Corporate lid on contributions should be maintained

THE ISSUE The House has killed a proposal to lift the state's cap on political campaign contributions by corporations.

A protest by a coalition of citizen groups led to the withdrawal of a House bill that would have opened the floodgates to corporation contributions to political candidates. Legislators should await the final ruling in a court challenge of the state's ceiling on such donations before clarifying the limit or, better yet, prohibiting corporate donations altogether.

The 2005 law was intended to prevent corporations, labor unions or other organizations from contributing a total of more than $2,000 -- $1,000 during the primary and $1,000 in the general election -- to all candidates in an election year. When the Campaign Spending Commission ruled that Maui Mayor Charmaine Tavares had improperly accepted contributions exceeding the limit, Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza struck down the ruling.

The commission's appeal of Cardoza's ruling is before the state Intermediate Court of Appeals. The appellate court's decision will determine if legislation is needed to clarify the law. In the meantime, some legislators have tried to backtrack, saying the caps were not their intention.

Last year's Senate approved a bill to eliminate the caps but it failed in the House after citizen activists voiced opposition and support evaporated. A similar bill was endorsed this year by the House Judiciary Committee but withdrawn this week from the full House after proponents realized they again lacked the votes needed for approval.

Limits on corporate contributions are neither unconstitutional nor unusual. The First Amendment keeps the government from limiting the amount that a person can contribute to political campaigns, but the government can limit what a candidate may receive in individual contributions.

Corporations are not protected by the First Amendment in amounts they can contribute to campaigns. Congress has banned corporate contributions in federal elections since 1907 and included labor unions in its prohibition in the 1940s. Corporate contributions are against the law in 22 states.

Barbara Wong, executive director of the Campaign Spending Commission, warned that the bill before the House would have supported "the absurd results of the court's ruling that corporations can use unlimited funds from their treasury to make contributions." Unless the appeals court expedites its review and overturns Cardoza's ruling, the absurdity could apply to this year's election.

Senate President Colleen Hanabusa has said that incumbent legislators rely on donations from corporations for campaign money. Hanabusa, who authored the original law, maintains that it was not intended to limit a corporation's entire campaign expenditure to $1,000.

If that is the case, the 2005 Legislature did the right thing by mistake, although true clarification -- and nothing more -- might be necessary.