Reader disappointed with Clarion stance

Your endorsement of Dan Sullivan for the reason you have given disappoints me.

Mr. Begich has served Alaska very well and understands the needs of our entire state. Mr. Sullivan does not understand subsistence issues and is on my bad side in the fishing debate. Changing the configuration of the Senate may very well doom Alaska to having Pebble Mine ramrodded through the permitting process and cleared for completion in the salmon streams of Bristol Bay. Ten or 20 years from now our children will deal with the mess and pollution that this will leave behind. This could happen sooner. Mr. Sullivan reopened the case against Katie John. He is certainly not on my side when it comes to the subsistence issues. I feel Mr. Sullivan is fairly ignorant of the issues and concerns of bush Alaskans even though he is connected through his wife. Did you consider Dan Sullivan’s record on women’s health issues? How can you support someone who feels he knows better than women what their health choices should be? I think your reasoning is flawed.

Alaska benefits from having a split ticket in the Senate and Mr. Begich is the person who can handle the assignment and make sure all of Alaska’s people are heard. Alaskan’s need to be concerned with their own future first and Mark Begich supports Alaska first.