>> ELECTION FEVER IS SWEEPING THE COUNTRY.

AS HAWAII VOTERS PREPARE TO CAST THEIR BALLOTS LATER THIS YEAR, COULD TAXPAYERS ONE DAY FUND FUTURE CANDIDATES' CAMPAIGNS?

RIGHT NOW VOTERS HAVE THE OPTION TO GIVE, BUT LAWMAKERS WANT TO EXPAND THE PROGRAM - POTENTIALLY USING MILLIONS OF STATE FUNDS TO HELP FUND CAMPAIGNSÖWHETHER YOU VOTE OR NOT.

PUBLIC FINANCING FOR ELECTIONS -- THE PROS AND .. TONIGHT'S LIVE BROADCAST AND LIVE STREAM OF INSIGHTS ON PBS HAWAII START NOW.

# # >> Daryl: ALOHA AND WELCOME TO INSIGHTS ON PB.. DARYL HUFF.

IT'S NO SECRET -- MONEY PLAYS A BIG PART IN POLITICA..

COMMERCIALS, ADS AND EVEN THOSE YARD SIGNS ALL COME AT A COST.

A COST THAT DISCOURAGES MANY PEOPLE FROM RUNNING AT ALL.

BUT WHAT IF CAMPAIGNS WERE FINANCED BY TAX DOLLARS?

DESPITE FALLING SHORT THIS YEAR...THERE'S A GROWING PUSH FOR PUBLICLY FINANCED ELECTIONS.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR PARTICIPATION IN TONIGHT'S SHOW.

YOU CAN EMAIL OR CALL IN YOUR QUESTIONS.

AND YOU'LL FIND A LIVE STREAM OF THIS PROGRAM AT PBSHAWAII.ORG AND THE PBS HAWAII FACEBOOK AND YOUTUBE PAGES.

NOW, TO OUR GUESTS.

KRISTIN IZUMI-NITAO IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STATE CAMPAIGN SPENDING COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION WORKS TO MAKE SURE CAMPAIGN DONATIONS AND EXPENDITURES ARE LEGAL AND TRANSPARENT.

CHAD BLAIR IS WITH HONOLULU CIVIL BEAT.

AS A REPORTER AND EDITOR, HIS WORK HAS FOCUSED ON HOW POLITICAL DECISIONS IMPACT PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES.

HE ALSO HAS A PH.D.

IN AMERICAN STUDIES FROM UH MANOA.

CAMRON HURT IS THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR AT COMMON CAUSE HAWAII - A NON-PARTISAN ORGANIZATION THAT AIMS TO CURB THE EXCESS INFLUENCE OF MONEY IN POLITICS AND PROMOTE FAIR AND HONEST ELECTIONS.

POLITICAL ANALYST COLIN MOORE COMES TO US FROM THE UNIVE.. OF HAWAII AT MANOA WHERE HE HAS BEEN A LONG TIME POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR NOW WORKING IN THE MATSUNAGA INSTITUTE FOR PEACE.

I WAS INTERESTED TO EHAR THAT.

VERY INTERESTING.

LET'S START OFF WITH A BROAD BRUSH LOOK.

THIS MOVE FOR PUBLIC FINANCING IS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY WITH THE SYSTEM.

CAMRON HURT, WELCOME.

GIVE US A SENSE OF WHAT'S SO WRONG WITH IT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED IN THIS DRAMATIC FASHION.

>> I THINK IF WE CAN JUST GO BACK FIRST TO THE CITIZENS UNITED RULING WAY THE SUPREME COURT PASSED, WHICH BASICALLY ALLOWED FOR CORPORATIONS TO HAVE THE SAME BUY-IN AS REGULAR PEOPLE.

THAT REALLY KIND OF CHANGE -- WELL, IT WAS ALR..

BUT IT SOLIDIFIED THE CHANGE IN OUR ELECTION PROCESS.

WHERE CORPORATIONS WERE ABLE TO COMPETE WITH REGULAR PEOPLE FOR POLITICAL INFLUENCE.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PUBLIC PERSON BUT I C..

I CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE STEVE JOBS, WITH THE AMAZONS OF THE WORLD OR EVEN WITH THE LOCAL DEVELOPERS OR MAINLAND DEVELOPMENT HERE.

AND WHAT THAT HAS DONE IS IT'S ALLOWED PEOPLE WITH THE BIGGEST POCKETS TO HAVE THE LOUDEST VOICES IN OUR VOTING SYSTEM.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE SEEKING TO DO IS CHANGE THAT BY GIVING EVERYBODY BUY-IN POWER.

SO ALL OF OUR DOLLARS MATTER.

ALL OF US NEED TO BE COURTED FOR THAT VOTE.

>> Daryl: CHAD BLAIR, AS A LONG-TIME REPORTER.. DO YOU FEEL MONEY IS TOO MUCH OF AN INFLUENCE?

HOW IS IT AN INFLUENCE?

ARE PEOPLE LITERALLY BEING BOUGHT OR IS IT A BR..

SYSTEMIC PROBLEM?

>> NOT JUST CORPORATIONS.

LABOR UNIONS AS WELL.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK A BANK OR AN AIRLINE OR A NAVIGATION COMPANY GIVES MONEY TO A POLITICIAN BECAUSE THEY SUPPORT THEIR VIEWS OR THEY LIKE THEM OR WANT THEM TO BE A SENATOR OR CONGRESSMAN.

I THINK THEY GIVE THEM MONEY BECAUSE THEY WAN..

THEY WANT SOMEONE TO LISTEN.

WHEN THAT PERSON CALLS AND SAYS I NEED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS BILL OR APPROPRIATION, THAT PERSON IS GOING TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND SAY OKAY.

COMPARED TO THE AVERAGE PERSON OR ME OR CAMRON WHO DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MONEY.

MUCH LESS LIKELY THEY'RE GOING TO PAY ATTENTION.

THAT'S HOW YOU GET YOUR FOOT IN THE DOOR, AND THAT'S WHY MONEY AND POLITICS IS SUCH A BIG DEAL.

>> Daryl: KRISTIN, TELL US -- WE TALKED ABOUT CITIZENS UNITED.

WHAT DID IS CITIZEN'S UNITED, AND WHAT DID IT DO TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM?

>> CITIZENS UNITED PERMITS THE FORMATION OF SUPER PACS.

AND SUPER PACS HAVE THE ABILITY TO RAISE UNLIMITED FUNDS.

THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO A CONTRIBUTION LIMIT, AND THEY CAN SPEND AS MUCH AS THEY WANT TO AS LONG AS IT'S NOT COORDINATED WITH A CANDIDATE.

THAT'S PRETTY MUCH CEMENTED THE CORE OF OUR POLITICS HERE, AND SO CURRENTLY, WE HAVE 19 SUPER PACS, AND I THINK EVERYBODY HAS SEEN HOW SUPER PACS HAVE SUPPORTED CANDIDATES, AS WELL AS OPPOSED CANDIDATES.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE A HARD THING WITH SPECIAL INTERESTS THAT CAN UNITE BY FORMING A SUPER PAC AND GETTING ITS PRIORITIES ACROSS BY SORTING -- >> Daryl: HOW LONG AGO WAS CITIZENS UNITED?

ROUGHLY?

I WAS DOING A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, WHICH -- SEEMS LIKE IT'S BEEN HERE FOREVER.

>> 2011.

>> Daryl: I WAS LOOKING AT A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE FROM 2004 -- NO, 2014, AND IT SAID PUBLIC FINANCING DIES AGAIN AT THE LEGISLATURE.

THAT WAS TEN YEARS AGO.

[LAUGHTER] COLIN MOORE, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE IMPACTS ARE ON THE SYSTEM?

HAS IT CHANGED DRAMATICALLY?

IS IT STILL BUSINESS AS USUAL?

>> IN WHAT RESPECT?

>> Daryl: CITIZENS UNITED.

>> I THINK IT'S CHANGED DRAMATICALLY.

THE SUPER PACS WIELD TREMENDOUS POWERS.

THEY'RE VERY DIFFICULT TO REGULATE.

ANOTHER CHANGE THAT HAPPENED PRIOR TO THIS, THE SUPREME COURT SAID WE COULDN'T HAVE EXPENDITURE LIMITS.

AND THAT SORT OF MOTIVATED A LOT OF THE CONCERN ABOUT CAMPAIGN FINANCE.

ONE OF OUR ONLY TOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES IS.. LIMITS.

EVEN THOSE ARE SORT OF IT'S DIFFICULT TO REG.. PUBLIC FINANCING WAS A WAY TO TRY TO CUT THIS CONNECTION BETWEEN DONOR GIVING AND THE ACTIONS OF POLITICIANS.

AND HAWAI'I WAS A PIONEER.

PEOPLE FORGET.

OUR SYSTEM HASN'T BEEN WORKING VERY WELL RECENTLY, BUT IT WAS PART OF THE 1978 CONCON.

TO CREATE THIS PARTIAL PUBLIC FINANCING SYSTEM THAT STILL EXISTS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS AGAIN.

IT'S IMPORTANT FOR FOLKS TO REMEMBER, WE WERE ONE OF THE LEADERS OFF ORIGINALLY.

>> Daryl: WHEN YOU DO A PARTIAL PUBLIC FINANCING, YOU CAN MAKE DEALS WITH THAT CANDIDATE THAT SAYS, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND ANY MORE THAN THIS, RIGHT?

THAT'S THE QUID PRO.

>> THAT'S THE TRADEOFF OF PRETTY MUCH EVERY SYSTEM ACCEPTING PUBLIC FUNDS.

GOVERNMENT TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO PROVIDE YOU MONEY TO RU.. CAMPAIGN.

IN EXCHANGE, YOU'RE GOING TO AGREE TO THIS EX..

THE TROUBLE WITH THIS, AND WE'LL GETTING INTO THIS LATER IN THE PROGRAM.

IS THAT CANDIDATES CAN OPT OUT.

YOU CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN A PUBLIC FUNDING PROGRAM.

SO IF YOU'RE A WELL-CONNECTED CANDIDATE, A R.. YOU CAN ALWAYS RAISE MONEY PRIVATELY.

>> IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT WAS DAVID IGE, A RELATIVELY UNKNOWN STATE SENATOR, CHALLENGING A SITTING GOVERNOR, NEIL ABERCROMBIE, WAS OUTRAISED 10 TO 1 BY THE GOVERNOR.

AND I BELIEVE IGE WAS ON THE PARTIALLY PUBLIC -- >> HE WAS.

>> AS SOON AS HE WON THE PRIMARY, I BELIEVE HE GAVE IT UP, DID HE NOT?

>> Daryl: KRISTIN IZUMI-NITAO, HOW POPULAR IS.. DO A LOT OF CANDIDATES SIGN UP?

>> THE PARTIAL?

>> Daryl: YEAH.

>> SO PARTIAL FUNDING PROGRAM HAS BEEN RUN FOR THE LAST 23 YEARS.

AND WE DO HAVE PEOPLE WHO WIN WITH PARTIAL PUBLIC FUNDS.

THIS PAST YEAR, WE WANTED TO BOOST ITS PARTICIPATION BY OFFERING TWO TO ONE MATCH.

SO IT HAS NOT BEEN REALLY TOUCHED.

>> Daryl: TWO TO ONE?

WHAT'S THE MECHANISM?

>> BASICALLY, IF YOU RAISE SO MUCH, WE WILL DOUBLE THE MATCH REQUIREMENT, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT BILL DID NOT MAKE IT THROUGH THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

>> Daryl: IT WAS A PROPOSAL.

>> IT WAS A BILL.

NO, THE PUBLIC FUNDING PROGRAM PRETTY MUCH EX.. YOU KNOW, FROM ITS CREATION.

AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO BOOST IT TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION.

BUT IT HAS MET WITH A LOT OF TROUBLES.

PARTICULARLY, BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PUBLIC FUNDING, IT WAS SORT OF MISCONCEIVED AS COMPETITION, BUT I THINK THE COMMISSION UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED PROGRAM.

AND IT'S ONE FOR WHICH THERE'S MONEY, AND ONE.. DON'T NEED ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL AT THE RATE IT'S RUNNING.

>> Daryl: THE ONE THAT WE HAVE.

>> THE ONE WE HAVE.

SO THAT'S WHY WE TRY TO BOOST IT.

>> Daryl: I'D LIKE TO HAVE CAMRON PITCH IN.

FROM YOUR OBSERVATION OF HAWAI'I POLITICS, WHERE DO YOU SEE THE MONEY HAVING THE MOST INFLUENCE AND MOST CONCERNING FOR YOU?

>> I DON'T THINK THERE'S ONE AREA BECAUSE CORRUPTION RUNS SO DEEP.

IT IS ALL VERY CONCERNING.

WHEN WE THINK ABOUT EVEN THE PARTIAL FUNDING THAT WE HAVE NOW, WHY DIDN'T THAT BILL MOVE FORWARD?

WE JUST HEARD IT'S BEEN AS IT WAS WHEN IT WAS FIRST WRITTEN, IT'S BEEN AS IT WAS.

WE DO HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO RUN USING IT, SUCH AS IGE OR REPRESENTATIVE CAPELLA, AND THEY ARE ABLE TO WIN.

BUT WHEN YOU TALK TO THEM ONE OFF, THEY'LL T.. GET A LOT OF MONEY FROM IT.

IT'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO WHERE IT SIGNIFICANTLY MATTERS AND I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO TURN YOUR BACK ON FULLY FUNDING CAMPAIGN FINANCING AND NOT IMPROVING THE SYSTEM WE HAVE SEEMS LIKE NEGLECT.

>> Daryl: FOR COLIN AND CHAD, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES IT COST FOR THE STATE HOUSE OR STATE SENATE OR GOVERNOR?

AND IS THERE A BIG DIFFERENCE THERE?

I'VE SEEN RELATIVE NOBODIES WHO ARE WILLING TO PUT THE SHOES THEY'RE IN AND WALK A HOUSE DISTRICT, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WIN.

DEPENDING ON HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT THE INCUMBENT.

IS THERE SOME LEVEL AT WHICH THE MONEY STARTS HAVING A LOT MORE INFLUENCE?

>> I THINK YOU NEED ENOUGH MONEY TO BE COMPETITIVE.

SURE, OUR LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS ARE SMALL ENOUGH WHERE THAT KIND OF PERSON TO PERSON CONTACT CAN STILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

I ACTUALLY CRUNCHED THE NUMBERS, AND IT'S ABOUT $40,000 IN THE HOUSE.

SO THE 13 HOUSE CANDIDATES WHO BEAT AN INCUMB..

PROBABLY THE BAR YOU WANT TO EVALUATE.

OPEN SEATS CAN BE A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT TO DISCUSS.

THEY SPEND ABOUT $40,000, AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT IF YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO RAISE PRETTY CLOSE TO $40,000 FOR A HOUSE SEAT, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO WIN, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY THE THRESHOLD YOU NEED TO REACH.

>> Daryl: THAT'S THE SMALL COMPETITIVE DISTRICT WE HAVE.

$40,000, THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY.

>> CAMPAIGN SPENDING COMMISSION TRACKS IT.

I SAW ONE PERSON, HOUSE SPEAKER SCOTT SAIKI, WHO'S BEEN IN TIGHT RACES LAST TWO CYCLES.

UP AGAINST KIM COCO IWAMOTO.

BARELY WON BOTH TIMES.

LIKE 130, 140 VOTES.

WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS THIS TIME.

SPEAKER SAIKI, I BELIEVE, SPENT WELL OVER $200,000 TO KEEP THAT SEAT HERE ON OAHU.

AND THE SENATE, WHAT'S THE AVERAGE?

80 TO $100,000.

LORRAINE INOUYE RAN AGAINST LAURA A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.

SHE SPENT SOMETHING LIKE $160,000.

THEY'RE MUCH BIGGER.

REMEMBER THIS, YOU CAN'T BUY TELEVISION ADS FOR A HOUSE OR SENATE OR COUNCIL SEAT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PROFITABLE.

>> Daryl: WHAT ARE THEY SPENDING THIS MONEY ON?

SCOTT SAIKI'S DISTRICT IS, LIKE, FROM BLOCK A TO B.

NOT A VERY BIG SPACE.

A LOT OF CONDOS.

>> YEAH, A LOT OF CONDOS.

>> IT DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH MONEY YOUR OPPONENT IS SPENDING.

>> WHAT ARE THEY SPENDING THE MONEY ON?

THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS YOU GUYS TRACK.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN YOU SPEND $200,000 IN A HOUSE RACE, WHAT ARE YOU SPENDING IT ON?

>> YOU'RE BUYING FLIERS AND DOING BANNERS AND DOING COMMERCIALS, DOING ADS AND SOCIAL MEDIA.

IT'S MAILINGS.

YOU'RE DOING ALL OF THAT.

SO THE MONEY, I HAVE TO ADMIT, THERE'S EIGHT AUTHORIZED USES FOR CANDIDATES, AND MOSTLY DIRECTLY RELATED TO THEIR CAMPAIGN TO WIN IT.

THAT'S A GOOD INDICATOR.

I DO WANT TO COMMENT THAT IF IT'S $40,000 IS THE NUMBER TO WIN A HOUSE RACE AND -- >> 80 TO 120.

>> Daryl: IT'S CALLED COMPETE.

>> ON A GOOD NOTE, THAT'S WHERE THE FULL PUBLIC FUNDING BILL CAME IN.

IT WAS A CRUNCH OF NUMBERS AS TO THE AVERAGE ..

THE WINNER IN THOSE RACES.

SO IT'S REAL NUMBERS, BUT YES, IT'S SORT OF SKEWED, TOO BECAUSE THERE WILL BE RACES THAT GO ABOVE THAT AND THERE WILL BE RACES WAY BELOW THAT.

IT HAS TO DO WITH AN INCUMBENT, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE POLITICAL MAKEUP OF THE PERSON, OPPONENT.

>> THE DISTRICT.

>> ABSOLUTELY, CAMRON.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWN FACTORS, BUT FOR PURPOSE OF THIS BILL, AT LEAST THE NUMBERS, THE MAXIMUM AMOUNTS THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO QUALIFY FOR WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE DATA AS TO WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO WIN.

>> BY THE WAY, SPENDING ON CAMPAIGN THERE'S B..

VOLUNTEERS, BOTTLES OF WATER, T-SHIRTS.

>> TO THE BILL, IS IT SB 3281?

IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, SOMEONE WHO GOT REQUISITE SIGNATURES TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR COULD QUALIFY FOR AS MUCH AS, WAS IT $2.5 MILLION IN A GOVERNOR'S RACE?

JOSH GREEN TWO YEARS AGO SPENT $4.5 MILLION.

THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED.

A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS TO BE COMPETITIVE IN A STATEWIDE ELECTION FOR GOVER.. >> Daryl: LET ME THROW OUT A GOOD QUESTION FROM A VIEWER.

NICOS FROM ALIAMANU.

HOW CAN A PUBLIC FINANCING SYSTEM -- WE'RE TALKING BROADLY.

HOW CAN A PUBLIC FINANCING SYSTEM RESPOND TO PAC SPENDING?

LIKE MILLIONS SPENT OPPOSING JILL TOKUDA AND SYLVIA LUKE IN 2022 WERE SELF-FUNDED CHECKBOOK CANDIDACIES?

CAMRON FROM COMMON CAUSE.

ANY PUBLIC FINANCE SYSTEM WILL ELIMINATE THIS KIND OF PAC SPENDING?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

ONE, YOU CAN LOOK AT OTHER STATES AND CITIES .. THAT HAVE IMPLEMENTED CAMPAIGN FINANCING.

WHAT WE HAVE TO REALIZE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A CULTURAL SHIFT, NOT AN IMMEDIATE SHIFT.

IF WE INTRODUCE FULLY-FUNDED CAMPAIGN FINANCING, THEN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE.

OVER TIME THE PUBLIC WOULD SAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE USING OUR MONEY.

IF YOU'RE USING MY MONEY, I WANT TO SEE YOU TAKE NO MONEY FROM THE SUPER PACS.

AND SHOULD I SEE YOU GET CAMPAIGN FINANCING AND TAKE MONEY FROM SUPER PACS, I WON'T VOTE FOR YOU.

>> Daryl: BUT TECHNICALLY, THEY'RE NOT TAKING THE MONEY FROM THE SUPER PACS.

SUPER PACS ARE JUST SPENDING IT.

>> OH, SPENDING TO COMBAT THEM OR SUPPORT THEM.

>> Daryl: YEAH.

IT'S AN OUTSIDE GROUP.

>> IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE CANDIDATES THAT HAVE INT.. AND RESPECT.

SO IF YOU SIGN A PLEDGE THAT YOU WOULD NOT SU.. YOU'RE BATTLING AGAINST DOLLARS BEING SPENT AGAINST YOU BY SUPER PACS, THAT'S WHERE IT'S GREAT THAT THIS BILL HAS IT WHERE YOU HAVE COMMUNITY SUPPORT.

IF YOU WANT TO BRING IN MONEY AND YOU'RE AN OUTSIDER TO MY COMMUNITY AND I'VE DONE MY LEGWORK TO GET MY $5 CONTRIBUTION, I'M ALREADY ABLE TO COMPETE BETTER THAN BEFORE.

>> Daryl: I THINK THIS IS NICOS.

HE BROUGHT UP SYLVIA LUKE.

IT WAS A SUPER PAC.

THE CARPENTERS UNION, PRP THAT SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TO DEFEAT SYLVIA LUKE IN THE PRIMARY FOR LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR TWO YEARS AGO.

AND THEY SUPPORTED IKAIKA ANDERSON.

YES, THEY CANNOT COORDINATE, AND ANDERSON WAS KIND HANDS-OFF BUT IT BACKFIRED.

FOR ONE THING, THE ADS WERE TERRIBLE.

NOBODY SEEMED TO BUY THAT SYLVIA LUKE WAS THIS CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE BEING DESCRIBED.

SO IT CAN BACKFIRE.

THE VOTERS CAN SEE THROUGH THIS.

>> Daryl: LET ME ASK COLIN.

JUMP IN ON THAT BECAUSE THAT'S CITIZEN UNITED.

YOU CAN'T STOP SOME INDEPENDENT GROUP FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE CAMPAIGN.

DOES IT WORK?

CAN YOU CAMPAIGN AGAINST THOSE GROUPS AND WIN?

IT SEEMS LIKE PEOPLE FLOUNDER AROUND.

>> SURE.

YOU CAN CAMPAIGN AGAINST THEM AND WIN.

JILL TOKUDA WON.

SYLVIA LUKE WON.

PUBLIC FINANCING IS NOT A SILVER BULLET.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP SUPER PAC SPENDING.

WE SHOULD BE CLEAR ON THAT.

SUPER PACS ARE STILL GOING TO BE INVOLVED, BUT I AGREE WITH CAMRON.

IT CAN BEGIN THIS CULTURAL SHIFT.

IT IS A MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO SAY AFTER CITIZENS UNITED, THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO.

WE THROW UP OUR HANDS AND SAY, THE AMERICAN .. FINANCE SYSTEM IS HORRIBLY CORRUPT, AND THAT'S ALL THERE IS TO SAY.

>> CANNOT BECOME -- WE CAN'T SIT IDLE ON OUR HANDS.

BECAUSE -- SPECIAL SHOUTOUT TO REPRESENTATIVE TARNES WHO CALLED THE BILL FATALLY FLAWED.

I WOULD LOVE TO GET HIS DIAGNOSIS OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM.

IF THE BILL IS FATALLY FLAWED, WHAT HAS PERPETUATED CORRUPTION UNLIKE MOST STATES IN THE UNION THAT WE'VE SEEN.

>> I'D LIKE TO ASK TARNES WHY HE DIDN'T TRY AND FIX THE BILL AND MAKE IT BETTER SO IT COULD PASS.

>> ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HAD MEAT IN THE BEGINNING IN THE SENATE WHEN IT WAS VOTED UNANIMOUSLY THROUGH.

>> Daryl: CAN OUR POLITICAL CLASS, EXISTING LEGISLATURE, EVER BE TRUSTED TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM THAT BASICALLY ENTRENCHES THEM IN OFFICE?

>> THAT'S THE BEST QUESTION.

[LAUGHTER] >> Daryl: THAT IS THE QUESTION.

>> WE'VE GOT TO CHANGE THE, I WOULD SAY, THE..

POLITICIANS.

BECAUSE CAN IT HAPPEN?

ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

YOU CAN'T CONVINCE ME THAT WE DON'T HAVE LEGISLATORS WHO WANT TO DO THE WORK OF THE COMMUNITY.

YOU CAN'T CONVINCE ME WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE NOW WHO WOULD LOVE TO VIE FOR A SEAT TO DO THE WORK OF THE COMMUNITY.

IS IT POSSIBLE?

YES.

BUT I OFTEN SAY THIS.

IN THE LATE 1800S, MERCHANTS CAME TO THIS ISLAND NATION AND TOOK IT.

THEY HAVE NOT LOOSENED THEIR GRIP SINCE.

WE'VE GOT TO CHANGE THE SYSTEMIC CULTURE OF THIS.

>> Daryl: OKAY.

I THINK WE CAN START WALKING INTO DETAILS AROUND HOW THIS WOULD WORK.

SHERI E-MAILED, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO THOSE ASSERTING WHO SAY CLEAN ELECTIONS ARE OPEN DOOR TO FRINGE CANDIDATES AND FRAUD.

KRISTIN, HOW WOULD THIS WORK?

SO YOU'RE NOT JUST GIVING MONEY TO ANYBODY, AND WITHOUT STRINGS ATTACHED, HOW WOULD THE MECHANISM WORK THAT YOU'RE GIVING IT TO REAL CANDIDATES WHO WILL SPEND IT ON REAL ELECTION?

>> WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SPIRIT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE FUNDING PROGRAM, SO THE BILL REALLY -- AND CHAD, THE BILL WAS SENATE BILL 2381.

YEAH.

AND THE WAY THE PROGRAM RUNS IS SHOULD THE CAMPA.. FUNDING COMMISSION DECLARE THAT THEY'LL RUN THE PROGRAM BECAUSE THEY HAVE EFFICIENT FUNDS.

WE HAVE $2 MILLION IN THE TRUST FUND -- >> Daryl: WAIT.

$30 MILLION TO DO THIS PROGRAM?

>> WELL, THE $30 MILLION IS A NUMBER THAT THE COMMISSION COMPUTED FOR THE 128 SEATS, ASSUMING THAT YOU HAVE TWO CANDIDATES RUNNING.

IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN TWO CANDIDATES RUNNING, THIS NUMBER INCREASES INCREMENTALLY.

IT'S AN ESTIMATE.

NOT EVERYBODY WILL OPT IN.

I AGREE WITH CAMRON, COLIN, CHAD.

IT HAS -- THE PUBLIC FUNDING PROGRAM HAS TO GROW SYSTEMICALLY.

IT HAS TO BE A STRATEGY ACCEPTED BY ALL FOR A CULTURAL SHIFT.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE YET.

BUT I CAN SEE IT'S BENEFITS.

I'M NOT SURE WE'RE THERE YET BECAUSE LOOK AT THE BILL.

IT DID NOT PASS.

AS FAR AS OPERATIONALLY, A CANDIDATE, IF THEY WERE RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR, THEY HAVE TO GET 6,250 FIVE-DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS.

AND THIS WILL HAVE TO BE -- >> FROM INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE.

>> FROM INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE.

HAWAI'I VOTERS.

AND THAT HAS TO BE CONFIRMED BY NAME, THEIR ADDRESS, DATE OF BIRTH, AND SIGNATURE, WHICH WE WOULD HAVE TO VERIFY OR CERTIFY THEY'RE LEGITIMATE.

>> I'M ONE OF THOSE GUYS.

I CAN ONLY GIVE THAT PERSON $5.

>> YES.

>> I CAN'T GIVE MORE?

>> NO.

SMALL DOLLAR CONTRIBUTION IS FIVE DOLLARS.

SO SHOULD THIS PERSON GET 6.250 FIVE-DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS, AND HAVE AN OPPONENT AND GO TO THE PRIMARY, THE PRIMARY -- THE STATE WILL GIVE THEM $1,675,000.

AND SHOULD THEY SURVIVE THE PRIMARY, GO TO THE GENERAL, THEY WILL GET $825,000 FOR A TOTAL OF $2.5 MILLION.

>> THE THRESHOLD IS VERY DIFFERENT FOR COUNTY RACES.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> STATE RACES.

FAR FEWER SIGNATURES.

THAT'S THE BIGGEST NUT THERE.

>> I CAN CONTRAST THAT WITH THE LOWEST FIGURE FOR THE BIG ISLAND OR HAWAI'I COUNTY COUNCIL.

THEY WOULD ONLY REQUIRE 50, 5-DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS.

IF THEY HAVE AN OPPONENT IN THE PRIMARY, THEY WILL RECEIVE $13,400.

AND SHOULD THEY MOVE ON, THEY WILL GET $6,600 FOR A TOTAL OF $20,000 FOR THE HAWAI'I COUNTY COUNCIL PROGRAM.

SO THERE'S A BIG VARIETY, AND THIS RUNS FOR EVERY SINGLE SEAT HAS A DIFFERENT COMPUTATION.

>> Daryl: COLIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW TO GET INTO THIS SYSTEM.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT STRUCTURE?

>> THIS IS A SOLID STRUCTURE.

$50,000.

I SAID $40,000 MAKES YOU COMPETITIVE.

WE'RE NOT FLYING BLIND.

THERE ARE THREE BIG STATES THAT RUN THIS SYSTEM.

ARIZONA, MAINE AND CONNECTICUT.

MAINE AND CONNECTICUT HAVE GENEROUS FORMS OF FUNDING.

IN SOME ELECTIONS, 80% CANDIDATES OPTING IN.

WE KNOW IT WORKS IN OTHER STATES.

IT'S NOT PERFECT.

THEY HAVE THEIR STRUGGLES, BUT HAWAI'I ISN'T ..

TRY THIS.

WE WOULDN'T BE THE FIRST TO IMPLEMENT IT.

THERE IS PLENTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE RESEARCH THAT SAYS THIS DOES A LOT OF GOOD THINGS.

PROBABLY INCREASES THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES.

IT PROBABLY INCREASES CANDIDATE DIVERSITY.

IT PROBABLY DOES NOT LEAD TO MORE FRINGE CANDIDATES RUNNING.

GETTING 125 PEOPLE IN YOUR DISTRICT TO GIVE YOU $5, THAT MIGHT SOUND EASY, BUT WALK AROUND YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

SAY I'M RUNNING FOR OFFICE.

GIVE ME $5.

THAT'S HARD.

PEOPLE FORGET, VERY FEW PEOPLE GIVE ANY MONEY T..

EVER.

FEDERALLY, ONE HALF OF 1% GIVE MORE THAN $200 EVERY..

CYCLE.

IT'S A RELATIVELY HIGH BAR.

>> I WOULD PUSH BACK.

HOW MUCH ARE YOU LOOKING AT?

THE CURRENT SYSTEM NOW, ALL I NEED IS A WEALTHY DONOR OR WEALTHY FAMILY, AND I CAN HAVE THE MOST OFF-THE-WALL IDEAS.

NOT REFERENCING ANYBODY THAT WE KNOW THAT HELD A SEAT.

>> NAME NAMES.

>> DON'T TEMPT ME.

THIS CURRENT SYSTEM ALLOWS FOR FRINGE CANDIDATES TO THRIVE.

ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS BE WEALTHY.

TO TOUCH ON SOMETHING THAT COLIN SAID, WITH THE DIVERSITY OF THIS PROGRAM, THIS PROGRAM CAN BRING, THE WAY SYSTEMICALLY THAT CERTAIN GROUPS HAVE MORE ACCESS TO MONEY IN THIS COUNTRY AND EVEN IN IT STATE.

THINGS LOOK A WAY FOR A REASON.

>> Daryl: CHAD, THE TERM FRINGE CANDIDATE, I THINK YOU AND I HAVE HAD EXPERIENCE WITH FRINGE CANDIDATES.

WHEN YOU WORK IN NEWS ORGANIZATION AND PEOPLE SAY I WANT EQUAL TIME TO THE GUY WHO'S GOT A CHANCE OF WINNING.

LIKE IT WOULDN'T ELIMINATE SUPER PACS, IT WOULDN'T ELIMINATE FRINGE CANDIDATES.

YOU CAN STILL RUN FOR OFFICE WITH VERY LITTLE -- LIKE.. SIGNATURES.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I WOULD EVEN SAY THERE'S EVEN FRINGE INCUMBE.. PEOPLE GET TO VOTE.

I THINK MANY WON'T LAST.

VOTERS WILL FIGURE OUT THEY DON'T BELONG THERE, AND THEY GENERALLY DON'T LAST VERY LONG.

IS ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR., A FRINGE CANDIDATE?

HE COLLECTED ENOUGH SIGNATURES, HIS TEAM, TO GET ON THE BALLOT IN HAWAI'I.

GUESS WHO'S CHALLENGING HIM?

DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF HAWAI'I.

>> Daryl: JOE BIDEN COULD LOSE HAWAI'I?

REALLY?

>> I DIDN'T SAY THAT AT ALL.

>> Daryl: SEVERAL QUESTIONS COMING IN ABOUT THE OTHER END.

THE SPENDING END.

THESE ARE TAXPAYER DOLLARS THAT ARE GOING TO THESE FOLKS.

BACK TO YOU, KRISTIN.

HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T JUST GO BUY A MERCEDES WITH IT OR GO OFF AND GO TRAVELING THE WORLD WITH THAT MONEY?

TWO QUESTIONS I WANT TO READ.

WHAT MECHANISMS WOULD BE NECESSARY TO ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN A SYSTEM OF PUBLIC FINANCING FOR ELECTION?

FROM BRIAN.

KEVIN SAYS, ONE OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT POTENT..

TAXPAYER MONEY.

CAN WE GUARANTEE THESE DOLLARS WON'T BE MISUSED?

>> LIKE ANY CANDIDATE RUNNING IN OUR STATE SYSTEM, THEY HAVE TO FILE REPORTS.

THOSE REPORTS WILL TELL YOU HOW THEY'RE SPENDI.. AND FOR PUBLICLY FUNDED CANDIDATE, I REFER TO EIGHT AUTHORIZES USES.

IT'S VERY LIMITED.

THEY CANNOT BE BUYING TICKETS TO ANOTHER CANDIDATE'S FUNDRAISER.

THEY CANNOT GIVE TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS OR PUBLIC SCHOOLS OR PUBLIC LIBRARY.

THIS WAS VERY SPECIFIC.

IT HAS TO BE SPENT TO GET VOTED INTO OFFICE.

AND AS FAR AS THE MISUSE OF IT, WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THAT.

SO A LOT OF TIMES, WE'LL SEE THEY USE IT FOR THINGS LIKE A HAIRCUT OR SOME COFFEE OR TO BUY A SHIRT OR SOMETHING IN THAT CATEGORY THAT'S MORE OF A PERSONAL USE.

SO WE'LL HAVE TO MONITOR IT.

NOW, THAT IS A REASON WHY WE BELIEVE, THE COMMISSION BELIEVES A NUMBER OF EDUCATION, TRAINING, NEW FORMS, NEW GUIDEBOOKS, THINGS WILL HAVE TO BE VERY SPECIFICALLY GEARED TOWARDS THIS NEW GROUP OF PEOPLE.

SOME OF WHOM HAVE NEVER RUN BEFORE.

>> Daryl: NEVER HAD THAT MUCH MONEY BEFORE.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THEY HAVE TO ALSO UNDERSTAND WHILE THEY MAY QUALI.. MONEY, WE WILL ALWAYS RESERVE THE RIGHT TO DO BACK AND AUDIT IT.

20 DAYS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM THE MONEY.

>> Daryl: COUPLE QUESTIONS.

SOMEONE WHO'S COVERED THIS FOR MANY YEARS, THE REPORTING OF THE SPENDING COMES OUT OF THESE REPORTS THAT ARE GENERATED BASED ON THE CALENDAR.

SO DO YOU NEED TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE IN YOUR AGENCY TO MONITOR THIS IN REAL TIME, OR DO YOU SEE HAVING A REAL TIME REPORTING SYSTEM.

WHEN SOMEONE SPENDS SOMETHING, IT IMMEDIATELY.. SHEET AND IS PUBLIC?

>> THE LATTER IS NOT HOW THE SYSTEM HAS BEEN BUILT.

NOR DOES THE LAW REQUIRES THAT.

REPORTING PERIODS FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

AND THERE'S A DEADLINE TO FILE THAT REPORT.

>> Daryl: IT'S A TON OF STUFF COMES IN AT THE SAME TIME.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

AND SOMETIMES REPORTS BUNCH UP TOGETHER.

WE HAVE A PRIMARY AND GENERAL.

THOSE ARE QUICK TURNAROUNDS.

WHAT IS GOOD, BECAUSE IT'S ELECTRONIC, ONCE IT'S FILED, ANYBODY CAN LOOK AT THE DATA.

AND IT CAN BE SEARCHED VERY QUICKLY.

THAT MECHANISM IS THERE.

>> TO ADD TO THAT REAL QUICK.

THEY'RE NOT OUT HERE THEMSELVES.

THAT BECOME PUBLIC IMMEDIATELY.

WATCHDOG GROUPS LIKE MYSELF, COMMON CAUSE AND OTHERS GROUPS WILL SUPPORT.

>> Daryl: SO WE'VE PRETTY MUCH -- I THINK WE FAIRLY DESCRIBED WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

ALL FOUR OF YOU, WHAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS ARGUMENT?

ARE THERE THINGS WE'RE NOT MENTIONING HERE?

THIS IS BASICALLY A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT SUPPORT -- CHAD, MAYBE YOU'RE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD.

BASICALLY SUPPORT THIS.

SO WHAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY HERE?

>> INCUMBENTS DON'T WANT TO LOSE.

>> Daryl: WE KNOW THAT PART.

>> I KNOW BUT THE HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER WENT ON RECORD SAYING, SHE'S A DEMOCRAT.

IT'S A DEMOCRATIC PARTY CONTROLLED STATE.

ADMITTED THEY WORRY, SHE AND OTHERS, THAT MORE REPUBLICANS WILL GET INTO OFFICE IF THIS COMPREHENSIVE PUBLIC FINANCING SYSTEM TAKES PLACE.

>> NOT TRYING TO BE A DOG WHISTLE.

YOU CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A REPUBLICAN.

YOU'RE TRYING TO -- YOU MIGHT GET UNSEATED IN THE PRIMARY.

DEMOCRACY IS COMPETITION.

>> THIS IS THE SAME BODY THAT DOESN'T WANT TERM LIMITS.

IT DOES GO TO THIS FUNDAMENTAL FEAR THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE CHALLENGED.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATS ARE.

SOMETHING LIKE 90% OF ALL INCUMBENTS GET IN YEAR AFTER YEAR.

AND THEY LIKE THEIR JOBS.

THERE'S BENEFITS.

SOME OF THESE GUYS HAVE SO MUCH MONEY THAT THEY CAN GIVE MONEY TO OTHER CAMPAIGNS.

>> AND DO.

>> EVEN THOUGH THAT'S NOT WHAT THE DONOR PLAN..

THEM A CHECK.

>> COLIN WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN.

>> OKAY.

LET ME GIVE YOU THE STRONG ARGUMENT AGAINST ..

THIS IS -- >> I'M THE SIMPLE MAN.

>> NO, I DIDN'T MEAN THAT.

SO THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE SCEPTICS.

I THINK A STRONG VERSION IS, A, THIS IS A WASTE OF MONEY.

IT DOESN'T HAVE MUCH OF AN EFFECT ON PUBLIC POLICIES THAT ARE CREATED.

IT DOESN'T REALLY DO MUCH TO MAKE THE DONORS AND CA.. MORE DIVERSE.

IT MIGHT CREATE MORE POLARIZATION IF YOU GET ..

CANDIDATES ELECTED.

IT DOESN'T DO MUCH TO END CORRUPTION.

SOME OF THIS IS TRUE.

NOT BECAUSE THIS DOES HARM.

WE DON'T HAVE EVIDENCE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT STATES THAT HAVE IMPLEMENTED A PUBLIC FINANCING SYSTEM SHOW MEASURABLE DECREASES IN CORRUPTION.

PARTLY BECAUSE THAT'S A HARD THING TO MEASURE.

IF WE HAD PUBLIC FINANCING, WOULD THIS HAVE STOPPED SOMETHING LIKE THE KALANI ENGLISH SCANDAL?

PROBABLY NOT.

>> Daryl: WE'RE TOUGH ON CAMPAIGN MONEY.

THEY NEED TO TAKE THEIR BRIBES IN CASH ENVELOPES.

>> OR POKER CHIPS.

>> BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S VERY LITTLE EVIDENCE IN ANY STATES THAT IMPLEMENTED THIS.

THIS HASN'T LARGELY BEEN A FORCE FOR GOOD.

IT HASN'T DONE ANYTHING BAD.

THE ONLY ARGUMENT IS THAT MONEY IS BETTER SPENT ELSEWHERE.

>> Daryl: THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY FOR AN UNPROVEN -- >> NOT UNPROVEN.

>> BUT YOU DON'T KNOW FOR SURE.

YOU KNOW IF YOU SPEND MONEY ON A ROAD, YOU'LL GET A ROAD.

>> YEAH.

>> ALIKA ASKED, WHAT ARE THE PROVEN BENEFITS?

ARE THERE ANY BENEFITS THAT WOULD SPECIFICALLY HELP WOMEN AND GIRLS?

>> YES.

WE'VE SEEN DIVERSITY IN CANDIDATES SHOOT UP.

EVERY RESEARCH SHOWS WITH ACCESS TO PUBLIC FUNDS COMES MORE DIVERSITY.

AND HERE IN HAWAI'I, WE HAVE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO.. GET OUR YOUNG WOMEN POPULATION INVOLVED, BUT TO GET KANAKA INVOLVED IN A WAY.

IN A WAY THEY'RE NOT REPRESENTED.

LET'S CALL A SPADE A SPADE.

THEY'RE NOT WELL REPRESENTED, AND THEY CAN'T REPRESENT IN THEIR COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY'RE OUTSPENT BY CANDIDATES.

SO WE COULD SEE AN INCREASE IN WOMEN LEGISLATORS.

WE COULD SEEN AN INCREASE IN KANAKA LEGISLATORS.

WE CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT CULTURAL SHIFT THAT MIGHT BRING.

>> Daryl: TO THROW OUT MY OPINION, WHICH IS ALWAYS DANGEROUS.

[LAUGHTER] IN COVERING ELECTIONS FOR MANY YEARS, WHAT YOU DO SEE IS INCUMBENTS GET THE MONEY.

A LOT OF THEM DON'T BUCK THE SYSTEM, AND YOU DON'T GET CHANGE.

SO IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE SOMETHING, CHANGE SOMETHING.

DON'T KEEP GOING BACK TO THE SAME WHEELHOUSE.

>> AND A LOT OF INCUMBENTS RUN UNCHALLENGED.

THEY'RE UNCHALLENGED BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE MUCH MONEY TO RUN AGAINST THEM.

SO EVEN IF THEY WERE TO RUN, EVEN IF THEY WERE TO RAISE MONEY PRIVATELY, WHICH A LOT OF INCUMBENTS PROBABLY WOULD, THEY'D STILL HAVE LEGITIMATE CHALLENGERS.

THEY HAD $50,000 TO SEND FLIERS.

THEY HAVE TO RUN A REAL CAMPAIGN.

THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO SAYS, I JUST GOT REELECTED.

>> Daryl: TALK ABOUT THE COUNCIL PAY RAISE ISSUE.

THE ONES THAT ARE RUNNING FOR REELECTION WITHIN SEVEN OR EIGHT MONTHS OF PAYING THAT RAISE DIDN'T TAKE THE PAY RAISE.

BUT THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE NOT HAVING TO RUN AGAIN FOR THREE YEARS TENDED TO TAKE THE PAY RAISE.

WHAT THEY NEEDED WOULD HAVE TO BE A WELL-FUNDED CHALLENGER TO SAY, REMEMBER THREE YEARS AGO, HE TOOK THIS MONEY.

AND OTHER ISSUES LIKE THAT.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE GOOD CHALLENGERS TO BRING UP FLAWS OF THE CANDIDATES.

>> THAT'S WHAT MONEY WOULD DO.

WE HAVE A MICROWAVEABLE MEMORY NOW.

IT'S VERY QUICK.

IF I'M GOING TO CAMPAIGN ADS NOW, I'M GOING TO REMIND YOU..

THIS TV AD, THIS COUNCILMEMBER TOOK THE MONEY.

IF I'M A GOOD CANDIDATE AND I DON'T HAVE THAT MONEY TO DRIVE THAT MESSAGING HOME, I'M FIGHTING ON MY OWN.

>> Daryl: I HAVE TO ANNOUNCE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

I DO WORK FOR A FOR-PROFIT TELEVISION STATION.

HOW MUCH DOES A 60-SECOND POLITICAL AD COST?

ANYBODY GOT THAT MONEY?

>> YOU'RE A TV PERSON.

>> Daryl: I DON'T TAKE MONEY IN PERSON.

>> IT'S THE BIGGEST EXPENSE.

THE GOVERNOR, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, SENATOR, IT IS AN ENORMOUS COST, AND LOCAL TV STATIONS, AS WELL AS RADIO STATIONS, I WORK FOR A NONPROFIT SO I CAN SAY THIS.

IT'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.

EVEN SOCIAL MEDIA, EVEN THOUGH IT'S INEXPENSIVE COMPARED TO TV, IT'S BECOMING MORE EXPENSIVE BECAUSE IT HAS GREAT REACH.

>> Daryl: WHAT DO THE CAMPAIGNS LOOK LIKE?

>> WELL, I HOPE THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE SPEECH.

THAT'S THE PHILOSOPHY BEHIND THIS.

WE CAN'T REALLY REGULATE WHAT THE WEALTHIEST CANDIDATES ARE SPENDING.

THEY HAVE A BIG VOICE.

MY HOPE IS YOU WOULD HAVE MORE CANDIDATES RUNNING, MORE DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES, MORE FLIERS IN YOUR MAILBOX.

IT'S NOT SO MUCH THAT MONEY AND POLITICS IS BAD.

IT'S GOOD TO SPEND MONEY GETTING FAMILIAR WITH CANDIDATES.

GETTING PEOPLE FAMILIAR WITH ISSUES.

BUT IT'S UNEQUAL.

NOT EVERYONE HAS THAT OPPORTUNITY.

>> Daryl: NOW, MOVING ALONG, I LOVE THE WAY THIS SHOW IS GOING.

WE GOT A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE.

SO BEYOND PUBLIC FINANCING, WHAT OTHER REFORM.. SYSTEMS ARE NEEDED?

GOOD QUESTION.

CAN WE DO THIS THROUGH A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND NOT IN THE LEGISLATURE?

THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS AN ISSUE.

>> WE DON'T HAVE CITIZENS INITIATIVE AT THE STATE LEVEL.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE OR HAVE A CONCON.

I WONDER WHY YOU PUT THE CARD ASIDE.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME PROGRESS.

>> Daryl: IT'S SAME GUY WROTE THE QUESTION.

[LAUGHTER] >> THERE HAS BEEN SOME CHANGE.

THERE IS A LAW IN PLACE, A COUPLE YEARS.

KRISTIN, CORRECT ME IF I HAVE THE DATE WRONG.

YOU CANNOT HOLD AN ORGANIZED FUNDRAISER WHEN THE LEGISLATURE IS MEETING IN SESSION, WHICH IS NOW FROM JANUARY TO MAY.

>> IF YOU'RE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.

>> IF YOU'RE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.

YOU CAN STILL ACCEPT CONTRIBUTIONS.

YOU JUST CANNOT SAY, COME TO MY FUNDRAISER.

CONSIDER GIVING $500 OR $2,000.

ONE EXAMPLE, WHETHER IT WILL CHANGE GOING FORWARD, I THINK IT'S TOO SOON.

PEOPLE ARE STILL GETTING MONEY.

>> IT CAN'T BE FROM A LOBBYIST.

>> THAT'S ANOTHER CHANGE.

>> Daryl: REASON THIS QUESTION CAME UP, ANONYMO.. WE CAN'T GET THE LEGISLATURE TO DO IT, WHAT ABOUT A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION?

WE HAVEN'T APPROVED THE -- VOTERS HAVEN'T APPROVED A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION -- >> EVERY TEN YEARS, IT AUTOMATICALLY COMES UP OR LEGISLATURE HAS SOMEONE PROPOSE IT.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE.

BEFORE 1978, WHICH WAS A MAJOR CHANGE IN HAWA.. YOU HAD CONVENTIONS ON A FAIRLY REGULAR BASIS.

>> Daryl: A GOOD QUESTION FROM MICHELLE IN HILO.

DO HAWAI'I VOTERS SUPPORT CLEAN ELECTIONS?

THE ONLY WAY TO FIND OUT IS IF THIS BECAME A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

>> WE POLLED THEM.

THE CLEAN ELECTIONS COALITION -- WITH COMMON CAUSE IS A PART ALONG WITH A LOT OF AMAZING GROUPS LIKE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS HAWAI'I.

WE FOUND THAT ONE -- REMARKABLY OVER 60% OF THE VOTERS FEEL THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE MORE BEHOLDEN TO THEIR FUNDERS THAN COMMUNITY.

OVER 70% POLLED WANT CLEAN ELECTIONS.

THIS ISN'T A FRINGE WANT.

IT'S A NEED FOR THE COMMUNITY.

>> BUT POLLING CAN BE A LITTLE TRICKY, AT LEAST THE NATIONAL POLL.

YOU ASK FOLKS IF THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF CLEAN E.. FOLKS SAY YES.

WHEN YOU PHRASE IT DIFFERENTLY, WOULD YOU LIKE THE TAX DOLLARS TO PAY FOR THIS?

THE SUPPORT IS A LITTLE LESS.

SO WE SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT VOTERS ARE SKEPTICAL ABOUT USING TAX DOLLARS THAT COULD GO TO OTHER THINGS TO PAY FOR THIS.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT FOLKS LIKE CAMRON AND HIS GREAT WORK, THEY'RE TRYING TO PERSUADE PEOPLE, THIS IS MONEY WELL SPENT.

THIS IS LEGITIMATE SKEPTICISM.

>> YOU DO SEE A DECREASE WHEN IT'S FRAMED AS, YOUR TAX DOLLARS GOING THERE.

WITH HAWAI'I'S POLL, WE SAW 50%.

>> Daryl: RIGHT NOW IS TAX SEASON.

I WAS ASKED, DO I WANT TO PUT THREE DOLLARS INTO PUBLIC FUNDING?

HOW MANY TAXPAYERS PARTICIPATE?

>> IF WE WANT TO REALLY TALK ABOUT PUBLIC INTEREST, YOU KNOW, AS I MENTIONED, WE HAD PARTIAL FUNDING PROGRAM SINCE 1980.

23 ELECTIONS.

FOR THE LAST TEN PLUS YEARS, WE'VE DONE A SUR.. CAN RESPOND TO FOR ONE MONTH, WE ASK, DO YOU SUPPORT PARTIAL PUBLIC FUNDING?

DO YOU SUPPORT THE $3 CHECKOFF?

THERE IS A GOOD PORTION THAT SAYS WE DO NOT LIKE TAXPAYER MONEY GOING TO FUND ELECTIONS PARTICULARLY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CANDIDATE IS IN MY DISTRICT AND SUPPORTS MY INTERESTS.

SO THAT IS IN AND OF ITSELF A SYSTEM.

BECAUSE WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IS THE $3 TAX CHECKOFF IS NOT MONEY FROM YOUR COFFERS.

IT'S THREE DOLLARS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO GO TO HAWAI'I ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND.

AND EVERY TAX YEAR, WE ONLY AVERAGE ABOUT RECEIVING SOMETHING LIKE $110,000.

THAT'S ALL WE GET.

THIS IS A $30 MILLION PRICE TAG.

I WOULD HOPE THAT IF YOU REALLY SUPPORT THERE, YOU SAY, WE WANT THREE DOLLARS FROM GENERAL FUND TO GO THIS PROGRAM.

THAT SHOWS TRUE GRASSROOTS INTEREST.

>> WITHIN CONTEXT, WE HAVE ONE OF THE WORST VOTER TURNOUT IN THIS NATION.

TO THINK THAT THIS STATE WOULD SOMEHOW BE OPEN AND ..

GIVING MONEY, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THIS STATE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GOVERNMENT, IT MAKES SENSE WHY PEOPLE WOULDN'T.

WE TALK ABOUT A CULTURAL SHIFT IS NEEDED WITH THIS.

>> Daryl: I BET CHAD WOULD LIKE THIS QUESTION.

BECAUSE OUR ELECTIONS ARE SO BORING.

[LAUGHTER] >> IT'S TERRIBLE TO SAY.

>> MAYBE THAT WILL CHANGE.

THE TOP RACES ARE NOT COMPETITIVE.

WE'VE HAD SOME VERY COMPETITIVE RACES.

INCUMBENCY IS POWERFUL.

THE BIGGER PROBLEM IS YOU HAVE ONE PARTY THAT DOMINATES THIS STATE.

A MINORITY PARTY THAT IS INEFFECTUAL.

YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT PARTY TRYING TO MAKE INROADS AND IT'S JUST NOT HAPPENING.

>> Daryl: MY QUESTION -- MAYBE COLIN, IF YOU HAD A LOT MORE COMPETITIVE RACES AT THE GRASSROOT LEVEL -- HOUSE AND SENATE, COUNCIL, WE COULD MAKE THINGS MORE INTERESTING.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S ONE THING WE'LL HOPE.

YOU'LL HAVE MORE CANDIDATES RUNNING, AND YOU'LL GET MORE INTEREST FROM CONSTITUENTS.

THERE IS EVIDENCE IN THIS.

IN ARIZONA THEY SAW THAT PEOPLE WHO VOTE ON DOWN TICKET RACES, THE LOW-LEVEL LEGISLATIVE RACES, THAT INCREASED AFTER THAT HE CREATED THIS PUBLIC FINANCING SYSTEM.

THERE'S A LOT MOVE SPEECH AND COMPETITIVE RA.. LEVEL.

WHEN YOU GET THAT LEVEL OF COMPETITION, PEOPL..

ATTENTION.

IT MAKES SENSE.

THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE HOPE WILL HAPPEN.

OTHER THING IS THAT CANDIDATES -- AND THIS IS TRUE FROM THE CANDIDATES IN MAINE AND ARIZONA WHO'VE RESPONDED TO SURVEYS ABOUT THIS.

SOME CANDIDATES LIKE THIS.

BECAUSE CANDIDATES DON'T ALL LOVE TO RAISE MONEY.

IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME.

>> IT TAKE THE MOST TIME.

>> EXACTLY.

AND IT'S NOT ALWAYS PLEASANT.

AND SO ONE THING WE FIND FROM STUDIES IN MAINE, CANDIDATES SPENT MORE TIME AT COMMUNITY FORUMS TALKING TO VOTERS ABOUT ISSUES.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO RAISE MONEY ALL THE TIME.

>> Daryl: THESE ARE ACTUAL QUANTITATIVE INFORMATION?

>> QUANTITATIVE POLITICAL SCIENCE STUDIES.

>> THERE'S A UHERO REPORT, WHICH I WROTE AND EVERYONE IS WELCOME TO READ.

THIS IS BASED ON BEST RESEARCH WE HAVE ON YEARS OF QUANTITATIVE STUDIES.

>> SPENDING MORE TIME WITH YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

A HOUSE TERM IS ONLY TWO YEARS.

I'M GOING TO COME IN, MAYBE GET ACCLIMATED THE FIRST YEAR.

SECOND YEAR, I HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO PASS ANY REFORM BILLS.

THANK GOD FOR THE NEW LAW THAT SAYS WE HAVE TO WAIT TO HOLD A FUNDRAISER, BUT WE KNOW PEOPLE GET AROUND THAT.

ONLY ONE YEAR INTO YOUR JOB AND YOU'RE THINKING AND PLANNING AND PLOTTING ON YOUR NEXT TERM.

YOU'RE TAKING THAT YEAR AWAY FROM THE VOTERS, AND YOU'RE DEDICATING YOURSELF TO FUNDRAISE.

WE'RE NOT GETTING THE MOST OUT OF OUR LEGISLATORS THAT WE COULD.

>> Daryl: DO WE HAVE ANY NUMBERS OF HOW MANY ..

PARTICIPATE IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S A QUANTITATIVE THING?

>> Daryl: IS THERE EVIDENCE OUT THERE THAT IF HALF WILL DO IT.

IF HALF DID IT AND THEY ALL SAID, I'M NOT TA..

ANYBODY ELSE, THAT'S A PRETTY BY CHANGE.

>> WE HAVE SEEN THOSE CHANGES IN SOME STATES THAT ADOPTED IT.

CONNECTICUT IS PRETTY HIGH.

WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS MONEY THAT THE HAS TO BE ENOUGH.

IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAVE TO OFFER ENOUGH PUBLIC FINANCING WHERE IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO OPT INTO PUBLIC FINANCING THAN TO TRY TO RAISE PRIVATELY.

>> Daryl: THEY'RE SAYING NO TO ALL THIS MONEY.. >> RIGHT.

IF IT'S $50,000, AND THAT'S ABOUT WHAT YOU W.. YOU WERE RAISING YOURSELF.

IT MAKES SENSE TO OPT IN.

THAT'S THE REASON OUR CURRENT SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK .. NOT ENOUGH MONEY.

AND YOU CAN'T RAISE PRIVATELY ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT SO YOU'RE NOT COMPETITIVE.

>> WE SHOULD MAKE CLEAR THE BILL THAT DIED, THE KARL RHOADS BILL, DID NOT HAVE THE $30 MILLION IN THE LEGISLATION, NOR $200,000 NEEDED FOR YOUR STAFF TO FUND THIS TO DO THAT RESEARCH AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE NOT FILING FRAUDULENT REPORTS.

BUT $30 MILLION, AS ONE SENATOR SAID, IS A DROP IN THE BUCKET.

>> IT'S LITERALLY LESS THAN 1%.

WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE CSC HAS NOT HAD ANY ADDED POSITIONS SINCE STATEHOOD.

>> Daryl: CAMPAIGN SPENDING COMMISSION.

>> I'M SORRY.

CAMPAIGN SPENDING COMMISSION HAS NOT HAD ANY POSITIONS SINCE STATEHOOD.

THAT IS ABHORRENT.

>> Daryl: I AM GOING TO BRING THIS UP OVER OBJECTIONS, I THINK.

THE KANESHIRO TRIAL RIGHT NOW, HE BASICALLY GOT M..

PROMINENT DEVELOPER AND IS ACCUSED OF DIRECTING THE PROSECUTION AT ONE OF THE FORMER EMPLOYEES BECAUSE HE GOT THIS MONEY.

THERE'S AN AWFUL LOT OF PEOPLE GETTING MONEY.

DO WE BELIEVE THE MONEY THAT A PERSON GIVES IS LIKELY TO GET THAT MUCH INFLUENCE OVER SOMEONE?

>> IT'S INTERESTING.

BEFORE DENIS MITSUNAGA, AND HE'S WELL-KNOWN.

>> HE RAISED MONEY FOR -- >> SOMEONE WHO GOE.. CAMPAIGN FINANCE RECORDS AGAIN AND AGAIN.

IT'S AMAZING HOW MANY TIMES -- AND HE'S NOT THE ONLY ONE.

BUT DENNIS MITSUNAGA AND VICE PRESIDENT AND ANOTHER MITSUNAGA.

WHY ARE YOU HAVING EVERYBODY IN YOUR COMPANY GIVE MONEY TO ALL THESE CANDIDATES?

CLEARLY, HE WANTED TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME.

I'M NOT MAKING JUDGMENT.

I BELIEVE THE TOTAL MONEY WASN'T THAT MUCH.

BUT IT DOES GO TO THIS POINT, WHY DO YOU GIVE SO MUCH MONEY AND HAVE YOUR PEOPLE DO IT?

PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR A MAYOR OR GOVERNOR WILL GIVE TO YOUR BOSS.

>> Daryl: KRISTIN, DO YOU GUYS MAKE AN ASSUMPTION THAT CAMPAIGN SPENDING, IF SOMEONE GETS MONEY FROM ONE PERSON, THERE'S LIKELY DECISIONS BEING MADE ON BEHALF OF THANK PERSON?

>> NO, BUT WE DO LOOK AT THE REPORTS, AND DO SEE IF IT'S A SERIES OF CONTRIBUTION FROM THE SAME EMPLOYER IN THE SAME REPORTING CYCLE, IN IT'S -- A LOT OF TIMES SAME DATES, IT DOES RAISE AN EYEBROW TO US.

BUT I WILL SAY THIS, PROVING THAT -- >> YES.

>> IS QUITE ANOTHER ISSUE.

SO WE HAVE TO BE VERY REAL WITH OUR RESOURCES AND WHAT WE CAN PROVE.

>> Daryl: LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION, AT FIRST..

THIS IS A HARD QUESTION TO ANSWER.

NOW THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A QUID PRO ACCUSATION, WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF IMPLEMENTING PUBLIC FINANCING FOR ELECTIONS AND HOW MIGHT IT AFFECT TAXPAYERS?

IS THERE ANY POTENTIAL THAT THIS IS GOING TO ..

INVEST IN FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS?

FOR EXAMPLE, MITSUNAGA WAS A GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR.

MANY ARE AMONG THE BIGGEST GIVERS HISTORICALLY.

THERE'S A LOT OF NONBID CONTRACTS THAT THEY GET.

THEORETICALLY, IF YOU TOOK AWAY THEIR INFLUENCE, WOULD THERE BE MORE FAIRNESS?

>> YOU'RE NOT TAKING AWAY THEIR INFLUENCE.

PEOPLE COULD STILL TAKE MONEY.

>> Daryl: THEY CAN STILL GIVE.

BUT IF HALF THE POLITICIANS AREN'T TAKING THAT MONEY ANYMORE, DOES THAT CHANGE THE DYNAMIC?

I DON'T KNOW.

WOULD IT BE LESS LIKELY THAT THESE BIG CONTRACTORS ARE GOING TO GET BE FIRST IN LINE FOR THE NONBID CONTRACT?

>> I WOULD SAY MORE THAN IT IS NOW.

I WOULD SAY THAT CONFIDENTLY.

IN THAT RIGHT NOW, THE SYSTEM IS SET UP TO WHERE IF YOU'RE A BIG CONTRACTOR AND YOU ARE TRYING TO GET THIS BID.

I HAVE EVERY REASON TO GIVE IT TO YOU BECAUSE OF ALL THE INFLUENCE THAT I MAY BE ABLE TO GET.

HOWEVER, IF I'M COMING UP ON THIS PUBLIC SYSTEM OF CAMPAIGN FINANCING, I'M BEHOLDEN TO THE PEOPLE I'M VOTING WITH.

THEREFORE, I'M LOOKING AT MORE LOCAL BUSINESSES BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ARE KEEPING ME IN MY SEAT.

I'M NOT LOOKING FOR SUPER PACS WITH FUNDING ON THE CONTINENT.

I'M LOOKING MORE INWARD.

SO I WOULDN'T SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A 60% RISE.

DO YOU THINK YOU'LL SEE BETTER DECISION-MAKING FOR THE LOCAL ECONOMY AND BUSINESS?

I THINK YOU HAVE POTENTIAL FOR THAT.

>> Daryl: ANYBODY AGREE?

>> I'M LESS ENTHUSIASTIC.

I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SHARE YOUR ENTHUSIASM FOR THAT.

I'LL TELL YOU WHAT "CIVIL BEAT' HAS DONE.

WE'RE TRYING TO PROVE THAT QUID PRO QUO.

IT'S DIFFICULT TO DO.

WE'VE DONE STORIES ON A BILL THAT MYSTERIOUSLY DIED ON A CERTAIN DAY.

THE VERY NEXT DAY THERE WAS A FUNDRAISER WHO SO AND SO..

WORKED FOR THAT COMPANY THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM THAT BILL OR NOT BENEFIT FROM THAT GAVE THEM A BIG CHECK.

HOW DO PROVE THAT?

I KILLED THE BILL BECAUSE I WANTED THEIR MONEY.

IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVE.

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S NOT SO MUCH WE HAVE TO .. LIKE IN A LEGAL SENSE.

THIS SYSTEM OF CAMPAIGN FINANCING, WE WOULD HAVE TO PROVE IT IN COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION.

MAKE THE PEOPLE SEE, THEY'RE STILL TAKING THESE DOLLARS.

TO CHAD'S POINT, YOU CAN HAVE SOMEBODY KILL A BILL, AND THEY'RE FUNDRAISING NEXT DAY.

OR YOU CAN HAVE SOMEBODY KILL A BILL ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT THEIR HUSBAND WAS A CEO OF A COMPANY THAT REALLY WANTED THIS BILL GONE.

MAKING THIS NEWS IN WHAT "CIVIL BEAT" AND PBS DOES BECAUSE, NOW THE EVERYDAY VOTER HAS A WAY TO FIGHT BACK.

>> Daryl: WE'VE ONLY GOT ABOUT THREE MINUTES LEFT.

TIME GOES FAST.

>> ALREADY?

>> Daryl: SO THE BIGGEST ISSUE, ONE OF THE HU.. AND WE SAW THIS ON MAUI, THERE UNDERLYING DISTRUST IN GOVERNMENT.

UNDERLYING CYNICISM.

LOW VOTING RATES.

ALL OF YOU TO PITCH IN QUICKLY.

DO YOU THINK THIS WOULD IMPROVE THE PUBLIC'S TRUST IN GOVERNMENT, WHICH WOULD BE A HUGE ACCOMPLISHMENT?

COLIN.

>> I DO.

I THINK IF YOU SAW 80% OF CANDIDATES TAKING .. PUBLIC SYSTEM.

YOU SAW INCUMBENTS LOSING?

THAT GIVES PEOPLE SENSE ELECTIONS ARE FAIR.

I THINK THIS WILL HELP.

IT WOULD MOVE THE NEEDLE, YEAH.

>> Daryl: CAMRON?

YOU THINK SO BUT TELL US WHY WE SHOULD THINK.. >> I ABSOLUTELY THINK SO.

ULTIMATELY -- I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE QUESTION?

REPEAT IT ONE MORE TIME.

>> Daryl: DO YOU THINK THE SYSTEM WILL LIFT TRUST?

>> YES.

AGAIN, WHAT IT WILL DO IT ALLOW COMMUNITIES .. PEOPLE WHO THEY FEEL LIKE ARE THEM OR ALONG WITH THEM.

IT GIVES ME REASON TOO, IF I KNOW FIVE DOLLARS -- ONE, MY TAX DOLLARS.

IF I'M DRIVING ON THIS ROAD AND FEEL A BUMP,..

DOLLARS PAYING FOR A BUMPY ROAD?

IF I KNOW $5 OF MY TAX DOLLARS ARE GOING TO A CANDIDATE ARE PARTICIPATING IN AN ELECTION BECAUSE MY MONEY'S IN IT.

I HAVE STAKE IN IT.

THE SAME WAY BILL GATES MAY HAVE STAKE IN ELE.. FUNDING WITH HIS $30 MILLION THAT HE CAN, AND $5 THAT I CAN GIVE WITH MY SALARY, NOW I'M GOING TO BUY IN MORE.

ADDING THAT MONEY ELEMENT AND LETTING VOTERS NOW YOU HAVE STAKE IN THIS.

>> Daryl: KRISTIN.

>> I WOULD AGREE.

I THINK WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE.

IF THIS IS GOOD, IT HAS TO BE EMBRACED PHILOSOPHICALLY.

BUT IT'S A START.

I DON'T THINK THAT IF IT WERE TO BE APPROVED IN ITS FIRST YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION, I'D BE SURPRISED, BUT WOULD BE HAPPILY SURPRISED.

IT'S A GOOD START TO EARN BACK THE TRUST.

IT'S A PART OF THE STRATEGY.

>> Daryl: HOW BIG, CHAD, WOULD THIS BE IN THAT .. >> LACK OF TRUST IN OUR GOVERNMENT CAN'T GET LOWER NOW.

[LAUGHTER] AND I'LL SAY THAT ACROSS THE BOARD FOR INSTITUTIONS.

WHY NOT GIVE IT A TRY?

IT IS UP TO THE VOTERS TO DECIDE WHO THEY WANT TO BE IN THE OFFICE AND HOW THEY WANT TO FUND THEM.

>> Daryl: I WONDER IF THERE MIGHT HAVE BE AN ARGUMENT IN THE LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR.

DON'T JUST PAST THIS SYSTEM AND DEVOTE $30 MILLION TO IT THIS YEAR.

PUT IT IN A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND LET ..

DECIDE.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL QUE.. STATUTORY QUESTION >> Daryl: THERE'S A LOT OF STATUTORY STUFF IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

>> THAT'S TRUE.

A VERY GOOD POINT.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE WHAT PEOPLE SAY.

>> RIGHT.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE LEGISLATORS, MANY SA.. GOOD PROGRAM IN THEORY.

MAYBE THIS PART OF THE BILL, WE TOOK OUT.

OR YOU NEED THIS FOR CAMPAIGN COMMISSION OR WHATEVER, WHAT HAVE YOU.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEM INVITE PEOPLE LIKE US WHO ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS TO THE TABLE AND TO SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS WORK.

USING THEIR MINDS AND OURS BECAUSE IF THEY'RE..

IT LIKE WE ARE, WE CAN DO SOMETHING GREAT FOR OUR STATE BESIDES PAYING LIP SERVICE.

>> Daryl: THANK YOU SO MUCH.

MAHALO TO YOU FOR JOINING US TONIGHT.

AND WE THANK OUR GUESTS -- KRISTIN IZUMI-NITAO FROM THE STATE CAMPAIGN SPENDING COMMISSION, CAMRON HURT FROM COMMON CAUSE HAWAII... CHAD BLAIR FROM HONOLULU CIVIL BEAT AND POLITICAL ANALYST COLIN MOORE.

NEXT WEEK -- SHOULD THE STATE LEGISLATURE BE..

RIGHT NOW LAWMAKERS ARE LIMITED TO A 60-DAY SESSION...WHICH LIMITS THEIR INFLUENCE MOST OF THE YEAR AND FORCES MANY CRITICAL DECISIONS TO BE MADE UNDER DEADLINE PRESSURE.

BUT WILL MORE TIME TO DECIDE MAKE THINGS BETTER OR WORSE?

PLEASE JOIN US THEN.

I'M DARYL HUFF FOR INSIGHTS ON PBS HAWAI'I.

ALOHA!