One we've just been talking about is the oil price in the next fiscal year. I happen to think it is politically shrewd of her to submit an optimistic price forecast ($74.41) while showing a moderate amount of belt-tightening on the expense side. If her political opponents scream too much, she can agree to a lower revenue forecast and can then further slash the budget saying "they made me do it". If the $74 number stays in and the actual price comes in much lower, she's going to have to slash expenses anyway or borrow from the CBR or some other source. She'll get the blame. She's probably hoping to be "forced" to lower the number during the budget cycle...LOL. All this is JMO.
The other longer-term issue is the prospect of declining output from the North Slope with no new oil drilling on the horizon because of environmental opposition. That's why the gasline is so critical. She's taking a big risk by the approach she took to get the project off dead center. There's still plenty of entrenched opposition that could throw a monkey wrench into the whole operation. With no appreciable movement towards the gasline being a reality for the last 30 years, she felt she had to do something.
The lady's got a ton of guts, one of her most enduring attributes IMO (out of many). Alaskans are a lucky bunch to have her. Wish we could all share in her leadership. Maybe next time.
I disagree. Alaska has normally based their budgets on numbers far more conservative basis.
Graph of previous numbers and estimates.
http://www.legfin.state.ak.us/Charts/Matterhorn_OIL_Forecast_vs_Actual_11-26-08.pdf
This is (in my opinion) over the top optimistic and not supported by number out of any analysis (IEA or EIA for example.
If the $74 number stays in and the actual price comes in much lower, she's going to have to slash expenses anyway or borrow from the CBR
To look at the data of today and pretend you won't have to do that is poor planing. Cutting government spending should always be done when it is first reconquest, not based upon the numbers might get better later.
With no appreciable movement towards the gasline being a reality for the last 30 years
There was an agreement by the producers signed just before she came into office. She threw it out. In my opinion, she set the process back 2 years. The current plan still requires those same producers to build the gathering facilities and Natural Gas Treatment plant and has no agreement with them.
The lady's got a ton of guts
Agreed. I believe she holds to principled conservative values on most issues. But not quite enough on some, in my opinion.