Our view: Oil taxes, gas lines

But we're not quite in the same place.

For the governor, the biggest change from last year has been his conclusion that Alaska's better gas line choice is one to tidewater that will both provide natural gas to Alaskans and tap the Asian export market. To that end, he has set specific gas line milestones in his state of the state speech -- a series of milestones he wants the North Slope producers to reach by the end of the year.

That's a departure from his previous policy. The governor has been in touch with the producers' CEOs and it will be interesting to see if they're prepared to toe his marks.

Second, while the governor has repeated his call for substantial oil tax reform, it's clear that the Senate will craft its own oil tax legislation. Senate President Gary Stevens, who clashed with Parnell last year by refusing to back the oil tax reduction passed by the House, expects a Senate bill soon. While both Stevens and Parnell spoke of common cause on Tuesday, Stevens made clear that any Senate bill won't be like House Bill 110 of 2011.

That's good. Alaskans should keep three things in mind during this renewed debate.

• It's Alaska's oil. Our constitution makes clear that Alaska's resource wealth belongs to Alaska and is to be developed and conserved for the benefit of all Alaskans. We need to make sure we're getting the most we can for that resource, both for the present and the future. The governor is right in that it's wise to sacrifice short-term gain if that yields long-term prosperity.

The question is not whether Alaskans are willing to do that. We are. The question is just how much short-term gain we need to give up -- and in what manner -- to guarantee that long-term prosperity.

• And that question leads to this question: If Alaska changes the ACES tax regime, specifically what does Alaska get in return? That question was not answered last year. Visions of billions and talk of more investment are not the same as public commitments to invest. We know what the producers get. They make a lot more money, for sure. What's the certainty for the state?

That's why some critics of a major ACES overhaul have insisted that tax credits -- even generous credits -- for exploration and development make more sense. With such credits, at least we know (or should) both what we're giving up and what we're getting in return. Rep. Berta Gardner is backing a bill to get a better fix on those numbers.

• Finally, as we've said before, ACES wasn't writ on tablets of stone and carried down from the mountain. If Alaska clearly benefits by amending ACES, then our lawmakers should amend it. But we should do so with a clear, cold eye and a solid deal, not as an act of faith. Good will is wonderful. Get it in writing. This is business.

And politics. The congeniality of Alaska's state of the state night was in evidence Wednesday. That may not last, but it's a good start. Let's see where the Senate goes from here.

BOTTOM LINE: It's the Senate's turn to tackle oil taxes and production.