Representatives Colleen Meyer and Gene Ward discuss Governor Linda Lingle’s Vetoes

Representatives Colleen Meyer and Gene Ward discuss Governor Linda Lingle’s list of 52 bills that she is considering for potential vetoes.
The Governor is required by statute to give the Legislature 10 days notice of any bill she is considering vetoing. This year the deadline to veto bills is July 8. Any bill on the potential veto list can still be signed by the Governor or allowed to become law without her signature. Placing the bills on the potential veto list allows the Governor additional time to deliberate, and provides additional opportunities for the public to voice their support or concern relating to the bills.
Governor Lingle pointed out that a number of bills on the list contain good programs; however, due to the State’s fiscal outlook and the fiscal impacts the programs would have on the State’s budget, she does not believe it would be prudent to implement them at this time. The Governor expressed optimism that the measures could be revisited when the state’s fiscal picture improves.
This year the Legislature passed 294 bills. Twelve bills were vetoed while the Legislature was still in session. For a complete list of bills that have become law this legislative session or to read the Governor’s statements of objections on bills already vetoed, visit the Governor’s Web site at: www.hawaii.gov/gov/leg/2008-session.
Public comments on the 52 bills being considered for vetoes on July 8 may be sent to the Governor’s office as follows:
Email: governor.lingle@hawaii.gov or gov.policy@hawaii.gov

The Electorial College

Representative Colleen Meyer discusses the Electoral College with Representative Gene Ward.
The Electoral College has been serving American politics for more than 200 years. But recently, due to a close election for the U.S. Presidency, some people at both the local and national level have been advocating a change in the way we elect our Presidents.So here we go again! House leadership has again introduced a bill (HB 3013) that will take away the advantage that a small state like Hawaii has over big states. It was introduced by the same person who chairs the Judiciary Committee (Rep. Tommy Waters). It has already passed a second reading with the Republican caucus voting “no,” but it has one more floor vote before it goes over to the Senate and Governor Lingle for signature.

This bill is another misinformed attempt to enable the winner of the presidential election to be determined by national popular vote rather than the Electoral College. The bill adds a new section to Chapter 14, Hawaii Revised Statutes, to enact agreement that allows member states to determine the winner of a presidential election by “national popular vote.” (HB3013 HD1)

Our founding fathers knew better. They understood the nuances of political contests, particularly the importance of small states and the possible tyranny of large states overwhelming national presidential elections. They understood especially how small states could be affected if only the popular voted counted. For example if one voted in Hawaii’s 2004 presidential election, it was a likely vote for John Kerry, but under the proposed new system, your vote would have gone to George W. Bush.
Likewise if someone in Hawaii’s 1988 presidential election voted for Michael Dukakis the vote would have only counted for Bush (Senior), and in Hawaii 1968 presidential election between Hubert Humphrey and Richard Nixon, a vote for Humphrey would have become a vote for Nixon. Is this the kind of ‘kapakahi’ results we want in Hawaii?
The best description in understanding the Electoral College is a sports analogy. In baseball’s World Series, for example, the team that scores the most runs overall is like a candidate who gets the most votes. But to become the World Series champion, it is the team that wins the most games who becomes the winner of the series. So no matter how many runs (votes) you get, you still have to win the most games (state ballots). No one calls the World Series unfair just because the team that got the most runs loses, right? It is all about the games, just like in politics it is all about the states.
Another downside for our nation with a proposed plurality ballot would be that “urban America,” particularly the large states on the east coast (e.g. New York) and west coast (e.g. California) will be the dominant player at the expense of “rural America.” Stated differently, imagine the urban core of Honolulu deciding for the entire state of Hawaii who should be our next governor and you can see how this allows a national advantage of large states and large cities to dominate. I believe the values of farmers and small town Americans are just as important (if not more important) as big city values and voters, so the Electoral College is the best way to filter for these differences.
The current Electoral College strengthens the status of minority groups, because the votes of small minorities within a state may make the difference between winning all of a state’s electoral votes or none of them. It enhances the political stability of the nation by promoting a two-party system that protects that presidency from impassioned but transitory third party movements, and forces the major parties to absorb the interests of small states and minorities; and it maintains the federal system of government and representation. Each state is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Representatives, plus its two senators, so Hawai`i has four electoral votes. All states have at least three electoral votes, no matter how small they are.
Hawaii needs more tax relief for our over-burdened families, expanding access to quality healthcare while reversing the financial problems plaguing our doctors and hospitals, developing more transitional shelters and affordable housing while fixing potholes, harbors and airports; we do not need some national agenda about a grudge match to distract us from the tasks at hand.
As the smallest state in the nation, it does not seem strategically wise to give up our comparative advantage offered us by the Electoral College. House Bill 3013 HD1 asks us to do this. Last year a similar bill was vetoed by Governor Lingle. The only thing left to say about this bill is: “Mahalo for your veto, Governor, get your pen ready for this year too. for your veto, Governor, get your pen ready for this year too.

Aloha Airlines Crisis Will Test Emergency Powers by Rep. Gene Ward

If the rumors heard at the state capitol are true, then some of my colleges have lost all their sense of reality.  Over the past few days, the media has reported that the Senate will consider offering a bail-out to Aloha Airlines.  Senators from the majority have proposed giving Aloha loan guarantees, waiving their landing fees, and eliminating the excise tax on their jet fuel.  They have called upon the Governor under the guise of an “emergency” to use state funds (or lack thereof) to prop-up this private company. 

            The sad irony of this episode comes from the attention that my majority colleagues are giving this “emergency.”  While the majority intends to subsidize a failing business, they have repeatedly denied that our state has faced homeless crises that have called for real emergency actions.  Why would the majority make such an absurd disclaimer?  Why does a failing business qualify as an emergency, while homelessness does not? 

             The answer is Governor Lingle.  The majority performs these political and intellectual gymnastics because of the phobia known as IFOL, or the Irrational Fear of Lingle.   For the past six-years, the majority in the state legislature has made it a habit of trying to prevent the Governor from taking actions and enacting reforms which would greatly benefit our state.  A specific target of the majority’s ire has been the Governor’s emergency powers, the actions she has taken to handle actual crises that have we have faced.   For example, Governor Lingle used such an action to help the homeless following the abrupt closure of Ala Moana Beach Park-an incident that the majority now denies as an emergency.  Evidently, the majority’s IFOL condition has now led to grand delusions. 

            Because of what she did for the homeless, she has been threatened by a bill to strip her of emergency powers as governor.  Senate Bill 2828 would require the Governor, before taking action in response to a disaster not caused by an enemy attack, to submit a report verifying that the emergency has produced “tangible and measurable harm or damage” as “resulted as a consequence of the disaster and that the disaster relief could not otherwise be achieved through legislation enacted in the next occurring regular session of the legislature or a special session of the legislature.”   Only after jumping through these bureaucratic hoops could Governor Lingle then use her emergency powers to tend to such an event.  If the legislature finds that relieving the disaster can be achieved through legislation, then “the governor shall not execute any action to further provide for disaster relief under this chapter.”  This bill would turn the executive into a reactive office, eliminating its preventative powers, and there are no provisions in this bill allowing for executive actions while emergency legislation is in debate. 

             Senate Bill 2828 literally puts public safety in jeopardy and ties the Governor’s hands to rapidly respond to a crisis without first filing “Findings” or a report to the legislature.  However, this is only the latest IFOL measure that has been heard at the state capitol this session.  A few weeks ago we heard House Bill 2686 which now sits in the Senate.  This bill would also curb the authority of the governor’s state agencies at the expense of legislative power.  It all started in 2005 when the legislature passed Senate Bill 1808 over the Governor’s veto.  This bill prevented Gov. Lingle from enacting administrative rules which would have reformed workers’ compensation laws; laws that are hurting Hawaiian laborers and businesses.   Also in that same year, House Bill 1224 was passed over a veto and took away the Governor’s power to appoint members to the Hawaii Simplified Sales and Use Tax Advisory Council.  The executive is now hindered from making sure that Hawaii complies with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement.  Just this past year, the legislature passed, once again over a veto, Senate Bill 1063, changing the procedures for filling vacancies in the State Legislature and U.S. Senate.  The Governor now must select a replacement from a list submitted by the political party of the former incumbent, giving further power to political parties and taking away public accountability, while preventing the replacement from taking place in a timely manner.  Ditto this same process for the University of Hawaii’s Board of Regents selection process. 

            The events of this week with Aloha Airlines filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy brings all of this into focus. Though for the past six-years it has been the compulsive behavior of the majority to undermine the efforts of the Governor, this week it suddenly appears convenient to pass the buck back to her while wringing their hands about an airline emergency. If the present legislation in this 2008 Session passes taking away her emergency powers, then real emergencies, like the homeless crises, hurricanes, earthquakes, floods-may receive only sluggish, burdensome, and ineffective relief.  But if Aloha Airlines fails after the legislature passes SB 2828 and takes away the Governor’s emergency powers, whose fault will it be? The State Legislature needs to let Governor Lingle do what all previous governors have been allowed to do – govern the state of Hawaii without tying their hands to the legislative branch.              

Gene Ward is Co-Chair of the Small Business Caucus and a member of the Finance Committee in the State House of Representatives

Cost Of Living

In the State of Hawaii, the Republican Caucus and the Lingle-Aiona Administration remains committed to reducing the cost of living for working families and low income residents.  Representative Gene Ward examines with Senator Gordon Trimble the pricing index.  Hawaii Expenditures have risen 87 percent in the last three years.

Governor’s Emergency Powers

 Representatives Kymberly Pine and Gene Ward discuss the “insane” attempt of the Democratic caucus bills introduction to limit Governor Lingle’s emergency power capabilities.

Medical Liability Reform

Republican Representatives Kymberly Pine and Gene Ward discuss the importance of Medical Liability Reform. The Democratic Chair of Judiciary, Rep. Tommy Waters would not hear the bills.

Rep. Ward and Senator Trimble Dicuss Campaign Spending

Representative Gene Ward joins Senator Gordon Trimble in a discussion about campaign spending purpose changes in SB 2004 SD1, which establishes no limit on contributions or expenditures to the corporation or company non-candidate committee

 

SB2004 SD1Clarifies campaign spending law relating to electronic filing of reports; clarifies that “ordinary and customary” expenditures are allowable under campaign spending law; clarifies that the campaign spending commission shall not issue rules through the issuance of an advisory opinion; clarifies that in the case of a corporation or company using funds from its own treasury, there shall be no limit on contributions or expenditures to the corporation or company non-candidate committee; clarifies who is subject to administrative fines for violations relating to campaign contributions and expenditures; doubles the amount a candidate can transfer from campaign or surplus funds to a community or charitable organization.  

Hawaii House Republicans Discuss Cruise Industry

Representatives Colleen Meyer and Gene Ward discuss the cruise industry in Hawaii and purposed changes to rulings by the Departmen Representatives Colleen Meyer and Gene Ward discuss the cruise industry in Hawaii and purposed changes to rulings by the Department of Homeland Security.House Concurrent Resolution 79 requests the United States Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Boarder Protection, to reconsider the proposed rule amendment USCBP-2007-2008, Hawaii Coastwise Cruises. The resolution has been referred to the Tourism and culture (TAC) committee and the Public Safety and Military Affairs (PSM) committee.

With 2 of 3 NCL cruise ships leaving, federal rule change would kill local cruise industry. House Republicans introduced a resolution today calling for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection to reconsider their proposed rule change that would affect coastwise cruises in Hawaii.

 “The potential losses to our economy are staggering”, said House Minority Leader Lynn Finnegan.   “According to the Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism’s estimates, this rule change could decrease sales by $155 million, decrease labor earnings by $44.4 million, and cost Hawaii almost 1,500 jobs,” she continued.  “Given the recent business decisions by Norwegian Cruise Lines to pull Pride of Aloha and Pride of Hawaii from the local cruise market due to increased competition, we can ill afford to lose foreign cruise vessels as well,” Finnegan explained.

 “Given the projected reduction in economic growth, I don’t think our economy can afford another $200 million dollar hit,” added House Minority Floor Leader Colleen Meyer (R-47th District), who is a member of the House Finance committee.  ”And the loss of even more jobs through so many sectors of our economy is certainly undesirable,” continued Representative Meyer.  The proposed rule would make foreign flagged cruise vessels travelling between U.S. ports stop at a foreign port for at least 48 hours.

  “This rule change will likely end most interisland cruises originating outside of Hawaii, leaving only Pride of America and this is not conducive to growing a local cruise industry,” commented Representative Barbara Marumoto (R-19th District ), member of the House committees on Economic Development & Business and Tourism, Arts & Culture.  “As has been reported in local media, without the boost in visitorship provided by all interisland cruises, tourism would have been flat for the past 4 years,” said Representative Marumoto.

“It makes no sense”, added Rep. Gene Ward (R-17th District), also a member of the House Finance committee.  “This rule change is so damaging to our tourism industry and economy.  Every other state that is home to a port city that deals with the cruise industry opposes this change - Alaska, California, Washington, Maryland, and more.  Politicians from those states have testified against this rule change, but our Congressional delegation supports it.  Even Senator Inouye’s good friend from Alaska, Sen. Ted Stevens, is opposed to this.  Why is our Congressional delegation trying to further damage our economy?

 “ In public commentary on the proposed rule change, the Hawaii Tourism Authority stated, “Hawaii’s cruise line industry provides great economic benefits to all affected islands, including generating business for tour and attraction operators, transportation providers, retailers, stevedoring and tug companies and may other residents and businesses providing goods and services to ships, passengers and crew.  On Hawaii island, Kauai and Maui, the economic benefits from Hawaii’s cruise line industry has an even greater impact on the smaller island communities.”  They further add that the “adoption of this item could mean the withdrawal of all international cruise business in Hawaii, and result in significant economic losses for our entire state.“ 

Besides the Hawaii Tourism Authority, the county of Hawaii, the Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce, Royal Caribbean Cruises, the Hawaii Pilots Association, and the Governor, among others, have submitted public comments in opposition to the rule change.

Rep. Ward Says Civility Lacking in Health Committee Hearing

Usually, I would write about a particular bill or issue of interest.  There were quite a few choices in yesterday’s public hearings of the Health Committee.  Universal health care was a topic of discussion.  So was emergency funding for Honolulu’s EMS services.  And pain management.  As well as increasing reimbursements to providers by insurance companies and leveling the playing field between non-profit and for-profit insurance companies – increasing competition, if you will.

 While many of these issues are important and interesting, there was a civility/protocol issue that was disturbing in yesterday’s hearing.  Of the many bills on the Health committee’s agenda today, HMSA was a testifier.  Indeed, as the largest health insurance provider in town, they have a stake in much of the legislation in the health arena.  Increasing health care insurance premiums does not make HMSA the most popular company in the State, or this Legislature, it seems.  Even more so when the Chair of the Health Committee is a health care provider (a doctor) and one of the pressing issues in health care today is reimbursement rates to providers.

 Time and again, the Chair of the Health Committee took the opportunity in the questioning period to attack HMSA for their shortcomings or opposition to measures, taking a sometimes angry and condescending approach to their testimony.  Through it all, HMSA’s representative responded with grace and dignity.

 Being a member of the Minority Party in the State House of Representatives, I can sympathize with the dynamic of being painted “the bad guy” and attacked as such.  What we should remember as people, and lawmakers, is that we serve the public, even individuals or entities that we may not appreciate or agree with, but that we should treat with civility. Our democratic form of government was purposely created in such a way as to allow for different points of view to be heard.  It is not the most efficient form of government, but it is the best.  And civility, amongst persons of different viewpoints is key to promoting democracy.  What was practiced in yesterday’s Health Committee by its Chair went a bit too far and was the most disappointing aspect of the hearing beyond whatever policy was crafted. 

Healthy Steps for Good Government

 In a joint press conference with the House of Representatives and Senate Republicans, Representative Gene Ward spoke on the necessity for a Constitutional Convention in Hawaii. Representative Barbara Marumoto speaks on reforming the Grants in Aid process and the need for ethics and transparency in the Legislature.

FACT SHEET – Gift DisclosureCurrent Law[1]Separate annual gift disclosures must be filed if:·        The legislator, his spouse or dependent children received gifts worth more than $200 in a year.·        The source has interests that may be affected by official action.·        The gift is neither from a relative, a campaign contribution, a thing distributed to the public without regard to the official status of the recipient, returned to the giver within 30 days, or part of an equal value exchange on special occasions.  Disclosures must include: gift description, value estimate, date of receipt, and identity source.Who Must File Gift Disclosures?[2]In Hawaii, the Legislator, spouse, and dependent children or any person receiving income for the benefit of the legislator.Recent Legislation to Lower the Amount for Disclosures from $200 to $100 (House Side)HB 286: 2003 Legislative Session- Introducer Calvin Say (Part of  House Majority Package)Lowers the value of a gift that must be reported by a legislator or government employee, spouse or dependent child of a legislator or government employee from $200 to $100.[3]Result: Passed Third Reading in the House.  Referred to TMG on the Senate side. No Action.HB 851: 2005 Legislative Session- Introducer Blake OshiroLowers the value of a gift that must be reported by a legislator or government employee, spouse or dependent child of a legislator or government employee from $200 to $100.[4]Result: Referred to LMG, JUD.  No Action Taken.  Basic InformationHonorarium Restrictions[5]States are almost equally divided between prohibiting and allowing honorarium for legislators. Twenty-five states prohibit honorarium if it is offered in connection with a legislator’s official duties. Meaning, a legislator could accept honorarium for services performed in relation to their private profession or occupation if unrelated to the legislator’s duties as a member of the Legislature. Additionally, most states which prohibit honorarium do allow for reimbursement for travel, lodging, and necessary expenses.Twenty-five states allow honorarium or do not specifically address honorarium in statute. These states typically allow honorarium as long as it does not influence a legislator’s official duties. Georgia is one state that only allows honorariums up to a certain amount. At least 15 states that allow honorariums do require that they be disclosed.  Hawaii Gift Exemptions[6]Exceptions to gift reporting statute:·        Gifts received by will or intestate succession;·        Gifts received by way of distribution of any inter vivos or testamentary trust established by a spouse or ancestor;·        Gifts from a spouse, fiancé, fiancée, any relative within four degrees of consanguinity or the spouse, fiancé, or fiancée of such a relative. A gift from any such person is a reportable gift if the person is acting as an agent or intermediary for any person not covered by this paragraph;·        Political campaign contributions that comply with state law;·        Anything available to or distributed to the public generally without regard to the official status of the recipient;·        Gifts that, within thirty days after receipt, are returned to the giver or delivered to a public body or to a bona fide educational or charitable organization without the donation being claimed as a charitable contribution for tax purposes;·        Exchanges of approximately equal value on holidays, birthday, or special occasions.  

---

[1] NCSL: Ethics: Personal Financial Disclosure for Legislators: Gift Honorarium Requirements

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/ethics/fd_gift_disclosure.htm

[2] NCSL: Ethics: Personal Financial Disclosure for Legislators: Household Member Requirements. http://www.ncsl.org/programs/ethics/fd_household.htm#ga

[3] Capitol Website Archive 2003: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2003/bills/hb286_.htm

[4] Capitol Website Archive 2006: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2006/Bills/HB851_.htm

[5] NCSL: Ethics: Honorarium Restrictions: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/ethics/gifts_and_honorariums.htm

[6] NCSL: Ethics: Legislative Gift Exemptions: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/ethics/e_gift.htm