The House and Senate are again moving towards adoption of the so-called “National Popular Vote” agreement that would essentially eliminate the role of the Electoral College in the presidential election process. Like last year, the bills are moving quietly with little or no discussion or debate and virtually no local interest, being pushed forward by top lobbyists and money from an organization on the mainland.

HB3013 was passed by the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, while SB2898 cleared the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Labor yesterday.

Only one individual presented testimony, and it was in opposition to the bill (Senate testimoney – House testimony). Two national groups favored it, although that doesn’t speak to whether Hawaii citizens have any interest in sidestepping the Constitution.

Essentially the same bill was passed last year but vetoed by Gov. Lingle, and the House failed to muster the votes needed to override the veto.

It isn’t that this is necessarily a bad idea. But it seems to me that making such a shift in presidential elections is something that needs a full, open, and vigorous public debate, not an insider-lobbyist sleight of hand. The process by which this supposed reform is being considered undercuts its claim to be a democratic reform.

And, once again, the sponsors of the bill have apparently ignored state law and failed to report the bulk of their expenditures lobbying to push this bill through. During the 2007 legislative session, there was an advertising blitz asking people to contact their legislators in support of the measure and override Gov. Lingle’s veto. None of those advertising costs were reported during the January-April period last year, and the most recent report covering May-December 2007 lists fees paid directly to lobbyists but not a penny for media or advertising is disclosed.

It isn’t often that an issue like this without much public support sustains this kind of barrage of broadcast and print ads, so the failure to report the costs and the source of the funds is quite noticeable. And with two of the state’s top lobbyists, John Radcliffe and Red Morris, on its payroll, the group can’t really say they were unaware of the reporting requirements in Hawaii law.

Section 97-1(7) of the state’s lobbyist law defines “lobbying” as follows:

“Lobbying” means communicating directly or through an agent, or soliciting others to communicate, with any official in the legislative or executive branch, for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative or administrative action or a ballot issue.” [emphasis added]

Expenditures for indirect or grassroots lobbying, in which an interest group or its agents seek to mobilize the public in an attempt to affect legislation, are reportable under this definition, according to the Ethic Commission’s executive director.

Interestingly, Hawaii Superferry Inc., which also spent big bucks on this kind of grassroots lobbying without disclosing any of it in their required reports, was also represented primarily by the same lobbyists.

It’s been damp and dark for several mornings, meaning that my camera has remained in its case and carried in a plastic bag to protect from the rain. So I don’t have many photos from recent days. This is an exception.