claimed. A claim that can only be secured by clearing bureaucratic barriers, confronting inertia, and affirming that Alaska’s land and future belong to its people.

The views expressed here are those of the author.

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.