Consistency is a good thing, whether it’s parents applying rules to their children or elected officials following the law.
Inconsistency can mean children misbehave because they know they will sometimes get away with it. And inconsistency can allow elected officials to do what will politically please their constituents most of the time rather than what is right all of the time.
Such as those elected officials who clamor and pound the campaign trail, demanding that the Legislature “follow the law” and appropriate money for the Permanent Fund dividend under the formula adopted 40 years ago.
No matter that paying out billions in dividends under the formula could decimate the fund’s earnings built up over time to pay for dividends and public services generations into the future.
No matter that diverting billions to dividends in a strained budget could result in significant cuts to public services statewide.
No matter that the dividend calculation formula was written in the days when the Permanent Fund was worth maybe 3% of what it has grown to today, and when Alaska’s North Slope was pumping three times as much oil as it does today.
Yes, legislators need to change the formula to something that fits the 2020s, not the 1980s, something that is affordable for the long term.
Yes, that will be incredibly, extremely, stupendously difficult politically. Legislative careers likely will end for some who vote to rewrite the formula to something reasonable rather than an unworkable historic relic.
But it is time to make that decision and update the law.
Meanwhile, many of those elected officials, including the governor, who proclaim they must “follow the law” and pay out a dividend this fall of more than $3,000 fail to show consistency. They want to follow the dividend law because it is popular and wins them elections. But they are just fine with voting to ignore the law in less well known, less well publicized state appropriations.
State law since 1972 has exempted a portion of the property value of homes owned by senior citizens from city and borough property taxes. The law says the state “shall reimburse” cities and boroughs for the loss of tax revenue because of the mandatory exemption. Lo and behold, when money got tight, the Legislature and governors in 1986 started shortchanging municipalities, scaling back those payments to less than required by law. In 1997, state reimbursement stopped, and never came back.
The Legislature’s decision to ignore the law will cost cities and boroughs about $94 million this year.
Another state law that some legislators have chosen to ignore and, in particular, Gov. Mike Dunleavy, is the statute that says the state “shall” reimburse municipalities for a share of the bond payments on debt issued for local school construction projects.
The governor has chosen in the past to entirely eliminate the legally mandated state reimbursement or, for next year, fund it at half of the $85 million owed to communities in Fiscal Year 2022. Either way, he is not following the law, and many of his supporters in the Legislature are silent.
Most legislators know they need to change the dividend formula in law and discussions are underway in the Capitol to do just that. It’s not easy and they may not succeed this year, but give them credit for trying.
Meanwhile, those lawmakers who recite the mantra “follow the law” for the PFD should either be consistent and fund every state law, or just admit all they care about is the dividend.
Reader Comments(0)