Hawaii ballot news
From Ballotpedia
U.S. Defense Department deny four states waiver from military ballot law
By Kyle Maichle
WASHINGTON, D.C.: The U.S. Department of Defense denied waivers to four states from complying with the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act on August 27, 2010. [1]
Wisconsin, Hawaii, Alaska, Colorado, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia were denied one-time hardship waivers for the 2010 election. [1] Washington, Massachusetts, Delaware, New York State, and Rhode Island had their waiver requests approved. [1] Maryland originally applied for a waiver, but later withdrew its request before the Defense Department made its decision. [2]
Colorado Secretary of State Bernie Buescher said that the state applied for a waiver because he wanted to ensure accuracy in the state's elections process. As a result of being denied, Buscher has ordered all county clerks to comply with the 45 day requirement for sending out military and overseas ballots. [1] Rich Coolidge, a spokesman for Buescher, blamed Colorado’s late primary election date and ballot initiative deadlines as a reason for non-compliance during an interview with the Associated Press. [3]
Kevin Kennedy, Legal Counsel for the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, said that Wisconsin will not change its primary election date of September 14, 2010 as a result of being denied. Wisconsin, along with other states applying for waivers, claimed that there was not enough time after their scheduled primary elections to send out ballots by the September 18, 2010 deadline. [1]
A U.S. Justice Department spokesperson said that they would work with the states to ensure compliance with the MOVE Act. Attorneys for the Department would file lawsuits against any state that does not voluntarily comply with the law. [1]
Hawaii legislators use $16 million from emergency 911 fund to balance the budget
HONOLULU, Hawaii: According to a report from the FCC, in 2009 the Hawaii Legislature approved using $16 million from the state's emergency 911 fund in order to help balance the state budget. Hawaii was one of 10 states which used 911 funds for such purposes, up from five in 2008. The fund, known as the Wireless Enhanced 911 Fund, was set up to maintain and improve the 911 system. It is comprised of fees levied on cell phone customers.
State Sen. Donna Mercado Kim, chairwoman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, pointed out that the fund was flush with cash, therefore making it vulnerable during a budget crisis. She stated, "If the fund is for 911 and they have excess balances, perhaps they (cell phone companies) are charging too much. The intent was to make themselves self-sufficient. But if there is over and above the actual money needed, what happens to that money?"[4]
However, Jim Schuler, a spokesman for CITA the Wireless Association, said that it was state legislators who set the surcharges that cell phone companies can charge their customers, stating, "The reason we get so exercised about it is that our customers are levied a fee for 911, and they think they're helping to pay for that. What Hawaii did was use it for other purposes. If there is an excess, that's usually a red flag for a legislature to raid the fund." He explained that such funds are vital for emergency responders to keep up with ever changing cell phone technology.
Gov. Linda Lingle initially proposed using $9 million from the 911 fund to balance the budget, and was met with fierce opposition from many opponents, including the Honolulu and Maui police departments, and the Kauai Fire Department. In the end, however, the legislature nearly doubled this request by approving the use of $16 million.
Hawaii same-sex couples sue Governor for equal rights
HONOLULU, Hawaii: On July 29, six same-sex couples sued Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle for equal rights from the state.[5] The lawsuit follows Lingle's veto of HB 444, which would have given the same rights and benefits to gay and lesbian couples that the state currently provides married couples. Legislative leaders did not challenge the veto.
Under the state's constitutional prohibition against sex discrimination, the lawsuit seeks the same benefits and responsibilities for same-sex couples currently afforded to opposite-sex couples. It does not ask for the ask for the titles of marriage or civil unions. Hawaii passed a "defense of marriage" constitutional amendment in 1998, but it does not say anything about the rights of same-sex couples.[6]
The lawsuit is being brought by Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union. Senior counsel for Lambda Legal, Jennifer Pizer, stated,"The state's equality guarantee at least has to mean same-sex couples should have the same rights and responsibilities, even if it's segmented off into a system that isn't as respected, understood and revered as marriage."
The previous week a similar lawsuit was brought by same-sex couples in Montana, seeking legal domestic partnerships under the state Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection.[7]
Legislators stop initiative legislation in Hawaii
By Kyle Maichle
HONOLULU, Hawaii: Hawaiian lawmakers ended their legislative session on April 29, 2010, without passing any initiative legislation[8] [9].
During the session, a total of six bills were considered by state legislators[9]. Members of the Senate considered three separate bills to implement the initiative process[9]. The separate bills were designed to allow Hawaiians to initiate state statutes, propose amendments to the state's constitution, and recall elected officials. All three of the bills died in committee without seeing a floor vote in the Legislature[10] [11] [12].
Lawmakers also considered three bills aimed at changing technical requirements towards referendums in Hawaii. Senate Bill 497 would have disallowed elections authorities from counting ballots with blank or under votes for referendums involving constitutional amendments. The other two bills that were considered are House Bill 838 which would re-affirm the current law requiring ballot questions to end in yes or no and Senate Bill 1019 which a similar version to House Bill 838. All three of the bills died in committee[13] [14] [15].
Democratic majorities in state senates at greater risk than Republican majorities, analyst says
By Geoff Pallay and Leslie Graves
While much of the country has been focusing on whether Congress will change hands, the importance of the state level elections is beginning to draw attention.
Across the country, there are 1,971 senate seats in the 50 states. Forty-three states are holding state senate elections this fall -- with a grand total of 1,167 seats up for grabs. Translation: 59 percent of all state senate seats are up for election.
According to Louis Jacobson, a staff writer for PolitiFact, partisan dominance will be at stake in 12 of the 43 states.[16]
When looking at states with elections this fall, the percentage of seats up for election jumps even higher. Nearly 70 percent of all seats in senates with elections this fall are up for election.
Meanwhile, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) reports that whichever party resides in the White House typically performs poorly during midterm elections for state level offices. In fact, only twice in the last 110 years -- 1934 and 2002 -- has the party that controlled the White House outperformed its opposition in state elections.[17]
Gov. Lingle vetoes civil unions bill, legislature won't challenge
HONOLULU, Hawaii: On July 6, Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed HB 444, which would have given the same rights and benefits to gay and lesbian couples that the state currently provides married couples. The veto ended weeks of speculation, as Lingle waited until the last possible day to act on the legislation before it would have become law without her signature.
At a press conference, Lingle stated, "There has not been a bill I have contemplated more or an issue I have thought more deeply about during my eight years as governor than House Bill 444 and the institution of marriage. I have been open and consistent in my opposition to same-sex marriage, and find that House Bill 444 is essentially same-sex marriage by another name."[18] She went on to say that voters should decide the fate of civil unions, not politicians.
No further action is expected to take place on civil unions this year, as legislative leaders said that they would not challenge a veto. Gov. Lingle leaves office in December.
Hawaii to experiment with publicly funded elections
HONOLULU, Hawaii: This fall's Hawaii County Council election is being used as a test run to experiment with publicly funded elections. Sixteen candidates for the Council applied to participate in the program. It will be financed by the $4.5 million Hawaii Election Campaign Fund, which consists of $3 donations from taxpayers who check off the box on their income taxes.
Candidates seeking public money must submit a petition of 200 signatures along with 200 donations of $5 each. They then receive funding based on the average amount spent by winning candidates in the district from the last 2 election years, minus 10%. No outside money can be accepted. If the trial run is considered successful, public financing of elections could spread throughout the state.[19]
On June 8 of this year the Supreme Court ruled against a similar program in Arizona. While the ruling does not apply to other states, it could be used as a foundation for legal challenges.[20]
Gov. Lingle adds civil unions bill to potential veto list
HONOLULU, Hawaii: At a press conference on June 21, Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle announced her potential veto list of 39 bills, including HB 444, which would allow same-gender couples to form civil unions. By adding it to the list, Lingle bought herself two more weeks to decide on it, and now has until July 6 to either sign it or veto, otherwise it becomes law without her signature. It has been on her desk since May 3.[21]
Lingle said she has gone back and forth on the issue, calling it the most difficult before her. Her office has received some 20,000 letters, faxes, e-mails and phone calls regarding the bill, most of which are said to be against civil unions.[22] Democratic leaders in the legislature have said if the bill is vetoed, they may try to override it.
Office of Hawaiian Affairs goes to court seeking $200 million from legislature
HONOLULU, Hawaii: In what chief executive officer Clyde Namuo called "a means of last resort," the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has asked the state Supreme Court to force the legislature to pay $200 million it says the OHA is owed for lands once owned by the Hawaiian monarchy. These lands were ceded to the state and include airports, hospitals, and the Hawaiian Housing Authority. According to the OHA, court decisions in 2001 and 2006 mandate that the legislature address the claims, and that an agreement was also made between OHA and the Lingle administration in 2008. However, proposals submitted by the OHA to the legislature in 2008, 2009, and 2010 were all rejected.[23]
Attorney General Mark Bennett has stated that OHA's appeal to the court is without merit, as it cannot force lawmakers to act in such a fashion. OHA is seeking a writ of mandamus, which, according to Bennett, is used to force a government official to perform a ministerial action. He stated, "I don't think that mandamus is the proper forum. I don't think the courts can require a Legislature to consider or address particular issues."[24] The state has been paying OHA approximately $15 million annually for the last few years, but it has not been agreed how much they should receive in the future or how much they are owed for the past 30 years.
Gov. Lingle signs anti-"birther" bill into law
HONOLULU, Hawaii: Last week Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle signed into law the so-called anti-"birther" bill. The law is intended to limit the number of requests for President Obama's birth certificate. It allows state agencies an exemption from FOIA requirements when multiple requests for the same information are made by the same person. While the law, Act 100, applies to all agencies, it specifically targets people requesting Obama's birth certificate.[25]
Earlier this year, Department of Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino testified that her department receives nearly 50 requests a month for the President's birth certificate, mostly from the same four or five people. While she has consistently vouched for the validity of Obama's birth certificate, it has not stopped the requests from flowing in.
The bill was introduced by State Sen. Will Espero by request of the Lingle administration. Although he believes the new law will help, Espero sees no end in sight for the controversy, stating "I tell them that the Republican administration (of Lingle) has gone on record as saying that (Obama) is a son of Hawai'i, but they still don't believe us."[26]
Hawaii legislature approves civil unions
HONOLULU, Hawaii: On Thursday, the Hawaii House of Representatives voted 31-20 to approve HB 444, which provides gay and lesbian couples with the same rights and benefits the state provides married couples. The measure still requires the signature of Gov. Linda Lingle, who has not stated if she would sign it or not. She has until early July to decide. If signed into law, Hawaii would become the sixth state to grant civil union status, joining California, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington.[27]
The measure came as a surprise to many, as the legislation was thought to be dead. The Senate had passed it in January, but the House refused to take a vote. Democratic House Majority Leader Blake Oshiro brought it up on the last day of the legislative session. If the legislation is vetoed, the Legislature would have to hold a special session in order to try to overturn it.[27]
Hawaii voters to decide if a "rainy day" fund is needed
HONOLULU, Hawaii: On Friday, Hawaii legislators referred the proposed Hawaii Tax Rebates Amendment to the November 2, 2010 statewide ballot. With several states across the country facing budget shortfalls, including the state of Hawaii, lawmakers are asking voters if a "rainy day" fund should be created. Specifically the measure calls for giving the legislature discretion to issue rebates when the state runs a surplus and redirect funds to a reserve fund.[28] The current state constitution requires that excess funds be returned to taxpayers, however, this particular proposal proposes redirecting those funds to a reserve fund.[29] In 2010 taxpayers received a $1 tax credit in light of a previous fiscal year surplus. However, the state is currently facing a statewide budget shortfall.[28]
Gov. Linda Lingle gave a similar recommendation in January but instead recommended the state save at least 5 percent of a two-year budget surplus. Critics of the proposed amendment argue that it is unlikely the legislature would deposit funds into the "rainy day" fund. Others argue that the current rebate requirement serves a purpose and should not be amended.[28]
Hawaii Board of Education appointment issue may appear on state ballot
HONOLULU, Hawaii: Voters in Hawaii may get a chance to decide whether Hawaii State Board of Education members should continue to be elected or appointed by the governor. Two legislative bills have been proposed - SB 2570 and SB 2571. Senate Bill 2570 proposes allowing the governor to appoint the school board and allowing the school board to appoint the superintendent. Senate Bill 2571, on the other hand, calls for allowing the governor to appoint board members from a list of qualified candidates. The list would be organized and selected by a selection advisory council. The board would appoint the superintendent.[30]
In 1964 the state of Hawaii converted from an appointed to an elected school board. According to reports, the proposed appointed school board would function similarly to the University of Hawaii Board of Regents, also appointed by the governor.[31]
In Hawaii, the state legislature must approve a proposed amendment by a supermajority vote of 2/3rds but the same amendment can also qualify for the ballot if successive sessions of the Hawaii State Legislature approve it by a simple majority.
Hawaii may move up primary election
HONOLULU, Hawaii: In order to comply with federal law, Hawaii officials are considering moving the state's biennial primary elections to August, instead of the usual September date. The new federal law requires that deployed troops be given enough time to vote. According to officials the current schedule does not leave enough time for ballots to be mailed and returned from overseas military troops.[32]
Election dates currently scheduled:
- September 18: Primary election
- November 2: General election
| ||||||||||
