An Anchorage Daily News Editorial writer Wednesday morning  meant well and wisely said, "The state's job is to get the most value it can from its resource for the benefit of all Alaskans. That's not a matter of discretion. That's in the state constitution."  Well, yes it is but....   But after we define who "Alaskans" are, we might reach a different conclusion than if we just assume the constitution grants this generation the right and obligation to unleash a slash-and-burn policy only benefitting current Alaskans.

If we want to extract every drop of blood out of a dying turnip for tonight's family dinner, we're not looking for ways of sustaining that turnip for the kids' families.  If we do want to sustain turnip output for future generations, we'll eat a little less tonight and plant a little more in the morning.  

Put another way, we agree with the editorial writer if our job is to extract from the Alaska North Slope (ANS) every single dollar possible for this generation to spend.  But ... if, as I have come to believe, our constitution demands we produce maximum natural resource benefit for this AND future Alaska generations, then we must undertake policies that weigh more heavily in favor of sustaining development for them, than for satisfying this generation's demands for cash now to spend now on me, now.

Put a final way, don't you agree that we should not let Alaska's constitution help us rationalize tax and regulatory policies that have the effect of taking sustained revenue from our kids to satisfy our greed today?  Some might still argue in favor of extracting the maximum benefit of natural resource revenue for this generation at the expense of the next.  To them, I would gently offer that such a philosophy would also justify spending the kid's college money and every future PFD check on things that I want for me to satisfy my immediate wants right now.

Come to think of it, I fear the growth of that "maximum benefit for me, now" mentality.  It is very self centered.  It ignores and disrespects the idea that one generation, through sacrifice, assures a better life for the next.  Ultimately, it is an argument for selfishness, for not giving, for not saving, for not loving, for not defending a country with one's life.

(Bottom line: Won’t our children appreciate our effort to make tax and regulatory policy attractive to future investors—instead of trying to extract maximum dollars from today’s resource developers for our own use?)

A 40-year Alaskan, Dave Harbour is former Chairman of the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, the Alaska Council on Economic Education and the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce.  He is former president of the Alaska Press Club and the American Bald Eagle Foundation.  He has addressed hundreds of audiences throughout the U.S. and Canada and has written hundreds of articles for newspapers and magazines throughout both countries. He publishes a decade-old energy blog: www.northerngaspipelines.com, where this commentary first appeared

The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch. Alaska Dispatch welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com.