Independent U.S. House candidate and former school district superintendent Bill Hill is a newcomer to politics. But he said he’s committed to holding billionaires to account who have “turned their wealth against America.”
Hill is a lifelong Bristol Bay commercial fisherman. He is Dena’ina Athabascan and said he benefited from a Bush upbringing in the tiny village of Kokhanok on the shore of Iliamna Lake. Hill went on to raise a family in Naknek, and has lived in Juneau and Fairbanks.
Hill spent decades in education – as a teacher, principal, and most recently as superintendent of the Bristol Bay School District, a position he retired from in 2023.
Hill has emerged as the most well-funded challenger to incumbent Rep. Nick Begich III, who President Donald Trump has endorsed for reelection. On April 2, Hill’s campaign announced it had raised more than $780,000.
At the end of 2025, Begich had raised more than $2 million for his reelection campaign. A campaign manager for Democratic challenger Matt Schultz said the campaign had raised $575,000 as of April 2. Funding totals have not been announced for two additional candidates – independent Matthew “Bronco” Williams and Democrat John Williams.
The deadline to file for the U.S. House race is June 1. Under Alaska’s open primary system, the top four vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, will advance to the Nov. 3 election.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
KYUK (Evan Erickson): Why should someone in rural Alaska, but more specifically Western Alaska vote for you?
Hill: I believe that I can represent all of us very well. I've had a really fortunate life to have worked in a lot of different careers in a lot of different places, but I think particularly for Bush Alaska, I've spent most of my life in Bush Alaska. So I get us. […] I was talking to someone in a small village here yesterday, where their price of fuel oil had just jumped in one week from $10 a gallon to over $12 a gallon. [...] And there's some villages in my region that are already at $13 a gallon. And I know in some of the other regions it's even higher than that. So the challenge of energy and heating, I understand that completely. The challenge of providing good education, I understand that. The challenge of health care, I understand that as well. And we got to drive by your impressive [Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation] hospital here. You guys have what looks from the exterior, looks to be a really great system for your people. But not every community has that.
I also understand a lot of things about, where in a small village there are only a handful of jobs to be had. And so if we talk about trying to implement a Western civilization sort of a life in some of our smaller villages, where the number of opportunities to earn a regular paycheck is pretty limited, that's just not realistic. So how do we make ends meet and how to make life work for people there? We talk about all sorts of things, even global warming. You can talk about global warming. And from a Bush perspective, I've spent decades in the Southwest [Alaska] region, and I remember when I was young, all of the lakes and the rivers and things were just, in the wintertime it was just a massive highway system. And we could go everywhere, and not just with snowmachines or four-wheelers, but also with trucks. They were frozen solid, and we used them. It's become very intermittent.
KYUK: It's been two decades since an independent was elected to the U.S. House. Why do you believe your campaign can buck the trend?
Hill: I think there's a lot about an independent in Alaska that just kind of meets with the Alaskan mentality. I firmly believe in evidence […] with over 60% of us not being affiliated with a party of any sort, that clearly shows Alaskans don't like to be fit into a neat little political box. And I'm one of those people, and I have voted all over the map. I've supported different kinds of people over my life. It just depended on who was going to be there. I voted for Ted Stevens and Don Young, but I'm also really interested in making sure that, when I'm in office, that I'll be focused on things that are going to be really important to the Alaska people, things like lowering costs and making life more affordable in Alaska, particularly in Bush Alaska. We need to do some things like, we need to make sure that we fight corruption in Washington, D.C., and we need to do the work to maintain the Alaska way of life.
I worry about things like, oh, the Safari Club International trying to wedge its way into a place where we could start losing access to a rural subsistence priority, you know? I mean, we got to have people who are looking out for all Alaskans. And it would be nice to have somebody who really understands the Bush Alaskan way of life and what's important to us. So the people that I will work with in Congress are going to be the people that are going to be working on things, and things that are good for Alaskans, or what I see as good for Alaskans, things like lowering the cost of healthcare, things like trying to find a way to reduce energy costs to all Alaskans. You look at the big beautiful bill that came out recently, and it clawed back a bunch of renewable energy projects that would have stabilized and decreased costs for Alaskan communities. […] We need to have an all of the above approach to energy, and some of those things are going to be really important in Bush Alaska.
I'm going to caucus with the people who are going to be looking at ways of making life more livable. I'm going to be caucusing with the people who are going to go after taxing corporations, not providing them with more corporate tax loopholes. And I'm going to be caucusing with the people that are going to take on the challenge of going after billionaires. I don't have anything wrong with people making money or a lot of money, but you have a certain set of people in our nation who have built a massive empire based on the infrastructure that we've put in place. You know, America and Alaska specifically has great resources. We've put together an infrastructure of ports, of airports, of roads and rail, you name it. We have an infrastructure built in training […] from career and technical education training all the way up to the university system that has created a very intelligent workforce. We've built all of this so that people could make some really good money, some really good livings in America, but there was a certain segment of that where they've become so wealthy that they've turned their wealth against America, in my perspective, and now they're paying less taxes than you or I, and they're not paying back into the system that made it possible for them to become billionaires, and I think we need to tax them.
KYUK: Do you have any thoughts about what role the federal government should play in disaster relief response with communities that are considering relocation and saying we would prefer to not rebuild, we're going to completely relocate?
Hill: I think the federal government has a huge role. I mean, the federal government had a major role in putting communities where they are, if you go back historically. I look at my grandma, who's a full blooded Dena'ina out of the Lake Clark area. They never lived in one spot. Over the course of the year, they'd live in six or eight different places, and the federal government came in and said, well, here's your post office, here's your school, and then there would often be a church involved as well. And then if you don't send your kids to school, you're going to be in trouble with the law. And so a lot of these communities may not have been year-round residences in the first place. So I think the federal government played a role in where a lot of these communities are, and they should play a role in making sure that the communities are put back in place where people can live and feel comfortable and safe in where they're living.
KYUK: Do you think the federal government has an appropriate level of control over the state's [fish and wildlife] resources?
Hill: In many respects, the state and the feds have to work hand in hand. Yes, the federal delegation can help bring projects to Alaska, but the state manages a big part of that. I mean, state management is a big part of that. But then there are cases, like with a rural subsistence priority, where the federal government wanted to ensure that there was a rural subsistence priority, but the state has a mandate, where what they see as all resources of Alaska should be equally accessible to all Alaskans. And those of us who live in Bush Alaska know that the rural subsistence priority is an important thing for us, and we need to keep that. And you know right now we have a member of Congress who's a member of the Safari Club International. And you know Safari Club International is trying to wedge its way into providing some more voice for the argument that the rural subsistence priority should go away.
KYUK: Your campaign has said that you stand for resource development that benefits Alaskans. Do you have an example of that?
Hill: A good example of that would be the Red Dog Mine, which has provided for people in its region, a lot of job opportunities, a lot of training, and it's provided revenue for the communities in that region. That's a great opportunity. You know, the proposed gas line, if that ever gets built, and if it can provide a steady resource of gas to communities along the route, and reduce the cost of gas and provide a lot of jobs for Alaskans, I think that would be positive as well. In my region, there is a massive project, the Pebble Mine [...] People have been promoting that for decades now, but it's an open pit, cyanide leaching extraction mine, and it sits on a fault zone, and it's a massive mine, and it threatens thousands of years of subsistence and a massive commercial fishing industry that provides thousands of jobs, thousands of small businesses thrive off of that every summer. And it's just ridiculous to think that we would trade the subsistence and the commercial fishery for the potential loss from this massive mine. And so that's, I think, a project that should never be built.
KYUK: Do you have a stance on the proposed Donlin Gold mine, which people have similar concerns about?
Hill: That one I'm actually still learning about. I mean, I don't know a ton about it, but I talked to the Tanana Chiefs Conference this week and understand that the conflict that arises between tribal sovereignty and what tribes think might be good, and also the different take that corporations may take. And so we've got this mixed use in our region. With Pebble Mine, most of the villages were against Pebble Mine. There were a couple that were for Pebble Mine, but they were seeing the direct benefit of it immediately through the exploratory process. There were a lot of jobs and money coming into a couple communities. The Native association in our region, the regional Native association came out against it, and the regional Native corporation came out against it. And so it's easy for us to say no as a group, and then your voice is heard loud and clear. But after talking to the Tanana Chiefs Conference and learning about you know, there's this push and pull between the regional corporation and some of the interests of the villages, tribes, and the idea of sovereignty on the land.
So it's a tough question, and I'm still looking into it, and I'd love to learn more from the people here about Donlin and to learn about the different viewpoints. But the bottom line is, I think that any project should first consider the people who live on the land. Second, we need to consider, is this a project that's going to make Alaskans the greatest beneficiary? Third, we need to make sure that the project is not going to cause long-term environmental damage, especially damage that will impact wildlife and fish. I am pro-development, because that's what Alaska is. That's how we get our money, for running our government, for running our villages. It provides jobs and economic opportunity to a lot of people. I'm pro-development, but I think we need to be, we need to be thoughtful about the process.
KYUK: Do you have optimism about North Slope development?
Hill: I think there's a lot going on on the North Slope. I think, as always, we've got to be careful when we look at projects, but yes, I’m pro-development, and particularly in this age [...] you have an administration that has pulled us into a war, and all of a sudden our energy rates are going to go through the roof. And this is a prime opportunity for Alaska to reassert its control and its leverage on projects and to make sure that Alaskans get the greatest benefit out of any project that's developed.
