The intent of Hawaii’s public campaign finance options was to limit the influence of private money in the elections process, an ideal that’s still valid today.
But competing with well-heeled competitors was tough, and it’s been all but abandoned as an option, especially in the current era of super-PACs.
The need for "clean elections" reform remains as strong as ever, however. People have a civic duty to be engaged, but many conclude that financial barriers have made it too hard to play a meaningful role in government.
The encouraging development in the midst of this is the progress of House Bill 2533. If the bill is enacted, public financing would be an option for state House candidates beginning with the 2016 elections.
It’s a successor to the pilot project in Hawaii County Council campaigns. That program ran in 2010 and 2012 but stalled in September, when the Hawaii Election Campaign Fund balance, overseen by the state Campaign Spending Commission, fell too low. There is now $2.9 million in the fund to underwrite public campaigns, below the mandated minimum of $3.5 million.
Commission staff said donations made to the fund through the state tax form have dwindled. Also, it’s now being tapped for about $600,000 in annual commission administrative costs, said Kory Payne, executive director of the nonprofit advocacy group Voter Owned Hawaii.
That funding shortfall will have to be resolved before HB 2533 becomes law. Advocates propose that administrative costs become a state budget expense, rather than draining funds for campaigns. This makes some sense, considering that the other revenue raised by the commission — the fines assessed for campaign law violations — was redirected to the general fund years ago.
The bill has passed the House Judiciary Committee; at its next stop before House Finance, an appropriation should be added to raise the campaign fund to at least minimum levels.
The system basically would work like this: Candidates contemplating a publicly financed run would be allowed to use up to $3,000 in private "seed money" to underwrite initial exploratory efforts. Once they commit to run, they must apply by garnering signatures and $5 donations from each of at least 200 residents of their district.
Then, assuming the commission certifies their candidacy, they qualify for an allotment from the election fund. Roughly, it amounts to an average expenditure by a candidate in the same district in a previous election cycle.
Qualified candidates will be able to raise some limited private funds, according to the bill, but only $50 per person; donors can be solicited statewide.
The citizen-funded campaign option represents just the tiniest reversal of the dispiriting election trends of recent years. But the state House is a critical entry point into government for new political actors. This state needs new leadership, and owes its prospective candidates a clearer path to the door.
