What others say: Reserve funds transfer would hurt state’s future fiscal options

  • Wednesday, May 27, 2015 4:36pm
  • Opinion

Necessity, according to the old saying, is the mother of invention. With the necessity of a state budget passed before July 1 bumping up against deadlock in the Legislature, the Republican-led majority caucus has despaired of reaching a deal with minority Democrats and has begun exploring alternate methods of funding state government that don’t require votes of members outside of their own caucus. The virtue of compromise over partisanship aside, the majority’s latest plan to achieve its members’ preferred budget could endanger the state’s options to deal with budget deficits in future years.

The easy way to fund state government is to draw from general fund revenue — money that comes in each year from leases of oil and mineral rights, oil production revenues, license fees and so forth. But when those revenues are insufficient to cover the cost of government, as is the case this year, the method of funding state operations gets more arcane.

The state has a few “rainy-day” accounts upon which it can draw in such cases. The good news for legislators is there’s money in the accounts to help keep the state afloat for at least a few years — mostly in the $10.1 billion Constitutional Budget Reserve fund. The bad news, at least for the majority caucus, is that the CBR requires a three-quarters vote by the Legislature to access, which means at least some of the Democratic minority members must sign off on the budget for it to be funded with money from the reserve.

Discussions on any kind of a budget compromise between the legislative caucuses have been unproductive, to put it mildly. In a rancorous special session, majority members spiked the minority caucus’ biggest priority, Medicaid expansion. Members of the two caucuses also engaged in a war of words over which budget vision was more responsible — Democrats want to reverse some education cuts and state employee pay freezes and cut money allocated to construction megaprojects such as the Knik Arm bridge and the Juneau road, while the Republican-led majority prefers the opposite.

Majority leaders have evidently given up most if not all hope that they will reach a budget compromise. Last week, they floated a plan that would allow them to access CBR funds by a majority vote — bypassing the need for Democratic support — by changing the balances of other reserve funds.

The CBR can be accessed by a simple majority in one specific case: when the balance of all reserve funds, the CBR included, fall below the previous year’s total budget. The combined operating and capital budgets came to $12.2 billion last year, which would mean that nearly every reserve fund other than the CBR would need to be drained. Chief among these is the Alaska Permanent Fund earnings reserve, out of which the state’s much-beloved dividend checks are paid each year.

Though it might be spun as a “raid on the permanent fund,” the majority’s proposed transfer of earnings reserve fund into the body of the permanent fund would be somewhat the opposite. Legislators would take $5 billion in the reserve, most of the available money in the account, and transfer it to the body of the permanent fund, where it would receive constitutional protection from year-to-year spending.

But that doesn’t mean the transfer is a good idea or that dividends couldn’t be affected. Moving $5 billion into a place where it couldn’t be used to help the state fulfill its budget obligations would greatly restrict the Legislature’s ability to deal with deficits in the future, as that money constitutes roughly a third of the money available to the state without drastic changes to Alaska’s revenue streams or laws.

Potentially more concerning for Alaska voters, reducing the permanent fund earnings reserve to near zero introduces another negative. Were this year’s permanent fund performance poor a result of market downturns, the body of the fund might not earn enough revenue to allow for the payment of dividends in 2016, regardless of the fact that dividends are supposed to be based on a five-year rolling average return. One needn’t be a political scientist to understand that if residents didn’t receive dividends in 2016 because of the move, legislators up for election would likely be ousted en masse.

The risk that Alaska would be exposed to if the legislative majority follows through on its plan is far too great to justify. It’s time for both caucuses to head back to the negotiating table.

— Fairbanks Daily News-Miner,

May 24

More in Opinion

A cherished "jolly Santa head" ornament from the Baisden Christmas tree. (Photo provided)
Opinion: Reflections of holidays past

Our family tradition has been to put up our Christmas tree post-Thanksgiving giving a clear separation of the holidays

Screenshot. (https://dps.alaska.gov/ast/vpso/home)
Opinion: Strengthening Alaska’s public safety: Recent growth in the VPSO program

The number of VPSOs working in our remote communities has grown to 79

Soldotna City Council member Linda Farnsworth-Hutchings participates in the Peninsula Clarion and KDLL candidate forum series, Thursday, Sept. 5, 2024, at the Soldotna Public Library in Soldotna, Alaska. (Photo by Erin Thompson/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: I’m a Soldotna Republican and will vote No on 2

Open primaries and ranked choice voting offer a way to put power back into the hands of voters, where it belongs

Nick Begich III campaign materials sit on tables ahead of a May 16, 2022, GOP debate held in Juneau. (Peter Segall / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: North to a Brighter Future

The policies championed by the Biden/Harris Administration and their allies in Congress have made it harder for us to live the Alaskan way of life

Shrubs grow outside of the Kenai Courthouse on Monday, July 3, 2023, in Kenai, Alaska. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Vote yes to retain Judge Zeman and all judges on your ballot

Alaska’s state judges should never be chosen or rejected based on partisan political agendas

A vintage Underwood typewriter sits on a table on Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2022, at the Homer News in Homer, Alaska. (Photo by Michael Armstrong/Homer News)
Point of View: District 6 needs to return to representation before Vance

Since Vance’s election she has closely aligned herself with the far-right representatives from Mat-Su and Gov. Mike Dunleavy

The Anchor River flows in the Anchor Point State Recreation Area on Saturday, Aug. 5, 2023, in Anchor Point, Alaska. (Delcenia Cosman/Homer News)
Opinion: Help ensure Alaskans have rights to use, enjoy and care for rivers

It is discouraging to see the Department of Natural Resources seemingly on track to erode the public’s ability to protect vital water interests.

A sign directing voters to the Alaska Division of Elections polling place is seen in Kenai, Alaska, Monday, Oct. 21, 2024. (Photo by Erin Thompson/Peninsula Clarion)
Vote no on Ballot Measure 2

A yes vote would return Alaska to party controlled closed primaries and general elections in which the candidate need not win an outright majority to be elected.

Derrick Green (Courtesy photo)
Opinion: Ballot Measure 1 will help businesses and communities thrive

It would not be good for the health and safety of my staff, my customers, or my family if workers are too worried about missing pay to stay home when they are sick.

A sign warns of the presence of endangered Cook Inlet beluga whales at the Kenai Beach in Kenai, Alaska, on Monday, July 10, 2023. (Jake Dye/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Could an unnecessary gold mine drive Cook Inlet belugas extinct?

An industrial port for the proposed Johnson Tract gold mine could decimate the bay