By SUZANNE DOWNING
Feb. 19, 2026 – An amendment to restore a full statutory Permanent Fund dividend to this year’s supplemental budget failed on the House floor, 28-12, after a debate over savings, timing, and even the future of the Alaska LNG project.
Rep. Frank Tomaszewski of Fairbanks offered Amendment No. 8 to Committee Substitute for House Bill 289, the supplemental budget bill, proposing “a full and statutory PFD for every man, woman, and child in the state of Alaska.”
“This pulls out of the earnings reserve account and gives a full statutory PFD for this year in October,” Tomaszewski said, introducing his amendment. “So, this is a 3 percent POMV draw. It’s also a statutory of about $3,600.”
The amendment would have restored the dividend to its statutory formula; Alaskans who were eligible last year received only $1,000.
Rep. Chuck Kopp, a Republican member of the Democrat-led majority, objected.
“Mr. Speaker, I do understand the desire to lock in a PFD amount today, but this amendment puts that funding in the wrong place, the wrong time, and it threatens every other item in this bill,” Kopp said.
He argued that the dividend should be addressed in the FY27 operating budget, not the supplemental bill now before the body.
“We know we are going to take up [the PFD] in the FY27 operating budget where we can properly put it alongside all of our other priorities,” Kopp said. “And despite Facebook chatter and rumors that happen every year, we have always funded a dividend every year.”
Kopp warned that adopting the amendment would reduce the Constitutional Budget Reserve to “less than a billion dollars, maybe $800 million,” at a time when the state may need to consider major investments.
“We are probably going to have a special session about the gas line, the AKLNG, and whether or not Alaska is going to assume an investor interest,” he said. “Even our minimum, the low end, if we come in at 5%, we’re looking at a billion and a half dollars. That’s a lot of money.
“I would hate to say we have no money in our savings account to become an investor in this gas line because we spent it all on a dividend for this year.”
Rep. Mike Prax of North Pole spoke in favor of the amendment, arguing that the statutory formula makes the dividend an obligation.
“It does belong in a supplemental budget because the law that affects this is that if you are eligible for and apply for a dividend, you’re entitled,” Prax said. “That’s what the statute says.”
The amendment ultimately failed on a 28-12 vote. With the roll call now recorded, House members have staked out their positions on a full statutory dividend — a debate that is certain to resurface as the operating budget moves forward.
The vote breakdown is as follows:
Yeas (12): Allard, Costello, Elam, Foster, McCabe, D. Nelson, G. Nelson, Prax, St. Clair, Tomaszewski, Underwood, Vance.
Nays (28): Bynum, Carrick, Coulombe, Dibert, Edgmon, Eischeid, Fields, Frier, Galvin, Gray, Hall, Hannan, Himschoot, Holland, Jimmie, Johnson, Josephson, Kopp, Mears, Mina, Moore, Ruffridge, Saddler, Schrage, Schwanke, Stapp, Story, Stutes.
No members were absent or excused. The entire supplemental budget must still be passed by the Senate.
17 thoughts on “Full PFD amendment fails 28-12 after floor debate; House members now on record”
We need to get a good conservative candidate in the Interior to replace Stapp. I never did trust that guy. All he ever talks about are his battle wounds from the military. I served too, in combat. And every soldier knows that real men don’t talk endlessly about their battle wounds.
I wonder if Stepp’s wounds are real battle wounds and not just cutting himself with a bottlecap. A lot of ex-military braggers were non-combatants far behind the lines.
Stolen valor is unconscionable, but continually bragging about valor shows an unsteadiness with an unproven confidence of mind. I won’t be voting for Stapp this fall.
We will remember those names come election time , and you guys are a bunch of thieves 🤬
So basically the excuse is that they have to steal from the people for their own good. Huh. I’m not sure that argument was ever a winning one.
Yeah, I think we, the people, know who wants ALL of our PFD dollars to play with and we, the people, can go pound sand! Elections have consequences (quote from a good friend of mine)!
How many of these egg suckers would’ve gotten elected had they ran on the point of being anti PFD. my guess is that at least the majority of them ran all protecting it.
Check out how many of these folks are on the House Finance Committee! Not good!
https://www.akleg.gov/basis/Committee/Details/34?code=HFIN
Might be the first red flag: ““We are probably going to have a special session about the gas line and whether or not Alaska is going to assume an investor interest,” (Kopp) said.
.
Don’t want to make Chuck mad and get accused of Facebook chatter and rumors, but …what assures that Alaskans and the Permanent Fund won’t be on the hook for debt traps, up-front costs, contractor fraud, and losses if Glenfarne can’t get, or loses, binding financial commitments from Asian companies and governments?
.
You just confirmed, Chuck, that “Facebook chatter and rumors” appear to be the most effective way of getting the attention of our lobbyist-legislator team.
.
So, if this question and about nine other questions don’t get straight, totally non-BS answers before Alaska’s forced into an “investor interest”, which nobody outside your Club can see, much less understand, is it not reasonable to expect the Club ain’t seen nothing yet?
.
Your Club, Chuck, can reward Alaska’s overpriced, underperforming, perverted education industry with all the money that mob wants and more, but when it comes to PFD’s? Oh hell no! Wrong place, wrong time, threatens everything else that’s more important!
.
Besides, full PFD’s for everyone might bring all the illegal-alien voters, and their addresses, out of the woodwork, and we can’t have that, right?
.
With that in mind, y’all have a wonderful special session, Chuck.
“……..full PFD’s for everyone might bring all the illegal-alien voters, and their addresses, out of the woodwork, and we can’t have that, right?……..”
Correct. And no PFD will likely get the parasite class packing in short order, reducing costs even more.
Have to agree with Morrigan. Any so-called Republican who favors LGBTQ, DEI, radical climate action and wokeism (via a bloated public education budget) versus a full, statutory PFD will get one-offed when I vote in 2026.
It is proper that the amendment that tried to slip in a full statutory PFD into the “supplemental budget”, was voted down.
The “supplemental budget” adds more spending to the official fiscal-year 2026 budget that was passed by the legislature in May 2025. The supplemental budget is generally meant to provide for extra unforeseen expenses like summer forest fires that happened after May 2025, or other urgent necessary things that cropped up later in 2025, or early in 2026.
.
I’m grateful for the 2024 PFD of $1000 of free money. However, I plan to send my uncashed paper PFD check back to the Dept of Revenue, as I have done with all my PFD checks since 2015. The reason is because our CBR savings account has not yet been refilled to my satisfaction, like it’s supposed to be. It saved our bacon in 2015, when the world price of oil crashed, and we had several years of multi-billion-dollar deficits.
.
Anyone who wants a bigger PFD should publicly state a specific item that can be trimmed from the budget, so that all expenditures fit within a balanced budget. I want a bigger PFD, and so my suggestion is to get rid of collective-bargaining for state employees and teachers. Free market-bargaining is better than collective-bargaining.
Good idea, but without a forensic audit to figure out who’s actually got what stashed safely out of taxpayers’ reach, isn’t the budget just a piece of paper which may or may not reflect what’s actually coming in and going out?
.
So why buy their budget lies, for example, to reward one of America’s most expensive, worst performing education industries with even more money, or to restart Alaska’s defined-benefit retirement system regardless of cost, while the Alaska Municipal League Investment Pool has, at this moment, $869,893,467.81 stashed safely out of taxpayers’ reach?
You can take the oil taxes back to Aces captain at 45% don’t pay a production credit until the 45% threshold is met and they can’t take a credit that reduces it less than 35%, that fixes the problem! Remember we didn’t have this problem until sb21 came in with all their big giveaways an elf what was just a revolving loophole. By the way they’ve floated bringing elf back which means we will be paying taxes to cover oil credits while they pay nothing because it is just a revolving loophole that eliminates most oil taxes.
Randy, you are misguided as to how our bloated state government and it’s elected enablers operate in Juneau. However, your consistency is respectable compared to your Democrat friends who desire no PFD, but would take whatever they could get, even if their government wages stay fully restored. So Randy, take your PFD, cash it in, and give it to a reputable charity of your choice. But don’t spoil it for others who will use their PFD to pay for fuel oil to heat their homes.
Gee, look at that vote tally! McCabe voted for the full statutory PFD! I wonder how that can be since he’s widely accused of being the PFD thief? I guess since it failed, it’s his fault, anyway?
Reggie with the exception of Sinclair and Nelson the others in the past have voted for budgets which cut the PFD . That’s being a PFD THIEF. I’m sure their full PFD stance has nothing to do with the fact that 2026is an election year. Based on their past actions all 40 of them should be given the boot this fall.