Hawaii enacts law modeled on ‘Montana Plan’

Montanans will have the chance to vote on a law aimed at limiting the amount of money spent in elections, following an announcement on Tuesday that the Transparent Election Initiative had exceeded the required number of signatures needed to get on the ballot. 

And while the idea to use state law to counter the Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, put forth by former Montana Commissioner of Political Practices Jeff Mangan, has been dubbed “the Montana Plan,” other states have taken the model and beaten the Treasure State to the finish line. 

Last month, Democratic Hawaii Gov. Josh Green signed Senate Bill 2471 into law after it passed on a series of bipartisan votes throughout the legislative process. 

The law has almost identical language to Montana’s ballot initiative, using a legal strategy promoted by the Center for American Progress to use a state’s ability to regulate the powers granted to corporations. 

In state law in Montana and Hawaii, “artificial persons” comprise nonprofits, trusts, partnerships, corporations, trade associations, or unincorporated associations 

The idea is that since the powers given to corporations are regulated by states, a state can limit those powers — in this case prohibiting them from contributing to elections, candidates or political parties. 

While dozens of similar bills have been introduced in legislatures across the country, Hawaii’s is the first to be signed into law, and it will take effect in summer of 2027. 

“With this legislation, Democratic and Republican legislators in Hawaii have blazed a new trail to curb the undue influence of big money in politics and end secret spending in campaigns,” said Michael Beckel with Issue One, a nonprofit political reform group focused on reducing dark money in politics. 

Beckel told the Daily Montanan that the bill’s passage with only one lawmaker opposing it in Hawaii shows the idea to limit spending in elections has support across the political spectrum. 

One lawmaker in Hawaii who voted against the bill early in the process but ultimately supported it was GOP Rep. Garner Shimizu, who said he changed his mind “to take a braver step of faith and courage.” 

“Hawaii and this 2026 legislature has the chance to make history, to reset a new precedent, to eliminate unlimited money sources that totally affect our elections and bring back some sanity and sanctity to our voting process,” Shimizu said in a press statement. 

Beckel said in discussions he’s had with state lawmakers across the country, the push by Montana to enact its version through a voter initiative inspired activists and legislators to bring their own proposals forward, and even if “Hawaii is the only one over the finish line,” it’s a big step forward. 

“It’s definitely a slower-moving train in Montana,” he said. “But Montana voters have a real chance to trailblaze.”

For a voter initiative to make it to the ballot in Montana, state law requires ballot initiatives to have 30,121 signatures statewide, including at least 5% of the vote cast for governor in 34 different state House Districts. 

The campaign behind “the Montana Plan” said the Montana Secretary of State has verified nearly 35,000 signatures already and it is confident the geographic requirement will be met, with more than 50,000 signatures submitted. 

Whether Montanans will follow up in the voting booth this November is another question, as the measure has drawn some pushback from different organizations including the state Chamber of Commerce, and multiple industry groups. 

Beckel said headwinds to the move to limit election spending have come largely from business and industry groups. 

“There’s so many people who have adjusted to this post-Citizen’s United status quo who don’t know exactly what this future could look like — or might not remember what the past, pre-Citizen’s United was like,” he said. 

With corporations limited in their contributions to elections, money favoring issues or candidates will have to flow through political actions committees, or PACs, which are regulated by the Federal Election Commission, have donor contribution limits and disclosure requirements. 

Hawaii’s law, as the first of its kind, is likely to be a test case for the legal framework “the Montana Plan” and other similar measures are built on. 

Hawaii Gov. Green said in an interview with a news network in Hawaii that there are “some challenges” with the bill, and the Attorney General in a memo to the Legislature said it “raises serious constitutional concerns,” and could end up challenged under the Citizens United ruling. 

Montana has a history of limiting corporate influence in elections, and in 1912 banned corporate spending in elections.  

After Citizens United, however, the U.S. The Supreme Court overturned a state supreme court decision that had upheld the century-old law.