In 1966, a well-known California political figure, Jesse M. Unruh, coined the phrase “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.” Today in Hawai‘i, the primary measure of a candidate is too often the question “yes, but can he/she raise the
In 1966, a well-known California political figure, Jesse M. Unruh, coined the phrase “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.” Today in Hawai‘i, the primary measure of a candidate is too often the question “yes, but can he/she raise the money?”
The opening paragraphs of the bi-partisan Common Cause Agenda for Change says it best: The problem is not so much the amount we spend on political campaigns … as it is who pays for them, what they get in return and how that distorts public policy and spending priorities. Keeping our elected officials dependent on the very same wealthy special interests they are supposed to regulate undermines public confidence in their government and its ability to tackle the tough issues that face the nation.
To ensure the survival of democracy, to re-inspire and re-engage those who have lost faith in government leaders, who’ve opted out of the system and who no longer even show up to vote on election day, the power of big money and big influence must be tempered through comprehensive campaign spending reform.
It is likely to cost $2 million to $3 million or more to get elected governor in Hawai‘i in the upcoming 2010 elections. The successful candidate for the office of lieutenant governor will spend at least $500,000 in the primary election alone.
While the majority of funds are spent on radio, TV and newspaper advertising, there are myriad other expenses such as office rental, yard signs, banners, mailings, brochures and inter-island travel.
Getting your message out to the public, building statewide name recognition, running a year-long effort focused on success at the polls on election day is just plain expensive.
There are only a few basic ways to raise money: go to Bishop Street in downtown Honolulu and ask 100 big dogs for the maximum $6,000, reach out to main street and try to find 6,000 regular people to contribute $100 each, ask Mom or Dad for a loan or dig into personal family wealth (if they have any).
For many good candidates, Bishop Street is a foreign town and accessing family assets is just not an option. These financial realities alone are formidable roadblocks to most who contemplate running for high office. To move higher requires convincing the moneyed elite that you are worthy. Or, one must be very good at organizing at the grassroots level and be able to build a veritable army of people willing to contribute at the $10 to $100 level.
Is this a bad thing? A rhetorical question for the candidate because this is the system we operate under. You have to be elected to serve and you have to raise the money to be elected. For the long-term public interest, it is a real question and the answer in my humble opinion is yes, it is a bad thing. Choosing our public leaders based on their ability to raise large amounts of money clearly does not serve the public interest.
A viable statewide public funding option is needed in Hawai‘i. A system whereby qualified candidates may access public funds to level the playing field against the favorite sons and daughters of established political and moneyed interests is essential to re-instill faith and confidence in the democratic process.
Until a fully funded public option is available in Hawai‘i, it is up to both the moneyed elite and the grassroots, and yes, Mom and Dad too, to carry the very heavy weight of paying the cost of the very core of our democracy — free and fair elections.
• Gary Hooser, a Democrat, represents the 7th District in the state Senate. This column was written exclusively for The Garden Island.
