honolulu diary / The state Campaign Spending Commission is poised to overturn an earlier ruling that a group representing island fishermen violated state law by running large newspaper advertisements just two days before the 2006 general election without registering as a campaign committee or disclosing its sources of funds.

Commission Executive Director Barbara Wong recommended the commission reverse itself in light of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June strictly limiting the ability to regulate advertising by independent groups during elections.

The Supreme Court’s ruling is expected to greatly expand the ability of well-funded corporations, unions and issue advocacy groups to target specific candidates, reversing a 30-year trend toward restrictions on campaign spending as a means of combating corruption. In Hawai’i, for example, state law limits contributions to political action committees (PACs) and other non-candidate committees to just $1,000 per person, but it will now be much easier for groups to accept unlimited funds to influence elections while avoiding disclosure of donors and other requirements that apply to PACs.

The case before the commission involves advertisements placed in the Sunday editions of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser on Nov. 5, 2006. Gov. Linda Lingle and Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona were on the ballot in the general election two days later. The ads were headlined: ‘The current state administration does not support fishing in Hawai’i.’

The advertisements then cited several grievances, including plans to ban fishing in certain areas, new rules to restrict gill nets, and ‘causing the loss of our local culture and lifestyle by favoring those of mainland and special ‘interest groups.”

The ad ended with a plea for action, saying, ‘The future of fishing depends on your vote.’

The ads appeared to be part of a well coordinated campaign to defeat new fishing regulations which ultimately led to the rejection of state land department director Peter Young’s nomination for a second term.

The day after the election, a complaint was filed with the commission by Pat Tummons, editor and publisher of Environment Hawai’i, a monthly newsletter on environmental issues. (Disclosure: Pat Tummons is an occasional contributor to Honolulu Weekly; and the Weekly sometimes reprints articles originally published in Environment Hawai’i.)

The complaint charged the ads violated state law because the sponsor, a group calling itself ‘Concerned Fishermen of Hawai’i,’ was not registered with the commission as a legal non-candidate committee. In addition, the complaint said the advertisements failed to contain the required disclaimers identifying the sponsoring group and whether the ad was done in cooperation with any individual campaign.

The commission agreed, voting at its April 2007 meeting that the ad fell within the legal definition of a campaign advertisement. The commission cited the ads’ timing right before the election, the statements critical of ‘the current administration,’ and the clear call to action to vote.

The commission’s investigative files are considered confidential while the complaint is pending, but a document spelling out the commission’s legal case discloses some of the findings. The commission issued administrative subpoenas to both newspapers for records relating to the ads, and to the UPS Store across from Kahala Mall, where Concerned Fishermen had a mailbox.

According to records provided by the newspapers and cited by the commission, both ads were placed on behalf of the group by Marc Inouye of 4Ps Inc. The Advertiser ad cost $5,155.92, while the group paid $2,604 to run the same ad in the Star-Bulletin.

The mailbox rental agreement was signed by Roy N. Morioka on behalf of Concerned Fishermen, the commission said. Morioka is the immediate past chairman of the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. Several organizations filed a complaint with the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Commerce earlier this year accusing the council of illegally lobbying state legislators for several fishing related bills during the 2007 legislative session.

Concerned Fishermen was represented before the commission by James ‘Kimo’ Mills, a senior executive at First Hawaiian Bank in Honolulu.

Former Hawai’i County Council member Keiko Bonk, who testified in support of Tummons’ complaint, alleged in her own complaint to the Commerce Department that Mills told her the ads were paid for by members of the Pacific Islands Fisheries Group, a nonprofit group which spearheaded opposition to increased regulation of fishing during the last legislative session.

If the commission reverses course, as now expected, there will be no opportunity for the public to find out who was really behind the ads.

Wong has advised the commission that it can no longer regulate so-called issue ads, even those that appear designed primarily to impact the election of one or more candidates, ‘only if the ad is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.’

As a result, Wong has recommended the commission dismiss Tummons’ complaint when it meets on Nov. 13. 

For more by Ian Lind, visit [ilind.net].