Search Results

DATE: Monday, June 15, 2026 TIME: 7:00 pm HST Call to Order: 7:10 pm HST. Roll Call: Austin Martin, Nicholas Zehr, Abbra Green Minutes and bylaws revisions from May 18, 2026: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Nicholas Zehr, Passed without objection. Agenda: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin, passed without objection. Unfinished Business: Bylaws to be sent to parliamentarians for review. New Business: Platform Draft feedback overview and read-through: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Abbra Green to change “land stewardship and” to “land ownership and environmental stewardship,” in “Pramble”, passed without objection Motion by Austin Martin second by Nicholas Zehr to “...and related innovations.” after “right”, in “Right to Self Defense” passed without objection Motion by Austin Martin second by Nicholas Zehr to add “or corporations” after “individuals”, in “Property Rights”, passed without objection. Motion by Austin Martin, second by Nicholas Zehr to place “Accountability is better served by upholding corporate and individual responsibility, rather than blanket regulatory systems which stifle the free market.”, within “Environmental Policy”, passed without objection. Assignments: Under freedom of speech, add a section distinguishing between freedom of speech and state speech Under criminal justice, add portions for due process, reading into the law, and jury nullification; consider changing the title on this section. Adjournment: 8:03 pm HST. The Next Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting Monday, June 29, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. Have suggestions For the Bylaws & Platform Committee? Contact us.

On May 14, 2026, Governor Josh Green signed Senate Bill 2471 into law as Act 11. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii stands firmly behind the federal lawsuit filed by the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii to strike it down. What Act 11 Does Act 11 prohibits incorporated organizations from engaging in what the law terms "election activity" and "ballot-issue activity." Those categories are defined so broadly that spending money to speak for or against a candidate, a ballot measure, or a political party is now forbidden for virtually every incorporated group in Hawaii. That means nonprofits, trade associations, civic leagues, charities, labor unions, and advocacy organizations of every political stripe are now legally barred from participating in the very elections that shape the laws they are required to abide by. The law takes effect July 1, 2027, unless a court stops it first. The institutional press, newspapers, broadcasters, and periodicals are exempt and get to keep speaking freely. Everyone else gets silenced. I will return to that glaring double standard shortly. The Grassroot Institute Lawsuit On June 5, 2026, the Institute for Free Speech filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii in U.S. District Court. Grassroot Institute of Hawaii v. Lopez, et al seeks declaratory relief establishing that Act 11 is unconstitutional, and injunctive relief blocking its enforcement before it takes effect on July 1, 2027. The lawsuit argues that Act 11 violates the First Amendment’s protections of free speech, freedom of association, freedom of the press, and freedom of petition and assembly. Every one of those arguments is correct. Keliʻi Akina, President and CEO of the Grassroot Institute, put it plainly: This law doesn’t affect just the Grassroot Institute. It affects every Hawaii resident who wants to join with others to speak out on issues that impact their community. He is right. It affects unions, homeowner associations, cultural preservation groups, and tenants’ rights coalitions. Act 11 does not care what causes you support. If you are incorporated and you spend money to speak about a ballot measure or a candidate, even in a small way, you are in violation. A Shocking “Definition” Most of the press coverage has focused on the campaign finance angle. What has received far less attention is a foundational provision buried in the bill’s statutory amendments. This is the language that shocked me: (a) The creation and continued existence of a corporation shall not be deemed a right but shall be a conditional grant of legal status by the State and shall remain subject to complete withdrawal at any time. All powers granted to corporations under the laws of the State before January 1, 2027, shall be revoked in their entirety. Beginning January 1, 2027, a corporation operating under the jurisdiction of the State shall possess no power unless specifically granted by this section. In other words, your organization’s legal existence is not a right. It is a conditional grant. The State can withdraw it. At any time. And as of January 1, 2027, every power an organization currently holds is revoked. All of it. Gone by default. The only powers you get back are the ones the State specifically hands you. This is an outrageous declaration of state supremacy over civil society. It converts every incorporated organization in Hawaii into a conditional tenant of the government’s goodwill. The moment you say something the State disapproves of, your legal existence becomes negotiable. When the government can revoke the very legal existence of an organization for political speech, you no longer have free speech, you have government-licensed speech. The Top 5 Infringing Elements of Act 11 Corporate Existence Defined as Government License As highlighted above, the statutory language reframes every incorporated organization’s existence as a conditional privilege subject to state withdrawal at any time. This is the philosophical foundation of the entire law. The State can revoke your existence for speech it disapproves of, turning the First Amendment a mere suggestion. Total Speech Ban on Incorporated Organizations Act 11 makes it so that any spending that directly or indirectly supports or opposes a candidate is prohibited. The Grassroot Institute, which publishes policy research about legislation and regularly names elected officials in its analysis, could be deemed in violation simply for doing its job. The Institute for Free Speech, which filed the lawsuit on Grassroot’s behalf, notes that existing Hawaii campaign finance law already requires registration and disclosure for independent expenditures. Act 11 goes far beyond that and eliminates the right to spend on political speech entirely. Vague Definitions The law prohibits spending to "directly or indirectly" support or oppose a candidate. That phrase is broad and vague. A policy brief that criticizes a sitting legislator’s vote on housing reform could be "indirect" opposition to that candidate. A public forum where a speaker questions a county council member’s record could qualify. Organizations are left to guess where lawful advocacy ends and a criminal violation begins. Vague laws invite selective enforcement. Dissolution to Penalize Protected Speech Act 11 establishes an escalating penalty structure: suspension of operating authority, revocation of tax exemptions, and ultimately involuntary dissolution. A labor union, a civil rights nonprofit, a libertarian think tank, or a local business association could be forcibly shut down by the State of Hawaii for exercising speech rights that the First Amendment explicitly protects. It is a state-ordered death sentence for any organization that dares to speak. A Government-Approved Press "Exemption" The Act carves out an explicit exemption for "institutional press entities" including newspapers, broadcasters, and periodicals. They may continue to speak freely about candidates and elections. Everyone else cannot. The First Amendment does not create a favored class of speakers. The government does not get to decide which voices are legitimate and which ones must be silenced. A well-funded media outlet with a printing press can endorse a candidate, but grassroots advocacy groups can’t send a single email? The State has clearly dictated its preferred megaphones as they muzzle everyone else. Even the Attorney General Said No As the legislature debated the bill, Hawaii Attorney General Ann Lopez repeatedly warned lawmakers that Act 11 would likely conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court precedent. She warned that it could constitute an unconstitutional content-based speech restriction. She warned that it would expose Hawaii taxpayers to substantial litigation costs defending a law that, in her words, is "likely impossible to defend." The legislature passed it anyway. 25 to 0 in the Senate. 49 to 1 in the House. Governor Green signed it. When your own attorney general tells you a bill is constitutionally indefensible and you pass it unanimously anyway, it becomes nothing more than a political statement at the public’s expense. Hawaii taxpayers will unfortunately foot the bill for this lawsuit in order to claw back their own inherent rights. A Red Herring Argument Supporters of Act 11 frame it as a response to Citizens United and argue the State can limit powers because it created them. The argument falls apart on contact with reality. Is the State the arbiter of corporate legitimacy? The First Amendment does not protect corporations as abstract entities. It protects the people inside them. When the State silences the Grassroot Institute, it is silencing every individual who joined that organization to collectively advocate for their shared beliefs. Stripping the vehicle of its speech rights has the same practical result as silencing its passengers. The legislature’s own committee report acknowledged this, noting that "the individual remains fully free to speak." So, the people of Hawaii can still have an opinion as long as they never pool resources to be heard? Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Freedom of association means nothing if the State can neuter the associations you form. People join organizations precisely because collective voices carry farther. That is the point of the First Amendment. What Comes Next The lawsuit is pending in federal district court. The key dates are: June 5, 2026: Federal lawsuit filed by Institute for Free Speech on behalf of Grassroot Institute July 1, 2027: Act 11 scheduled to take effect A court injunction before that date is the goal of the litigation. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii will be watching this case closely. Free speech is the very foundation of every other right. When the government starts deciding which organizations get to speak and which ones get dissolved for speaking, no one is safe. Support The Libertarian Party of Hawaii

They Voted Yes. The People Said No. Bill 66 Passes Despite Overwhelming Public Opposition On June 3, 2026, the Hawaiʻi County Council voted 5-3 to pass Bill 66, adopting the Hawaii County General Plan 2045, a sweeping 300+ page document that will govern land use, growth, infrastructure, and community development across the Big Island for the next two decades. The vote came despite the Hilo council chambers overflowing with residents who showed up to voice their opposition. The county committee voted yes and did so knowing what the room looked like. The Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi stands firmly with the people of this island who showed up, testified, and were ignored. We oppose Bill 66. We are calling on Mayor Kimo Alameda to do what the Council refused to do: listen to the constituents, and veto this bill. The chambers were full. The opposition was overwhelming. The Council voted yes anyway. It is governance by imposition. What Is Bill 66? Bill 66 adopts the Hawaii County General Plan 2045, a comprehensive policy document that acts as the legal blueprint for land use decisions across Hawaiʻi Island. It is a foundational document that will shape zoning decisions, infrastructure investments, housing policy, agricultural land designations, and energy mandates for the next 20 years. The plan had been in development for over a decade and costed the county approximately $1.7 million to produce. The 2045 Plan is a top-down policy prescription with hundreds of pages of mandates, restrictions, and centralized targets that leave little room for individual property owners, rural families, farmers, or community members to chart their own course. Key provisions of the 2045 Plan include: Strict land use restrictions designed to confine growth to designated urban areas, limiting what landowners can do with their own rural and agricultural property "Net-zero" carbon emissions goals and renewable energy mandates built into county planning policy as governing targets Provisions for mass transit expansion across an island where transit infrastructure has historically been limited and individual transportation is a practical necessity Climate change adaptation frameworks that could be used to justify further restrictions on land use, building, and development for years to come Stricter zoning and land use rules, enforced through a planning framework that empowers bureaucrats to override local and individual decisions What Happened at the Council Chamber The scene at the Hilo council chambers on June 3 told the whole story. Residents packed the room. Testimony after testimony came from Big Island community members ranging from farmers, to landowners, to small business owners, and long-time residents who stood up to say they did not want this plan imposed on their island. Chairman Austin Martin testifies against the Hawaii County General Plan Those who attended accruately described the plan as a "blatant land-grab," "too prescriptive," and an overreach that failed to reflect what the community actually wants. They were the kind of residents who don't normally show up to county council meetings, motivated enough by their opposition to make themselves heard. And the Council voted yes anyway. Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Ashley Kierkiewicz, and Holeka Inaba cast no votes, standing with their constituents. The other five overrode the clear will of the public and passed the bill on its second and final reading. When the chamber is full of no-votes and the Council still votes yes, they are no longer representing the people as their job description dictates. Elected officials who cannot be moved by the people they represent have stopped serving them. Why We Oppose the Hawaii County General Plan 2045 The Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi opposes Bill 66 for principled reasons rooted in the values we hold regarding individual liberty, private property, and limited government. Our opposition is grounded in what this plan actually does and who it actually hurts. 1. The Threat to Private Property Rights The 2045 Plan gives county planners expanded authority to restrict what individuals can do with their own land. Confining growth to urban areas means that families who have held agricultural land for generations may find themselves increasingly unable to use, sell, or develop that land as they see fit. Property rights are a foundational protection for individual freedom. 2. Imposing Energy Ideology Through Land Use Policy Embedding net-zero emissions targets and renewable energy mandates into a county general plan means that property owners, developers, farmers, and businesses will be subject to planning decisions driven by centrally determined climate targets instead of community needs. 3. Passage Over Overwhelming Public Opposition Our government is to be accountable and constrained. A council that passes a 20-year policy document despite a chamber full of opponents (with a handful of supporters present at best) is a council that has become tone deaf of the people it serves. The sheer weight of public opposition demanded more than a yes vote. 4. Too Prescriptive & Too Centralized Even Mayor Alameda has called the plan "too prescriptive" and "too one-sided." We agree. A plan that tells people what they can build, where they can grow, how they must power their homes and businesses, and what their land can be used in the next two decades is a plan that has replaced the persuit of happiness with control. The Libertarian Party exists because too often government grows beyond its proper role and starts making decisions that individuals and communities should make for themselves. The 2045 Plan is a textbook example: a large, expensive, technically complex document produced largely by planners and consultants, passed by representatives over the objection of the people they represent, that will govern daily life across an entire island for a generation. Mayor Alameda Has Said He Has Reservations. Tell Him to Act on Them Mayor Kimo Alameda has publicly stated that he is "not happy" with the plan as-is. He has called it "too prescriptive" and said it needs to "move itself back to more of the middle and not be so one-sided." He has indicated he will neither sign nor veto the bill, effectively passing it while expressing his displeasure. Expressing reservations is not the same as acting on them. A mayor who doesn't like a bill, and who knows the people don't like a bill, must not let it pass anyway. Mayor Alameda has the power to veto Bill 66. A veto would send a clear message that the people's voice matters, that the County must go back and produce something more balanced, and perhaps most importantly, that the overwhelming opposition expressed in that council chamber was heard. Take Action Today Mayor Alameda: You've said you're not happy with this plan. The people of your island aren't happy either. Honor their will. Veto Bill 66. We'd like to thank everyone who has stepped up to voice their opposition to the plan so far. The bill is now on Mayor Alameda's desk. This is the moment to speak up loud and clear. Contact the Mayor's Office directly and urge him to veto Bill 66. Be respectful and clear. Be consistent and persistent. East Hawaiʻi 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, HI 96720 Phone: (808) 961-8211 Fax: (808) 961-6553 TDD: (808) 961-8521 West Hawaiʻi 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Bldg CKailua-Kona, HI 96740 Phone: (808) 323-4444 Fax: (808) 323-4440 TDD: (808) 327-6003 Email: mayorsoffice@hawaiicounty.gov It's Easy. When you call or write, you can say something as simple as: "Mayor Alameda, I'm urging you to veto Bill 66. The people showed up to oppose this plan and their voices were ignored. You've said you're not happy with it either; please act on that. Veto the bill and send it back." The Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi stands for individual liberty, private property, and government that serves rather than controls. Bill 66 represents the wrong direction for our island. We will continue to speak out, and we ask you to join us.

“The Libertarian Party must not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy.” That was Scott Horton’s opening salvo. He came to the microphone at the National Libertarian Convention to make one thing clear: the LP’s affiliation with the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties is a mistake, and it must be corrected. It must be Ended. Horton’s message was one of the most pointed and substantive speeches this convention saw. Grounded in history, backed by names and records, his words carried the weight of something that doesn’t get said enough out loud: We are being used, and we need to stop letting it happen. He walked us through the architecture of the color-coded revolutions: the bulldozer revolution in Serbia, the rose revolution in Georgia, the orange revolution in Ukraine, the tulip revolution in Kyrgyzstan. He named what they actually are. These are coups in disguise, financed through USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, and a sprawling NGO infrastructure bankrolled by Soros-aligned institutions. Horton explained the genius of the modern model is that openness became its cover. When the CIA secretly backed political parties and it inevitably blew up in their faces, they adapted. Now the intervention is visible, open, and laundered through foundations. They finance the groups that they want to win and manufacture the narrative along the way. Around those operations is a sprawling industry of NGOs acting as auxiliaries to American foreign policy. Many of those organizations call themselves libertarian and many of its activists coordinate within our conventions. Who Is Actually In The Network? Pierre Crevaux of the IALP was an advisor to Salome Zorabichvili, the “sock puppet president” of former Soviet Georgia. She had never set foot in the country before the Rose Revolution installed her as finance minister, and would later describe the Soros Foundation and its NGOs as having carried the revolution and noted how they were subsequently integrated directly into government power. Horton also identified Tenetin Bolokats, another IALP functionary, who has openly called for EU and NATO membership for Georgia, is funded by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, and participated in a USAID workshop as recently as July 2024. The 2024 Georgian protests that she and her network supported were basically a jobs protest by the NGO industry. Georgia is a poor country, so working for a Western-funded NGO is an enticing route to the middle class. When the Georgian Dream government passed a law requiring disclosure of foreign funding above 20% (a law modeled directly on our own 1938 FARA statute), they called it a “Russian-style law” because they were all in on the take. These are the parties whose claim to libertarianism we are being asked to formally validate through affiliation. Groups that demand American military intervention while waging full ethnic cleansing. Groups that pressured Cato into running off Ted Carpenter, one of the most principled anti-intervention voices in the entire liberty movement, for having the principled consistency to note that NATO expansion contributed to the war in Ukraine. These are not our people and we should not let them hitch their wagon to ours. These international networks would have us serve as pressure from below to justify their interventions from above. The Libertarian Party, if entangled with these groups, becomes a vehicle for manufacturing domestic cover for State Department and USAID operations abroad. It would make us useful tools, not to liberty, but to the empire. Horton invoked the Daniel McAdams rule: never criticize a country the CIA is in the middle of criticizing. And the Murray Rothbard rule: universal human rights, locally enforced. Any American government large enough to be meaningfully interested in former Soviet Georgia is too large to be anything but a threat to liberty here. The IALP Is Moving to the U.S. Stop It. The IALP is actively relocating from Switzerland to the United States. Horton’s response to this move was three words: “Don’t. Stop. Go back.” Leave the Libertarian Party of the United States out of it. We cannot allow these groups to claim the backing and the legitimacy of the U.S. national party. A resolution to disassociate from the IALP was introduced on the convention floor by Horton and backed by the original founder who no longer recognizes the organization he built. The resolution failed. We are the Party of Principle. We do not play auxiliary to any empire’s agenda, simply because it cloaks itself in the word “liberty.” We watched the LNC filings that unbound the committee from the Statement of Principles, the perfect ramp up for their new international framework. The same entities that were leading the charge to take over our last convention from the mainland also have strong ties to and positions within the IALP. The web is large and the pattern unrelentingly consistent. Scott Horton was right about where this leads. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii unanimously passed a similar resolution, and encourages other affiliates to do the same: Resolution Against International Entanglements WHEREAS, the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties (IALP) no longer represents the original goals and vision of its founder and has been co-opted by foreign influence operations that are incompatible with the non-interventionist, peaceful foreign policy clearly articulated in the Libertarian Party platform; and WHEREAS, continued association with the IALP exposes the Libertarian Party to potential conflicting foreign influence and undermines the Party’s commitment to independence from government agencies such as the State Department, USAID, and other entities that may advance agendas contrary to libertarian principles; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, the undersigned Libertarian Party state affiliates: Call upon the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) to immediately disassociate the national Party from the IALP; and Urge all LNC and Libertarian position holders to publicly resign any affiliation with the IALP and commit to protecting the Party from foreign influence and government-linked operations; and Affirm its own disassociation from the IALP at the state level and encourages other state affiliates to do the same. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be transmitted to the LNC, all other state Libertarian Party affiliates, and published publicly as a clear signal of our commitment to the Libertarian Party’s principles of peace, non-intervention, and resistance to foreign and governmental influence. (This Resolution Against International Entanglements was unanimously passed in the Libertarian Party of Hawaii Executive Committee on May 27, 2026)

No public official should enjoy a permanent shield from accountability, especially those charged with holding others accountable. The End Judicial Immunity Act is a short but bold legislative proposal designed to restore balance and protect civil liberties by ensuring that Hawaii’s courts serve the people rather than insulate those who wield power. Judicial immunity is a doctrine rooted in common law that has expanded throughout the years through federal court decisions. It grants judges near-absolute protection from civil lawsuits for actions taken in their "official capacity". It has often created a class of untouchables, eroding public trust and leaving victims of judicial overreach with few meaningful remedies. No One Is Above the Law The principle that government officials are bound by the same laws as citizens is foundational to liberty. When judges violate constitutional rights through biased rulings, due process failures, or overreaching orders, current precident frequently bars victims from seeking civil redress. This contradicts the principle of equal justice. Our Act affirms that judges, like everyone else, must face consequences for clear violations of rights. Public service is a responsibility, not a license for misconduct. Hawaii deserves a judiciary that upholds the Constitution without bias or favor. When stories of judicial misconduct surface and affected populations have no effective recourse, cynicism grows. From families entangled in family court disputes to individuals facing unfair administrative actions, the lack of civil accountability can leave lasting harm. By ending blanket immunity for rights violations, we will empower citizens to pursue justice. We can incentivize higher standards on the bench and rebuild faith in the system that governs so many aspects of life. Judges are human. They can err, act with bias, and often exceed their proper role. Absolute immunity insulates honest mistakes and serious infringements on liberty alike. Actions such as improper detentions, unwarranted property seizures, or denials of fundamental fairness are egregious infringements. Government power must be checked to prevent it from becoming tyranny, especially in the courtroom. The legislation also reinforces the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause. State judges cannot prioritize conflicting state rules over federal constitutional protections. This ensures the uniformity and primacy of individual rights across Hawaii. Under our Act, claiming “I thought it was lawful” would not serve as a valid defense for violating clearly established rights. The standard applied to ordinary citizens would be applied to those on the bench. Judges, trained professionals sworn to uphold the law, should be held to the highest standard. Their job relies on the knowledge and application of law. When the System Betrays the Individual This bill proposal stands in protection of the mother in Honolulu fighting for the custody of her children. She works her way tirelessly through the system only to face a judge who ignores evidence and issues rulings driven by personal bias rather than law. She loses years with her keiki, drains her savings on attorneys, and is told by higher courts that the judge is untouchable, even if the misconduct was glaringly obvious. When passed, this law will stand in defense of the small business owner on the Big Island whose property is seized through an unconstitutional order, destroying his livelihood, while the judge who signed it walks away completely shielded from accountability. These are unfortunately not theoretical victims. They are your neighbors, your ohana, who once believed the justice system existed to protect them. Instead, they discovered the hard way that the very people entrusted to uphold the Constitution can violate their most fundamental rights without having to answer for their crimes. These victims of the state are all around us; I would wager you know at least one. This is the answer to ending the pattern of state abuse and vindicating it's survivors. No public official should enjoy a permanent shield from accountability, especially those charged with holding others accountable. When a judge violates clearly established constitutional rights, the victim is left harmed and abandoned by the very system designed to deliver justice. They carry the trauma, the financial ruin, the broken families, and the deep disillusionment alone. The End Judicial Immunity Act is a bold legislative proposal designed to restore balance, protect civil liberties, and ensure that Hawaii’s courts serve the people rather than insulate those who wield power. Critics of reform often warn of a flood of lawsuits that could intimidate judges. We disagree. Targeted accountability for rights violations, paired with existing procedural safeguards strikes the right balance. Reform deters dishonorable conduct while preserving independence for good-faith decisions. Accountability and judicial integrity are indeed compatible. Help Us End Judicial Immunity The End Judicial Immunity Act advances core libertarian principles by eliminating special privileges for government actors, maximizing protection for individual rights, and holding our government accountable to the people of Hawaii.We invite all Hawai‘i residents who value justice, fairness, and liberty to join us. Sign Our Petiton to show lawmakers Hawaii wants to End Judicial Immunity. You can read the exact, brief language prior to signing. Download our free Activism Packet for bill text, talking points, handouts, templates, sign-up sheets, qr codes, and more: Put the Packet to Use by urging others to sign the petition. Share This Article on social media and send it to your friends and family.

Did you know that in 1999, the Libertarian Party of Hawaii unanimously adopted the Liberty Penguin as its official mascot? ❓🐧❓ Several affiliates embraced the playful “LP” (Liberty Penguin) as a cooler, more memorable symbol for the party of liberty. Hawaii’s adoption was the fourth, and even earned a brief spotlight in local news. A 1999 Honolulu Star-Bulletin article notes that the party wanted a “cooler” image and officially chose the Liberty Penguin as its mascot. The Liberty Penguin represented a fun, grassroots effort by state parties in the ’90s to give Libertarianism a lighter, more approachable face. Details on our own party’s penguin are an intriguing piece of hidden LPHI lore. The penguin seems to like a low profile. We haven’t been able to track down the original mascot, but we have had some fun playing around with the concept. Help Us Preserve Party History Your Secretary has been working hard to preserve party history. If you have old photos, newsletters, meeting notes, stories, or any other tidbits about any chapter of the Libertarain Party of Hawaii history, please help preserve our party’s heritage! Send them to lphisecretary@gmail.com.

The Hawaii DOGE committee is working to make our state government leaner, more transparent, and truly accountable to the people. Tell us what you’ve seen. Gripes: Share examples of waste, fraud, abuse, inefficiency, or bureaucracy gone wild (a bloated program, redundant spending, slow service, or outright misuse of taxpayer dollars). Praises: We also need to know about the bright spots where the government actually got it right (a department that saved money, delivered services efficiently, cut red tape, or showed real innovation). Every submission helps us build a clear, evidence-based case for reform in Hawaii. Government Efficiency Survey Email your story to lphisecretary@gmail.com with the subject line “Hawaii DOGE”. Please include in your Government Efficiency Survey: Your experience Where in Hawaii and when it happened Any details, photos, documents, or links that support it (optional but very helpful) We never share personally identifiable information without permission. We respect your privacy and will only use submissions to advance the initiative.

Senate Bill 2694 is now sitting on Governor Green’s desk, and Hawaiʻi residents should pay close attention. This bill would authorize automatic annual shipping rate increases for interisland water carriers, primarily benefiting Young Brothers, the state’s dominant interisland shipping company. The measure allows the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to establish “automatic adjustment mechanisms” enabling shipping companies to raise rates every year, with increases of up to 5% annually through at least 2029. (LegiScan) This comes after Young Brothers already received a massive 25.75% rate increase approved by the PUC in late 2025. (Maui Now) Supporters argue the bill helps carriers keep pace with inflation and avoids large one-time increases after years of regulatory delay. But the deeper issue is this: Hawaiʻi does not have a healthy competitive market for interisland shipping. It has a heavily regulated system dominated by a single major carrier. Instead of addressing the lack of competition, SB2694 effectively normalizes automatic price increases within a protected market structure. Why This Matters Everything in Hawaiʻi depends on shipping. Food. Building materials. Appliances. Vehicles. Household goods. Farming supplies. Small business inventory. When shipping costs rise, nearly every sector of the economy feels it. The first-order effect is obvious: higher shipping prices mean higher consumer prices. But the second- and third-order effects are even more damaging: Local families face even higher costs of living Small businesses become less competitive Neighbor island residents pay disproportionately more Farmers and producers face higher input costs New businesses become harder to start Economic centralization increases Dependence on a single dominant carrier deepens Innovation and market entry become less likely Over time, policies like this create a feedback loop where government regulation protects concentrated market power, concentrated market power drives higher prices, and residents are told higher prices are inevitable. They are not inevitable. The Real Solution: More Competition The answer to monopoly pricing is not guaranteed annual rate hikes. The answer is reducing barriers to entry and allowing more competition in interisland shipping. Competition pressures companies to improve efficiency, lower prices, and provide better service. Protected systems do the opposite. When businesses know price increases can be built into regulation itself, the incentive to innovate and reduce costs weakens. A freer and more competitive shipping market would strengthen Hawaiʻi’s economic resilience far more than automatic rate adjustments ever could. A Principled Position From a liberty-oriented perspective, government should not be empowering politically connected or government-protected industries to automatically pass rising costs onto the public. Markets work best when consumers have choices and businesses must compete for customers. SB2694 moves Hawaiʻi further away from that model. Even many legislators reportedly expressed discomfort with the bill while voting for it, arguing they felt there were few alternatives under the current system. (https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com) That should itself be a warning sign: when policymakers believe residents must simply accept permanent cost increases from a dominant carrier, something is fundamentally broken in the structure of the market. Hawaiʻi residents deserve better than managed decline and perpetual price increases. We deserve policies that encourage competition, resilience, affordability, and decentralization of economic power. Contact Governor Green Now Governor Green still has the opportunity to veto SB2694. Respectfully urge him to reject automatic shipping rate hikes and instead pursue reforms that increase competition and lower costs for Hawaiʻi residents. Contact Governor Green here: Governor Green Legislative Comment Portal Please be respectful, concise, and principled in your message. The more Hawaiʻi residents speak up now, the harder this issue will be to ignore.

Seeking fellow Hawaiians who believe in individual liberty, smaller government, and more personal freedom: Hawaiʻi’s elections consistently see low candidate participation. The last cycle left nearly 20 districts uncontested. That creates a real opportunity. If you’ve ever considered running for office, this is the time to step forward. In districts without competition, simply getting on the ballot dramatically increases the likelihood of giving voters a meaningful choice or even winning outright. Costs are low, risk is minimal, and the impact is tangible. There is also a strategic benefit for the broader movement. Every Libertarian candidate on the ballot strengthens our ability to maintain ballot access, without relying on burdensome petition efforts. By stepping up, you’re not just running a campaign; you’re helping secure long-term access, expand representation, and advance the principles of individual liberty across the islands. If you’re willing to put your name forward, we’ll support you all the way through the process. The window to file as a Libertarian candidate for the 2026 elections is closing soon. Candidate filing ends on June 2, 2026. If you’ve ever considered running for office to defend liberty in Hawaii, now is the time to act. Become a Libertarian Candidate Thinking about running for office yourself? Contact Libertarian Party of Hawaii today! Prepare to Win We’ve made it easier than ever to get ready. Check out our Candidate Readiness Seminar featuring 2024 congressional candidate, Aaron Toman. These resources cover the practical steps to run an effective campaign in Hawaii. Quick steps to get started: Coordinate with LPHI early so we can assist with filing, signature gathering, messaging, and campaign setup. Confirm eligibility and district residency requirements for the office you’re considering. Review current races and see where there’s no competition on the Hawaii Office of Elections website. Complete the nomination paper and gather the required number of signatures. Submit your filing either online or in person, along with the filing fee or petition alternative. Help a Libertarian Candidate Want to join a Candidate Team? Fill out our volunteer sign-up sheet and help support Libertarian candidates across the islands. Help with media dispersment, event coordination, signature gathering, and more. Whether you want to run yourself or support a candidate, your involvement matters. Hawaii needs more voices that will push back against overregulation, high taxes, and government overreach. Every Libertarian who steps forward brings us closer to real change. Act now to help us put Libertarians into office!

The Libertarian Party of Hawaii’s (LPHI) 2025 State Convention was projected to have around nineteen participants from the state of Hawaii. However, in the last 48 hours before the event, we faced an excessive surge of last-minute membership applications from out of state with no prior history of engagement with our affiliate. The Executive Committee worked very hard to balance these numbers out at the last minute after recognizing the risk of an out-of-state takeover. You could feel the tension building among members in the room after the revelation that this convention had the potential to remove local control of our Hawaii affiliate. The already overwhelmed credentials committee spent the morning working through the backlog, which delayed the convention by over two hours. When Aaron Toman (LPHI candidate for U.S. House of Representatives in 2024) finally presented the credentials report, the numbers sat at 88 credentialed remote Zoom attendees and 15 members physically present in Hilo. The room in which LPHI's leadership, bylaws, and future would be decided was outnumbered nearly six to one by people attending from laptops across the mainland. Not only was this level of turnout unprecedented for Hawaii, our 2025 convention turned out having more attendees than any prior Libertarian convention that year. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii 2025 Convention, Part One The Operation Evidence reveals this was a calculated, data-driven operation organized by the LP Alliance. Founded in November 2024, the LP Alliance is a national inter-caucus coalition. They describe themselves as encompassing a wide array of factions. They do not seem to have a single coherent ideology, but appear united by antagonism toward conservative opinions. However, they do have a verifiable and coherent strategy. Their stated goal is to gain enough organizational control of state affiliates to reshape the national party from the inside out. “From phone banking to candidate consulting to fundraising to coordinating rides and lodging, we do everything in our power to make sure that the right people are at the right conventions to run for and support Ally-backed slates.” ~ LP Alliance They utilize national networks, phone banking, and candidate consulting to ensure their preferred voters can flood targeted affiliate conventions. As early as December 2024, their organizers were directed to a restricted communications channel to coordinate state-by-state research to document seasoning requirements and bylaw gaps to exploit. On August 30th, their target was Hawaii. Kelly Nguyen was the on-site organizer for the LP Alliance. She had been an elected At-Large member of the LPHI Executive Committee in 2023 for a few short weeks before abruptly resigning, only to reappear at the 2025 convention in Hilo. The LP Alliance's publication, The Torch, later identified her explicitly as "the Alliance's on-site organizer." Nguyen's role was managing credentialing readmissions for the remote Alliance delegates. A former LPHI Executive Committee member was back in the room, working the floor for the faction trying to take over the party she had abandoned. The operation had a clear structure. A remote bloc would supply the votes, Nguyen would manage the ground, and Kyle Davis, and other Zoom attendees, would run parliamentary interference and back-end communication channels in order to prevent LPHI from protecting itself from takeover. Parliamentary Warfare When Aaron Toman moved to limit voting to Hawaii residents and lifetime members, Davis immediately raised a Point of Order to kill it. The motion died before it could reach a vote. Andrew Chadderdon then cited Robert's Rules of Order on whether remote attendees could legally vote at all, and Chairman Austin Martin called a recess, reviewed the rules, and reversed the ruling to confirm remote participants were ineligible to vote. The quorum collapsed to the 15 people physically present in Hilo. The ruling was immediately appealed by Daniel Lutz, seconded by Kelly Nguyen. The Chair's ruling was upheld among the in-person delegates. A motion by Nguyen to adjourn for lack of quorum was not well-taken. What followed was a sustained effort to destabilize whatever was left through parliamentary attrition. "As expected, the MC removed the people in Hawaii, lol." "As we told everyone, the MC planned to violate the members of Hawaii. They did exactly what we said would happen." ~ Kyle Davis, via Zoom chat This was their manufactured narrative, written before the convention started. Control the vote and win outright, or lose and claim fraud. Either way, they had a story ready to publish for their mainland pals. Parliamentarian and former LNC Secretary, Caryn Ann Harlos was on speakerphone with Nguyen throughout the proceedings, participating as a non-voting "observer." When Aaron Toman asked Harlos for clarification, she acknowledged a conflict of interest on the record. She could not fully respond because she had "other clients in this event," which was not disclosed from the onset. With the remote delegates properly excluded and the disruption finally exhausted, the convention held its elections. LPHI lifetime member Feena Bonoan suggested the nomination of Austin Martin for Chair. The man they came to remove was re-elected unanimously by every in-person delegate who cast a vote. The convention then passed a unanimous motion to authorize a Special Convention within 12 months to cover the agenda item that remained, the Bylaws and Platform revisions. . The Organization The LP Alliance is a broad inter-caucus structure founded in November 2024. Their goal is to gain enough organizational control of state affiliates and the LNC to reshape the party from the inside out. Their publication, The Torch, is their ideological platform edited by Amanda Griffiths. They have published a piece titled "The NAP is Woefully Outdated" and have authored work challenging the Non-Aggression Principle's prohibition on offensive political violence. Her co-organizer, Kyle Davis, sits beside her on the national Bylaws & Rules Committee, despite being openly opposed to the party’s Non-Aggression Principle. The Alliance acts as a domestic arm of a high-stakes internationalist network. Their leadership maintains a close relationship with international political figure Pierre-Alexandre Crevaux, a high-level LP insider, advisor to former foreign head of state, and the the Regional Coordinator for France’s Renaissance party. He oversees Macron’s ruling party’s presence and activities in Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. He serves as the Regional Vice-chair for Eastern Europe and Central Asia for the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties. He is also associated with the Georgian party, “Girchi – More Freedom”, a splinter from the original libertarian Girchi Party who aligned with NATO powers in an apparent effort to undermine and subvert the sovereignty of the nation of Georgia. While Crevaux manages foreign political principals, the LP Alliance acts as the domestic vehicle to integrate these internationalist agendas into U.S. party operations. Internal communications show Kyle Davis describing the Alliance as "effectively a refounding" of the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties to focus on international messaging. All of this may present a significant legal risk under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Data Acquisition Months after the August 30th convention, Kyle Davis sent a formal demand to LPHI for their complete membership list. He demanded every member's name, address, and voting weight, citing HRS Chapter 414D, Hawaii's Nonprofit Corporations Act. He threatened lawsuits and court-ordered inspections against the Hawaii affiliate for noncompliance to his demands. This was part of a documented pattern of data acquisition for the LP Alliance. Kyle Davis reportedly admitted in direct communications that he had already downloaded the national LP membership and voter database. In those conversations and even on the LP Allies podcast, Davis made statements seemingly indicating that this data was shared or used in ways inconsistent with authorized LP data-sharing policies. LPHI blocked the targeted attempt to integrate Hawaii’s data into an unauthorized national list. HRS Chapter 414D does not apply to LPHI. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii is a qualified political party organized under HRS Chapter 11, Part V, His demand was legally invalid and imposed no obligation on LPHI whatsoever. “Because LPHI is not subject to Chapter 414D, the record-inspection provisions you invoke simply do not apply. Your demand is therefore legally invalid and imposes no obligation on LPHI." ~ Chairman Austin Martin Since the threat lacked legal merit, Davis could not publicly complain about their "legal rights" being violated without exposing the flaw in their own argument. The Island Spirit Remains The Bylaws & Platform Committee has been meeting monthly since the convention. Every meeting is recorded and publicly available. Our bylaws are being rebuilt in public, with our members and for our members. LPHI is active, growing, and doing the work that brought most of us into this party in the first place. We are tracking and testifying on over 200 measures this legislative session. The Defend Hawaii Act has glided through hearings. Our candidates are preparing for campaign season. Real relationships, real candidates, real legislative impact, real aloha is ground that no outside operation can take from us. It was built here, by people who live here and love this place. Our island spirit has preserved the libertarian heart of LPHI.

Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting DATE: Monday, April 20, 2026 TIME: 7:00 pm HST  Files: Bylaws & Platform Committtee Call to Order: 7:15pm HST Roll Call: Austin Martin, Nicholas Zehr, Abbra Green, Bryce Thon, Viewing: Celina Monge Minutes and revisions from April 06 & March 16, 2026: Passed without objection.  Agenda: Passed without objection. Unfinished Business: N/A New Business: Article III, Section 3: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Bryce Thon to change “fees for membership rights, determined by membership level” to "annual donation thresholds which determine membership level." Passed without objection.  Article III Section 3.a: Motion by Nicholas Zehr, second by Austin Martin to replace “may be lowered by the Executive Committee by 2/3rds approval at any time. The annual dues may be raised by the Executive Committee once per term, no later than ninety days after convention by 2/3rds approval, and with thirty days’ notice provided to the membership.” with "may be changed by a special or regular convention, by two-thirds vote, with sixty days' prior notice." Passed without objection Article IV, Section 1.b: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Nicholas Zehr to add: "pursuant to Article III." Passes without objection. Motion by Abbra Green, second by Bryce Thon to Remove "Ensure that deadlines required by these Bylaws or state law are met" from Article IV, Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5. Add new subsection 1.g: "Officers shall ensure that deadlines required by these Bylaws or state law are met." under joint duties in Section 1 Passes without objection. Article V Section, Section 4.b: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Abbra Green to add "with prior notice" and strike: "for cause". Merge into article IV 6.a.2. Passes without objection. New Article IV 6.a.2 reads: “Automatic Vacancy:  If any State Committee member is absent for two consecutive regular committee meetings, that member’s position shall be deemed vacant with prior notice. The vacated member may seek reinstatement at the following regularly held meeting, provided another member in good standing is willing to sponsor the motion. This motion may be brought in the meeting immediately following automatic vacancy without prior notice. This provision shall not be construed to affect the Chair’s ex-officio membership status concerning subcommittees, nor to disparage the state committee’s prerogative to excuse absences.” Article VI, Section 2.a: Motion by Bryce Thon, second by Nicholas Zehr to replace "by five (5) State Committee members" with "subject to the State Committee" Passed without objection. Article VI, Section 4.b: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Abbra Green to replace with "Obtain EC approval, subject to State Committee or Special Convention." Passed without objection Motion by Abbra Green, second by Bryce Thon to Strike subsection d. Passed without objection Adjournment: 8:34pm HST The Next Bylaws & Platform Committee is Monday, May 04, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. HST

The University of Hawaii Systems is once again silencing the peaceful petitioning of Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) advocates. On April 7, 2026, YAL State Chair and Libertarian Party of Hawaii Chair Austin Martin  was helping a student gather signatures to reform campus weapons policies. Campus security demanded they seek prior permissions or otherwise seclude their activities into a designated free speech area. When they stood their ground and invoked the First Amendment , administrators admitted they would need to “ review the policy. ” Despite the blatant acknowledgement that university officials do not understand their own rules, they called the Hawaii Police Department anyway, and issued a trespass warning. Very shortly after the advocates left campus, the community college sent a warning message to all students cautioning them to notify authorities if they saw Austin Martin.  Dusting Off the Old Script   It is the exact same unconstitutional playbook the UH system used and lost in 2014 . Back then, UH Hilo YAL leaders Merritt Burch and Anthony Vizzone set up a table in the Campus Center Plaza during a university event. They offered free copies of the U.S. Constitution and liberty literature. Director of Student Affairs Ellen Kusano ordered them to stay behind the table and to stop approaching anyone. When the students cited their constitutional rights, she replied, “It’s not about your rights in this case, it’s about the University policy that you can’t approach people.” Then, the university doubled down with an email to every student organization: “RISOs may not approach people to solicit information… each person should be able to freely choose whether to listen to your solicitation or not.”  They went as far as to herd students into a tiny “free speech zone”  that covered just 0.26% of campus. All of this was justified by the broad Board of Regents rule (§ 20-13-7)  that banned “solicitation”  anywhere on campus and, at the time, gave administrators total discretion on how to define the term The students sued, resulting in the university agreeing to a settlement in 2014 and adopting Executive Policy EP 10.206 (effective December 1, 2014), which requires campuses to protect non-commercial speech. The current official policy , still posted on the UH Hilo website, could not be clearer: “Campuses will implement the solicitation policy as set forth in Section 20-13-7 of the Administrative Rules for the University of Hawaiʻi in a manner to permit students to approach others on campus and to distribute non-commercial literature such as petitions, circulars, leaflets, newspapers in all areas generally available to students and the community.” Petitioning to change campus policy is definitively constitutionally protected and non-commercial speech. Yet here we are in 2026, and the same campus, under the same UH system, is treating signature gathering for self-defense rights as if it were criminal.  Inexcusable Parallels The pattern is unmistakable. The University of Hawaii Systems implemented textbook institutional DARVO  (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim & Offender) to evade accountability for violating constitutional rights: D eny: Administrators deny responsibility, and deny wrongdoing, and deny constitutional rights. Administrators in both instances denied any First Amendment violation by deliberately mislabeling protected political petitioning and literature distribution as “soliciting”  or “commercial activity,”  The exact same semantic gaslighting used in 2014 to shut down Constitution handouts is used in 2026 to stop self-defense petitions, even though the university’s own post-2014 policy explicitly protects this activity. This stage has the effect of predisposing observers to side with a specific manufactured narrative. A ttack: They moved to marginalize, silence, and remove advocates from campus. Peaceful advocates were intimidated through prior-approval demands from the Board of Regents, limiting what areas they could use their rights in, detention threats, trespass warnings, and police calls. R everse Victim & O ffender: They reversed roles by positioning themselves as the noble protector of the heckler’s “comfort” . They characterized speech as “harassment”, tactically claiming that is making others feel uncomfortable. In 2026 a campus-wide alert was blasted, defaming the Chairman. The goal of this stage is to cast the actual victim as the aggressors who cause “intimidation”  or “uncomfortable feelings” It was the same heckler’s veto that justified both the 2014 and 2026 First Amendment violations. This is a deliberate, repeating institutional tactic to suppress liberty. Déjà Vu for Free Speech UH Systems lost the 2014 fight, revised its policies, and publicly committed to constitutional compliance. Yet mid-level administrators either never got the memo or feel entitled to ignore it. Either way, the results are the same. Taxpayer dollars are being wasted on police calls, potential lawsuits, and the systematic suppression of speech. The right to keep and bear arms  is fundamental to self-defense and personal liberty. The First Amendment is not optional on any public grounds. No government bureaucrat gets to decide whose message is too uncomfortable to be heard, and the heckler’s veto has no place in a free society. The administration should be providing mandatory First Amendment training for all campus security and staff until this pattern ceases. They should have already implemented their clear, system-wide directive ending the weaponization of free speech. Hawaii’s students deserve better than Groundhog Day for liberty. The University of Hawaii Systems owes taxpayers full and immediate respect for the Constitution. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii will continue to stand with every student, every group, and every citizen who refuses to let government officials treat the  Bill of Rights  as a suggestion. Free speech and self-defense are not privileges, they are inherent in every Hawaiian. Contact Us Have your rights been violated by the State of Hawaii? We’d love to hear your story. Contact us anytime. Help us spread liberty throughout the islands by making a one time or recurring payment to the Libertarian Party of Hawaii: