Among the 17 bills on Gov. Josh Green’s intent-to-veto list, House Bill 2581 strikes close to the heart for media organizations — whether radio, television or newspaper outlets, which now reach as many or more readers via electronic (digital) means as with paper. HB 2581 is a measure that protects free speech and communications during a state of emergency, and the governor is urged to restrain from vetoing it.

HB 2581 would eliminate current state law specifying that a governor or a mayor “may … to the extent permitted by or under federal law, suspend electronic media transmission” during a state of emergency. As the Legislature determined in crafting HB 2581, the existing law is “overly broad and vague,” and could affect “not only all radio and television broadcasts, but also could potentially include text messages, emails and posts to social media platforms, which would restrain lawful free speech and publication.”

To be fair, current law also specifies that federal law (including the First Amendment) applies to Hawaii’s statute; nonetheless, its broad language does increase the potential for mayors or a governor to decide it’s within their power create a complete communications blackout.

Justification for such a blackout could only arise under the most extreme, dire circumstances. If such circumstances should arise, under terrorist attack and/or takeover of communications channels, for example, eliminating the statutory language doesn’t ban this extreme step. The governor must recognize this, and allow HB 2581 to escape veto.

Conversely, another emergency-powers bill on Green’s list does deserve to be vetoed. Senate Bill 2512 would establish unnecessary reporting requirements related to emergency proclamations that seem more designed to jam up the system than to make operations more efficient.

This attempt to essentially hobble governors who declare an emergency by requiring that they fill out extra reports is clearly pushback against executive use of emergency powers. However, if the Legislature finds that the governor’s emergency powers are too broad, the way to deal with that is to restrict those powers — not to require “notice to the Legislature not less than 14 days before the date of expenditure or use,” or “a report to the legislature within five days of each exercise of this authority.”

SB 2512 appears to be an attempt by legislators to show that it controls the show, and Green would be justified in this veto.

Another reasonable veto would be of House Bill 1763, which would prevent the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corp. (HHFDC) from providing grants or forgiving loans from its rental housing fund to build affordable housing as it now does — an ill-advised move when affordable housing is among the state’s greatest needs.

If enacted, HB 1763 could lead to an overall slowdown in affordable housing construction; it would prohibit the HHFDC from forgiving any loan made from the state’s Rental Housing Revolving Fund, unless foreclosing on a project. It eliminates grants, and at the same time, restricts loans from the fund by setting priority for projects that are perpetually affordable — in other words, public housing, or projects on public land.

These restrictions interfere with HHFDC’s discretion in distributing loans and grants to public, private, nonprofit or for-profit developers, and eliminates the potential for affordable housing that may be most efficiently developed on privately owned property or by a private developer.

The fate of these bills and the 14 others on Green’s intent-to-veto list will become clear by July 10, the deadline for final decisions. If the Legislature strongly disagrees with a veto decision, leaders can call a special session and seek to override a veto with a two-thirds majority vote.