The Alaska Senate has approved a measure that would lower the requirement for overriding a governor’s veto of spending bills. If passed by the House and subsequently approved by Alaska voters, the change would alter the state’s constitution.

Lowering the Override Threshold

Currently, the Alaska Legislature requires a three-fourths majority – 45 of 60 votes – to override a veto of revenue and appropriation bills. The proposed resolution seeks to reduce this threshold to two-thirds, aligning it with the requirement for other types of overrides.

Bipartisan Support and Opposition

The resolution passed the Senate with exactly the 14 votes needed to advance a proposed constitutional amendment. This vote occurred along caucus lines, with the bipartisan majority supporting the change. However, the Republican minority caucus strongly opposes the measure.

Senate Minority Leader Mike Cronk, a Tok Republican, stated that the current high threshold “is high for a reason,” reflecting the framers’ intent to grant the governor significant control over state spending. The minority caucus called the resolution a “short-sighted and retaliatory push.”

Constitutional Amendment Process

The resolution’s sponsor, Anchorage Democrat Sen. Matt Claman, emphasized that it is easier to present a constitutional amendment to voters than to successfully override a fiscal veto. He also noted that Alaska currently has the highest veto override threshold of any state.

Claman stated, “I would suggest that having this three-quarters requirement over time has actually undermined the balance of power between the Legislature and the executive.”

Next Steps and Timeline

The resolution now moves to the House of Representatives for consideration. House leadership from both parties have indicated that the resolution has not yet been discussed within their caucuses.

If the House approves the resolution with a two-thirds vote, it will be placed on the ballot for the November 2026 general election. Alaska voters last approved a constitutional amendment in 2004. As a constitutional amendment, the governor does not have the power to veto the resolution.

This action occurs during the final term of Gov. Mike Dunleavy, who has frequently used his veto power during his time in office.