Donald Trump has upended the government in the first 100 days of his second presidential term. He’s made his mark on Alaska in the process. In part that’s because the federal government has a big presence here, the state with the most federal land. Alaska also has, or had, a significant federal workforce and benefited from higher than average spending per capita. Trump has also written orders specifically for Alaska.
But how do you quantify what has changed in Alaska in the first 100 days of Trump’s presidency? It’s difficult. Here’s what we know.
1. Millions in lost federal dollars
The Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, has cut tens of millions of dollars in grants and contracts in Alaska. The cuts have strained public safety, the social safety net and community programs. They’ve halted or delayed infrastructure projects, and eroded scientific research.
"The uncertainty is, you know, is really scary for folks,” said Amanda Toerdal, a program director with the nonprofit Kawerak, which hopes to build the Bering Straits Community Solar and Battery Systems Project.
The project, approved last December with funds from the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act, would have provided a source of alternative energy to five Northwest Arctic communities that typically rely on diesel fuel to generate power. But after the Trump administration suspended the grant funding, Toerdal said, the project is on hold and faces an uncertain future.
It’s been impossible to put even a ballpark value on the Alaska grants and contracts that have been cut and suspended. The people who might aggregate that information, like Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s office or the Foraker Group, say that’s what they want to know, too.
One man who has tried is Will Ragland, who leads research projects for the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning, non-partisan think tank. He has built a DOGE tracking tool.
“We decided to do our best with the data that was made available from DOGE itself, from trade associations, from independent researchers and build a data set,” Ragland said.
His figure for Alaska: $69,566,305.
He’s the first to admit it’s not complete. And he’s only tracking grants and leases that have been terminated. Many Alaska nonprofits say their funding was, at least temporarily, frozen. That missing money would not be included in Ragland’s DOGE tracker. Nor would canceled contracts.
2. Hundreds of federal jobs eliminated
The federal government has been Alaska’s No. 1 industry, with 15,000 employees. Just the portion paid in wages to Alaska’s federal employees adds up to $1.4 billion a year.
We know that hundreds of Alaska’s federal workers have lost their jobs or have opted for an early retirement. We don’t know how many yet. That data is likely to emerge months from now.
While this is upending life in some Alaska households, the impact on the state isn’t clear.
“That has been a big question, a gaping question,” said Brock Wilson, assistant professor of economics at the Institute of Social and Economic Research, part of the University of Alaska Anchorage.
“What everyone wants to know is the magnitude” of the job losses, he said. “And that has been really challenging to make any firm conclusion about.”
The state of Alaska says more than 230 federal workers have filed unemployment claims.
But Wilson cautions that the number of unemployment claims aren’t all that telling, since some of the probationary workers were rehired, some fired a second time, and some continued to receive pay for a time despite getting emails saying they’d been fired. Wilson says that’s just one moving piece that confuses the federal employment picture. Another, he says, is that people who took the Fork in the Road buyouts are on a different path.
“In fact, they may have gotten another job elsewhere, and so you wouldn't see that movement in unemployment,” he said.
The best indicator, Wilson said, will be payroll data – how many Alaskans receive federal paychecks now compared to a year prior. The government releases those figures about half a year after the fact, so it will be a few months before we know how much the Trump administration has shrunk Alaska’s federal workforce.
3. Oil patch feels a regulatory weight lifted
President Trump’s energy mantra has been “Drill, baby, drill” and he signed an executive order on Day 1 called “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential.”
It calls for tossing out the Biden administration’s restrictions on oil development and making more of the Arctic available for leasing.
Realizing most of those things will require new regulations or legislation.
The biggest change for Alaska’s oil industry so far? The head of Alaska’s oil and gas trade association says it’s the intangible boost that comes from seeing an administration take over that doesn’t act like oil is dead.
“Just the tone of and that philosophical belief that there is a future (for oil), I think, is really what's going to drive the change,” said Kara Moriarity, president of the Alaska Oil & Gas Association. “Versus an administration who was: ‘It's over … . It's a dying industry. We need to move on.’”
The administration recently called for speeding environmental analyses for energy projects. Instead of taking years, a permit can be issued in 28 days, the policy says.
That would be a boon for industry, if the permits hold up when challenged in court.
Lifting regulatory burdens may make a difference on the margins of a project, said industry analyst Brad Keithley, but price and cost are what really matter.
“If the prices aren't there, or if the development costs are too high, then no amount of regulatory relief … is going to make something economic that it's otherwise not,” he said.
4. Renewed interest in the Alaska gasline project
The Trump administration has also led to a surge in optimism for the long-sought Alaska LNG project, an 800-mile pipeline that would take gas from the North Slope and transport it to Southcentral for export as liquefied natural gas.
Trump has touted the “gigantic” pipeline project as a priority for his administration, which has languished for decades with possible overseas gas-buyers hesitant to bet on the project, last estimated in 2023 to cost $43.8 billion.
“Having President Trump's support, I think, can make a significant difference in getting buyers lined up for the pipeline,” Randy Ruaro, head of the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, said at a recent legislative hearing.
Trump plans to gather officials from Japan and South Korea in Alaska in June, according to news reports, and administration officials hope to use the summit to announce commitments from the two countries to purchase gas from the LNG project.
Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, a longtime skeptic of the project who pushed to cut the state gasline agency’s funding last year after a decade of slow progress, said Trump’s return to power had buoyed the pipeline’s prospects.
“It was, in my opinion, highly unlikely we'd get a gasline until the Trump administration came in,” he said in a recent interview.
But state officials and industry leaders have been seeking foreign backers for the projects for decades, and Stedman said it’s still not clear if the project will proceed even with the White House’s support.
“It remains to be seen if jawboning Japan and Korea will work to get them to write a check,” he said.
5. A new name for the nation’s highest peak
Trump announced on his first day back in office that he wanted to change the name of Alaska’s big mountain from Denali to Mount McKinley. His Interior Department followed through and changed the official map.
The name change struck a nerve in Alaska. Many Alaskans told us they intended to call it Denali no matter what. Some said it felt like erasing Indigenous culture to replace the name with that of a deceased president who had nothing to do with Alaska.
“It should be called Denali,” one Girdwood resident wrote to use. “It was called Denali by the Koyukon Athabaskans long before the Russians came to Alaska and long before Alaska was a state.”
The Alaska Legislature, by an overwhelming majority, passed a resolution asking Trump to reverse course. He has shown no sign he’s considering it.
6. The price of oil is down and could fall further
The price of Alaska North Slope oil has dropped about 10% since Trump started his second presidential term at the end of January. Economists blame slumping prices on fears that Trump’s trade war could slow economic growth.
Peter Navarro, a White House aide, has said the administration would like the price of oil to fall even further, to $50 a barrel as a tool to curb inflation.
Longtime oil and gas analyst Brad Keithley said those goals are at odds with Trump’s stated goal of “unleashing” Alaska’s oil and gas.
“I mean, you drive the price of oil down, you're undermining the economics of projects,” Keithley said.
But industry leaders are excited about the executive order, Moriarty, the head of the Alaska Oil & Gas Association. She said it’s still possible for companies to invest in Alaska with lower oil prices.
“As the administration is trying to focus on unleashing access, improved regulatory process and infrastructure, all of those things can also help with the cost of doing business,” Moriarty said.
7. A larger state budget deficit
Declining oil prices have left lawmakers facing hundreds of millions of dollars in deficits this year, and future years aren’t looking any better, state budgeters say.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration and Republican allies in Congress are looking to pare back federal spending, leaving larger gaps in the state budget. Earlier this year, the leaders of the state House and Senate sent a letter to Alaska’s congressional delegation saying plans to slash spending “endanger the economic prosperity and social well-being of Alaskans.”
“The biggest concern, the most unknown number, is what will happen back in Washington, D.C.,” Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, the state Senate’s chief budgeter, said at a news conference Tuesday.
Among the biggest concerns for the state budget is reduced support for Medicaid, the largely federally funded, state-run insurance program that covers roughly a third of the state’s residents. The U.S. House of Representatives approved a budget resolution in April that congressional budget-scorers say would likely require billions of dollars of cuts to the program. Though some prominent Republicans in the U.S Senate have said they oppose cuts to Medicaid, Stedman said he anticipates significant reductions in federal spending.
“We're most likely going to get more financial obligations that were handled by the federal government delivered to the state budget, which we're going to have extreme difficulty backfilling,” Stedman said.
Senators are already scaling back budget increases added by the governor and the state House and weighing cuts that would bring the Permanent Fund dividend to roughly $1,000. Though House leaders have proposed closing the deficit by drawing from the state’s roughly $3 billion rainy-day fund, Senate leaders say uncertain federal spending and oil revenue make them hesitant to put savings toward ordinary state operating expenses.
“This year, I believe, is a transitional year. It is tight. It is difficult,” Hoffman said. “But next year, it's going to be worse.”
Federal spending, investment returns and oil revenue are the top three sources of state income.
8. The value of the Permanent Fund has declined
Though federal spending is the No. 1 source of state revenue, a yearly draw of 5% of the Alaska Permanent Fund’s value provides the majority of the general-purpose money for the state budget, funding everything from state troopers and teachers to ferries and snowplows. So the fund — and all Alaskans who receive a Permanent Fund dividend — have some exposure to the market volatility induced by Trump’s trade war.
As of April 30, the fund was worth $81.6 billion, down $1.44 billion since the end of January, according to financial statements.
Even so, compared with the uncertainty surrounding oil and federal revenue, Stedman said the fact that the 5% draw is based on a five-year average value should insulate the state from swings in the market.
“There's some smoothing there, and financial markets go up and down, and that’s just the way it is,” Stedman said. “So I'm not too concerned about the Permanent Fund, other than the earnings reserve issue.”
9. New tariffs weigh on Alaska businesses and industries
Experts say Alaska is one of the most vulnerable states in the country when it comes to Trump’s trade war.
“I know it wasn't tailored to hit us hardest, but it's going to, unfortunately,” Jon Bittner, executive director of the Alaska Small Business Development Center said on a recent episode of Alaska Insight. Bittner said that’s because Alaska is the only state where ground transportation has to go through a foreign country. And businesses in Alaska have higher operating costs.
Gregory Wolf, executive director of the World Trade Center of Alaska, said it comes down to a fundamental weakness in the state’s economy.
“We don't really do any of the final processing or refining of anything here, whether it be oil, whether it be mining,” he said. He added it’s the same with seafood, or forest products.
A survey from the Small Business Development Center in April found that many small business owners in the state were uncertain about the future, and worried about increased costs.
“There’s very few businesses that thrive in chaos,” Bittner said.
Of the roughly 100 respondents, 70% of small businesses with suppliers said their costs have already increased as a result of tariffs. Ten percent of businesses said they anticipate having to close in the next six months if the financial picture doesn’t improve.
Even businesses that manufacture locally aren’t celebrating the tariffs, including Ermine Skate. Owner Paxson Woelber said a boycott of American goods over Trump’s tariff policy is bad news for companies like Ermine.
“You'd think that we'd be the very kind of company that would be helped by having tariffs on imported goods, and the reality is a lot more complicated,” he said.
A Canadian lumber company confirmed in March that it had no choice but to largely shut down a work site near Kodiak. Why? Because China halted imports of U.S. logs in response to tariffs imposed on Chinese goods. The company’s CEO said he was sending his staff home because they could not find new customers, despite looking elsewhere.
Alaska’s seafood industry has also voiced its wariness over the impact of tariffs. The At-Sea Processors Association and the Pacific Seafood Processors Association, which both represent vessels and processors in the state, sent a letter in mid March to the Trump administration’s U.S. trade representative over concerns that tariffs would further hurt the industry after two rough years of market conditions that sent prices spiralling.
Alaskan seafood exports are already subject to tariffs from the last trade war during the first Trump presidency, and both groups cited continued trade with Asian countries, like Japan, and the European Union as particularly important.
“We really do live and die by fair access to those export markets,” said At-Sea Processors Association CEO Matt Tinning.
Tariffs also make it harder for Alaska oil and gas projects to pencil out, experts say, citing increased development costs.
10. Damage to Alaska’s relationship with Canada
In February, Trump signed an executive order imposing 25% tariffs on Canada. He later paused them – and the country ultimately fared well compared to others, like China. Still, the move – combined with repeated comments about Canada becoming the 51st state – have delivered a major blow to the country and its relationship with Alaska.
That seems particularly true in border towns including Haines and Skagway. In both communities, local officials have reported hearing from Canadians that they do not plan to visit the area this summer – even for some events that typically draw participants from both sides of the border. And at least one Canadian artist pulled their work from a local shop in Haines.
Woelber, the owner of Anchorage-based Ermine Skate, said Trump’s threats to Canada aren’t productive for companies like his that are trying to manufacture in the U.S. and export to the rest of the world.
“Pretty much immediately after the United States started threatening Canadian sovereignty, I got one very terse email, that just said, cancel everything, you know, don't talk to me again, basically. I respect it, I refunded the order,” he said.
In an interview earlier this month, Yukon Premier Ranj Pillai affirmed the importance of cross-border relationships and called on residents of both towns to speak out against Trump’s direction on trade.
And in March, the Alaska House passed a joint resolution recognizing Canada’s right to govern itself and opposing efforts to restrict cross-border trade.
Alena Naiden, Kirsten Dobroth and Annie Feidt contributed to this report.
_
