Slashing a budget is easy; Creating revenue, that takes talent!

Alaskans are a fortunate bunch. We are living in a place that most only dream about from their bucket list. We are a self-reliant lot and typically use our resources wisely. We are neighborly, faithful, adventurous and opinionated.

Debate is a passionate sport. Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s proposed budget is the pinnacle of debate at this time in Alaska history. A historic turn of events is headed our way, and what that will look like will depend on the end result after the debate ends and the loudest of voices subsides. A compromise is coming. This political game of chicken between a full PFD payout and the services we have enjoyed will come to an end. One side or the other will jerk the steering wheel at the last second or maybe both drivers will.

In the words of Thomas Jefferson, “we have the wolf by the ears and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go.” Whatever the final budget looks like there will be losers in the debate and reality will set in. It could be thousands of jobs lost and a slowdown to the state’s economic recovery or even a complete halt and back to a recession as predicted by many economists, if the Governor’s budget passes, as is, it could be a cut in the PFD payout, which amounts to an unfair head tax of every qualifying Alaskan man, woman or child.

There are people in the blind spot of those who are debating the issue. In the blind spot are the parent or parents who struggle to provide basic needs for their families. Those who have to chose between paying the electric bill or a week of filling meals, a meal plan that includes ramen noodles, hot dogs and other not-so-nutritious delicacies, just to make it to the next paycheck.

These are families who make too much for government assistance, but can’t afford life’s luxuries. They look at a full PFD payout not as way to spend on frivolous items but as a means to get back to net zero. They do a head count in their family. “There’s four of us and at $3,000 each that’s $12,000.” Then they begin to plan which bills that have been hounding them can be paid. Then, spending plans for what is leftover, and yes some of the money will be spent foolishly, but they have a right to splurge and enjoy life like anyone else. Go out to dinner, buy a new phone — that’s their business, not ours.

These families also have a right to the best education we can provide their children. Yes, we must provide the opportunity. They also have the basic human right to quality health care. Note the word free was not in that last sentence. Health care insurance is a shadow of what it once was as insurance companies continually provide less benefits for higher premiums. Young families grapple with that expense as well as astronomical daycare costs. This budget proposed will have an effect on these costs as well.

For the past few years, as employment in the oil industry has shrunk, the health care industry has been the fastest growing employers. Yet, by this budget and eliminating federal funds, this could very well stymie the growth we have seen. Cuts in Medicaid will stunt the growth of the industry. A certain percentage of our population relies on assistance to pay their medical bills. Looking down our noses at our neighbors who, for one reason or another, rely on this is not the solution.

Those in the legislature, from both the left and the right, I might add, who oppose the Governors budget, have pointed out a bag full of political footballs to make their case. Some examples, like that of Senator Scott Kawasaki, claiming the Governor is turning his back on veterans who worked to bring a Veterans cemetery to Fairbanks. As veteran myself, I applaud the effort, but when education and health services are on the chopping block, then it’s about priorities. Not everyone is going to get what they want. In this case, the feds were offering $500k and the State would have to pay $1.1 million. I can see why it was cut.

The ‘roadshows’ from both sides are happening now. The same message from the public is being repeated during audience participation. Either the public wants their PFD or they want services. But there is a segment of the population, which goes unheard. Either the political process is too daunting or fear of their own voice keeps them from speaking. It could be as simple as they are busy in their own day-to-day routines. Whatever the reason, when the budget is negotiated the decision makers need to look beyond those who voice their opinion and place themselves in the shoes of struggling families across the state and bear them in mind.

There has to be a balance between a full PFD payout and services. It can not fall on just the property owners to foot the bill as the pressure is placed back on municipalities with the cuts that are proposed. We all have to share the cost. I keep hearing how teaching phonics and basic math is what’s required for education. One comment was we don’t need a Cadillac when a Kia will do when it comes to education. If that’s the case, just watch as we keep falling behind the rest of the country. We owe it to the children of our community to offer them the best possible education we can. Those entrusted with funding owe it to the rest of us to do that as efficiently as possible.

Governor Jay Hammond, who gets much credit for the creation of the PFD, believed in fiscal responsibility as our current Governor does. Expenses can not exceed Revenues. In his book ‘Diapering the Devil’, he proclaimed himself an environmentalist, but not in the typical sense. The environment he said includes the people. We are all part of the environment. We have to take care of our environment. With this in mind, he envisioned the PFD as way to help the people of the Alaskan environment. He also believed it was a mistake, as he stated in the book, to repeal the state income tax. His idea was to suspend it and have it reinstated in case of a fiscal crisis. I don’t know if we are in a fiscal crisis. It depends on where you get your information. Expenditures can’t exceed revenues. Revenues shouldn’t dictate expenses. If certain services are a necessity and of course that is part of the debate then shouldn’t the other part of the debate be how do we increase revenue.

It doesn’t take a fiscal genius to slash every service to match revenue. It does take talent to create revenue.

Maybe that’s what is lacking in this debate.