Scores of private companies, nonprofit groups and state agencies will divvy up more than $412 million this year in earmarked federal funds that were designated by one or more of Hawaii's four members of Congress.

That's $318 for every Hawaii resident, the largest per capita amount in the nation, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

But that largesse could shrink considerably in coming years if new earmarking policies recently enacted by the House Democratic and Republican caucuses come to fruition.

House Democrats announced they will no longer sponsor earmarks for for-profit firms—a category that accounted this year for about 1,000 earmarks worth $1.7 billion. House Republicans upped the ante by saying they will initiate no earmarks whatsoever—though only for fiscal year 2011 appropriations bills.

However, Hawaii Democrat Daniel Inouye, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and other influential senators have criticized the House reforms. Inouye and U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka voted Tuesday to kill a Senate proposal to bar earmarks next year.

“;If the Senate doesn't play ball, it'll have virtually no effect on Hawaii because the earmarks that are obtained by the state are almost purely driven by Sen. Inouye,”; said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

But if Congress ends up significantly curtailing earmarks, the state could see a lot less money flowing in, particularly for military contractors, said Jim Tollefson, who heads the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii.

“;We want to see the cost of government come down,”; he said. “;However, earmarks have been very good for Hawaii, and any reduction in earmarks will be detrimental to the economy, especially in this period of economic upheaval.”;

Others contend it's time Hawaii weaned itself off earmarks.

“;We've grown too reliant on federal money in general,”; said Jamie Story, president of the Grassroot Institute. The House reforms are “;a victory for taxpayers because we pay for these earmarks ourselves. It's not free money.”;

Most of the spending earmarked for Hawaii in recent years was due to Inouye, who also heads the defense appropriations subcommittee.

The $392 million in earmarks he sponsored or co-sponsored this year was the second-highest total in the Senate. He makes no apologies, casting earmarks as a result of the spending authority the Constitution places in the legislative branch.

“;I don't believe this policy or ceding authority to the executive branch on any spending decision is in the best interests of the Congress or the American people,”; he said in a statement in response to the House Democrats' decision.

He insisted his for-profit earmarks are all subject to competition, though his aides did not respond to queries about the process.

Akaka and U.S. Rep. Mazie Hirono also have sponsored many earmarks over the years. Democrat Neil Abercrombie did so as well before he resigned his U.S. House seat last month to run for governor.

The ban on for-profit earmarks will make it harder to promote research and technology in Hawaii that can generate jobs and economic growth, said Hirono.

“;I consider it my job to respond to needs that are brought to me by my district,”; she said. “;If we don't do that, then we truly are ceding all decision-making power to the executive branch, and I don't think that's very good.”;

Inouye and Akaka declined comment.

In addition to the $412 million in Hawaii earmarks, the state will get another $359 million in other earmarks that were backed by the Obama administration and, in many cases, Hawaii lawmakers, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Hawaii nonprofit groups that received earmarks say they are concerned those funds might dry up.

An after-school program for rural communities could be eliminated if the $1.25 million that is earmarked for it disappears, said David Nakada, executive director of the Boys and Girls Club of Hawaii.

“;I can tell you that on the neighbor islands where we have provided these services, there literally are no services for those kids,”; he said.

The three major candidates to fill the 1st Congressional District seat vacated by Abercrombie take varied approaches to earmarks.

Democrats Ed Case and Colleen Hanabusa and Republican Charles Djou agree that the earmarking process should be more transparent.

Djou, however, said all earmarks should end until the federal budget deficit is a smaller percentage of the gross domestic product. Once that occurs, spending on earmarks should be offset with cuts elsewhere, he added.

Case agrees with the House Democrats' actions and contended there is a “;growing connection”; between earmarks and political contributions. Thus, he said he would bar contributions from employees of companies that receive earmarks.

Hanabusa opposes efforts to curtail or eliminate earmarks, saying Hawaii needs such spending, especially in rough economic times.