ADN, or anyone else reading this, please explain Wielechowski's position.  

The Constitution allows for a permanent fund, but it also says "All income from the permanent fund shall be deposited in the general fund unless otherwise provided by law."  So... the protected part of the fund is the fund itself, the distribution of which is a matter of law, which is not the same as a constitutionally protected distribution of funds.

Without getting into the good-bad of it, can anyone explain to me the how of it?  I've read the brief, and I still don't fully understand the argument.