HILO, Hawai'i — A proposal to publicly fund some Big Island elections, which passed the Legislature by a wide margin and awaits Gov. Linda Lingle's signature, will make candidates less beholden to special interests, supporters say.

Those opposed to the measure say it will cost taxpayers too much and will enable candidates with little support in the community to run.

The pilot project to test out publicly funded elections in the county council races on the Big Island won approval last week in the state House and Senate, and public financing advocates are now shifting their focus to Lingle.

The bill won support from almost all Democrats in the Legislature and almost all Republicans in the House, but drew sharp criticism from some GOP members in the Senate. It isn't clear yet whether Lingle is inclined to sign or veto the bill, and she has until July 8 to decide.

This is the closest Hawai'i has come to trying out the kind of publicly funded campaigns adopted in states such as Connecticut and Arizona.

Under the proposed pilot project, each qualifying council candidate in the nine Big Island council districts who wants to participate would be provided enough public funding to run a credible campaign without accepting any significant private contributions.

To qualify for public funding, each candidate would have to collect a signature and a $5 donation from 200 registered voters in the council district where that candidate is running.

Qualifying candidates could then receive funding from the state amounting to 90 percent of the average amount spent by the winners in the previous two council races in that district. That is expected to work out to roughly $20,000 for each qualifying candidate on the Big Island, although the exact amounts provided would vary from one district to the next.

Candidates who don't want to participate would still be free to raise and spend money under the existing campaign spending law, but candidates who accept public financing under the new system would not be able to accept private contributions other than the initial $5 qualifying donations.

The money to finance the Big Island pilot project would come from the Hawai'i Election Campaign Fund, which is financed with voluntary contributions by taxpayers who donate to the fund by checking a box on their state tax returns. The fund had about $5.5 million at the end of last year.

The proposed Big Island test of public financing would last for three election cycles starting in 2010. Under the bill approved by lawmakers last week, the cost of the pilot project would be capped at $300,000 per election cycle.

The measure (House Bill 661) was approved 49-1 in the state House and 19-5 in the Senate. The only Big Island lawmaker to vote against the bill was Sen. Paul Whalen, R-3rd (Kohala, Kona, Ka'u), who was unavailable to comment.

LESS OUTSIDE INFLUENCE

Big Island County Councilman Bob Jacobson, who helped convince fellow members of the council to volunteer to try out the new system of campaign financing, said public funding could reshape the political landscape in several ways.

Candidates will be able to spend more time speaking with constituents and listening to their concerns because they won't have to spend time raising money, he said. Jacobson and other advocates predict voter turnout and the number of candidates will increase.

As for potential effect on issues that come before the council, "those people who are traditionally financed by developers tend not to do as well" in publicly funded programs, Jacobson said.

Others disagree that public funding will benefit any particular policy position or political party. Kory Payne, community organizer for Voter Owned Hawai'i, said the bill will benefit conservatives and liberals alike, including small-business people who don't have money to donate to political campaigns.

"This program does not cater to any demographic or any party or any label," Payne said. "It breaks through all of those labels and perceptions. What this comes down to is freeing up a candidate, regardless of what the letter is by their name, it frees them up to make decisions on bills without having to worry about what the people funding their campaigns are going to say."

Perhaps the most outspoken critic of the public funding plan on the Big Island has been Andrew Walden, editor and publisher of the conservative Hawaii Free Press newspaper, which comes out twice a month.

Walden questioned the wisdom of providing public funds to candidates who can't seem to go out and raise money on their own. He argues at least some of the backers of public campaign financing are "failed candidates."

"Candidates who are getting no support whatsoever will suddenly be flooded with state money," Walden said. "The assertion is that these candidates aren't winning because they aren't getting money, but in fact they aren't getting money because nobody supports them."

Walden also contends the state is notoriously late in paying contractors, and said similar state delays in disbursing election funds could influence political campaigns. If the state bureaucracy controls campaign funding, it might release funds more quickly to "favored" candidates, and influence elections by delaying payments to candidates who are not favored, he said.

COSTS COULD ADD UP

The bill is also opposed by Barbara Wong, executive director of the state Campaign Spending Commission, who warns that publicly funded elections will be expensive if the program is expanded statewide. She points to Connecticut, where the cost of a similar program is expected to be $45 million this year, and to Arizona, where $40 million is budgeted for publicly funded elections.

"That's why I think the public hasn't been informed properly on this issue," Wong said. "If (the voters) want it and they say 'Yes, we're willing to spend those amounts of money,' we can run the program.

"But nobody's asking the public, 'Are you willing to spend this amount of money?' So, we think it's more financially prudent to take it one step at a time," she said.

Wong also believes the limit of $300,000 per election for the program is a problem. She calculates that is only enough money to finance 18 council campaigns, and said there were 23 candidates who ran for the council in 2006.

Instead of testing out publicly financed campaigns, Wong contends lawmakers should allow more public funding to be distributed to candidates under the existing system.

The current system provides modest public funding to candidates if they agree to limit the amount of private money they raise and abide by voluntary campaign spending limits. Wong wants lawmakers to boost the amount of public funding available under the current system so candidates have more of an incentive to abide by the voluntary spending limits.

Payne, of Voter Owned Hawai'i, said thousands of Hawai'i residents have signed petitions or written letters in support of publicly funded elections in years of lobbying at the Legislature, making it clear the public wants the program.

He also contends Wong's cost projections are unrealistic. Payne said the $300,000 per election will be enough to pay for the program because many Big Island council candidates won't receive public financing.

In other states, only about a third of the people who tried to qualify for public financing were actually able to do so, and many candidates refuse to participate in public financing because they prefer to finance their races with private donations, he said.

Voters in Arizona, which has nearly five times the population of Hawai'i, opted for publicly funded elections that include the races for governor, lieutenant governor, state House and Senate, attorney general and other offices, Payne said.

The cost of that program may seem high, but Payne said the program "saves taxpayer money in the end."

"This pay-to-play system of government that we currently have, it's costing more than if we had a system that wasn't so dependent on special interests controlling the lawmaking process," he said.