Without more activism, Legislature won’t change

We may live on islands in the middle of the Pacific, but don’t expect a sea change in local elections next month.

A fast look at the probable composition of Hawaii’s state House and Senate indicates it is likely to be about the same.

The House, for instance, which is usually the area showing the biggest change, could have five or fewer new members after the November elections.

There are 51 House members and they all stand for election every two years, as compared to the Senate, which has staggered terms with either 12 or 13 members up in each election.

If you look back some years, the period from 1974 to 1982 showed marked change. During that period, there was an average of 17 new members in every election cycle.

The period from 2004 to 2014 shows an average change of just nine new faces in the House.

The Senate doesn’t lend itself to as clear an examination because the usual political route is for state senators to come from the House.

The big year of change in this decade was 2002, when 14 new House members were elected. Of that group, only two are still in the House. And another three are serving in other elected positions.

When Hawaii was a younger state, there were election years like 1982 and 1970 when 20 new members came into the House.

The banner year was 1974, which added 22 new members, including two former governors, Ben Cayetano and Neil Abercrombie, and former Speaker of the House Henry Peters and former Senate President Norman Mizuguchi.

Some of the statistics were put together by Rep. Bert Kobayashi, who is a former political science professor.

“It is a combination of several things: the lack of competition in general including the lack of a two-party system,” Kobayashi said in an interview. “It is also a function of low voter turnout.”

The lack of competition, Kobayashi said, is mirrored in a slowdown in community activism and community pressure. He said the two points go together: fewer people are demanding change and that results in fewer changes.

“I think most will agree there is always a need for new ideas,” said Kobayashi.

Colin Moore, University of Hawaii political scientist, said the lack of change is the result of having only one viable political party, the Democratic Party.

“It is a one-party state, so you are not going to get a bunch of aggressive challenges. Many know that they should wait their turn,” said Moore in an interview.

The turn-waiting comes not from an excess of politeness, but the understanding that it is almost impossible to beat an incumbent.

“Democrats know what support they need to win and they know the district is likely to go Democratic anyway,” Moore said, explaining that if the seat already has an incumbent, most challengers won’t run.

If Republicans don’t appear able to provide much competition, Moore speculated that change could come from new pressure groups such as Democrats who supported Vermont’s U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.

That, however, takes a long time, Moore said, while new groups fight to “outline a coherent, new legislative agenda.”

All this means that if legislative stability is what you want, you will love the local returns in November.

Richard Borreca writes on politics on Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays. Reach him at rborreca@staradvertiser.com.