This week we arrive at the annual ritual of spring break on the legislative calendar, when lawmakers will shove aside their pressing state business to attend the annual Energy Conference in Washington D.C.

The conference hosts policy makers from oil and gas states and provinces, while providing a forum to meet with federal regulators, congressional members and the ability to be briefed on the latest energy trends.

The debate over this year's trip and it's true benefits to Alaskans has begun anew over the need to be spending time and money sending almost two dozen state lawmakers to the nation's capitol while many of the same lawmakers are complaining about not having enough time to do their traditional responsibilities.

However for me, this year's debate over taxpayer funded trips to the energy conference over shadows the real issue; a sinking feeling that Alaska's lawmakers have run up against the energy wall.

Over the last five years, the State of Alaska has spent $142 million on developing a natural gas pipeline. From consultants and conferences to reports, the state has been spending money like its going out of style in order to make something happen with Alaska's next economic dream.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a growing recognition that whatever they're doing, isn't working.

On Saturday afternoon, I attended my legislative town hall meeting hosted by lawmakers, State Senator Lesil McGuire, Representative Bob Buch and Representative Craig Johnson.

For the first time publicly, I heard both Rep. Johnson and Sen. McGuire tell a room full of their constituents that they both believed AGIA would fail. Johnson even added an additional dose of reality by saying that the "big line wouldn't be operating for another twenty years.

What makes these comments so powerful is that both Johnson and McGuire chair the Resource Committee in their respective bodies. These are the two lawmakers, who if anybody knows what the score is, they should.

But the hour-plus lesson in oil and gas reality at Mears Jr. High on Saturday left me feeling a little uneasy because in the place of a clearly defined contingency plan, there seemed to be nothing offered to fill the energy void but pie in the sky wishes.

No direction, no focus, just the belief that if they mentioned all of the energy projects that have ever been considered in the history of Alaska, it might ease concerned minds.

We're looking into Hydro, tidal and geothermal lawmakers said. We're going to look at the railroad bonding for an in-state gas line and don't forget about the idea to pre-buy the pipeline steel as an idea to help jump start the gas pipeline.

As presented by my lawmakers, Alaska's energy plan appears to be little more than a Rorschach test of inkblots representing far fetched projects instead of a viable long term energy plan.

With the growing realization that AGIA will not deliver Alaska a natural gas pipeline as promised by the Palin/Parnell gas line team, more lawmakers are breaking away on their own to support everything possible that might generate a precious kilowatt of power for their neighbors.

If that means Rep. Caig Johnson telling Alaskans we can have the Susitna Hydro dam along with a gas line to southcentral Alaska, so be it. Even though the laws of economics say you can't have both projects.

If that means Sen. Lesil McGuire telling Alaskans we can have value added products, when a key value added plant (Agrium) has shut down because of operating costs, so be it.

Even though we all know that Agrium isn't coming back.

And if that means Rep. Bob Buch has to re-write his personal beliefs concerning oil and gas issues, so be it. Even though we all know his clearly established legislative record.

During Saturday's constituent meeting, a woman asked if reducing oil and gas taxes would encourage companies to begin more capital investment. Rep. Bob Buch (D-Anchorage), who voted for both AGIA and higher oil & gas taxes over the last two years, started tap dancing instead of answering.

I don't think it's the legislature's responsibility to try and inject ourselves into decisions made inside oil company boardrooms, Buch responded.