Alaska
Permanent Fund leaders again call to restructure fund as spendable cash dwindles
There’s a nearly 50-50 chance that the Alaska Permanent Fund won’t have enough spendable money to pay dividends and the state’s bills at least once over the next decade — unless lawmakers change the structure of the fund to function more like a university endowment.
That’s the message Permanent Fund leaders and the Legislature’s chief budget analyst delivered to lawmakers on Tuesday.
The head of the Legislature’s nonpartisan budget analysis agency, Alexei Painter, presented lawmakers with a financial model showing a 46% chance that the fund’s spendable account would not have enough money to provide a payment to the state’s general fund that makes up the second-largest overall source of state revenue — second only to the federal government.
Permanent Fund Corporation Executive Director and CEO Deven Mitchell and Board of Trustees Chair Jason Brune told the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee that the issue is not with the $80-plus billion Permanent Fund itself, but with the fund’s two-account structure.
“We want to ensure that there’s an ability to provide a payment to the state of Alaska each and every year,” Mitchell said. “We don’t want to have a 46% probability of failure. We don’t want to have any probability of failure for this revenue stream at this point.”
The Permanent Fund is separated into two accounts. The $60 billion principal can’t be spent without a vote of the people.
The earnings reserve account, which has about $9 billion in spendable money, is more flexible. Legislators could spend every last dollar of the account — and possibly more in unrealized gains — by a simple majority vote.
Lawmakers have drawn 5% of the fund’s value every year to fund dividends and state services since 2018 after oil prices crashed in the mid-2010s. Today, the Permanent Fund provides more than half of the state’s general-purpose revenue.
This year, lawmakers are considering amending the Alaska Constitution to combine the two accounts into one.
That would solve the problem, Painter said.
“The [earnings reserve account] balance would no longer be something that would stop us from continuing to draw,” he said. “That would reduce the risk to zero. There’d be no risk at all.”
Lawmakers in the largely Democratic majority caucuses in the House and Senate have introduced amendments that would combine the accounts. Minority Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, has introduced a similar proposal.
The amendments would also place a constitutional cap on the annual draw. The current 5% cap is set in statute, but lawmakers could vote to ignore the law by a simple majority.
A pair of similar proposals sponsored by the Senate Finance Committee and Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, would constitutionalize the current 5% maximum draw rate.
Kaufman’s proposal would cap it at 5.5% to provide what called “headroom,” though he said at a news conference Tuesday that he was open to changing the maximum figure. It would also require the state to pay a dividend set by a formula set in law, though the proposal is silent on what the formula should be. Kaufman is a cosponsor of a bipartisan bill that would set the dividend at 25% of the state’s annual draw from the Permanent Fund.
Brune, the Permanent Fund board chair, said combining the two accounts and capping the draw would provide “predictability and sustainability” for the fund going forward.
Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, said limiting the draw with a constitutional amendment would prevent lawmakers from raiding the fund when facing a deficit. Lawmakers are currently looking for ways to fill a more than half-billion dollar hole in the state’s budget.
“The little piggies in the trough are getting hungry in this building,” he said.
Stedman, a co-chair of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, has suggested on more than one occasion that the 5% draw rate may be too high to be sustainable.
Combining the accounts and capping the draw is broadly popular among senators in both the largely Democratic majority and the all-Republican minority. The Permanent Fund’s board has been pushing to combine the accounts for decades. Last year, they published a rare analysis paper illustrating the importance of the concept.
Lawmakers could place a constitutional amendment on the ballot for the next election with a two-thirds majority vote in the House and Senate. The governor would not be able to veto it.
Alaska
Peltola challenges Sullivan in Alaska
Democrats are going after Alaska’s Senate race this year, and they’ve landed probably the only candidate that can make it competitive: Mary Peltola.
The former congresswoman on Monday jumped into the race against GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan, adding yet another hard-fought campaign to what Democrats hope is shaping up to be a wave year that could carry them in red states like Alaska.
Peltola certainly doesn’t sound like a typical Democratic candidate as she starts her bid: She’s proposing term limits, is campaigning on “fish, family and freedom,” and has already name-dropped former Republican officials in her state multiple times.
“Ted Stevens and Don Young ignored lower 48 partisanship to fight for things like public media and disaster relief because Alaska depends on them,” Peltola says in her launch video, referencing the former GOP senator and House member, respectively.
“DC people will be pissed that I’m focusing on their self-dealing, and sharing what I’ve seen firsthand. They’re going to complain that I’m proposing term limits. But it’s time,” she says.
Peltola is clearly appealing to the state’s ranked choice voting system and its unique electorate, which elevated moderate Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, over a candidate supported by President Donald Trump. The last Democrat to win an Alaska Senate race was Mark Begich in 2008, though Peltola won the state’s at-large seat twice — even defeating former Gov. Sarah Palin.
Sullivan defeated Begich in 2014, followed by independent Al Gross in 2020; Sullivan also recently voted to extend expired health care subsidies, a sign of the state’s independent streak.
Alaska
Wayne and Wanda: I love Alaska winters, but my wife has grown weary and wants to move
Wanda and Wayne,
My wife and I moved to Alaska four years ago for work and adventure, thinking we’d stay a couple of years and see how it felt. We fell hard for it almost immediately. But by our second winter, my wife started talking about how hard the cold and dark were on her, and every winter since that feeling has grown heavier.
This recent cold snap and snow dump really pushed things over the edge. She’s deeply unhappy right now, withdrawn, sad and openly talking about how depressing it feels to live here, especially being so far from family and old friends. She tries to manage it with running, yoga, the gym, but even those things she often does alone. She hasn’t really built a community here, partly because she’s introverted and partly because she sticks closely to her routines and her co-workers aren’t the very social. Meanwhile, I’ve found connections through work and the outdoors, especially skiing in the winter (cross country and touring, downhill, backcountry, all of it!), and Alaska still feels full of possibilities to me.
But now she’s done. She wants to move back “home” soon. She wants to start trying for kids within the next year and doesn’t feel like Alaska is the right place to raise a family. She worries about schools, politics, the economy and being so far from family support. We both have careers that could take us almost anywhere, as well as savings, and a house we could sell quickly, and many of the Alaska toys we could also sell. Logistically, it would be easy. Emotionally, I feel like I’m being told to leave after I just got settled.
There are places I still want to explore, trips I’ve been planning, seasons I want to experience differently now that we’re more established. I keep thinking: If we can just get through to summer, maybe she’ll feel better. But I don’t know if that’s hope or denial, and yeah, summer feels a long ways away and goes by pretty quickly. Honestly, now I’m starting to get bummed about the idea of leaving.
I love my wife and I don’t want her to be miserable. But I’m scared that if we leave now, I’ll resent her, and if we stay she’ll resent me. Is there a way to buy time without dragging this out painfully? Or is this one of those moments where love means choosing between two incompatible futures?
Wanda says:
If this was your first Cheechako winter here, or your second, I could write off your wife’s apprehension to culture shock or a sophomore slump. But this is year four, which means she’s endured winters of record snowfalls, weird snow shortfalls, terrible windstorms, bleak darkness and desolate below-zero temps. Sorry to say, but it’s likely there’s no number of laps at the Dome or downward dogs on the mat that will make her find the special beauty of an Alaska winter.
This place is tough. For every old-timer who jokes, “I came for two years and I’m still here,” there are plenty who maybe made it that long and bailed. While the state shines with possibilities, rugged beauty, unique traits and cool people, it’s also far from basically everything, pretty expensive and definitely extreme. Some people will thrive here. Some people won’t. No one’s better or worse, or wins or loses. Were you on your own, at a different point in life, you may have made your forever home here. But instead you pledged forever to your wife, and I’m afraid it’s time to start out on your next adventure — in the Lower 48.
Your wife gave this a real shot. She’s stayed four years. That’s four long — and for her, miserable — winters. It was also four seasons of no doubt incredible summers, full of fresh halibut and farmers markets and quirky festivals and blue skies at 11 p.m. If these special aspects of Alaska haven’t yet been enough to convince her the winters are worth it, they won’t ever be.
Wayne says:
Sure, your Alaska bucket list is still growing faster than you can check things off, but take it from a lifelong Alaskan: You’ll never do it all. People fall in love with this place in a million different ways. You and I? We believe there’s always another season of adventures ahead, another trail and another corner of the state to explore, and we’ll always feel some serious AK FOMO when we’re stuck at the office working while everyone else is ice skating on a perfect winter day or dipnetting during a hot salmon run.
Here’s the perspective shift you need. You love your wife. You’re committed to a happy life together. And by any reasonable measure, you’ve made the most of your four years here. So ask yourself this honestly: Is another spring of shredding pow in the Chugach more important than her mental health and your marriage? And why resent her for being ready for a new chapter after she showed up and gave Alaska a chance? When you frame it that way, “incompatible futures” sounds dramatic and “buying time” sounds selfish.
And Alaska isn’t going anywhere. You know that. It’s a flight or two away no matter where you end up Outside. Maintain your friendships, stay on the airline alerts, narrow your must-do list to the Alaska all-timers, and plan to come back regularly. And imagine this: years from now, bringing your kids here after years of telling them stories about the winters you survived and the mountains you climbed. That’s not losing Alaska, that’s carrying it with you wherever you go, along with your wife and your marriage.
[Wayne and Wanda: How can I support my partner’s hardcore New Year’s reset, even if it’s not for me?]
[Wayne and Wanda: I kissed my high school crush during a holiday trip home. Now I’m questioning everything]
[Wayne and Wanda: My girlfriend’s dog fostering has consumed her life and derailed our relationship]
[Wayne & Wanda: My husband has been having a secret, yearslong emotional affair]
Alaska
The Alarming Prices Of Groceries In Rural Alaska — And Why They’re So Expensive – Tasting Table
Many households across America have been struggling with their grocery bills due to inflation that hit the global markets after the COVID-19 pandemic, but for families in Alaska, especially in rural communities, the prices of basic goods have reached alarming heights. Alongside inflation, the main issue for the climbing prices is Alaska’s distance from the rest of the U.S., which influences the cost of transport that’s required to deliver the supplies.
Given that Alaska is a non-contiguous state, any trucks delivering grocery stock have to first cross Canada before reaching Alaska, which requires a very valuable resource: time. According to Alaska Beacon, “It takes around 40 hours of nonstop driving to cover the more than 2,200 highway miles from Seattle to Fairbanks” on the Alaska Highway. That’s why a fairly small percentage of the state’s food comes in on the road. For the most part, groceries are shipped in on barges and are then flown to more remote areas, since “82% of the state’s communities are not reachable by road,” per Alaska Beacon. As such, even takeout in Alaska is sometimes delivered by plane.
Planes, trucks, and boats all cost money, but they are also all vulnerable to extreme weather conditions, which are not uncommon in Alaska. Sometimes local stores are unable to restock basic staples like bread and milk for several weeks, so Alaskans struggle with high food insecurity.
How much do groceries cost in Alaska?
Groceries in Alaska cost significantly more than in the rest of the U.S., but even within the state itself, the prices vary based on remoteness. You’ll find that prices of the same items can double or even triple, depending on how inaccessible a certain area is. The New Republic reported that prices in Unalakleet, a remote village that’s only accessible by plane, can be up to 80% higher than in Anchorage, Alaska’s most populated city. For example, the outlet cited Campbell’s Tomato Soup costing $1.69 in Anchorage and $4.25 in Unalakleet. Even more staggering is the price of apple juice: $3.29 in the city, $10.65 in the village. Such prices might make our jaw drop, but they’re a daily reality for many Alaskans.
As one resident shared on TikTok, butter in his local store costs $8 per pound — almost twice the national average. Fresh produce is even more expensive, with bananas going for $3 a pound, approximately five times the national average. It’s therefore not surprising that most of the people who live in Alaska have learned to rely on nature to survive.
Subsistence living has great importance for many communities. They hunt their own meat, forage for plants, and nurture their deep cultural connection to sourdough. For rural Alaskans, living off the land is a deep philosophy that embraces connection with nature and hones the survival knowledge that’s passed down through generations — including how to make Alaska’s traditional akutaq ice cream.
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology6 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Delaware3 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Dallas, TX1 week agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Iowa6 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Montana2 days agoService door of Crans-Montana bar where 40 died in fire was locked from inside, owner says
-
Health1 week agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits