House adopts updated rules, including new transparency and social media provisions

The House of Representatives adopted House Resolutions 6 and 7 on the chamber rules after a floor debate that included both support and reservations from members.

The resolutions, moved together by Representative Calvin Todd and seconded by Representative Della Morikawa, were carried after discussion and are recorded as adopted by the House. The measures implement an updated set of House rules covering committee procedures, the handling and publication of testimony, a social media policy for members and staff, telework for legislative staff, and other procedural changes.

Members speaking in favor described the rules package as a modernization that increases transparency and updates longstanding practices. Representative Todd commended the “tremendous amount of time, work and coordination” that went into the draft and said the changes make the House “a more competitive and accommodating employer,” noting a new telework policy for staff and provisions intended to improve the public’s access to committee testimony.

Several members voiced specific concerns about parts of the draft. Representative Rachel Bellotti said she “rise[s] with reservations” and requested two proposed changes (identified in debate as change 27 and change 23) be entered in the journal. She described change 27 as a provision that “formalizes the process of the approval of written remarks into the journal” and said she supported requiring members rather than staff to approve written remarks. She said change 23 would require finance committee materials — the house financial plan and budget worksheets — be provided to members and the public 48 hours before decision-making in finance committee, and expressed support for codifying that practice or instead providing the materials 48 hours before third reading.

Representative Iwamoto opposed the motion, citing concern that portions of the draft (most prominently a revised Rule 20 governing committee openness) move away from transparency and public notice for some working groups or interim committees. Iwamoto referenced the chamber’s historical rules and said the removal of some openness requirements risks cutting “the public out of this process.”

Other members supported the package with reservations. Representative Peruso said she would vote “yes with reservations” and cited three commitments she expects leadership to follow: building capacity and consensus within the body, revisiting public-notice language for Rule 20 over the next couple of weeks, and piloting earlier access to testimony for committee members and the public during the session. Representative Garcia said he supported the reforms but registered reservations about changes to the invocation process. Representative Pierrick raised questions about a social media standard (page 49, section 3) that bars content “used to disparage other members” and asked how that could apply to ordinary policy criticism in members’ communications.

Representative Tarnas, chair of Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs, said the rules incorporate recommendations from the Commission to Improve Standards of Conduct and praised the consultative process used to draft the changes. Several other members — including Representatives Garrett, Keela, Matsumoto and Grandinetti — expressed support while noting the work is not finished.

After members concluded debate, the House voted to adopt both resolutions. The clerk recorded the motion as carried and the speaker announced, “House resolution number 6 and 7 are adopted.” The transcript does not record a roll-call tally for the final vote.

The adopted rules package contains multiple specific provisions discussed on the floor: a requirement that testimony be made public to committee members and the public two hours before hearings begin (with encouragement for earlier release), a public list of all individuals appointed by the Speaker and their terms, a social media policy intended to balance decorum and free expression, telework allowances for legislative staff, and changes to committee membership practices (including language intended to allow members who vote “no” to remain eligible for future conference committee assignments). Several members also urged formal adoption or clarification of fiscal transparency practices such as fiscal notes and routine provision of the state financial plan to inform budgeting decisions.

Though members differed on whether the package went far enough on openness and public notice, leadership repeatedly described the rules as an initial, consultative update that they expect to refine during the term. Representative Peruso and others asked leadership to return with follow-up language or pilots addressing the specific concerns raised, particularly for Rule 20 (open committee meetings), finance transparency, and social media definitions.

The House adjourned with plans to reconvene at 9 a.m. Tuesday and to meet in joint session at 10 a.m. for the governor’s State of the State address.