Ideally, legislators in the Hawaii State Capitol, or any elected body, should be like the people in the communities that they represent. There are barriers preventing that from happening, though — in many cases, hundreds of thousands or even a few million of them: the dollars that it takes to run for office.
The financial demands of campaigning especially discourage diversity among candidates, tending to favor the well-connected incumbent over the younger political hopefuls who lack such networks.
Correcting that, and reducing the influence of monied interests in governing, are the benefits to the electorate of publicly funded campaigns.
There are now bills newly introduced in each chamber of the state Legislature aiming to create a more robust public campaign funding source, and they have drawn a pledge of support from Rep. Scott Saiki, speaker of the House.
That is a welcome piece of good news: It does help to have the House leader go on record with the pledge to hoist up what has always been a heavy lift, politically. Incumbents who benefit from the status quo often resist a so-called “clean elections” overhaul of the system that put them in office.
But there has been a renewed push behind it, starting last session with ethics reforms bills arising out of the scandal over former Senate Majority Leader J. Kalani English and former state Rep. Ty J.K. Cullen. Both lawmakers pleaded guilty to accepting bribes in 2022.
Even those incremental efforts fell short last year: Fundraising events during legislative sessions were banned — good — but what’s needed is a ban on any kind of donation-seeking efforts during that time, when monied interest groups can wield too much influence over key decisions.
Last year’s measure to bolster public campaign financing, Senate Bill 1543, sponsored by state Sen. Karl Rhoads, stalled in conference committee. The hope is that the new companion bills, Saiki’s House Bill 2328 and Rhoads’ SB 2381, can finally get to the finish line. These provisions would take effect in four years, and they would apply to state and county electoral races.
As noted in the bills’ introduction, some form of public campaign financing has existed in Hawaii since 1978, when a partial public funding program was added to the state Constitution.
The problem is that the options on the books are not generous enough to make those who use the funding competitive in elections, said Colin Moore, a political analyst. Very few politicians have opted to use it.
A report published by the University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization was authored by Moore, who is also a UH associate professor.
The new bills seek to level the playing field — or at least give the political novice a reasonably secure onramp. Candidates for the same race would receive identical amounts of state funds to run for state and county elective offices.
What’s now proposed ranges from the offering for gubernatorial candidates — $1.675 million for the primary election and $825,000 in the general — down to county council seats in a county with a population under 150,000. Candidates for those seats would receive $20,100 in the primary and $9,900 in the general, according to the bills.
This would be a crucial assist to those just starting out, especially in districts with less money available for private fundraising.
“Clean elections” laws of this kind have not been found to be a panacea in other states, and this legislation would not close off all access to private financing. But it could at least lessen the distraction and corruptive influence of fundraising on the political class, a benefit worthy of investment.
