GaryHooser's Blog

There were several times during my service in the Hawaii State Senate, where I came very close to supporting proposed legislative measures (bills), that was in direct opposition to my core values.  Some of these instances were a result of political pressure from colleagues (other Senators) and stakeholders (those who benefit from the proposed legislation).  But most instances of where I almost voted wrong, were those involving bills that were drafted in a manner that misconstrued the underlying intent of the bill.  

To say that in these situations the bill sponsors (other legislators serving stakeholders who will benefit) were “less than forthright” in presenting the intent and content of the bill is being overly generous.  It is much more accurate to say the bill language was most likely driven by an intent to deceive. 

The reality of the law-making process however is that much, if not a majority of new legislative initiatives, are in essence introduced by “special interest groups – stakeholders – advocacy organizations”. While the name of the special interest group will not be found anywhere on the bill itself, the bill’s content most often originates directly from the special interest entity.  

This reality is not unique to Hawaii, nor unique to only state government. The same is true in county and federal governments and in political jurisdictions everywhere. 

These groups whether driven by business interests, professional licensing issues, environmental protection, labor, social justice advocates, or whomever, are constantly encouraging legislation that benefits the particular interest they support.  Each year they encourage legislators to introduce and support bills that create new laws and/or amend existing ones.  

Often they provide the legislator with an actual “proposed bill draft” that contains the exact language they prefer.  These drafts originate frequently from a bill or a law that was passed or considered in another state or jurisdiction, but it’s also not unusual for the measures to be drafted by private attorneys employed by the interest group who will benefit.

In my opinion, this is not an inherently bad thing.  The special interest group often knows and understands the subject matter far better than the individual legislator, who is, after all, responsible for voting on hundreds of issues covering a wide range of interests.  

The problem, or at least one of the problems, stems from the original drafter’s choice of words which far too often are simply carried over to the official bill that is ultimately introduced.

An advocate will always frame an issue in the absolute most favorable manner, a practice that can easily be pushed to transcend ethics and fair play, essentially being deceitful.

One example I remember clearly was a bill introduced to “Bring the State of Hawaii into alignment with Federal Clean Water Standards”. This sounds on its surface to be a reasonable proposal, almost like “housekeeping” (remember this word – it should always raise red flags).  

Yes, this measure sounds reasonable, until you find out on your own (because nowhere in the bill does it say this), that Hawaii’s existing clean water standards were/are actually stronger than the federal standards.  Supporting this measure would translate to supporting the weakening of Hawaii’s existing clean water standards. If passed (it was not), this measure would have saved millions of dollars for those required to utilize and manage sewage treatment plants, and our nearshore waters would have in turn, become increasingly contaminated.

Important side note: In most cases, federal law and rules represent a “floor, not a ceiling”.  State governments are in general, allowed to pass laws that are stronger than the federal government, but not weaker.  The most prominent anomaly to this of course is the medical cannabis issue where many states have legalized activity that the federal government considers illegal.

Another egregious example is a bill that once came before me proposing to “Level the playing field and amend the tax law to equalize the tax treatment of certain types of private trusts and foundations so that all are treated fairly”. (paraphrasing from memory)

Who can argue with “leveling the playing field and equal and fair”?  The problem at the end of the day for this measure is that it primarily benefited one very large private trust that was coincidentally (read – sarcasm) preparing to dissolve and disperse its assets to family members. Passage of this bill would have transferred to this one particular trust many millions of dollars that otherwise would have gone to schools, environmental protection, and other public services.  Nowhere within this bill did it indicate who specifically would benefit. The measure died a quick and quiet death in caucus once the true nature of its intent was revealed by one particular sharp-eyed Senator.

A third and perhaps most dangerous example is the use of the words and phrases, “streamline the process” and “fast track” and “expedite”.  This is most often used in the context of land use and real estate development and translates to “weaken environmental protections, make less transparent and allow rich landowners and developers to become more rich, more faster”.  Bills that contain these words are often accompanied by a “purpose clause” in the bill which trots out the need for affordable housing and jobs as justification for the elimination of public protections and accountability.   

It is a given that every single “affordable housing forum” that is held to figure out and “chart a path to generate more affordable housing” will conclude with a statement on the need to “streamline and expedite the process”.  Rarely if ever will the conclusion be to properly staff the agencies responsible for processing the permits and even more rarely will the actual building of truly affordable housing be a requirement for the lessening of public protections and oversight.  

There are many, many other real-life examples I could name, but for now, I think it suffices to say words matter. Legislators and citizen advocates alike will be well served by knowing some of the more common buzz words and catchphrases to watch out for.

“Housekeeping” is a phrase used to imply that there is nothing of substance being changed in a bill but it is simply “cleaning it up”, perhaps making it “gender-neutral” or “bringing it into alignment with other statutes”.  In many cases, these phrases are intended to make a busy legislator look away or perhaps only skim through the review of the bill. On the contrary, these words should trigger a legislator to look even closer at a measure and to not discount it as unimportant.  The placement of a comma, or the changing of any word really, has the potential to fundamentally change the meaning of the law.

I would be remiss if I did not include before I conclude, the phrase “public/private partnership” which means that a public asset or responsibility is essentially sold to a for-profit business.  Yes, the private sector can and does operate more “efficiently” in many areas than government, however many if not most “public services” are not intended to be profitable (think parks, lifeguards, police, fire departments and yes even public transportation), which is why they are called “public services” and paid for and administered by the government. There is a place for public/private partnerships but history will show that this is an area of great abuse. This buzzword should not bring comfort to lawmakers who believe in putting the public interest ahead of corporate profits.

Only legislators can introduce bills and everyone – the governor, for-profit and nonprofit and everyday citizens must go through the same process. Some bills can be purposefully vague, others are by nature of the subject matter simply confusing. The volume of bills and frenetic pace of the session only further exacerbates the likelihood of error and misjudgment. Because legislators aren’t subject-matter experts in all subjects they rely on bill advocates or departments to explain the measures. 

For elected officials and citizen advocates alike, a little bit of skepticism and a lot of critical thinking are essential attributes. And yes, watching with vigilance the words contained within all measures, is simply the responsible thing to do.

Aloha Friends,

I wanted to share with you a few updates, some interesting reading I hope you enjoy, learn from and perhaps find provocative.  And I wanted to also ask for help, which I don’t want to get in the way of the other important stuff, so will place at the bottom of this page 😉

First: The corporate water theft bill HB1326 introduced by Representative Ryan Yamane has passed the House, and now is in the hands of Senator Kai Kahele.

I want to mahalo plenty the House members who voted No yesterday on the House floor –  Be sure to take a moment today and send them your gratitude for standing up to corporate exploitation and for Hawaiʻi’s water rights!

Kitagawa, Lisa, 808-586-8540, repkitagawa@Capitol.hawaii.gov

Perruso, Amy, 808-586-6700, repperruso@Capitol.hawaii.gov

Eli, Stacelynn, 808-586-8465, repeli@Capitol.hawaii.gov

Wildberger, Tina, 808-586-8525, repwildberger@Capitol.hawaii.gov

DeCoite, Lynn , 808-586-6790, repdecoite@Capitol.hawaii.gov

McKelvey, Angus, 808-586-6160, repmckelvey@Capitol.hawaii.gov

Gates, Cedric Asuega, 808-586-8460, repgates@Capitol.hawaii.gov

Kobayashi, Dale, 808-586-8475, repdkobayashi@Capitol.hawaii.gov

Thielen, Cynthia,808-586-6480 repthielen@capitol.hawaii.gov 

The below blog link will bring you up to speed both on the bill but also on the process of “crossover and conference”.

”HB1326 is the proverbial “sticky wicket” with Hawaii legislators caught between the interests of the corporate elite, and those who put protection of the environment ahead of corporate profits.” Read the entire piece HERE on the Hooser blog  

There are two minimum wage bills still alive that will need your help in the future.

SB789 introduced by Senator Brian Taniguchi proposes to phase in increases to achieve a $15 per hour level by 2023 – FOR ALL WORKERS (both full time and part time). This measure also includes tax credits to help small businesses.

HB1191 introduced by Representative Aaron Johanson proposes a two tiered minimum wage with most full time workers who are provided health insurance by their employers entitled to receive a $12.50 per hour by 2024.  Part-time workers and those who do not receive employer health care coverage would be entitled to a $15 per hour minimum wage, also in 2024.

My personal preference is a blend of the two measures that provides phased in increases to $17 per hour, with continuing incremental small annual increases above the rate of inflation until a true living wage is achieved PLUS a tax credit to support those small businesses who provide health care coverage.  This ensures that ALL workers are paid a decent wage, AND ensures that small businesses are incentivized to provide ALL workers with full time work and health care benefits.

RED FLAG –  HB96 also introduced by Representative Johanson proposes to “authorize each county to establish a minimum wage that is a higher wage than the state minimum wage…” I am very concerned that this measure will be used as a way to “punt” the minimum wage issue to the counties and provide a political “out” for the State legislature to claim they took positive action on the minimum wage issue.  Giving the counties this authority does not result in increasing the standard of living for working people in Hawaii, but risks further delays and ultimately finger pointing between the state and county as to who is responsible.  If the state established a living wage “floor”, then to allow the counties to exceed that living wage floor would be acceptable (in my humble opinion).

Heads Up! The Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii is a powerful force at the legislature and they are fighting hard to block any and all increases to the minimum wage.  PHI President Josh Frosts blog is must reading! Check it out HERE Let’s be clear – The Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii is Lying to You

WANTED – NEW POLITICAL AND GOVERNMENTAL LEADERS

If you are rooted in your community, share the core values of putting people and the planet first, and aspire to serve in government at a leadership level…then consider the Kuleana Academy. This is a statewide nonpartisan program and residents from all islands are encouraged to apply.

Go HERE for more information and to view a short video featuring recent graduates of the program! Please watch the video!

Now for my request for help:

As described in the past, I wear several hats – President of the Board for the Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action (HAPA), and Executive Director for the Pono Hawaii Alliance (PHI) – Each has a separate Board of Directors and each has a separate administrative structure and budget.  This is necessary due to the laws governing political activity and the tax treatment of contributions.

HAPA does not engage in any campaign work nor does it support any persons election to public office.  HAPA does educate and train aspiring leaders who want to get more involved and possibly serve in public office.  HAPA is nonpartisan, does not restrict participation in its activities based on party affiliation and extends invitations to all political parties in its training programs. HAPA’s work on legislative issues is also limited. Thus contributions to HAPA are tax deductible and may be made HERE.

Contributions to PHI are NOT tax deductible, however its legal structure allows it to engage in unlimited lobbying on legislative issues plus it may provide some support of candidates who are running for public office.

As you can imagine, fundraising for PHI is more challenging because the contributions are NOT tax deductible.  At the same time the work PHI does is valuable and needs to be sustained.

We are now in the middle of the legislative session and frankly we need your help to continue the work. The PHI “mother of all data bases” project needs to be kicked up a notch NOW which translates to aggressively targeting various districts in Hawaii with issue based surveys – thus recruiting residents from those districts to join the movement and engage those very same issues.  In addition we are funding other communications related efforts in support of our key issues, and there are the never ending costs of inter-island travel that have to be dealt with.

In summary, PHI needs to raise at least $10,000 within the next 24 days, or an average of $416 per day.  This will allow us to maintain and grow momentum, plus put us in a strong position for the final month of the legislative session.  Can you help?  Whether it is funding one day of work, or one hour, any and all contributions are welcome and much needed.  Especially helpful are those contributions that can be received by the end of the day Friday, March 8.

Online contributions may be made securely HERE.

Or checks may be mailed to: Pono Hawaii Initiative, P.O. Box 871, Honolulu HI 96808

Thank you in advance for all of your help –

Sincerely,

Gary Hooser, Executive Director – Pono Hawaii Initiative – 808-652-4279

PS. It goes without saying that if you want to meet personally to talk about how you might get further involved in supporting the work, please do not hesitate to call or email.  If you are willing to join in our effort by offering testimony at the legislature, or support our work with funding or in other ways – I would love to speak and or meet with you in person or a small group.  I am also available to speak to political science classes, or any groups or organizations interested in learning more about the political process in Hawaii (without charge of course).

With the legislative session at its midway point it is time for “crossover” when bills that have been heard and passed in one legislative body cross over to go through the same identical process, in the countervailing body.

The Hawaii constitution requires both the House and the Senate to hold hearings on and to ultimately both agree to the same exact terms of a bill, before it can be sent to the governor for approval or veto.

Entering this crossover phase now is HB1326hd2, a controversial measure which allows KIUC/Grove Farm and A&B/Mahi Pono and others to continue diverting and dewatering streams without conducting an environmental impact statement (EIS) or securing the long term lease/permits normally required by law.

In Hawaii, water is a public trust resource. The health of native streams and coastal wildlife, traditional customary practices, and domestic water needs are prioritized over private commercial uses of water. “Holdover” revocable permits are a loophole to get around Hawaii’s  water protections. These month-to-month permits improperly allow corporations to divert streams for years without protecting the ecosystems or downstream users.

HB1326 originated in the House (thus the HB).  The initial version proposed granting these companies the continued ability to divert various streams for an unlimited amount of time, thus avoiding the need to conduct an EIS and other studies required to secure their long term permits.

During its first hearing in the House Water Land committee, Chair Representative Ryan Yamane amended the measure to limit the time period remaining to complete an EIS and other documentation to 7 years thus generating a HB1326hd1.

This measure was then heard in House Finance, Chaired by Representative Sylvia Luke, who further amended and “cleaned up” the bill, thus creating HB1326hd2.

Along this path, with Maui Representative Tina Wildberger first shining the light, the measure has picked up an increasing number of “No” votes during every single subsequent vote.

In addition the Hawaii Sierra Club, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, HAPA, and numerous other individuals and public interest organizations have loudly and persistently expressed their strong opposition to the measure – making HB1326hd2 a political litmus test of environmental values.

This is now the can of worms crossing over from the House to the Senate, squarely into the lap of State Senator Kai Kahele Chair of the Senate committee on Water and Land.  Senator Kahele by the way is also running for Congress in the second congressional district (the area most directly impacted by HB1326hd2).

The next step in the legislative process involves Senator Kahele scheduling a hearing for the bill in his committee.  There seems to be no doubt that he will ultimately pass the measure out, after making further amendments.

As in most controversial and hot potato issues, the political tendency is to either kill the bill or attempt the wisdom of Solomon and split the baby.  In this case, the large corporate players who are driving the entire effort are too big, and the political repercussions too great- to kill the bill.

Conversely, splitting the baby in half, to possibly 3 years instead of 7, as the committee will no doubt feel inclined to do, is also totally unacceptable to the environmental community.  After all, these same corporate entities have already squandered a prior 3 year extension and have been diverting this stream water for decades now without the proper environmental protections required by our state constitution.

Whatever ultimately passes out of this Senate Committee, and any other it might be referred to in the Senate, is destined to go to “conference”.  The conference committee is made up of the Chairs of both the House and Senate subject matter committees, plus other members of the House and Senate.

In order for any bill to pass out of conference committee and ultimately become law, both Chairs must agree on the same identical language.  If either Chair disagrees, the bill dies. NOTE: WHILE THIS IS PAST PRACTICE THE CONFERENCE RULES WHICH MAY CHANGE SESSION TO SESSION – ALLOW FOR A MAJORITY OF THE CHAIRS TO MAKE A DECISION AND THERE MAY BE 4 CHAIRS ON THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, SO THUS ONE CHAIR IS UNABLE TO BLOCK PASSAGE. (this section is CAPS was added and not in the original publication of this piece).

The parameters upon which the two Chairs negotiate are set by the content of the bill that was passed out by each chamber.  Consequently whatever amendments that will ultimately be made in the Senate become “the Senate position”. Generally speaking negotiations must be limited to matters that separate the House/Senate positions, and may not be more or less restrictive than those already established positions.  New material such as new significant conditions not contained in the two bills on the conference table, are normally not entertained.

At the end of conference both Representative Yamane and Senator Kahele must agree, and thus share responsibility for the content and passage of HB1326hd2 – which when amended becomes a “Conference Draft” or CD1.

This of course, is the proverbial “sticky wicket” with legislators caught between the interests of the corporate elite, and those in the broader community who put protection of the environment and the fundamental public trust ahead of those corporate profits.

The large corporate diverters have without question been abusing the system for generations, as these diversions date back to the plantation era.  Their strategy now is to use small farmers and ranchers who also need permits for their water as human political shields, knowing legislators are hard pressed to bring hardships upon the little guys.

However the Senate can choose to protect the small users and or offer them assistance in achieving compliance, while at the same time insisting that the large and most egregious users comply promptly with the law.

Now is when our elected leaders will show their true colors.  There is a reasonable path forward and granting additional years to comply without teeth or strong penalties for non-compliance is unacceptable.

Set strong parameters, perhaps give them 6 more months to comply if you must, but then hold them accountable.

*Note – If you are interested in learning more about the inside workings of the Hawaii State Legislature and how to best impact the law-making process, you might be further interested in reviewing these additional “Lessons from the Ledge”.

The question of power flow at the Hawaii State legislature is not as simple as it may appear at first glance.  While most will assume that power is concentrated at the top with the Senate President and Speaker of the House, most students of government will say that actually the most powerful figures in any legislative bodies are the “money chairs”.  In the case of Hawaii this would be Senator Donovan Dela Cruz and Representative Sylvia Luke, Chair of Ways and Means and Finance, respectively.  And, upon just a small amount of reflection this would seem reasonable as money is central to almost all decisions.

As previously discussed, the most important number in the Senate is 13 and in the House it is 26.  These are the numbers it takes to “organize” and select the President, Speaker, the money chairs and all other “subject matter chairs” (education, environment, transportation etc).

Consequently, you will very rarely if ever see a “floor vote” where the President, Speaker, WAM and Finance Chairs are on the losing side of the vote.  By definition, they represent the majority and if they lose that majority, they in fact will lose their positions.  These types of voting situations rarely happen because they are usually not allowed to ever come to a vote, and will otherwise be amended to please the majority or the bill will die more or less quietly, without a vote, in a private meeting, held in a windowless room, down in the capitol basement (trust me I am not exaggerating).

Every committee is made up of a Chair and members, a majority of whom technically can control or at least veto the actions of the committee upon which they sit.  In the Senate committees are frequently made up of only 5 individuals, which translates to only 3 votes being needed to confirm the decisions.  In the House, the committee membership is normally larger.

At the risk of over-simplification, the power at the legislature flows from the majority (at least 13 in the Senate and 26 members in the House) to create “leadership” (President and Speaker) and create the committee Chairs and structure.  From this point the control of proposed legislation (bills), including the state budget, flow through the subject matter committees and ultimately often also through the money committees and or other “second tier committees” such as Judiciary and Consumer Protection.  At each step of the way, any of the Committee Chairs may kill or amend the measure. 

While the power of a committee is technically held by a majority of members on the committee, the reality is that the Chair of the Committee exercises an inordinate amount of power and control. Members rarely challenge that authority.  Perhaps members will raise concerns directly to the chair in private, but rarely will they vote against the Chair in public.

Understandably, some members may be hesitant to risk angering or irritating a Chair, who then could punish that member by deciding not to hear their particular priority bill, or fund their particular priority capitol improvement project (district specific school, highway improvements etc).  One really never knows if they have been “punished” or not as time does not allow every bill to be heard, there are duplicative bills to choose from, and certainly there is not enough money to go around to fund every school improvement or every highway expansion in every district.  But the fear of angering a Chair and facing possible retribution always lingers over any vote or decision any member may be considering that goes against the Chair, unless that member is also a Chair who then could offer retribution of their own.

All of which justifies the term “snake pit” that some use when referring to the legislative environment.  

For the regular readers of this column, I refer you back to the term leverage which equates directly to power.  The more leverage a member has, the more power and influence they have.

The “Money Chairs” have the leverage that comes with controlling every single aspect of the state budget.  “Subject Matter Chairs” have the leverage that comes with every single bill that is referred to their committee.

If a legislator is new and/or does not Chair a committee then their leverage and thus power is limited to their voice and their vote – and perhaps amplified by their “faction” (their legislative friends) within the legislative body.  

Those members who have the ability to articulate the issues, are willing to speak out, and who are politically strong in their districts – hold their own brand of leverage and power.

Leadership’s job is to hold the ship steady, avoid controversy and conduct “the people’s business” with as little drama as possible.  A maverick legislator, willing to speak truth to power, who knows their facts and knows how to articulate them clearly, can often generate media and thus public attention on issues and questions that otherwise may not be raised. 

So Mary, Mary quite contrary – how does the power flow?

It begins with the referral process normally managed by the House/Senate leadership (President and Speaker).  Bills are introduced and referred to Subject matter committees.

The Chair of the committee decides to either schedule a bill for a public hearing, or not.  The Chair then decides to pass and/or amend the measures they have agreed to hear.  The committee normally acquiesces to the decision of the Chair (who hopefully has “taken the temperature of the committee prior to the hearing).  There may or may not be a maverick or dissident voice that raises questions or offers a competing public opinion.

Frankly, in a one party state like Hawaii there are not enough competing ideas and voices (IMHO).

The bill then moves on normally to at least one other committee. This more often than not, will be the “money committee” (Ways and Means in the Senate or Finance in the House).  The money committee Chair then decides similarly, to hear or not hear and to pass or amend, or not.

For many bills this translates to a fact that a total of 4 legislators, two in the House and two in the Senate totally control the fate of critical legislation that impact every aspect of our lives.  A majority of legislators can of course over-rule the decisions made by these 4, however this is the same majority that empowered them with their committee chairmanships in the first place.

The 4 legislators describe above are one example of a particular bill, meant to be a general example of the power of Chairs.  

Some Bills only have 2 people who drive the entire process.  For example decisions on the budget bill which is the biggest most important bill at the legislature are entirely driven by the Chair of the House Finance Committee, and the Chair of the Senate Ways and Means Committee.  To be clear, lot’s of people “weigh in” including committee staff, departments heads, agency staff, the public and a wide range of special interests, but the basic core decision-making is done by just these two individuals.  Members of the committee will lobby the chair on interests important to them and their district, but they will always “vote yes” with the Chair. 

And the public? Where does the public fit into all of this?

The public, hopefully between working multiple jobs, attending PTA meetings and mowing the grass – the public is doing their best to pay attention, submitting testimony, calling/emailing their district Representatives and Senators, writing letters to the editor – and in general being involved in the process.

And of course, every two years the public elects the legislators to serve, or un-elects them as the case may be. 

While perhaps not a pretty description of sausage-making, but according to Winston Churchill, “Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

Note: For those interested in learning the reality and inner-workings of the Hawaii State Legislature, here is a collection pieces I have written that are eventually intended to become a “handbook to the legislature” of sorts, in the future:

Below are a loose collection of articles, essays and missives I have written over the years that may be of interest to those seeking to understand the legislative process.  My intent is to explain, educate and describe – How it really works.

The articles may or may not be in order of priority or otherwise organized.  Over time, my intent is to edit, reedit, reorganize and fill in the gaps.  But for now here it is…

Legislative Session Primer – 30 days out

Legislative Session Primer 2 – Rules of the game

Legislative Primer 3: Passing a bill – the basics

Legislative Primer 4 – Hierarchy of access and influence

Legislative testimony: A quick and concise tutorial.

Lessons from the Ledge – The players, the process  and the rules

Lessons from the Ledge – On the meaning of leverage and other important lessons

Lessons from the Ledge – On the executive branch nominees and advice and consent process

Lessons from the Ledge – Power Flow 

The Conference Committee – where bills are laid to rest quietly, with little fanfare and no fingerprints

Lessons from the Ledge – The end of session (or not)

In order to understand and effectively navigate the legislative process, there are 7 critically important universal truths, that must be understood and followed.  They may at first seem overly simple and obvious, but they are critically important and impact all decisions.

1) To serve in the legislature you must first win an election.  To continue serving, you must continue winning.  Every legislator loves serving and wants to continue doing so, as long as is humanly possible.  Ensuring ones reelection is probably the most important objective of almost every legislator.   This is not a bad thing.  If someone is doing their job properly, loves their job and wants to keep doing that job, this a natural and positive inclination.  As an advocate wanting to influence the lawmaking process, your issue, your policy objective and your priority must impact this reality – either positively or negatively.  If there is no impact, it will be difficult at best to get attention for your issue.

2) Legislators avoid controversy, as controversy breeds divisiveness, and divisiveness loses elections.  They want to accomplish stuff, they want to be able to tell people that they are doing stuff, meaningful stuff that will help them get reelected.  Again, this is not a bad thing.  And yet again, your issue, your policy objective and your priority must impact this reality. The sweet spot in the law-making business are issues that are both good policy and good politics.

3) Legislators are very, very busy during the legislative session. They deal with a zillion bills on a zillion topics, most of which they do not have a deep understanding of.  Individual legislators may focus on individual issues pertaining to their particular “subject matter interest”.  Unless you and/or your issue is important to them, they will not pay attention.  They simply don’t have the band-width to do it all.  You must break through the congestion of issues that compete for the lawmakers attention (by addressing #1 and #2 above).

4) Majority Rules – There are 25 members in the Senate.  The most important number in this body is 13 which is a majority and thus controls everything.  Any Senator who has 12 friends who will stick with him/her, can run the show.  The majority control the “leadership structure” (President, Vice President, Majority Leader etc), they control all committees, the budget and the entire legislative agenda.  A majority of 13 can pass any policy agenda they choose, so when someone points to a committee chair or “leadership” as to why something fails to pass, it is the majority that is responsible and not the individuals.  The majority allows these singular seemingly all-powerful individuals  (committee chairs and members of leadership) to pass or kill bills, and thus the majority is responsible.  You must count your votes and keep counting until you have a majority of members in both bodies, who are on record publicly in support of your issue. Yes, you must also court the powerful Chair and “Leadership”, but they will ultimately follow if a majority of members want to pass or kill something.

A small but very big piece of the numbers game that might make your head spin: 

If 13 is the magic and most powerful number in the Senate, what is the most important number contained within that 13?  No, the answer is not 7.   The answer is 1.  For if any one member of the majority of 13 decides to leave that majority, the entire power structure collapses.  This is why sometimes certain members appear to hold inordinate power and influence, even though they may not Chair a “big committee” or be part of top leadership.  For without them, all others who retain their power and influence via being part of the majority, risk losing it all.  The 13 must stick together.  Of course in the 51 member House, 26 is the magic number etc etc.

5) The legislature makes the rules.  One of the most frustrating situations that often confront an advocate seeking to pass into law some public policy initiative, is when they are told, “Sorry, you missed the deadline.”  ALL the rules that govern the process of passing bills into law can be amended or “waived” at any time if “leadership” (Senate President and/or House Speaker) want to do so.  The rules and deadlines are changed on a regular basis and often with very little or no notice at all. 

6) When they tell you there is no money, what they are really saying is that it’s not a priority.  The legislature will find the money needed for the things, the majority wants to fund.  Think rail.  The 2017 legislature called a special session and raised taxes to fund the rail system.  With regards to education, they play “whack the mole and pass the buck”.

7) The most important person to any legislator is the person who can help them get elected.  Translation: If you live in the legislator’s district and if you are active in politics and campaigns, you have more influence than almost anyone else (see rules #1 and #2 above).  The legislator needs and wants your vote, and he/she definitely does not need or want your opposition whether it be you running for office against him/her or you helping someone do the same.  Unfortunately most people don’t even take the time to know who their district Senator or Representative.  So, this last truth is perhaps the most important one and the place anyone who aspires to affect the public policy process should start.

Please.  Get to know your Senator and Representative and Councilmember for that matter.  Call them up.  Send them email. Meet with them and share your concerns and hopes for the future of your community.  This is where it all starts.

To find out who exactly YOUR district Senator and Representative is AND for their email and phone # – use this handy tool provided by the Capitol website https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/fyl/ Just put in your address and voila! The information you need will appear.

Closing Note: An Insiders Look At The Legislative Process

During my 16 years serving in elected office at both the County and State level (details at http://www.garyhooser.com), I have periodically written a variety of blog posts and articles about the legislative process and attempted to describe “how it really works.” I have loosely entitled this effort “Lessons from the Ledge.” My hope is to ultimately compile and edit them into a “handbook for legislative advocates” or something similar.

For those serious about learning and understanding how the legislative process really works, I believe this collection of short essays will prove useful and perhaps entertaining. When reading the various pieces, please remember that some/most are written within the context of issues/events that were occurring at a particular point in time.

Please know that I do not purport to be the expert on all of this, but I do want to share my perspective, thoughts, and conclusions.

Here is the assembled collection to date: Lessons from the ledge – a primer on how things really work at the legislature

January 16th, is opening day of the Hawaii State Legislature.  The legislative session will run for “60 session days” and adjourns on May 2 “sine die”.

During the legislative session, thousands of “bills” will be introduced and several hundred will attempt to navigate the process in a treacherous upstream salmon-like journey toward possibly becoming law, or death.

A bill is a proposed law and nothing more.  

For those residents interested in “citizen based advocacy”, the below may be helpful.  While only legislators may introduce bill’s, individual residents can usually find a willing legislator who will introduce a bill on their behalf or “upon request”.

To pass a bill into law, the recipe and ingredients are as follows:

Proposed policy change must be “Ripe”:

A significant % of the general community must be aware of the issue and generally acknowledge there is a problem that needs to be solved.

The proposed policy must have been previously “vetted”, proposed in previous legislative sessions, and/or passed into law in other states or municipalities.

The proposal must be perceived as having the potential to have significant and tangible impact on the problem/issue being addresses.

Legislators are hugely busy with thousands of competing issues and priorities.  Public acknowledgement of the problem needing to be solved, and consequently public support for the bill is essential.

Legislators are not big fans of risking taking.  Therefore, if the proposed policy has been implemented in some other jurisdiction or state and potential unintended consequences vetted, the issue is much more likely to be deemed “safe” and then much more likely to pass into law.

Bills and public policy making is about finding solutions to problems.  Just shouting “fix it” or beating a drum about affordable housing or homelessness, does not result in the passage of legislation.  The proposal must propose a tangible and significant solution to at least key components of the problem

2) The proposal must have a “core” advocacy base:

*The base must be anchored by an established advocacy organization that can provide administrative support and some funding.

*The advocacy organization must be supported by a core group individuals (volunteers and staff) committed to putting in the time and effort needed to see the campaign through to its successful conclusion.

*The advocacy base must be broad reaching across islands and demographics

*Advocates have to be informed and educated on the subject matter, policy basics.

A single individual or even a small group with a good idea, are normally not enough.  However when joined by established organizations such as the Hawaii Sierra Club for environmental issues, or Hawaii AppleSeed for economic justice issues – the issue and bill can quickly gain traction and credibility.

While the organizations name and administrative support are crucial, likewise are the volunteers and grassroots advocates who must back up the effort via testimony (both in person and via email).

30% of the legislators are from the neighbor-islands.  Testimony and support must come from all islands, and a wide range of demographics.  And advocates must take the time to learn the facts, understand the data supporting (and opposing) their proposal.  FAQ sheets are essential.

3) The core advocacy base, must have collaborative partners willing to testify in support.

Example: For SB3095 and related pesticide bills, support was provided by the Hawaii State Teachers Association (HSTA), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Hawaii Nurses Association, the Sierra Club and many other organizations.

Ideally, the public policy being proposed has so-called “main stream institutional support”.  While the initial proponents might be wild eyed activists with purple mohawks, unfortunately these types of individuals do not make the best testifiers.  

A brief look at history will show clearly that all great movements and changes to public policy were in fact initiated by the firebrands.  Those willing to march and to carry signs and yes, to get arrested sometimes, are the ones who force the issue to the forefront.  However, pushing something to the forefront of the publics consciousness is only the first half of the task.  It is a critically important part, but it is not enough to take the issue, the bill or the public policy change, all away across the finish line.

While “dealing with the opposition” will be discussed in a future column, suffice it to say that they will not have many crazy activists testifying from within their ranks.  The status quo, is by definition, well it is the status quo.  They do not want change and they will fight until the end to keep change from happening (except of course “their change”).  They will also show up with stacks of data, and a long line of experts who will testify on their behalf.

To close the deal, the proposal must have so-called mainstream, institutional support.  Doctors, lawyers, teachers, business owners etc, all have far more credibility with legislators than that activist with the purple mohawk who started it all.  Sad but true.

At the end of the day it is simply a battle.  While “war metaphors’ are somewhat distasteful, that is really what we are dealing with.  While you don’t have to have more data, more research or more institutional support than the opposition, you have to at least hold your own in these departments.  You must hold your own with the basics, and you must win overwhelmingly in the field of public support and sentiment.  You do this and you win.

First of all, your testimony is important and has an impact.  Trust me on this.  I have served in public office on both the state and county level for 16 years, and I can say without hesitation that your testimony is important.  While testimony delivered in person is preferred, the reality is that the vast majority of testimony is delivered via email.  It is easy really, but there are 6 basic points that can make a world of difference as to the effectiveness of the message.

The “hot topics”, those bills or proposed laws that are the most significant and thus the most controversial, often can generate hundreds and sometimes thousands of pieces of testimony.

In politics and in life, people are busy.  Do you really think that legislators read all 480 pieces of testimony that come into their office on a particular piece of legislation?  Do you think that even their staff reads each and every one?

The answer, of course, is no.  It is an impossible task, but still incredibly important for citizen advocates to take the time to submit that very same testimony that few will read.  I repeat, trust me on this.  Your testimony, even if unread, is important.  Volume matters.

#1)  Which leads to the importance of the subject line.  While each and every testimony might not be read in its entirety, you can be sure each is at least “skimmed” and categorized as “support, oppose and comments/amendments”.  The subject line is everything!

It is critically important that two items ALWAYS be put in the subject line: The bill # (HB1234 or SB4321) AND the words “Support or Oppose or Comments/Amendments”.  “Support Intent of HB1234 With Comments/Amendments” is also commonly used when someone supports the basic purpose of the bill, but is concerned about various provisions as they are currently written.

But, the subject line must contain the bill # and a clear indication of whether your testimony is in support or opposition.  Legislators and their staff are extremely busy and will not take the time to review your entire testimony, trying to figure out which bill you are testifying on and whether or not you are for or against it.

#2)  It kills me to have to state the obvious, but it is also immensely important that you include your name and at least the town or general area where you live.  There is no shortage of email testimony that is submitted from email addresses such as stargazer1407@someweirdemail.com and does not list the person’s actual name or address.

Honestly, it helps to be taken seriously if you have an email address that reflects someone who is part of mainstream society.  If you want to be taken seriously, it is important to keep your purple mohawk hidden!

#3)  For all testimony, there is a hierarchy of importance, and highest on this list is a person who lives in the district of a legislator who sits on the committee (especially the Chair) that will be voting on the issue.  So, it is important to STATE THE TOWN OR AREA IN WHICH YOU LIVE IN YOUR TESTIMONY.

The actual content of the testimony of individuals is less important than the three items listed above.  If you state clearly your position (oppose or support), your name and where you live – the legislator then has the basic information needed to judge community sentiment.  And, while some legislators will argue with me on this point, community sentiment is the most important element involved in making a political decision.

#4) However, yes it is also a good idea to include a few points of substance that support your basic conclusion to support or oppose.  But it is not necessary to write a lengthy dissertation, or to extensively expound upon the intricacies of the subject matter.  If you are an “expert in the field” or otherwise have genuine value to add by all means please do so, and include attachments and/or links to resources that might be useful.  But for most citizen advocates, a single page of testimony sticking to the basics is enough.

#5)  For the policy wonks and those who truly understand the subject matter, the offering of specific amendments is important.  If you possess the expertise to offer specific changes to the language in the bill that will improve it, please do so and mark it clearly: Suggested Amendment (and state the suggested new language).  Remember, most bills are “works in progress” and will undergo extensive amendments during the review process.  Your suggestions if they add value and are presented clearly, may very well be utilized.

But for most citizen advocates and regular residents who simply want to make a difference, submitting basic testimony in support or opposition and stating the basics will suffice.

#6)  The essential online tool for testimony submission can be found at https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov .  Yes, you have to enter your email address and “log in”, but the rest is easy!  Please take a moment, embrace the citizen advocate within you, and start today getting more involved in the legislative process!

The 2019 legislative session is in full swing and those familiar with the process know the environment in “the building” is hectic at best.

Having served in the building for eight years as a State Senator, I can say without reservation that the work environment is extremely intense.  3,000 bills will be introduced and thousands of people will be sending email, making calls, and stopping by each legislator’s office, attempting to exert influence on those bills.

In addition to the general public, each legislator is also being lobbied by their fellow legislators both in their own institution (the House or Senate), and in the countervailing one as well.  They will get calls from the heads of government, business, labor, and community organizations – each pressing upon them to “vote yes or vote no”, or “amend the bill” this way or that.

So how do legislators deal with drinking from this fire-hose?  How do they manage their time and prioritize their telephone and meeting availability?

If advocates want to “reach” a certain legislator with their message, who is the best person to carry that message?

While some manage their own schedules, most legislators utilize staff to guard the gates of entrance and access.  For both, there is a “hierarchy of access and influence” that governs who gets called back first, who can just “walk right in” without an appointment and who perhaps gets ignored completely.  The below, is a fairly typical representation (written from my perspective) of the filter many/most legislators use to prioritize access to their limited time and bandwidth.

Hierarchy of access and political influence (outside the building):

1) Family – You can be sure that when my mother calls, I will take that call.  Likewise if my wife, daughter, or son calls or stops by the office – I will normally step out of a meeting, stop what I am doing, and speak with them.  If my dad calls, I know it must be serious as he never ever calls.  I am not being facetious.  If there was a bill that was near and dear to a close family member’s heart, you can be sure that I would pay the utmost attention to it, and do whatever I could to support that measure.  To be clear, I would not violate my core principles and would not go to jail to please a family member or friend, but yes absolutely I would do what I could to make my mom and dad and children (and now grandchildren) happy.

2) Friends/Campaign Volunteers – Without question I will take the calls and try to help other friends and volunteers who have stood out in the hot sun holding signs for days on end, to help me get elected.  There are people who as volunteers have given up weeks and months of their lives to help me, and you can bet I am deeply and personally indebted to them.  Yes, I would want to help them and yes of course they can call or come in to see me anytime whatsoever. But as is the case with family, any help that I offer will never violate my core values and principles.

3) The Media – They can help you or hurt you and it is always best to get back with them as soon as possible.  If they call you, it is likely because either you are doing something good, or something bad. In either case the sooner you deal with it the better.

4) Voters/Constituents that live in your district – These are the core group of people who at the end of the day determine whether or not you can continue to serve in public office – they vote. When a constituent calls or stops by the office, it behooves the legislator to pay attention.  Constituent service is everything.  Every politicians bad dream revolves around a constituent writing a letter to the editor complaining about how the politician didn’t call them back, was not supportive, or otherwise blew them off.

5) Advocacy Groups (labor unions, environmental, etc) – Advocacy groups normally have influence over elections, and they have a legitimate voice representing large constituency groups.  These groups often are also “subject matter experts” on issues that impact their subject matter interests.

6) Non Voters In District – They don’t vote, but they might write letters to the editor and or talk to friends and neighbors.

7) Voters In Other Hawaii Districts – Unless the legislator is seeking higher office, these voters don’t carry a lot of weight nor do they deserve a lot of time or energy.  The refrain “I am never going to vote for you!” coming from someone who does not live in your district, means nothing.

8) People outside Hawaii – Unless they represent large advocacy organization or are campaign donors, the testimony from these folks is funneled always to the circular file (metaphorically speaking).

Hierarchy of access and political influence (inside the building)

1) The Chair of the House and/or Senate “money committee” (Finance or Ways and Means) – Just about everything any legislator wants to do costs money, and the “money chairs” essentially control that flow.  Further, rarely do they ever come to see you but rather you are the one seeking to connect with them – so when they come calling it behooves you to be there and available.

2) The Senate President or the House Speaker – When they come calling, it is usually to provide guidance (please appreciate the nuance here).  Usually the guidance will be to encourage (yes, more nuance) you to vote a certain way, hear a certain bill (or not), and to pass, kill, or amend a certain bill in a manner that serves the majority caucus (which may or may not align with your interests and or the broader public interest).  Both the President and the Speaker hold their positions due to the support of “the majority” and thus they theoretically speak for the majority.  So yes, these two individuals generally rank pretty high on the hierarchy of access and influence.

3) Various Committee Chairs – If a committee chair wants to see you it is either because they want something from you, or you are asking them for something, and they are ready to talk.

4) Legislators from your “faction” – Generally speaking these folks are your friends and either seek camaraderie, wish to give you a “heads up” on something happening in the building, or seek your support and help.

5) Legislators from outside your “faction” – Generally speaking these folks are not your friends, but may not be your enemies, but will act like your friends.  They will be seeking “intel”, and/or trying to enroll your support.

6) Staff – While they do not hold the same status as the other power brokers, every legislator wants their staff to think of them as “a good guy” (gender neutral intended).  Thus staff also have significant influence but not overtly and such influence must be far more nuanced – a staff member will never tell a legislator how to vote, etc.

A brief note on leverage:

No one listed above on the hierarchy of access and influence from “inside the building” will normally call, visit, or broach a conversation with a fellow legislator unless they want something.  Yes, of course I exaggerate – but not really.  People in the building are BUSY and the pace and mood is frenetic.  The clock is always ticking and there is always a deadline that needs to be met or some bill is going to die.

So except for a small circles of friends, the vast majority of times that a legislator will reach out to another legislator is when they want something.  They want a bill heard or they want your vote, or they want support for something that is important to them.

Legislators quickly learn that when this happens, there is an opportunity for “leverage”.  “Sure” they will likely respond, “I will give you this, but by the way, I need your help on this other thing too”.

Call it horse trading, call it leverage, or call it politics as usual.  It is the way of the world – in the building.  People are busy, and they are trying to get stuff done.

First published on Feb. 6th, 2019 in The Garden Island Newspaper

Brutally frank – a discussion we need to have.

The cynics, jaded and the obsessively pragmatic need not read further. In fact, delete now please and for that matter there is an unsubscribe button at the bottom of this page.

The people I want to hang out with believe positive change can happen, and they understand to make that a reality, they must be willing to work hard.

The label I prefer is, pragmatic idealist. This is not to say pollyannaish, but a realist who believes that the world can change for the better, and that as Dr. King said so eloquently “…the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

So…let’s do this.

Many of you who open and read these emails, are stepping up and helping by submitting testimony, sharing the information with your friends, and helping with financial contributions. And your involvement and help is critically important.

But we need more.

We can pass a strong bill that increases Hawaii’s minimum wage to $17 and puts us on a path toward a living wage, phased in incrementally and supports small business.

We can pass legislation that increases pesticide regulation, and further protects our keiki.

We can fully legalize hemp and offer increased support to our family farms.

We can take further meaningful steps to eliminate fossil fuel consumption.

We can reform our elections and campaign systems, and restore faith and confidence in our democracy.

We can do all of this and more, here in Hawaii and set an example for the rest of the world.

And we can do it now, during the 2019 legislative session. But to make it happen we have to turn it up a notch or two or three.

So please click on the identified links below, read and think about the bills, and then offer testimony in support if possible.

Please also share this email with your friends and neighbors.

And please consider offering Pono Hawaii Initiative, (PHI) a financial contribution, whether $25 or $2,500 or anything in between – all is welcome and much needed. While we operate on a very tight budget, we do have expenses and in order to maintain our basic administrative infrastructure and just to keep doing the basic work, we must raise the funding needed. In order to maintain our momentum contributions made this week are urgently needed. Full Disclosure: Contributions are NOT tax deductible, and none of the funds raised will be used to fund the ED position, which I hold.

Thank you in advance for your ongoing help and support, online contributions may be made securely at https://ponohawaiiinitiative.org(scroll to bottom of page). Or checks mailed to P.O. Box 871, Honolulu HI 96808.

Please help if you can.

I understand, this is a long email and I am asking you to read the bills, send emails, and offer a contribution. Please know, I would not be here on my keyboard, early in the evening on Super Bowl Sunday, if the help I am asking for was not critically important.

In solidarity,
Gary Hooser
The above is an excerpt from my recent email, sent out to “my list”…if you would like to be included in future emails, please go here to subscribe and “Join Me”. http://www.garyhooser.com/#four