Hawaii House Bill HCR191

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/16/26
• Refer: 3/18/26
• Report Pass: 4/1/26
• Refer: 4/1/26
• Report Pass: 4/9/26
• Engrossed: 4/9/26
• Refer: 4/10/26

Caption

Urging The Department Of Business, Economic Development, And Tourism To Submit An Annual Hawaii Genuine Progress Indicator Report To The Legislature No Later Than Thirty Days Prior To The Convening Of Each Regular Session, Beginning With The Regular Session Of 2027.

Summary

HCR191 is a nonbinding House Concurrent Resolution that urges the Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT) to provide the Legislature with an annual Hawaii Genuine Progress Indicator (HI GPI) report no later than 30 days before each regular session, starting in 2027. The resolution frames the HI GPI as a broader alternative to Gross Domestic Product, intended to measure economic welfare alongside social well-being and environmental sustainability. The resolution specifies what the annual report should contain, including an executive summary, trend analysis for economic, social, and environmental indicators, a methodology overview, policy implications, and a detailed data appendix. It also urges DBEDT to post the report publicly online and send copies to the relevant House and Senate committee chairs, as well as transmit a certified copy to the Director of DBEDT.

Impact

Because this is a concurrent resolution rather than a bill, it does not change state law or create enforceable duties. Its practical effect is to encourage DBEDT to institutionalize annual reporting on the Hawaii Genuine Progress Indicator and to standardize the content and timing of that report for legislative review. If followed, it would increase the Legislature’s access to data on economic, social, and environmental conditions and could influence future policy and budget decisions.

Sentiment

The resolution appears broadly positive and informational in tone, with no recorded committee debate, votes, or opposition in the provided materials. Its findings emphasize evidence-based policymaking, transparency, and a more holistic view of progress, suggesting support for the concept of using HI GPI as a planning tool. The absence of recorded votes or transcripts means there is no documented controversy in the available record.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, based on the text, could include whether HI GPI is a better policy metric than traditional economic measures, the administrative burden on DBEDT to produce an annual report, and whether the Legislature should rely on a composite well-being index when evaluating policy tradeoffs. However, no named opponents or competing viewpoints are reflected in the available history.