By Jerry Burris
Advertiser Editorial Page Editor

There has been much talk in recent days about the "ambiguity" of the so-called "resign-to-run" provision of the state Constitution.

Circuit Court Judge Sabrina McKenna said it directly when she declared that Honolulu Mayor Jeremy Harris should already have resigned because he has made himself a "candidate" for governor. Harris was operating on the understanding that he did not have to resign until he files nomination papers.

"The court finds the phrase 'eligible to be a candidate' (the language used by the Constitution) to be patently ambiguous," she wrote, before concluding that the bulk of the record supports early resignation.

But if there is ambiguity about how the provision is supposed to work, there is precious little ambiguity about its intended effect or the reason it was written.

It was written to take care of Frank Fasi.

By 1978, Fasi was in his second campaign for governor, running from the safe harbor of the mayor's office, where he was in mid-term. Win, he becomes governor. Lose, he remains mayor.

There had been many attempts at the Legislature to stop this by passing a resign-to-run law. But there were always enough seasoned political professionals around to kill the idea. Not so at the 1978 Constitutional Convention, which was aggressively dominated by people who did not hold office.

While the delegates were confused about the details of how the amendment would work, there was little confusion about who it was about.

Delegate Georgia Miller, arguing against resignation, contended the proposal was a jab at one specific person, "an incumbent mayor who had his sights on higher office."

While others argued that this wasn't about Fasi in particular, the amendment became known as the "Fasi law."

But Fasi and Harris share more than the distinction of being the two most prominent targets of the resignation law. They also share a parallel unhappy history with the state Campaign Spending Commission.

Harris, of course, has been bedeviled by today's commission. It has been on his back for accepting excess campaign contributions. It ruled that he could not collect the full $6,000 he is allowed from each supporter (a federal court has ruled against this) and it has declared him a "candidate" by accepting his campaign organizational report. The commission is the eye of Harris' political storm.

Back in 1974, Fasi was one of the first targets of the commission when it was in its infancy (and its executive director was none other than Robert Klein, now the ex-justice who is Harris' lawyer today). First, the commission launched an investigation into Fasi's "gift" of $365,000 in campaign money to the city. And then it censured him for failing to turn over a list of contributors from 1970 through 1974 in a timely way.

Many said those troubles soured Fasi's campaign for governor that year. (He came in second and George Ariyoshi won.)

Harris must be hoping that this is one of those times when history does not repeat itself.

Reach Jerry Burris through letters@honoluluadvertiser.com.