Home
https://www.adn.com/politics/2016/11/17/judge-hears-arguments-over-gov-walkers-partial-veto-of-pfds/


Judge tosses legal challenge to Walker's PFD veto
Author: Alaska Dispatch News Updated: 19 minutes ago Published 1 hour ago

Judge William Morse challenges plaintiff and state Sen. Bill Wielechowski during oral arguments at the Nesbett Courthouse on Thursday, Nov. 17, 2016. (Loren Holmes / Alaska Dispatch News)

Anchorage Superior Court Judge William Morse ruled from the bench Thursday that Gov. Bill Walker had the legal authority to veto half the transfer of state funds into the Alaska Permanent Fund dividend account, rejecting a judgment sought in a lawsuit by a state senator.

Prior to issuing his ruling, Morse was openly skeptical of the arguments brought by Sen. Bill Wielechowski in his lawsuit, though he also challenged the state's defense attorney, Assistant Attorney General Margaret Paton-Walsh.

The closely watched lawsuit was brought by Wielechowski and two other plaintiffs in an effort to restore more than $600 million to Alaska's 2016 Permanent Fund dividend program, following the veto this year by Walker.

Wielechowski said outside the courtroom that he will appeal Morse's decision to the Alaska Supreme Court.

Walker vetoed half the Alaska Legislature's deposit into the Permanent Fund's dividend program in June. The veto had the effect of cutting this year's dividend checks for most Alaskans in half, to a little more than $1,000.

Morse said Alaska's Constitution grants the governor extraordinary powers to make line-item vetoes from the budget, especially at times of economic troubles.

"And we're in crunch time," Morse said.

While much of the case turned on technical words of state finance, such as the difference between an "appropriation" and a "dedicated fund," Morse ultimately said the framers of Alaska's Constitution clearly wanted to give the governor strong veto power.

Wielechowski, in arguing for a summary judgment declaring Walker's veto unconstitutional, said the fund was enshrined in the Constitution and the governor had no right to veto the transfer.

A small group of protesters outside the state courthouse in downtown Anchorage demanded restoration of the full dividend, supporting Wielechowski's lawsuit.

Supporters of the lawsuit, including Chugiak resident Rocky Dippel, left, wave signs before oral arguments Thursday morning, Nov. 17, 2016, outside the Nesbett courthouse in Anchorage.
Supporters of the lawsuit, including Chugiak resident Rocky Dippel, left, wave signs before oral arguments Thursday morning, Nov. 17, 2016, outside the Nesbett courthouse in Anchorage.
Walker said that the Legislature's failure to produce a fiscal plan in the face of huge deficits forced him to veto the money.
Quote
Walker said that the Legislature's failure to produce a fiscal plan in the face of huge deficits forced him to veto the money.



Lying SOB
Agreed... not like he can just spend it elsewhere...
I guess I need to read up on the state constitution, but to my mind if the Governor is going to veto a line item it should be the entire item. Hence I can see him vetoing the entire PFD payout, but not a partial payout.

While not a ruling by the judge, it does seem to set a dangerous precedent that the Governor can practically write legislation in the name of a line item veto.
Its a special kind of veto called the "partial percentage-based line item veto".

Sort of the Excalibur of vetoes.
Walker " banked the funds" ....he didn't want to get caught having in in the States wallet, so to say...and yea I think he's a ahole ..
Quote
and yea I think he's a ahole ..



You were told he was an ahole before the election if I recall.
Originally Posted by watch4bear
Quote
and yea I think he's a ahole ..



You were told he was an ahole before the election if I recall.


I tried to tell anybody that would listen...
Originally Posted by cwh2
Its a special kind of veto called the "partial percentage-based line item veto".

Sort of the Excalibur of vetoes.

I think you're onto something.
Sounds special, for sure.
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
I guess I need to read up on the state constitution, but to my mind if the Governor is going to veto a line item it should be the entire item. Hence I can see him vetoing the entire PFD payout, but not a partial payout.

While not a ruling by the judge, it does seem to set a dangerous precedent that the Governor can practically write legislation in the name of a line item veto.

I think the judge got it wrong and this will be overturned by the supremes.

Guess hes on our/your side ...if it benefits him.....what can I say... The only faith I have ...is in faith hill 😁😁
Quote
The only faith I have ...is in faith hill 😁😁



She's also a democrat. You can sure pick em wink
The kkk blush part….? Now I aint even got faith... No more voting for me...I'll just do what I want / like before.....and stop this nonsense of asking .gov what can I do.. grin
© 24hourcampfire