The Outlier State: Alaska’s FY 2012 Budget
DOI 10.1515/cjpp-2012-0027 Calif. J. Politics Policy 2012; 4(3): 2–38 Research Article Jerry McBeath* and Tanya Buhler Corbin The Outlier State: Alaska’s FY 2012 Budget Abstract: This report discusses the Alaska economy in 2010 and 2011, reviews demographic and workforce changes, and surveys the 2010 primary and general election outcomes. It discusses state issues with federal connections, and then analyzes the FY 2012 budget process (the governor’s requested budgets and legi­slative responses extending into a special session. The state entered FY 2012 with a substantial budget surplus, unlike most other states. Keywords: Alaska Permanent Fund; natural gas pipe line; oil prices; petroleum production tax (ACES); redistricting *Corresponding author: Jerry McBeath, Department of Political Science, University of Alaska Fairbanks, PO Box 756420, Fairbanks, AK, USA Tanya Buhler Corbin: Department of Political Science, Radford University, PO Box 6945, Radford, VA, USA 1 Introduction Alaska is a non-contiguous state of the American union. Certainly, it differs from all other American states in its revenue sources and expenditures. This paper describes the fiscal policy process explaining the Alaska FY 2012 budget plan, and covers the period from July 1, 2010 until the end of August, 2011. The report begins with a discussion of the state’s economy in 2010 and the first eight months of 2011, provides an overview of the demographic and workforce changes in the previous year, and then surveys the 2010 primary and general election outcomes. Next, we discuss the state issues with federal connections tracked in this report over the last dozen years. Central to this report is an analysis of the FY 2012 budget process, including the governor’s requested budget (operating, supplemental, and capital), legislative responses, and the extension of debate into two special sessions. A special section examines the main fiscal issue of the legislative session – Governor Parnell’s proposed reform of the state’s oil taxation regime. The report presents the final FY 2012 budget, with explanations of changes from the previous year. Alaska entered FY 2012 with a substantial budget surplus, unlike most of the other states. The plan for this year’s expenditures is positive, and no major
Planning Amid Abundance: Alaska’s FY 2013 Budget Process
DOI 10.1515/cjpp-2013-0019 Calif. J. Politics Policy 2013; 5(3): 319–342 Jerry McBeath* Planning Amid Abundance: Alaska’s FY 2013 Budget Process Abstract: This report describes the fiscal policy process relating to the develop- ment of Alaska’s FY 2012–2013 budget. Alaska entered FY 2013 with a substantial surplus and with hefty financial reserves. The report explains the origin of these conditions, which distance Alaska from most of the other western states; it also provides information on the threats to Alaska’s fiscal stability represented in its extreme dependence on depleting oil reserves and on federal government support. Keywords: Alaska; budget; FY 2012–2013; governor; legislature; West. *Corresponding author: Jerry McBeath, Professor of Political Science, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA, e-mail: gamcbeath@alaska.edu 1 Introduction This paper describes the fiscal policy process explaining the Alaska FY 2013 budget plan. It covers the period from the most recent Alaska report (McBeath and Corbin 2011) in late August, 2011 to December 2012. The report begins with a discussion of the Alaska economy from the third quarter of 2011 through most of 2012 and briefly treats the redistricting process after the 2010 census, which set the parameters for the 2012 state elections. Next, we discuss state issues with a federal connection tracked in the Alaska reports over the last dozen years. The core of the paper is analysis of the FY 2013 budget process, including the governor’s requested budget (operating, supple- mental and capital), and legislative responses. A special section examines the main fiscal issue of the 27th Alaska Legislature: Governor Parnell’s proposed reform of the state oil taxation regime, followed by a report on the 2012 special session. The last section of the report presents the final state budget, with analysis of revenues, the capital, supplemental and operating budgets for FY 2013, and reserve funds. Alaska entered FY 2013 with a substantial surplus (variously estimated from $2 to $3.7 billion) and with hefty financial reserves. The report explains the origin of these conditions, which distance Alaska from most of the other western states;
The fragmentation of small asteroids in the atmosphere
The fragmentation of a small asteroid in the atmosphere greatly increases its cross-sections for aerodynamic braking and energy dissipation. The differential pressure across a meteoroid disperses its fragments at a velocity that increases with atmospheric density and impact velocity and decreases with meteoroid density. At a typical impact velocity of 22 km/s, the atmosphere absorbs more than half the kinetic energy of stony meteoroids with diameters, D M < 220 M AND IRON METEOROIDS WITH D M < 80 m. The corresponding diameter for comets with impact velocity 50 km/s is D M < 1600 m. Most of this energy dissipation occurs in a fraction of a scale height, which causes large meteoroids to appear to »explode« or »flare« at the end of their visible paths