Next year, the Big Island County Council elections will conduct a first for Hawai'i: a publicly funded election. It's a concept that has grown increasingly popular in recent years, and with good reason. It gives candidates who aren't beholden to well-monied special interests a fighting chance to compete for public office.

The idea is simple enough. Candidates who collect only small donations from large numbers of individuals in their home districts — an authentic grassroots effort — can qualify for limited public funds to run their campaigns. For Big Island candidates, they would need to collect 200 signatures and 200 $5 donations to qualify. Because of the potential cost and logistical concerns, it's a pilot project.

But in other states, including Maine, Connecticut and Arizona, voluntary public financing laws have been in place for several years and have shown some success. With money raised from voluntary check-offs, surcharges on civil and criminal fines or other financing methods, hundreds of candidates have opted for the public route. Janet Napolitano, the secretary of Homeland Security, was elected governor of Arizona with public financing.

Now there's an attempt to replicate that success on a national level with the Fair Elections Now Act (S. 752 and H.R. 1826).

Under the act, U.S. House candidates who raise 1,500 small contributions totaling $50,000 would receive enough public funding to run a competitive campaign. U.S. Senate candidates would have to raise a set amount of small contributions, based on a population formula, to get public funds. If they want to raise more — in no more than $100 increments — the money would be matched on a 4-to-1 basis.

The money would have to come from individual donors in their home states. Political action committees and other special interests could not contribute. Participation would be voluntary.

The impact of this legislation could be profound. Consider the current debate on health care reform: Health interests gave about $94 million to candidates for Congress last year. Most of it went to lawmakers with influence over health care policy, according to Common Cause. It would be naive to think that all this money won't influence in some way the legislation that will eventually emerge.

Now imagine that the expectations raised by those big donations did not control the debate, because lawmakers did not depend on them to get elected. Rather, they owe their support to all those $100 donors — you and me — back home.

That's the goal of publicly financed campaigns and the Fair Elections Now Act. It's in the public interest, and worthy of support.