Published July 17, 2016 by Anchorage Dispatch News
The 2016 sessions-regular, extended-regular, and special(s)-have, collectively, been the most disappointing experiences I’ve had in my admittedly short legislative career.
If Alaskans feel like the 29th Legislature has failed to provide for Alaska’s fiscal future, and failed miserably, it’s because it has.
Some reflections on the political context may be helpful. While there is the occasional bi-partisan impulse operating in the Alaska Legislature (and the majorities have some talented and capable members wanting to find a way out of the fiscal morass), it mostly doesn’t exist. True, it can-thankfully-be identified from time to time. During the past year, it was felt most keenly in what was coined the Seaton-Wilson Compromise. Moderate and conservative House Republicans fashioned a series of progressive reforms to the oil and gas tax subsidy outlay. The reforms were quite comprehensive, at least relative to the credit schedules. The package was then proffered to the House Independent-Democratic Caucus for its input. Our concerns were partially noted and four additional amendments we sought were incorporated into the reform bill. (This is the way the democratic process should work!). On May 13, this truly bi-partisan effort passed by a vote of 25-12. Its passage by the Senate, hopefully intact, became critical to advancement of other portions of the fiscal package.
Sadly, on June 6 the House voted to concur, 21-19, in Senate changes to this bill that gutted potential oil and gas tax credit savings in the “out” years, largely by eliminating reform of net operating losses, an expensive problem that could recur if oil prices plummet again, potentially costing the State hundreds of millions of dollars.
This concurrence vote, in my view, largely doomed further passage of fiscal reforms. If nothing else, it was a dreadful omen.
I noted that bi-partisanship can occur from time to time. But, it mostly doesn’t. At all. Democratic bills rarely get serious committee attention. Rarer still is it when they get to the House Floor for a vote. Some of this inattention is due to policy differences. Fair enough. But, much of it is not.
To cut through the partisanship in Juneau, early in the session, Democrats and Independents offered to form a “Committee of the Whole”. It was designed to ease communication between the parties and find common ground from which truly bi-partisan solutions to our fiscal woes could be forged. This offer was rejected, essentially outright. Democrats and Independents also offered to form a Ways and Means Committee-a committee exclusively designed to “vet” new revenue measures. This was rejected, as well
I made my own formal appeal to House Leadership in two special orders (commentaries made by legislators at the close of daily sessions). I offered to help in any way I could to facilitate and cooperate in the tough decisions that were required to fashion a fiscal solution to our $4 billion deficit. None of my majority colleagues ever asked for my assistance. Not even close.
To my utter astonishment, having arrived off the Haines ferry on January 12, when the first special session closed on June 18, not a single penny of new “fiscal plan” revenue was raised. I didn’t think such a lack of accomplishment was possible, or even allowed. Again, other than a request from the Governor, I have never been asked by my Republican colleagues what I can do to lend a hand in solving our fiscal crisis. The lack of dialogue and communication is appalling. Avenues and forums for such exchanges are nearly non-existent.
I do not mean to place responsibility for this Legislature’s failures entirely on the majority. It is true that, if the Democratic Party didn’t exist and every member of the Legislature was a Republican, there is zero evidence that the majority would have solved the State’s fiscal dilemma on its own. The Legislature’s bill hearings and floor calendar are controlled by those with gavels: the majority party. And, it was provably incapable of achieving reforms, although the Senate did pass what could be described as a highly regressive Permanent Fund restructuring bill. At the same time, the State’s present difficulties require an “all hands on deck” solution. I wished to be one of those hands, but was never given the opportunity to cast a tough vote, let alone champion a bi-partisan bill that actually became law. I remain available to be part of a “Caucus of the Willing”.
While I am disappointed in the Governor’s cuts to public education and the University in particular (and am stunned at the lack of any Senate majority willingness to hold a joint session to discuss veto overrides in this year’s Second Special Session), I appreciate the courage the exercise of his vetoes must have taken. And, the Governor has reason-every reason, indeed-to think the Legislature is a dysfunctional mess and institutionally incapable of passing meaningful fiscal plan measures. I wish it were different. Perhaps under new leadership, a new direction could be forged.
Andy Josephson of Anchorage is a teacher and lawyer, and was first elected to the Alaska House of Representatives in 2012.