"So many people could get out of debt, buy a better car, or get the Internal Revenue Service off their back. ... I would bet my life on the fact that if this was put to a statewide vote, it would pass easily," Stuart wrote.

Holm's bill passed out of the House Special Committee on Ways and Means on Wednesday. But it isn't getting as much acclaim in the Legislature as in the streets. The idea faces opposition from lawmakers who say that the dividend program should be preserved for future generations and that Holm's bill would let today's Alaskans rob their grandkids.

The plan would need two-thirds support of both the House and the Senate, as a constitutional amendment, and would need to be approved by Alaskans in a statewide vote.

North Pole Republican Sen. Gene Therriault, the president of the state Senate, called it the
"take the money and run plan." Therriault said he doesn't see that there is much support for the idea right now in the Senate.

Anchorage Republican Rep. Mike Hawker, the House Ways and Means chairman, said all the committee members gave Holm's bill a "no recommendation" when they passed it Wednesday.

Hawker said the dividend program is good for the state and he doesn't want to see it end. Still, he said, Holm's bill should at least be on the table as the Legislature figures out how to fix the state's budget troubles."I think it has merits and the subject deserves further discussion," Hawker said. 

It contains a formula that could make $800 million a year from the fund available for state spending after the check bonanza, while still allowing what's left of the fund to grow with inflation, according to the bill. That could fill the state's recurring budget shortfall for now, although other revenues might be needed in the future.

The bill, HJR 31, now moves to the House State Affairs Committee. The committee chairman, Juneau Republican Rep. Bruce Weyhrauch, said he's willing to give it a hearing in the next couple of weeks. 

Weyhrauch said he's not supporting the bill but thinks it is worth debate. It might be the only way for the Legislature to get past the stalemate that is forcing the state to cut programs while it has $28 billion in the fund, he said.

Holm said "70 percent, maybe more" of the public feedback on his bill has been positive. He said the prospect of a super-sized dividend would convince the public to support using some of the Permanent Fund for state services. And all that money would help people a lot more than the annual dividend check, he said. For example, families could buy a house, he said.

"If we can make a life-altering change for people, what better gift can we give to them and their children?" Holm said.

As for future generations, he noted the dividend program is only 20 years old and people did without it before then. And, he said, the Legislature has to respond to the current budget crisis.
Sen. Jerry Mackie introduced a similar bill a few years ago, but opponents called it a  bribe  and it didn't go anywhere. Mackie, now a former senator and lobbyist at the Capitol,
said he's glad to see that Holm has resurrected what was then known as the "Mackie Plan." Mackie said state budget cuts and all the recent talk of taxes and tapping fund earnings for government have made people more receptive. He said people keep coming up to him and saying they hated the "Mackie Plan" back then but love it now. "If I had a dollar for every time that has happened I would have a big pile of money," Mackie said.
Several of the people who e-mailed Holm said they think the Legislature is going to grab the dividends anyway, so it's best to cash in now. Others focused on the benefits of freeing up fund dollars for public services.

There are opponents in the public. Roger Gay of Big Lake testified Wednesday that getting rid of the annual dividend would be devastating to businesses that depend on Alaskans spending their checks each fall. And some people e-mailed Holm to complain that $20,000 apiece isn't nearly enough.

One Wasilla man e-mailed that $20,000 "would barely dent my debt." He said $30,000 to $50,000 would be a much better sell to the public. John Ginder of Fairbanks felt that even wouldn't be enough."LEAVE IT ALONE!!!!!! Your 20 pay-off is ridiculous!! Start with 75 and That may be given some thought. Otherwise, Quit and leave it alone!!" he wrote.