Governor's budget reflects safety in numbers

Frontiersman editorial board

It's understandable the governor would be a little gun-shy, after last year's uprising among senior Alaskans who felt they had been jilted out of their longevity bonuses.

But, with promises to turn the state government around, Gov. Frank Murkowski appears to only have packed a few more straws on the backs of a herd of camels, in hopes they won't crash at his feet -- at least not for a few more years.

The governor proposed generating revenue by adding to a few existing taxes. A transient accommodations, or bed tax, would generate about $32 million in annual revenue. A tobacco-tax increase of $1 per pack would generate about $36 million. Cruise ship passengers would be subject to a $3 head tax, described as a tax on gambling. Guided tours on shore will be subject to a tax as well, which Murkowski hopes will add up to about $5 million. Increases to the state's share of pull-tab receipts would generate about $2 million.

Although many across the state would agree new revenue is needed, how much is really done by tweaking the figures and targeting some industries while others get a free ride?

Many communities already have bed taxes in place. In the Valley a 5-percent bed tax generates revenue that is split between the Mat-Su Convention & Visitors' Bureau and projects related to bettering the experience of tourists visiting the Valley. In reading the governor's plan, there's no guarantee the revenue generated from state bed taxes will go toward any tourism-related activities. In an administration that touts its commitment to generating revenue through the natural resource development, perhaps it's too easy to get caught up in romantic notions of cultivating new gas fields and forget about natural resource-tapping industries that are less intrusive.

Although the proposed taxes would generate about $80 million, one has to wonder how many of the proposed taxes will truly make it through the legislative mill. The cruise ship industry is one of the strongest lobbying groups in Juneau, and has worked double-time previously to reshape bills into little more than milky mush. But their fate may be more promising than the other leg of Murkowski's plan -- the percent of market value method of utilizing the permanent fund. Although the fund appears to have merit, Alaskans have a history of strong opposition to any purported use of the permanent fund.

Murkowski's plan of nudging up existing taxes and giving the permanent fund a new role in Alaska's future may be a tentative step toward adding revenue to Alaska's economy, but it remains to be seen whether the incentive behind the new taxes will be strong enough to move it past lobbyists and, more importantly, Alaska voters.