The Committee on Judiciary and Government Operation (JGO) heard a number of bills on ranging from fireworks importation to procurement of meats and vegetables. The bill of interest for me was HB2003— Relating to Campaign Financing. The stated intent of the bill is "to ensure the integrity and transparency of the campaign finance process" in order to "promote the public's confidence in government." The bill goes into great detail about:
— the specific definitions of what constitutes the various types of campaigning ("advertisements", "contributions", "expenditures", "fundraiser", etc.),
— the duties and obligations of the Campaign Spending Commission,
— registration of candidate committees and non-candidate committees
— reporting and filing with the committee
— Contributions, prohibitions, and limits
— loans to candidate committees
— partial public financing
The first testimony came from Barbara Wong of the Campaign Spending Commission strongly in favor of the bill but with a few definition clarification suggestions. Next up was Jim Haley from Ola Hawai'i 2020 (I believe; I couldn't find their site anywhere). The last testimony came from Nikki Love from Common Cause. She pointed out that this bill is the only campaign finance bill still alive in this session of the Legislature.
Ms. Love had six main suggestions for the bill:
1) limit corporate donations to candidates to an aggregate per-election total of $1,000
2) ensure transparency for any corporate donations by making them go through a non-candidate committee (or PAC)
— that requirement is currently missing from the legislation
— Ms. Love also pointed out that all three candidates for the 1st District House of Representatives seat (Charles Djou, Ed Case, and Colleen Hanabusa) supported the idea of more transparency in campaign financing.
3) keep the Pay-to-Play Law Intact (prohibiting government contractors from donating to campaigns)
4) keep the provision that articulates that any ambiguity in the law should be construed in favor of transparency
5) keep mainland contributions to a 20% limit rather than the 30% proposed in HB2003 HD3
6) prevent candidates from donating additional campaign funds to schools and libraries which would give incumbents an unfair advantage over electoral challengers; such donations should be handled through sound public policy and/or philanthropy
Sen. Sam Slom had some follow-up questions for Ms. Love about why unions' contributions weren't included in her testimony. Ms. Love clarified that they should be but since corporations tend to donate far more to political campaigns than unions, corporate participation seemed to be the bigger threat at this time. Sen. Slom disagreed and argued that unions can and do contribute as much, but he didn't offer any evidence of that. That just might be something we will want to look into a bit further.
The JGO committee voted to table the bill until Tuesday, March 30.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I find it hard to believe (as I include myself as one of the cynical many with regard to our elected officials) that any politician would vote for a bill that would limit their ability to raise money. What we need to impress on these people is that not only is it the right thing to do for the integrity of democracy, but if they can get out front on such an issue as campaign finance, they can become the face that people associate with someone who is trying to fix the system rather than take advantage of it. It worked for John McCain (well, almost) so who will be the face of democratic integrity in Hawaii? Brian Schatz?
ReplyDelete