One of the most influential legislators in the state House says he's sick and tired of plans, studies, and spending, and wants some action on natural gas for in-state use -- and moreover, he thinks plenty of Alaskans feel the same way and wants those voters to have a say.

House Speaker Mike Chenault introduced a bill last week that would ask voters in the 2010 election for direction through an "advisory vote." Such a vote isn't binding by law, but it would give lawmakers a sense of Alaskans' perspectives.

The bill seems almost too simple. But Chenault, a Republican from Nikiski, said his question really is as straightforward as it sounds. Do voters want lawmakers to take money from the Permanent Fund's earnings -- after dividends, after protecting the main fund from inflation -- and use it to build an in-state natural gas pipeline?

There's a potential hangup, although the bill doesn't give many details. Annual dividends come from the earnings reserve account, but only half the account's total can be used for that payout. And while five months remain in the fiscal year, if dividends were paid today, the fund doesn't hold enough money to cover the full amounts.

Chenault said in such a case, there just wouldn't be money to shoot toward an in-state gas pipeline. Voters should still have a chance to direct their government, he said.

"This piece of legislation simply just gives the Legislature the opportunity to hear the voices of Alaskans when it comes to the energy needs of the state," Chenault said during a committee hearing on Wednesday. "With the energy crisis that will be looming upon us in the forthcoming years, we need to have Alaskans speaking ... If we run out of energy in this state by not trying to push something forward, it's shame on every one of us."

The bill doesn't discriminate among the several in-state pipeline proposals on the table. It also wouldn't give lawmakers any more authority than they already have to spend earnings off the main Permanent Fund investments on whatever they like, including energy. But the approach still enters sensitive territory, involving the fund that Alaskans hold sacred.

Traditionally, the earnings have been used to pay annual dividends to each Alaska resident, but some earnings are routed back into the main fund to protect against inflation. And at times, lawmakers have funneled earnings back into the sacrosanct body in order to add to the fund's base, which in turn can make for bigger dividends in good investment years.

This plan is not a raid on the actual Permanent Fund, Chenault emphasized.

"I think we've been smart over time that we've never cracked that egg," Chenault said. "I think most of us know it's political suicide."

The House Resources Committee moved the bill on after a hearing Wednesday, offering an amendment that drew a party-line vote. The committee's five Republicans voted to specify that the vote will be held in the August primary election; three Democrats wanted to delay the vote until the November general election. Another Democrat who caucuses with Republicans, Dillingham Rep. Bryce Edgmon, was absent.

Rep. Mark Neuman, R-Mat-Su, chaired the committee. He called for the primary election vote, saying Alaska can't afford to wait any longer.

Reps. David Guttenberg and Scott Kawasaki of Fairbanks and Chris Tuck of Anchorage, all Democrats, opposed the bill. Their concern? The bill isn't focused enough to provide voters with the information they need on projects, costs and returns, and it involves earnings on the Permanent Fund.