Why I cannot vote for Speaker Nakamura – at this t
Since the victory of my long-fought campaign to unseat the former Speaker of the House, I’ve been frequently asked what reform-minded citizens should be looking for in his replacement.
My answer has consistently been that the House needs a speaker who leads, not through fear or favor, but through collaboration and inclusion. I have steadfastly advocated for the abandonment of pay-to-play politics and the adoption of rules and procedures that promote transparency, ethics and full representational democracy.
I went into my first meeting with Speaker Nakamura full of hope. Her reputation as a dedicated legislator who was not prone to pettiness or punitive practices preceded her. And her track record as a high-performing Kauai County Council Member, known for complying with sunshine and ethics laws, led me to believe that she would bring these much needed attributes to her new position.
Then came the committee assignments, and Speaker Nakamura’s choice to violate existing House Rules, specifically those related to proportionality and the need to limit the power of the vice-speaker. On the assumption that this had to be an oversight, I sent her an email pointing out the violations. I felt invested in her success as the first Madam Speaker and was inspired to think we would be working together to lay the foundation for the high ethical standards I campaigned on.
I offered Speaker an alternative way of calculating the rule of proportionality (see House Rule 11.2(2)), which at worst disadvantaged democrats because we were underrepresented on the Finance Committee by one member; however, this would require her to concede that the Vice-Speaker is not eligible to vote on any standing committee.
The specific House Rule limiting the Vice-Speaker from voting on any standing committee has been part of the House Rules since the very first legislative session of the State of Hawaii. This rule limits how much power is concentrated in one person.
Speaker Nakamura assigned the Vice-Speaker to three standing committees as a voting member.
Speaker Nakamura’s response was to double down: she did not believe she violated any rules, and she would address my concerns by changing the rules to clarify that she was in compliance.
(My email is being made available to the public; Speaker Nakamura can decide for herself if she will allow the public to read her response. The public can also compare her committee assignments to the existing House Rules.)
My email to Speaker also reminded her that House Rule 19 required her to convene an Advisory Committee on Rules and Procedure before the beginning of the 2025 Legislative Session and House Rule 20 required her to publicly notice the hearing.
Although she did convene this Committee, it met behind closed doors after recieving around 70 proposed rule changes submitted by House members. Speaker failed to publicly notice these meetings and did not make them open to the public.
Article III, Section 12 of the Hawaii Constitution requires: "Every meeting of a committee in either house [ . . . ] held for the purpose of making decision on matters referred to the committee shall be open to the public."
I did not campaign for five years on a good-government reform platform to vote for a Speaker who does not comply with House Rules and constitutional requirements protecting transparency and the preservation of our democracy.
For these reasons, I cannot vote for her today. But I hold out hope that Speaker Nakamura will remember how well she did serving the public while protecting democracy during her time on the Kauai County Council. Unlike many of the Hawaii House Speakers before her, she has experience legislating while complying with Hawaii’s Sunshine laws and ethics laws.
Let me end with the first words of the House Rules. The “Preface to House Rules” states:
it is the policy of the House of Representatives to: (1) Provide the general public with a meaningful opportunity to participate in the legislative process. Public participation is a basic tenet of our democratic process. Public participation is vital to maintaining a check on the legislative process and legislative decisions.