Daily Archives: May 12, 2009

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

House Journal Written Remarks

May 5, 2009 – Day 61

H.B. No. 128, H.D. 1, S.D. 1, C.D. 1

Relating to Elections

I rise in support of House bill 128, House Draft 1, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1, relating to elections.

The purpose of this bill is to update, organize, and clarify, as well as make minor substantive amendments to, current campaign finance laws.   We did not not revise current substantive law regarding contribution limits to candidate committees or noncandidate committees; the language in this measure is identical to that currently codified in HRS 11-204(a) and 11-204(b).  We did not consider it prudent to address new or clarified limitations on such contributions at this time due to pending appellate judicial review of Charmaine Tavares Campaign v. Barbara U. Wong by the Intermediate Court of Appeals, which struck down that section of the law.  It should be noted that a number of lawmakers agreed to the decision by the Second Circuit Court that struck down contribution limitations to noncandidate committees because it discriminated corporations from individuals and other entities in participating in the political process.

This bill made some substantive changes to current law such as restricting the limitation on contributions by contractors with the State to contributions by non-bid contractors only.  It also allows for pro-rata attribution of contributions by partnerships and limited liability companies considered as partnerships by the Internal Revenue Service among the partners or members.  Further, the limit on contributions by non-residents was increased from 20 percent to 30 percent of the total contribution received by a candidate or candidate committee for each election period (A number of lawmakers believe that this will be struck down by the courts because it is discriminating non-residents from residents in political participation).  Finally, this bill provided that campaign funds to be used for donations to public schools or public libraries are subject to limitations similar to those for donations to community service or educational organizations already allowed under current law.  Thank you.

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

House Journal Written Remarks

May 5, 2009 – Day 61

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 166

H.B. No. 300, H.D. 1, S.D. 2, C.D. 1

Relating to the Judiciary

When the House passed the Judiciary budget to the Senate, the House reduced the budget by $28,065,985 in the first fiscal year (2009-2010) and $28,065,985 in the second fiscal year (2010-2011).  The proposed Judiciary Budget by the House was $124,232,511 in the first fiscal year (2009-2010) and $124,232,511 in the second fiscal year (2010-2011).  The House also eliminated 114 vacancy positions.

In contrast, the Senate draft reduced the Judiciary budget by $8,408,626 in the first fiscal year (2009-2010) and $8,408,626 in the second fiscal year (2010-2011).  The proposed Judiciary budget by the Senate was $143,889,870 in the first fiscal year (2009-2010) and $143,889,870 in the second fiscal year (2010-2011).  The Senate did not eliminate any vacancy positions.

 In conference, after negotiations between the House and the Senate, we agreed to reduce the Judiciary budget by $11,000,000 and eliminated 79 vacancy positions.  As a result, the Judiciary budget has become $141,298,496 in the first fiscal year (2009-2010) and $141,298,496 in the second fiscal year (2010-2011).  We restored all the initial cuts to the purchase of service agreements, which funded many of our important non-profit corporation legal services.  The capital improvement projects for the Judiciary budget included: $230,000 for plans and design for a new administrative services office building for the Kapolei Judiciary Complex; $3,995,000 for design and construction for upgrade and modernization of the elevators at Kauikeaouli Hale on Oahu; $550,000 for plans and land acquisition for a new Judiciary Complex for Kona; and $5,000,000 for plans, design, construction, and equipment for the remodeling and upgrading of Judiciary buildings statewide for fiscal biennium 2009-2011.  Thank you.

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

Final Reading

May 5, 2009 (59^th Day)

Written Remarks

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 129

H.B. No. 1378, H.D. 2, S.D. 2, C.D. 1

Relating to Advanced Practice Registered Nurses 

          Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition of House Bill 1378, House Draft 2, Senate Draft 2, Conference Draft 1.

          This bill would allow Advanced Practice Registered Nurses to open clinics as primary care providers and expand their medical authority without any physician oversight.  Under joint and several liability, physicians will face greater liability costs.  Earlier this legislative session, we had a number of bills aimed at reducing liability  costs for Hawaii’s physicians by adjusting our tort laws, creating incentives to reduce liability insurance costs, and forming a task force to implement a statewide health information technology system to reduce errors and omissions, all of which had a great discussion, but are not before us today.  I oppose this measure because it will take us in the opposite direction by increasing the liability costs for our physicians.  Thank you.

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

House Journal Written Remarks

May 5, 2009 – Day 59

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 34

H.B. No. 1316, H.D. 2, S.D. 1, C.D. 1

Relating to Torts

I rise in support of House Bill 1316, House Draft 2, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1.

This bill helps to address the concerns of Hawaii’s design professional companies (professional engineer, architect, surveyor, or landscape architect licensed under chapter 464) in regards to joint and several liability.  In any case involving tort claims relating to the design, construction, and maintenance of highways, where a design professional is determined to be a joint tortfeasor along with one or more other joint tortfeasors, and the degree of negligence of the design professional is ten per cent or less, including the vicarious liability of the design professional for the negligent acts or omissions of the officers and employees of the design professional, the liability of the design professional for more than the design professional’s pro rata share of negligence shall not exceed the available policy limits of the design professional’s professional liability coverage; provided that one of the following applies:

(1)  The contract amount for design professional services relating to the tort claim is $500,000 or less and the design professional is covered for the claim by a professional liability insurance policy with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 in the aggregate; or

(2)  The contract amount for design professional services relating to the tort claim is $1,000,000 or less and the design professional is covered for the claim by a professional liability insurance policy with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate.

This section of the law shall not apply to any design professional with a gross annual revenue of $10,000,000 or more during any of the three calendar years immediately preceding the effective date of the contract for design professional services relating to the tort claim.  Information produced pursuant to this section relating to gross revenue shall be confidential and used only for purposes of this section unless otherwise ordered by the court.  Thank you.

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

House Journal Written Remarks

May 5, 2009 – Day 59

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 43

H.B. No. 1512, H.D. 1, S.D. 1, C.D. 1

Relating to Temporary Restraining Orders

I rise in support of House Bill 1512, House Draft 1, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1, relating to temporary restraining orders.

Unfortunately, there are situations where animals are victims during a domestic dispute.  This bill allows the court to issue a temporary restraining order enjoining or restraining both of the parties from taking, concealing, removing, threatening, physically abusing, or otherwise disposing of any animal identified to the court as belonging to a household, until further order of the court.  In this draft of the bill, we decided to require both parties to be covered by the temporary restraining order to preclude the possibility that one party might misuse the temporary restraining order process with the intent of gaining control over and abusing an animal.  We also deleted references and definitions of “pet animal” and “equine animal” that was in previous drafts to allow the court greater discretion in granting protection to animals.  It is our hope that this measure will prevent the abuse of animals in the middle of domestic disputes.

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

House Journal Written Remarks

May 5, 2009 – Day 59

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 18

H.B. No. 618, S.D. 2, C.D. 1

Relating to the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act

I rise in support of House Bill 618, Senate Draft 2, Conference Draft 1, relating to the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act.

 The purpose of this bill is to enact the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act to conform the law governing the spending of charitable endowment funds with modern investment and expenditure practices.

Hawaii law prohibits charities from expending endowment funds that fall below the principal of the endowment (historic dollar value).  However, under current economic conditions, many endowments may be below their historic dollar value, preventing charities from funding their various programs.

 Under this bill, allowable endowment fund expenditures are based upon the value of the fund’s entire portfolio, rather than its historic dollar value.  This improves the ability of charities to address fluctuations in the value of the endowment.

This bill also streamlines the process for releasing restrictions on the management, investment, or purpose of endowment funds that do not exceed certain value thresholds.  Charities will be able to release these restrictions without court approval if the value of the fund is below $250,000 and after obtaining the Attorney General’s consent.  For funds with a value of less than $50,000, the charity may release restrictions without court approval after providing notice to the Attorney General.  Thank you.

Representative Jon Riki Karamatsu

House Journal Written Remarks

May 5, 2009 – Day 59

Conf. Comm. Rep. No. 10

H.B. No. 615, H.D. 1, S.D. 2, C.D. 1

Relating to Harassment

I rise in support of House Bill 618, House Draft 1, Senate Draft 2, Conference Draft 1, relating to the harassment.

The purpose of this measure is to keep up with technology by updating Hawaii’s harassment and harassment by stalking laws by including the definition of electronic communication as defined in the Hawaii Revised Statutes section 711-1111(2), which means any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system.  Unfortunately, many individuals are harassing and stalking others through the Internet.  Harassment and stalking can cause annoyance, mental distress, and safety concerns.  It is our goal to protect our community from harassment and stalking done in person or through technology.  Thank you.