Trump officials are visiting Alaska to discuss a gas pipeline and oil drilling

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — The Trump administration is sending three Cabinet members to Alaska this week as it pursues oil drilling in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and reinvigorating a natural gas project that's languished for years.
The visit by Department of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin comes after Trump signed an executive order earlier this year aimed at boosting oil and gas drilling, mining and logging in Alaska. It also comes amid tariff talks with Asian countries that are seen as possible leverage for the administration to secure investments in the proposed Alaska liquefied natural gas project.
Their itinerary includes a meeting Sunday with resource development groups and U.S. Sens. Dan Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski in Anchorage before heading to Utqiagvik, an Arctic town on the petroleum-rich North Slope where many Alaska Native leaders see oil development as economically vital to the region.
The federal officials also plan to visit the Prudhoe Bay oil field Monday — near the coast of the Arctic Ocean and more than 850 miles (1,368 kilometers) north of Anchorage — and speak at Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy's annual energy conference Tuesday in Anchorage.
While it's not unusual for U.S. officials to visit Alaska during warmer weather months, Dunleavy's office said the officials' visit is significant. Dunleavy, a Trump ally, said he is thankful for an administration that 'recognizes Alaska's unique value.'
Government and industry representatives from a number of Asian countries, including Japan, are expected to participate in a portion of the trip, reflecting pressure from the U.S. to invest in the pipeline — despite skepticism and opposition from environmental groups.
In Alaska, some environmentalists criticized the agenda for Dunleavy's conference. Highlighting fossil fuels alongside renewable or alternative energy make 'energy sources of the past look more legitimate at a conference like this," said Andy Moderow, senior policy director with the Alaska Wilderness League.
'I think we should be looking at climate solutions that work for Alaskans, not trying to open up places that industry is taking a pass on, namely the Arctic refuge,' he said.
A push for more drilling
Trump has long taken credit for provisions of a 2017 tax law championed by Alaska's congressional delegation that called for two oil and gas lease sales in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge's coastal plain by late 2024. The first one remains the subject of ongoing litigation, with the main bidder a state corporation that saw its seven leases later canceled by then-President Joe Biden's administration. A judge in March ruled Biden's administration overstepped, and the Interior Department, in line with Trump's executive order, is working to reinstate the leases.
There weren't any bids in the second sale, held under Biden and blasted by the state as overly restrictive.
Debate over drilling in the refuge — home to polar bears, musk ox, birds and other wildlife — has long been a flashpoint. Indigenous Gwich'in leaders consider the coastal plain sacred land, noting its importance to a caribou herd they rely upon.
Many North Slope Iñupiat leaders who support drilling in the refuge felt their voices were not heard during the Biden era. During the Trump officials' visit, they also hope to make a case for additional development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, which Trump has advocated, and for being included in planning decisions.
Nagruk Harcharek, president of Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat, an advocacy group whose members include leaders from the region, called the officials' visit 'a step in the right direction.'
'Gigantic natural gas pipeline'
For years, the state has sought to develop its stores of North Slope natural gas as a way to provide affordable energy to more residents and bolster revenues via exports. But cost concerns, shifts in direction, competition from other projects and questions about economic feasibility have stymied progress. Oil companies have long reinjected gas that occurs with oil deposits on the slope to produce more oil, which remains Alaska's economic lifeblood.
The latest gas proposal calls for a roughly 810-mile (1,300-kilometer) pipeline that would carry gas from the North Slope to port and a facility that would process and export liquefied natural gas to Asian countries. In a March speech to Congress, Trump touted his ongoing support of the 'gigantic natural gas pipeline." He said countries like Japan and South Korea 'want to be our partner, with investments of trillions of dollars each.' No firm commitments from countries have been made.
The company advancing the project — in partnership with a state corporation — is in a stage of refining cost estimates, previously pegged at around $44 billion for the pipeline and related infrastructure, before final decisions are made on whether to move forward with the project.
Alaska in the spotlight
While Dunleavy has likened Trump's friendly approach to energy development as 'Christmas every day,' Alaska's fortunes remain tightly linked to the volatility of oil prices, which are down sharply from a year ago, squeezing state revenues.
State lawmakers across party lines overwhelmingly passed a resolution urging Congress to provide Alaska with 90% of royalty revenues for oil and gas leases in the Arctic refuge, arguing the U.S. government reneged on past promises for such a share. The resolution also asked for that to be extended to the petroleum reserve.
Alaska's tax structure allows companies like ConocoPhillips Alaska — which is pursuing a massive oil project known as Willow in the reserve — to write off a portion of their development costs against production taxes they incur elsewhere on the North Slope. While lawmakers widely support Willow, they also have argued a change in federal royalty share would address a hit to state revenues created by production in the reserve.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

CBS News

2 hours ago

• CBS News

7 highlights from Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski's interview with "CBS Sunday Morning"

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski told CBS News senior correspondent Norah O'Donnell that she's navigated President Trump's Washington by staying focused on constituents in her home state of Alaska. In a wide-ranging interview for "CBS Sunday Morning," O'Donnell spoke with the GOP senator about navigating a polarized Washington as a moderate, why she doesn't feel allegiance to the Republican Party, and her new memoir, "Far from Home: An Alaskan Senator Faces the Extreme Climate of Washington, D.C." Here are some highlights from the extended version of Murkowski's interview, which can be watched in the player above: The "big, beautiful bill" and why Congress "is not doing its job" Murkowski, who has served in the Senate since 2002, is a key vote in determining whether Republicans' so-called "big, beautiful bill" passes the upper chamber. The bill would implement Mr. Trump's domestic agenda and cut trillions of dollars in taxes and spending, including hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to safety net programs like Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the legislation would add $2.4 trillion to federal deficits over the next 10 years, a figure Republicans dispute. The House passed its version of the legislation in May. Murkowski told O'Donnell that "something" will pass the Senate, but she has "significant reservations" about how cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, or food stamps, will impact Alaskans. Alaska is the state most dependent on federal funding, with 32% of its population enrolled in Medicaid. The senator said she has not given the Trump administration an "absolute" red line that would cause her to vote against the bill, and said she would communicate her concerns "every step of the way." "I want to try to do what we can to address certain aspects of our entitlement spending," Murkowski told O'Donnell. "We've got to do that. But doing it with the most vulnerable bearing the brunt of that is not the answer." Back in February, following a flurry of executive orders from the White House, Murkowski warned her GOP Senate colleagues that the legislative branch must not cede its authority over controlling government spending to the president. She told O'Donnell that Congress should not cede ground to "anybody," including the executive branch and the courts. "We have a role that is prescribed under Article I of the Constitution," Murkowski said. "We need to take that seriously. And I fear that what we're seeing more and more is a Republican conference in both the House and the Senate that may agree with the goals of President Trump, and so they're good with however we get there." Murkowski said she believes her GOP colleagues are not acting as a check on the executive branch's use of emergency powers because they agree with the policy outcome. "We need to ask ourselves, if this was President Biden or if this were to be a President Booker, how would we respond?" Murkowski said (referring to Democratic Sen. Cory Booker). "Because I don't think we would just sit back and say, 'It's OK that you use that.'" Asked by O'Donnell if Congress is capitulating, Murkowski said, "I think it's Congress not doing their job." CBS News' Norah O'Donnell with Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. CBS News Murkowski says her allegiance is "not to the Republican Party" Murkowski's independence on Capitol Hill has raised questions about her party loyalty. She was one of three Republicans who voted against confirming Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense, and also voted against Kash Patel, Mr. Trump's pick to lead the FBI. Murkowski also said she has never voted for Mr. Trump, the leader of her party, in a presidential election. "My vote, my views, and so for me, it was the decision that I made. I have a hard time voting, kind of for the lesser of two evils, if you will," she told O'Donnell. "I want to be a proactive voter. I want to vote for somebody who I believe in." Murkowski knows what proactive voting looks like. In 2010, the senator won a historic write-in campaign after she lost the GOP primary to a conservative candidate aligned with the Tea Party movement. She said her path to return to the Senate reinforced her independence on Capitol Hill. "I still have the same Republican values that I have long held," Murkowski said. "But my allegiance is not to the Republican Party. It's not to a party. It is to the people who returned me. And those people were Republicans and Democrats and independents and nonpartisans." After Mr. Trump's second impeachment trial in 2021, Murkowski was one of seven Republicans who voted to convict him on the charge of incitement to insurrection over his role in the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Murkowski was the only Republican who was up for reelection the following year and voted to convict. The president openly clashed with Murkowski during her 2022 reelection campaign, throwing his support behind Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska and 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate. Today, Murkowski said she needs to work with the administration and is aware her effectiveness in Congress is linked to her relationships with key members of the White House team. "It is no secret that I did not support the president, and it's also no secret that the president did not support me," Murkowski told O'Donnell. "He actively campaigned against me in the state. But at the end of the day, he won, I won." On her vote for RFK Jr. Murkowski voted to confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the secretary of health and human services. He recently removed every member of a committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on vaccines, a controversial move that caused consternation among some GOP senators who supported him. "I don't like what he did on the vaccine committee," Murkowski told O'Donnell. Asked if she regrets voting for him, the senator said, "I don't get any do-overs. I just don't. And so I'm not going to spend a lot of time saying I regret the vote." Murkowski did praise Kennedy's support of the Indian Health Service. She said that in a private call, the secretary vowed not to make cuts to the agency. Murkowski also said many of her constituents feel Kennedy is "on the right track when it comes to chronic diseases," acknowledging that many of her constituents struggle with conditions like diabetes. "Is he 100% for me? No," Murkowski said. "Is he somebody that I can have that conversation with and have him come back … to me with answers? Yeah." Murkowski says Kavanaugh lacked "self-awareness" about impact of sexual misconduct allegation Murkowski was the only Republican who voted against the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court in 2018, following testimony by Christine Blasey Ford, who alleged that Kavanaugh assaulted her decades before when she was 15 and he was 17. Kavanaugh strenuously denied the allegation and was eventually confirmed by the Senate. In her memoir, Murkowski writes about a private meeting she had with Kavanaugh before the final vote to confirm him. She told O'Donnell that she felt Kavanaugh did not have "self-awareness" about how the allegation against him "opened a wound and a scar" for women across the country. Murkowski said the purpose of her meeting with Kavanaugh was not to address his qualifications, but to stress the importance of "women being believed." "It was a matter of, are you aware that this has brought out such passion and such emotion from so many women around the country?" she said. "But he didn't, he didn't get it. He couldn't acknowledge it," she added. "And what it showed me was that he was not able to understand what was happening in the country." In a chapter of her memoir titled "No More Silence," Murkowski briefly mentions in a single paragraph that she was sexually assaulted as a child. "I chose one very quick paragraph to acknowledge that I had been in the same place that other women had," she told O'Donnell. "It's scary to be vulnerable and to share certain things," Murkowski said. "But I saw the strength of so many women during that time when the Kavanaugh hearings were going on. Women who were afraid to speak up, but felt that they needed to. And in speaking up, they empowered other women to do the same." The overturning of Roe v. Wade Murkowski is Catholic, and also supports abortion rights. The senator voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, both of whom would go on to vote to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022 in a landmark case that repealed the nationwide right to an abortion. "I never imagined the extreme possibility that it could be overturned completely," Murkowski writes in her memoir. Murkowski told O'Donnell she came to that conclusion based on "representations" the justices made about Roe in their private discussions and public comments. Asked if she was misled by Gorsuch and Barrett during their confirmation processes, Murkowski told O'Donnell, "I actually asked that question of myself in the book, right? Was I misled? Or did they say what they needed to say, which was, 'This is settled precedent, this is well-defined.'" Barrett and Gorsuch said during their confirmation hearings that Roe is a precedent of the Supreme Court, but declined to classify it as falling into the category of a "super-precedent." In 2020, Barrett told the Senate Judiciary Committee that she defines super-precedents as "cases that are so well-settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for overruling." Murkowski said she does not bear responsibility for the outcome the justices reached in Dobbs v. Jackson, the 2022 case that overturned Roe. "I do not accept responsibility for the fact that they made decisions and determinations to the best of their ability," Murkowski told O'Donnell. Murkowski says Alaskans' fear about federal cuts "is real" Murkowski clarified comments she made to a crowd of nonprofit workers in Anchorage back in April, when she said "we are all afraid." Murkowski said she was speaking about federal grants that had been frozen or paused, and echoed the concerns of her constituents. "I have shared with them that fear … That fear is real, and so I can't tell them, 'Don't worry, don't be afraid.' I have to say, 'I feel that, too,'" Murkowski said. "I can't say, quite frankly, things are fine right now, because I don't feel that they are." The senator also addressed her previous comments that she sometimes feels anxious about using her voice because "retaliation is real." While Murkowski said she doesn't feel individually threatened to cast her votes a certain way, she told O'Donnell, "We are seeing actions out of the administration where we're saying, this is just beyond the norm." Remaining rooted in Alaska Even after serving more than two decades in Washington, Murkowski told O'Donnell she still feels like a "bit of a stranger" in the nation's capital. Murkowski travels to her home state nearly every weekend — a journey that takes 12 hours each way. Murkowski says the trip is worth every minute because the people in Alaska anchor her. "That's how I think I have mastered Trump's Washington, is staying focused on my Alaska," she said. READ AN EXCERPT: "Far From Home" by Lisa Murkowski For more info:

CBS News

2 hours ago

• CBS News

Sen. Lisa Murkowski on navigating Washington under Trump, her place in the GOP, and her new memoir

For Senator Lisa Murkowski, Alaska, the last frontier, is her favorite frontier. The third generation Alaskan is as familiar in the halls of Congress as she is on an Alaska Airlines flight (where even the flight attendants call her "Lisa") as she flies home nearly every weekend to America's northernmost state. Each day is packed with constituent meetings. The state's senior senator says it's what keeps her connected to the needs of Alaskans, from the high cost of living and childcare, to the shortage of housing. She writes about being a moderate in a polarized Washington in her new memoir out this week: "Far from Home: An Alaskan Senator Faces the Extreme Climate of Washington, D.C." The book jacket shows Murkowski bundled in a parka (lined with wolverine, beaver and fox) on the steps of the Capitol building. "I had brought my parka back to Washington, D.C. for the inauguration, because we knew it was going to be cold – We're gonna take a picture in the snow, wearing the parka with the Capitol," she said. Forum Books After a career as a lawyer and state legislator, Murkowski came to Washington in 2002 when her father appointed her to fill his Senate seat after he was elected Alaska's governor. She faced charges of nepotism, which Murkowski calls "accurate." She was ultimately elected to a full-term. Each election has been a challenge, but none as difficult as in 2010, when she was primaried by the Tea Party … and lost. Then, she made the difficult decision: run a write-in campaign, with a challenging last name. "Nine letters," she said, "and it had to be spelt right. Because we weren't sure how the courts were going to interpret it, if it was 'Murkowsky' with a y at the end instead of an i, was that going to be sufficient to count?" She won, giving Murkowski what she calls "a new freedom." She said that winning independently of a party's backing reminded her of the idea that she had the support of her constituents to do what she thinks is morally right. "It absolutely reinforced that," Murkowski replied. "It's a daily reminder of how I was returned to the United States Senate. It was not through the help or the assistance of the Republican Party; it was through the hope and the assistance and the persistence of Alaskans all across the board." Asked about her allegiance to the Republican Party today, Murkowski said, "I still have the same Republican values that I have long held. But my allegiance is not to the Republican Party. It's not to a party. It is to the people who returned me. And those people were Republicans and Democrats and independents and nonpartisans. So, when people back here in Washington talk about 'I need to answer to the base,' my base is so beautiful and diverse and eclectic and genuine." Murkowski never voted for Donald Trump. In February, following a flurry of executive orders from the White House, Murkowski warned her Republican Senate colleagues that Congress must not cede its authority over controlling government spending to the president. "Just to put it into context and be fair, I don't think that we should cede – we, the Congressional branch – should cede ground to anybody, not to the courts, not to the executive," she said. "I think we have a role to do. We cannot, whether it is with tariffs, whether it's with spending, whether it's the role of advice-and-consent, we have a role that is prescribed Under Article I of the Constitution. We need to take that seriously. "And I fear that what we're seeing more and more is a Republican conference in both the House and the Senate that may agree with the goals of President Trump, and so, they're good with however we get there. But we need to ask ourselves: If this was President Biden or if this were to be a President Booker, how would we respond? Because I don't think we would just sit back and say, 'It's okay that you use that.'" CBS News' Norah O'Donnell with Sen. Lisa Murkowski. CBS News I asked, "You think there would be more oversight?" "I think there would," she replied. "If not oversight, at least feigned outrage. But we are basically saying, 'Whatever way you wanna get there is gonna be okay because we like the goal.'" "Is that a capitulation by the U.S. Congress?" "I think it's Congress not doing their job," Murkowski replied. Their job right now: Deciding whether or not to pass President Trump's so-called "big beautiful bill." With a lot of concern over hot-button issues like Medicaid, Senator Murkowski will likely be a deciding vote. Alaska relies more heavily on federal funding and programs than perhaps any other state in the country, so Murkowski knows the stakes for her constituents. "I realize that my job, number one, is to be effective for Alaska," she said. "I have to be aware that my effectiveness is going to be tied to relationships, right? And so, how I am able to develop relationships in an administration where it is no secret that I did not support the president, and it's also no secret that the president did not support me. He actively campaigned against me in the state. But, at the end of the day, he won, I won." READ AN EXCERPT: "Far From Home" by Lisa Murkowski For more info: Story produced by Julie Morse. Editor: Jason Schmidt.

Yahoo

20 hours ago

• Yahoo

Senate parliamentarian strikes key SNAP spending cuts from GOP megabill

The Senate parliamentarian on Friday ruled against several more Republican provisions in President Trump's megabill, including language to bar immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents from receiving food assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, also ruled against a key Republican pay-for in the bill, a proposal requiring states to pay for a certain percentage of food assistance under SNAP depending on those states' error rates in delivering aid. The proposal to shift SNAP costs onto the states was a sticking point with Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine). The parliamentarian's ruling could make it easier for Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to pick up Murkowski's and Collins's support as the SNAP-related pay-for will now need to be stripped from the legislation. The Senate bill as drafted would have required states to pay between 5 and 15 percent of food benefits in 2028 on their rate of error in paying out food benefits. Almost every state in the country has had error rates of 6 percent or higher, which would have shifted a significant percentage of the cost for delivering food assistance onto the states. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the Senate language would have cost North Carolina, for example, to pay up to $438 million for food aid in 2028. MacDonough struck another blow against the GOP leadership's agenda by ruling against a section to extend the suspension of permanent price support authority, something that traditionally has been part of the farm bill. Congress passed a one-year extension of the farm bill in December after Democrats and Republicans failed to reach a deal on a multi-year extension of the law due to disagreements over SNAP funding. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, applauded the parliamentarian's decision on Friday. 'The Senate parliamentarian has begun providing guidance that certain provisions in the Republicans' One Big, Beautiful Betrayal will be subject to the Byrd Rule — ultimately meaning they will need to be stripped from the bill or altered to comply with the rules of reconciliation,' Merkley said in a statement. 'As much as Senate Republicans would prefer to throw out the rule book at advance their conservative families lose and billionaires win agenda, this process has rules and Democrats are making sure those rules are enforced,' he added. 'We will be fighting this bill every single day until Republicans bring it to the floor.' Provisions of the reconciliation package that the parliamentarian decides violate the Senate's Byrd Rule are not eligible to pass with a simple-majority vote. If Thune and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) don't remove provisions found to be in violation of the Byrd Rule, the Republican package would need to muster 60 votes to advance. The parliamentarian ruled against several provisions of the bill under the Commerce Committee's jurisdiction, including a section that appropriated $250 million to Coast Guard stations on South Padre Island, Texas, damaged by fire in 2025. She also ruled that language allocating $85 million to transfer the space shuttle on display at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum to a non-profit group in Texas would not be eligible for the budget reconciliation fast track. Provisions found not to comply with the Byrd Rule would need at least 60 votes to overcome a point-of-order objection. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.