The Zobel decision did NOT "allow the PFD program to begin".  As the dividend was originally set up, It increased the amount of the dividend payment based on longevity.  (the longer you lived in the state since 1959 - the beginning of statehood, the larger your dividend)  The Zobels sued the state claiming that basing the dividend on longevity was unconstitutional, and ultimately won on appeal to the U.S. supreme court.  So the Zobel decision fundamentally altered the PFD, but did not "allow it to begin".  As to the point that the "crafters" of the permanent fund originally tied it to the dividend, the wording of the original constitutional amendment that started the permanent fund stipulates that the income from the fund "shall be deposited into the general fund" unless unless otherwise provided by law.  The law establishing the dividend came later, and I believe that the dividend was never meant to preclude it being diverted back to the general fund as needed.