Bid to subdue
isle campaign
spending is born

Proposals intended to level
the playing field among candidates
will go before Hawaii legislators

By Mike Yuen
Star-Bulletin

If the state Campaign Spending Commission has its way, monetary peaks in the political landscape will be bulldozed, leveling the playing field on which candidates would run.

Voters, for instance, would learn about large, last-minute contributions to candidates before an election -- not after.

Deep-pocket donors won't find it as easy to throw their money into campaigns, as limits would be significantly lowered.

Candidates won't be able to carry over a hefty campaign war chest for their next elections after completing an electoral bid.

And there would be new regulations for not just candidates and incumbent officeholders to follow, but also for political parties, lobbyists, businesses and labor unions.

The proposed changes are in a commission-backed bill that will be before the Legislature when it convenes Jan. 20. The recommendations will be seen as drastic by some, conceded Anthony Baldomero Jr., associate director of the Campaign Spending Commission. But, he added, the proposals are in large part based on rules at the federal level and in California, Minnesota and Arkansas.

The proposals are being pushed as campaign spending in Hawaii and just about everywhere else is seen as spiraling out of control.

"This has turned into an arms war," said Ira Rohter, an associate professor of political science at the University of Hawaii who is also a leader of the Hawaii Green Party. "How many hours (of campaign commercials) did we need to see of Gov. Ben Cayetano?"

Cayetano spent more than $4.8 million on his re-election bid, while his Republican challenger, Linda Lingle, spent more than $3.1 million.

Senate Judiciary Co-Chairman Matt Matsunaga (D, Palolo) said he will likely introduce the bill to stimulate discussion.

It would be a step in the right direction, Matsunaga said, if campaign spending regulations are as stringent as those on the federal level.

"As long as we don't impair free speech, I don't see any problem with leveling the playing the field. Generally speaking, I think it is fair to say that the younger and newer lawmakers are more receptive to the concept of leveling the playing field," said Matsunaga, 40, who was elected to the state Senate in 1992.

Leaders of the state Democratic and Republican parties, however, cautioned that the commission's effort could have unintended consequences that could hurt rather than help the political process.

"I tell you what bothers me the most about this contribution and spending curtailment," said Democratic Party Chairman Walter Heen. "It gives to the print media, especially, a large opportunity to sway public opinion without the targets of the media having an opportunity to make their case, which they can with advertising."

Heen said he believes that the state's two major daily newspapers, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser, both which endorsed Lingle, were biased against Cayetano. Therefore, Cayetano had to rely on paid advertising, Heen said.

Star-Bulletin Managing Editor David Shapiro, Advertiser Editor Jim Gatti and State GOP Executive Director Jesse Yescalis dispute Heen's claim that the Honolulu dailies were slanted against Cayetano.

"I think Walter's usually clear vision is fogged on this one," Shapiro said. "I'm satisfied that our news coverage during the campaign was extremely fair to the governor and his opponent."

Gatti said the Advertiser provided "objective and balanced" coverage of the gubernatorial campaign.

However, Yescalis concurs with Heen in believing that the proposals pushed by the Campaign Spending Commission could result in giving the media a more influential role in elections.

The U.S. Supreme Court has said there can be no spending limits when noncandidate committees comment on a race without directly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate.

But if spending and contribution limits are placed on candidates, they face the danger of losing control of the message they want to give to voters, Yescalis said.

"The core issue is: Who will be responsible for delivering the message? The candidate or the political parties or special interests or the media?" Yescalis said.

Garen Deweese, a lobbyist for the state's largest public workers union, the Hawaii Government Employees Association, said he has yet to see the commission's proposals.

But, he said, he views the union's membership -- and not so much the political contributions HGEA might make -- as its greatest resource. HGEA's members can provide the manpower and votes to help HGEA-endorsed candidates, Deweese said.

Under the commission's proposal, businesses and labor unions would be prohibited from making contributions directly to candidates. They would have to establish and administer separate political action funds, which some businesses and unions have already done voluntarily.

---

Campaign reform

Here's what the state Campaign Spending Commission is proposing to lessen the influence of money on elections:

Require contributions of $500 or more that are received within 15 days of the primary or general election to be disclosed within 24 hours so that they're revealed before an election.

Prohibit candidates, including incumbent state lawmakers, from holding fund-raisers during the legislative session, a period long used for soliciting contributions.

Prohibit businesses and labor unions from making direct contributions to candidates; businesses and unions would be required to establish and administer a separate political action fund.

Require all candidates, whether they won or lost, to dispose of surplus funds within 90 days of an election to prevent the stockpiling of funds for a subsequent election.

Require legislative candidates to file campaign spending reports electronically, to match the requirement for candidates for governor, lieutenant governor, mayor, county prosecutor and council.

Slash by 50 percent what an individual can give to candidates, meaning that gubernatorial hopefuls would get a maximum of $3,000 instead of $6,000 and mayoral candidates would get $2,000 instead of $4,000.

Lower the maximum amount an individual can give to political parties to $10,000 from the current $50,000.

Establish an aggregate limit of $25,000 that an individual can give to candidates each year; political parties would be excluded from the limitation.

Prohibit contributions from state or county contractors.