How should Alaska Permanent Fund dividends be set?
Governor
Bill Walker
Nonpartisan candidate for Governor
The dividend is a critical piece of the fabric of Alaska’s economy. Alaskans use it to offset the high cost of living, buy fuel for homes and gas for snowmachines and boats for subsistence use, and pay for training and education. The dividend must be something Alaskans can rely on, and it must be predictable, sustainable and protected.
The only way to end the yearly battle over the dividend amount is for the governor and Legislature to work together, with input from Alaskans — without speaking in absolutes — and develop a durable, sustainable and fair dividend formula for Alaska’s future. That could include amending the 40-year-old statutory formula, or a constitutional amendment.
Charlie Pierce
Republican candidate for Governor
The fund’s original formula needs to be protected within the Alaska state constitution. Our legislators simply lack the will to balance the state’s budget or respect the original intent of the Alaska Permanent Fund. As stated earlier, too many of their votes are “for rent” and are going to special interest groups. We need a constitutional convention to protect the Permanent Fund and establish a spending cap that the Legislature cannot ignore. Additionally, those who champion withholding the PFD for state spending need to be honest about the fact that they are taxing every qualifying man, woman and child in the state. They have violated the original “contract” made with the people at statehood when individuals were denied subsurface rights on their property.
Les Gara
Democratic candidate for Governor
We have to end the 10-year battle over the PFD, and recognize many people rely on it, but also recognize we can’t make people fight between a PFD, schools, renewable energy, jobs and the things that create a future.
With a fair share for our oil, we’d be able to easily fund a strong PFD of over $2,200 that grows annually, and that gets paid, not just falsely promised. By ending $1.2 billion in oil company subsidies, we’d have the funds for a strong PFD. I supported this year’s PFD and energy relief check added to the PFD, as we had high oil revenue because of Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. But that’s not a fiscal plan or the future.
Without oil revenue in his first three years, this governor made false PFD promises that came with no funding, resulting in an average $1,230 PFD from 2019-2021. Gov. Dunleavy voted for the $1,000 vetoed PFD in 2016. He doesn’t truly believe in a strong PFD, or he’d propose the funding for it. I’d fund a strong PFD, and not give away our oil wealth as he has. Under his plan we’ll be back to cuts to everything, and a $1,200 PFD once Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ends.
Mike Dunleavy
Republican candidate for Governor
Our state Legislature should either follow the law, or change it. I’ve proposed a 50-50 split of the Percent of Market Value draw that would go through a constitutional amendment in line with former Gov. Jay Hammond’s philosophy that the state government should never take more than half of the earnings from the Permanent Fund. My 50-50 plan is a starting point that would need to be approved by the people. If the people reject it, that should inform the decisions of the Legislature and the governor going forward. We can’t ignore the people when it comes to the PFD. There is no solution to the PFD issue without giving the people a voice. A PFD that consists of only what’s left over after the government takes its piece will continue to paralyze our politics. We must set a formula that takes Juneau out of the equation once and for all, and I believe that will only happen when we listen to the people of Alaska.