The House version of a bill to draw money from Permanent Fund earnings would likely survive a legal challenge, according to the Legislature’s top legal adviser.
The issue in question was a provision of Senate Bill 26 that was added by the House. The provision said the bill will only go into effect if the Legislature also passed bills that institute a broad-based tax, like an income or sales tax, and that raise oil and gas taxes.
Members of the House minority who opposed the provision said it may violate the Alaska Constitution’s prohibition on laws that address more than a single subject. But that’s not the view of Doug Gardner, the director of legal services for the nonpartisan Legislative Affairs Agency.
In a memorandum obtained by Alaska Public Media and KTOO, Gardner examined legal precedents in other states. He found that most state courts have found that laws that depend on other laws being enacted don’t violate the “single-subject” rule – as long as each individual bill focuses on a single subject.
Some senators in the majority caucus have said the House should have sent over what they call “a clean bill” – one that made changes to the Permanent Fund without also requiring the tax bills.
The chairmen of the House Finance Committee originally wanted to pass a different bill that combined changes to the Permanent Fund with an income tax. But they decided to not to do that because they were concerned there would be a lawsuit challenging whether the bill violates the single-subject rule.
