JUNEAU — Gov. Sean Parnell said he plans to continue to “pursue vigorously” changes to Alaska’s oil tax structure as a way to boost production in the state.
Parnell told The Associated Press he is currently working to get the votes needed in the Senate to advance the tax cut narrowly passed by the House during the regular legislative session. The bill stalled in the Senate, with leaders in the majority bloc saying they didn’t have the information needed to make a sound decision, but the bill will still be in play when the Legislature reconvenes in January.
While Parnell said he’s open to other ideas for stemming and reversing the trend of declining production, “we need to see it. At this point, what we have on the table to increase jobs, increase production and basically create a longer-term future for Alaska, that’s what I’m looking for right now.”
Parnell said he considers changes to the tax regime critical to his goal of having one million barrels of oil per day course through the trans-Alaska pipeline system within a decade. The tax element, or otherwise making Alaska more competitive for investment through royalty relief or other means, is one aspect of a broader strategy that his administration is taking to achieve the audacious goal. Others include improving the permitting process and access to resources — something that Parnell said must be done by both the state and federal governments. A more detailed plan is being finalized.
Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Dan Sullivan called this an “all hands on deck moment in Alaska.”
The trans-Alaska pipeline remains the state’s economic artery, though it’s far from operating at peak levels. At its height, in the late-1980s, the pipeline moved 2.1 million barrels of oil a day from the North Slope. Since then, oil production has been declining and throughput has recently averaged about 640,000 barrels a day.
Questions were raised during the tax debate — and conflicting data was provided — on how long the line could continue to safely and efficiently operate. Similarly, the administration’s defense of its tax-cut bill proved lackluster, at best, for a number of lawmakers, including some senators who believed aspects of the tax regime — like the progressive surcharge tripped when a company’s net profits top $30 a barrel — could be revisited. But leading senators said they didn’t have the information needed — on issues like jobs, the potential to recover revenues lost by cutting taxes, whether Alaska’s tax system is actually out of whack compared to other energy-producing regions — to immediately act.
It is widely anticipated, though, the debate will be revived next year. Industry representatives and groups, like the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, plan to maintain their call for tax changes.
In the months ahead, Parnell said he plans to work with lawmakers — including senators with whom he’s had a prickly relationship — to move beyond the contentious regular and special sessions this year and “figure out how to better work for Alaskans. That’s what we’re here for.”
“When politics gets in the way of the people’s business, or personalities get in the way, it’s time to take a step back, take a breath and figure things out together — and how we can work together better,” he said
Comments (20)
Add commentCrooked or Stupid
Is he crooked or just plain stupid? Maybe he want to just give the oil away.
Well, we know who he works
Well, we know who he works for---He's just got them confused with the Alaskan people.
Pursue vigorously
Well, then maybe Alaskans need to "pursue vigorously" a recall election.
Biblical topic
Wally Hickel talked about Alaska as an "owner State" where all Alaskans are the owners. We elect Governors as stewards to do what is best for all of us as owners, not for special interests.
This week I found a passage in the Bible, Luke Chapter 16, verses 1-14 about a steward. I wonder if it has any lesson or message for Alaskans - I sort of think it does.
Typical republican
He's not stupid; he's a typical republican, and this is what republicans do.
Republicans protect the mega-rich, the corporations, and the big oil industries to the detriment of Alaskans. It's what republicans do.
It amazes me why certain voting blocs of Alaskans still support ANY republican agenda.
Governor: Push all you want. People like me are just as determined to push back to ensure that you don't get to give $2BN/year of Alaskan's money away to your oil buds.
And please stop saying it will generate more oil flow and jobs. It won't. That is a smokescreen and people see through your little act.
All I see are denegrations.
All I see are denegrations. Convince the rest of us that your view will have the best possible outcome for the 'owners of Alaska'. Just slinging arrows doesn't get you anywhere with the other side of the argument.
Remember elections have consequences and for those of you that castigate Parnell at every turn, you lost the last election. The majority of Alaskans liked what he proposed and elected him.
Does ANYBODY here still think electing Parnell was a good idea?
I know Ethan B. could be a might abrasive(the Dems SHOULD have nominated Hollis French) but is there anything he could have done as gov that could possibly have been worse than Parnell's idea that the oil companies should be able to steal even more of the wealth that rightfully belongs to the people of Alaska?
There's no way that the revenues we'd lose from Parnell's proposal would ever be made up. And we wouldn't be a decent society if we cut enough to close the gap through austerity alone.
There is a greater and greater case that the people of this state should own the oil wells and manage them democratically.
It's just wrong that the profits taken from them should end up, as they will under Parnell's giveaway, in offshore accounts in the caymans.
We can't afford the oil barons anymore, folks. That's just reality.
And Calypso, Parnell NEVER said he'd cut oil taxes to nothing
during the campaign, so you really can't argue that the voters approved this.
What we're seeing here proves that oil lobbyists should never be given the governorship of this state.
Elections lost, suck it up?
Calypso, really? Any person that didn't vote for parnell should just sit silently for years? I haven't seen an article that mentions Begich or Obama that you haven't posted some babble about corrupt, boy, worst ever, defining moment, etc.
If one were to follow their own instructions you should have nothing to say in most cases.
Parnell is the biggest fork tongue d88shbag Alaska has seen in decades. He makes Mystrom & Wuerch look like political geniuses. You and I can debate the next election and speculate but there is no right to say "shut up". My money is that he's going to flame out HARD in his next primary just like Murky now that we all know just how craptacular he is. He is trying to fast track selling us all out as fast as he possibly can. You want to compare this to something compare it to palin signing Alaska's name to a contract we can't get out of while working over 500m.
Now ask yourself this. Why would our Gov veto any alternative energy projects that have been vetted and approved for decades? Maybe because he's working for the wrong team?
And when his tax plan puts the State in a hole..
If this passes and several years down the road we start getting into some serious financial troubles as a State, I'm sure the line will be - "The State is in trouble because of greedy public employees. Unions are killing us."
What a sham!
Cripes!
I mean don't get me wrong, I'm really happy to have the unstable whack-job Palin out of office, but look at the dead-wood she left behind! The oil companies are pleased though.
Hey, romper, don't put words
Hey, romper, don't put words in my mouth. I never said "shut-up", your words. I said make your case because the constant whining about the Republican governor that was fairly elected last election is really tiresome and gets neither side anywhere. A little defensive, huh?
"boy" - I've never called Obama that either. Stop making things up.
It's amazing that a tax reduction to the oil companies is stirring up such emotion. All I can figure is those against it see their money pot in the form of a permanent fund dividend decreasing. Or is it just hatred of big oil? Suppose it works out for the better and Alaska reaps huge rewards?
I have to say neither side has presented a viable argument - it's all emotion. Hence the stalemate.
With very few exceptions
With very few exceptions - Alaskans are against this idea. Gov. Parnell, you work for US, and we don't want this. Drop it already before we drop YOU!
It's not just a tax reduction...it's a MASSIVE tax reduction
And Calypso, you know perfectly well it's not about our dividends...it's about the services the people of this state need.
If that tax slash(or, basically, tax abolition) went through, the budget deficit would be so massive we'd have to cut state government to Calvin Coolidge-size levels. That is unacceptable for a civilized, modern state.
There'd be no way to enforce most, if any, environmental regulations(and that should bother you, because, last I checked, even conservatives need to breathe).
Bush Alaska would essentially be left to die, meaning most Alaska Natives would either starve or have to give up their dignity by moving to Anchorage and opening trinket shops.
We'd have a massive increase in the homeless population because of the cuts in housing subsidy. And it's not like we could just give them all the "blue ticket", because it would also likely mean that the Marine Highway would go out of existence.
Or, if none of that impresses you, they might have to bring back the state income tax just to maintain even Coolidge-size state government. I assume you wouldn't be down with that.
This giveaway to Big Oil(whose OWNERS clearly deserve our disrespect) would harm almost all Alaskans. And the only rewards would end up in those offshore accounts in the Caymans. They would never trickle-down to us, because trickle down never trickles at all(it's kind of an economic kidney stone that tickles those it afflicts rather than agonizing them).
Ken, spoken like a true
Ken, spoken like a true progressive - worse case senario, doom and gloom and playing to the lowest common denominator. You only see government having to shrink and that scares you.
It's a complicated issue that I venture to guess not many voters begin to understand. They're reading the hype that's playing off of people's emotions and off they go with an opinion that's only half baked.
This is an older article but glance through the comments at the end. They're quite enlightening and present both sides and have some facts.
http://www.redstate.com/vladimir/2010/01/16/sean-parnell-pushes-changes-...
There's no best scenario
Cutting oil taxes cannot possibly lead to anything but a massive decline in state revenues. The notion that tax cuts increase tax payments has always been a myth.
And yes, it is complicated...which is why we need to educate the public to this and to not just TRUST Lil' Seanie the Oil Boy
with our state's fufure.
The oil barons aren't our friends. If we're going to keep drilling(and yes, if we open ANWR) we need to do it under state ownership and the democratic management of the oil workers themselves. We need to take the CEO's and the management elite out and keep the revenues where the belong-in the hands of all the people of Alaska.
Ken, I believe that "state
Ken, I believe that "state ownership" is akin to socialism. We don't do that in America - we do capitalism. I hear Venezuela is a great place to see "state owned" oil companies in action.
Be careful what you wish for...
By the way, tens of millions of Americans have 401(k)s and pension funds (including public employee retirement funds) invested in America's oil and natural gas companies that make great returns. Do you?
Yawn
More socialism comments Calypso? Everything that doesn't place the reins of power, the wealth of the nation and personal moral standards into the hands of the corporations is socialism isn't it. At least you didn't make as crass a comment that people should plan on getting raped and get insurance accordingly.
You are right about one thing. If I were one to let people tell me what my place in life was maybe I could buy into your non-statments about how Alaskan resources aren't partly my responsibility, they are solely parnells.
Maybe if I was a conservative GOP with a shotgun in my truck and a cross around my neck I could have faith that lowering tax rates could produce more tax revenue (btw, I'll be blunt. You are sadly mistaken here and that's about as polite as I can be about it. Tax rates have low been lowered and lowered and are now in imbalanced. Insufficient tax revenue period). You clearly imply that the investment opportunities of people that can afford to justify eliminating social programs (that many of them crazy xxx people want), entitlements, work programs, education, etc. Well, a LOT of people would consider the current system rigged that the rich get richer and the poor get stuck. Now, who's in control of this system? It's people. People are ensuring they get rich and other people don't. At some point either the programs have to give, or the tax revenue has to go ...BACK UP. So, if you have a black and white political ideology and it's all about getting yours you can easily take the "My work, My taxes" attitude. Other people will take the "Rich robbing from the poor and than shafting them by taking their services too".
The rich have no problem getting educated.
The rich have no difficulty putting food on the table and paying their utilities.
The rich do no suffer from lack of investment opportunities and the liquidity to take advantage of them.
The rich have a standard of living that FAR exceeds the ratio of income to cost of living basis.
The poor? Well, they just hope they can cover all the bills.
Your solution? Work harder? You betcha it sure is complicated and telling people to work harder sure is easy isn't it. But, we've been here again and again.
Oh, one last thought. I'm just fine with my taxes going up and I want yours to go up too. I'm not going to "donate" while pricks like you demand the most and want to pay the least. It's called personal responsibility. It has many aspects. And one of the lessons you teach a child is that if you won't do it on your own sometimes someone else will just make you.
But go on, quit your job and live off the grid like a few people I know that think not paying taxes is the bomb. No unemployement, no health care, no nothing. I got a retirement I'm working on. They sure showed me.
GOP the moral voice of america. Utterly maniacally and hysterically insane to think so. If any one of you had an once of REAL humility you'd know that your jesus wouldn't be a CEO working on how to screw everyone else for his next bonus. He'd be picking food for pennies and sharing his dinner with the next guy that didn't get to work that day.
http://money.msn.com/saving-money/article.aspx?post=3204cf7f-38ee-453f-b...
Akromper
Dude/Dudette(whatever is pertinent),
Please do not pretend to know what Jesus would do because it is clear you do not believe who he is and what He stands for. The problem with raising taxes is the ones who get taken to the bank are not the poor or the rich but the ones in the middle. The poor do not pay any taxes (other than local sales tax) and the rich can afford to pay someone to help the pay less. Although the rich do pay a lot. BTW, please refrain from calling people names. I am not pretending to know what the right thing to do is about the oil taxes. But I do know you need better manners.
justlivin
If you're worried about the middle class getting squeezed, then structure the tax raises accordingly by requiring those with greater wealth to pay a higher tax rate. It seems straightforward and simple, so why doesn't it happen? Because the wealthy are naturally the ones in power, and they would rather become richer beyond any normal person's wildest dreams than have to pay taxes for social services for the people who work the hardest. I also enjoy you saying, "I am not pretending to know what the right thing to do is about the oil taxes" after blatantly stating your opinion on how raised taxes would affect the middle class. If you don't know anything about oil taxes, you probably don't know anything about other taxes, so just stay out of the discussion. Also, please keep the jesus crap out of political discussions. Thanks.