������Ƶ

It was exactly two years ago that revelations of government corruption prompted House Speaker Scott Saiki to appoint an independent commission to study how the Legislature should clean up its act.

Bribery convictions of two former legislators had just shaken up the State Capitol in mid-session. Saiki immediately proclaimed the need “to rebuild integrity and trust in our legislative process” while Senate President Ron Kouchi said the crimes “cast a pall over the Legislature and the work we are trying to accomplish.”

After meeting frequently for most of 2022, the Commission to Improve Standards of Conduct concluded that the problems went well beyond a couple of cases of bribery.

It was right. Legislative leaders conduct much of the people’s business behind closed doors and wield near-dictatorial powers in open committee meetings and especially during the secret negotiations that dominate each session’s final days. Some are beholden to special interests that funnel so much money into their campaign war chests that they are virtually unbeatable when they seek reelection.

Citing a “deep moral crisis” that had eroded the people’s faith in their leaders, commission members recommended dozens of changes to improve ethics and transparency at the Capitol. When the Legislature convened in 2023, the push for reform seemed to have momentum.

Some modest and mid-size accomplishments were achieved. But the major proposals coming from the commission and other good-government advocates were shot down that session, and most have already died this session as well.

If you listened to some legislators and even some of the former standards commission members, you might have thought the 2023 session was a big one for government reform.

After all that talk about rebuilding trust, state lawmakers could be going into election season with little of consequence they can point to when it comes to reform.

Or, they could pass the one piece of game-changing legislation that is still alive. There’s a lot riding on , which would set up full public financing of election campaigns beginning in 2028.

The measure sailed through the Senate with unanimous approval Tuesday. Does that make it a safe bet to clear the Legislature this year? Hardly. Last year was overwhelmingly approved by both chambers but still died without any public explanation in the dark days of conference committee.

Over-Celebrating The Little Things

If you listened to some legislators and even some of the former standards commission members, you might have thought the 2023 session was a big one for government reform.

Truth be told, it was only a big year for talking about reform.

Civil Beat recently asked one of those commission members to identify its most important recommendation that actually became law. He came up with the approval of a plan to start producing an online voters guide.

We applaud the action, but it was long overdue — most states already have such guides.

Some measures to strengthen restrictions on campaign contributions and lobbying were also approved, but others weren’t. The state Campaign Spending Commission has resurrected a bill to prohibit public officials from accepting campaign contributions during legislative sessions, but so far neither nor its companion, , has been scheduled for a committee hearing with a Friday deadline approaching.

The commission also brought back an important proposal to prohibit campaign contributions by state or county contractors or grantees, as well as their officers and immediate family members. But also lacks a hearing date so far in the Judiciary Committee, and a companion bill has already run out of time in the House.

Meanwhile, the major reform proposals other than public financing of campaigns are dead — again. They include:

— , which proposed asking voters to approve a constitutional amendment to create a year-round Legislature. The current 60-day session is ridiculously rushed, and the time constraints encourage political power plays while discouraging reasonable discourse. The measure would also have applied the Sunshine Law for open meetings to the Legislature, ending its secrecy.

— , which would have asked voters to decide on another constitutional amendment, this one to establish statewide citizens initiatives. Hawaii is the only Western state that doesn’t allow voters to go over the heads of the Legislature to enact new laws.

— , putting yet another constitutional amendment to voters to see if they want to establish legislative term limits. We’re pretty sure they would (recall this 2018 Civil Beat poll), and in fact many rank-and-file state lawmakers also support term limits.

— Last year the standards commission proposed to establish a “Bill of Rights” setting out what citizens and state lawmakers alike should be able to expect from the Legislature. A new Office of the Public Advocate would have enforced those rights. House leaders killed the bill and later claimed they had added most of the proposed rights to the House rules. They hadn’t.

The Obstacles To Public Financing

The specter of across-the-board budget cuts in response to Maui wildfire expenses imperils any proposed new spending this session that’s not related to the disasters.

Sen. Karl Rhoads, the author of the public financing legislation, anticipated as much when he revised this year’s bill to delay implementation until the 2028 election. Thus most of the estimated cost of $30 million per election cycle would be paid down the road rather than at the same time as this year’s fire-related appropriations.

It also would be shortsighted to contend that leveling Hawaii’s political playing field has nothing to do with the wildfires. Among the many good-government organizations of SB 2381 was Lahaina Strong, which stated:

“Hawaii has witnessed the detrimental impacts of pay-to-play politics, and it has become increasingly evident how decades of failing to hold utility companies and large private landowners accountable have contributed to the environmental mismanagement that fueled the devastating fires. In light of these challenges, we must take proactive measures to address the root causes of these issues and create a political environment that prioritizes the needs of the community over corporate and special interests.”

Rep. Nadine Nakamura, the House majority leader, recently called the bill “flawed” and said it would disproportionately help Republican candidates. Rhoads disagreed, contending that Hawaii Democrats are traditionally better at generating the grassroots support that would be necessary to qualify for public funding. 

In fact, it would help all challengers — Republicans and Democrats — while also allowing incumbents to focus on issues instead of fundraising.

The real winners would be the voters, who would have the opportunity to cast ballots that matter in more closely contested primaries and general elections.

Dozens of legislative incumbents will be facing those voters in just a few months. Here’s hoping they can point to one major government reform that they actually helped push past the finish line this session.