By Edward Martin, Jr.
In every serious debate about the Permanent Fund Dividend, a familiar phrase eventually appears: “free money.” It is usually followed by a warning about mob rule, emotional voters, and the supposed irresponsibility of letting the people speak directly on fiscal policy.
That phrase — free money — is doing far more work than it deserves.
The PFD is not free money. It never was.
Alaskans did not receive private mineral rights under their land at statehood. Instead, those rights were pooled into common ownership, with a constitutional command that Alaska’s natural resource wealth be managed and conserved for the maximum benefit of the people. The Permanent Fund was created to honor that bargain across generations. The Dividend emerged as a uniform, per-capita distribution of income derived from that commonly owned resource wealth.
That structure matters. It explains why the PFD is paid equally to every qualified Alaskan, without means testing, political favoritism, or discretionary adjustment. It is not welfare. It is not a subsidy. It is a royalty-like distribution arising from shared ownership.
Critics often respond that there is no “binding contract” guaranteeing the Dividend. That observation misunderstands how public obligations work. Not all duties arise from signed agreements. Some arise from constitutional structure, statutory design, and decades of consistent administrative practice that induce public reliance.
For more than thirty years, the State of Alaska administered the PFD uniformly and predictably. Families planned around it. Rural communities relied on it. Local economies incorporated it. The state itself promoted it as a defining feature of Alaska’s social compact. That history is not meaningless. In law and equity, reliance matters. In constitutional governance, trust matters.
What changed in 2016 was not the Constitution, and not the Permanent Fund. What changed was legislative behavior.
Today, two conflicting PFD statutes coexist without resolution. The executive branch selectively follows one and ignores the other. Courts defer rather than adjudicate the underlying constitutional conflict. This is not a policy disagreement; it is institutional failure. When elected officials refuse to reconcile conflicting laws while continuing to appropriate Permanent Fund income for general spending, they are not exercising prudence— they are avoiding accountability.
Some argue that allowing a statewide vote on the PFD would amount to mob rule. That claim turns republican government on its head. Alaska’s Constitution does not treat the people as a last resort or a threat to stability. Article I, Section 2 declares plainly that all political power is inherent in the people. The initiative and referendum process exists precisely for moments when representative bodies entrench themselves against the public will on matters of fundamental importance.
If the PFD truly lacks significance, a vote should pose no danger. If it is as consequential as legislative actions suggest, then the people have every right to speak directly. Rejecting a vote while dismissing public reliance on the Dividend reveals not wisdom, but fear.
The real danger to republican government is not citizens voting. It is institutions redefining long-standing public assets as discretionary revenue streams while telling the people they have no standing to object. That is not responsible governance. It is managed consent.
Reasonable Alaskans can disagree about formulas, amounts, and implementation. What is no longer reasonable is pretending that the PFD is merely “extra money,” or that decades of uniform practice created no obligation, expectation, or duty of care. The Permanent Fund represents a trust relationship between the state and the people— one that no single legislature has the authority to quietly dismantle.
The people are not asking for something new. They are asking why something long honored was broken, why conflicting laws remain unresolved, and why they are told they have no right even to vote on restoring it.
The PFD is not free money. And the people are not the problem. They are the source of all legitimate power, and it is time our institutions remembered that.
Ed Martin, Jr. is a retired 50+ year IUOE, General Contractor and long-time Alaskan with a strong belief in the National and State Constitutions and the inherent rights of citizens. He devotes his retirement to investigating Constitutional violation(s) in hopes of protecting the eternal rights of liberty. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” — 2 Corinthians 3:17.