
Members of the Alaska House of Representatives watch the voting board in the House on Thursday, March 12, 2026, as legislators vote on whether or not to spend from savings on a fast-track supplemental budget bill. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
The Alaska House of Representatives on Thursday postponed its final vote on a fast-track supplemental budget bill that would use the state’s largest savings account to cover some shortfalls in the current state budget.
Members of the House voted 21-19 to pull the bill from the House floor after it became clear that there were not enough votes to fund the bill from savings.
Thirty votes are needed to spend from the Constitutional Budget Reserve; a vote to spend from the reserve failed 22-18 before legislators reversed course, rescinded their rejection and sent the bill back to the House Rules Committee.
All members of the House’s multipartisan coalition majority voted in favor of the postponement; all members of the Republican House minority voted against it.
Rep. Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, was the only member of the minority to vote in favor of spending from the reserve. All legislators voted in favor of the underlying bill, even if they disagreed on how to pay for it.
A new vote on spending from the reserve could take place as early as Monday, but it might not be needed: On Friday, the Alaska Department of Revenue is expected to release a revised state budget forecast, and members of the House minority indicated they may be willing to bet that oil revenue from the Iran war will fill the gap.
“We have been blessed in this state. We have been blessed right now with the ability to look a little bit into the future … and notice that we have an additional amount of revenue that we have to spend. How incredible is that?” said Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna.
Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage and co-chair of the House Finance Committee, said he does not believe oil prices will rise high enough and stay high enough to pay for the supplemental budget bill without savings.
If Alaska North Slope oil prices were to average $90 per barrel between March 10 and June 30, that would raise an additional $300 million in state revenue — not enough to meet the need, Josephson said. Prices would have to average more than $105 per barrel for that period to avoid a withdrawal from savings, he said.
The bill in front of the House on Thursday would have spent $373.5 million from savings to unlock federal transportation grants, cover last year’s wildfire response spending, and pay for part of the cost of dealing with the disaster caused by ex-Typhoon Halong in Western Alaska.
All those items are additions for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30. Lawmakers are simultaneously working on a separate budget for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1.
The bill in front of the House on Thursday was adopted by the Senate on Wednesday after the six-person Senate minority negotiated the removal of $150 million in items in exchange for their votes on the bill and the draw from savings. Those items will still need to be funded later.
The biggest remaining item in the bill is $129.6 million to refill the state’s higher education investment fund, which was drained last year amid a veto-involved dispute between the Legislature and governor.
The item that has garnered the most attention is smaller — $70.2 million that would be used to match federal grants for highway construction.
The state’s construction industry has been lobbying heavily for the Legislature to approve that money early so companies can make plans for the summer construction season.
“There is no way I would ever vote to gamble the future of our construction and oil and gas industry on months of oil prices in the most volatile market and geopolitical conditions of my lifetime,” said Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage.
Fields said any delay has a cost: “Even if oil prices come in higher for the rest of the year, the Department of Transportation cannot put out bids based on price forecasts. They have to have a budget bill passed by us.”
Without firm projects, construction companies cannot make hiring decisions, he said.
“This is now a starvation year for the construction industry,” Fields said.
The postponement preserves some political leverage for the 19 Republican members of the House minority. Because 30 votes are needed to spend from the reserve and there are 21 lawmakers in the coalition majority, money can’t be spent from the reserve without at least nine minority members in support.
After the floor vote, House Minority Leader DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, said the vote was not about leverage, but, but that the minority voted to protect savings ahead of Friday’s forecast.
She pointed out that as currently written, the bill would have authorized lawmakers to spend hundreds of millions of dollars from the reserve, regardless of how much extra money the state earns from the Iran war.
“What we were really doing is making sure that we didn’t just give a full, free opportunity to take money from our savings and spend $378 million without any controls whatsoever.”
Republican lawmakers said they had not seen the revenue forecast yet, but expressed confidence in increasing oil prices, despite uncertainty around the Iran war.
“There’s a saying in the infantry, ‘no plan survives first contact with the enemy,’ right? So I don’t know what’s going to happen with the Iran war,” said Rep. Will Stapp, R-Fairbanks and a veteran of the Iraq war.
“I can tell you, there’s been a lot of oil and gas infrastructure that has been blown up, and you generally can’t rebuild that stuff in a day,” he said. “So I don’t expect, personally, oil to be like $150. It is going to be higher than it was three weeks ago, probably for a while.”
But members of the House majority were clearly frustrated by the delay.
“Volatility is a 10 out of 10 right now,” said Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham. “I’ve never seen a responsible finance committee or responsible leadership in the House make such an effort to gamble on the future in terms of oil prices.”
Rep. Calvin Schrage, D-Anchorage, serves as co-chair of the House Finance Committee.
He pointed to past forecasts where revenues did not materialize and budgets had to be revised, and called the minority members’ move irresponsible.
“That’s what they were suggesting today, that we rely on a forecast — unrealized, unpredictable, uncertain money to finance a budget when industry and Alaskans are asking for certainty. I mean, as recently as last year, we saw the folly of that sort of budgeting methodology, and it’s irresponsible.”








