Letters to the Editor

Protectionist attitudes hurting state, indeed

I have lived and worked in Hawai'i for more than 15 years, and I have never read as accurate an analysis of the state's dysfunctional atmosphere of bureaucracy as that of James Dannenberg's in the Aug. 26 Focus section.

He is right about the constrictive and pervasive nature of protectionism and isolationism that is rampant within the bureaucracy of this state. As Dannenberg stated: It is not about the hiring of paramedics or teachers or any other field where shortages exist, it is about the segregating factor of where they were educated, trained and worked previously. If the education, training and/or work were done on the Mainland, then regardless of critical shortages, people trying to work in Hawai'i face many obstacles.

We should not look at the econo-mies of Asia or the Mainland to blame for Hawai'i's dismal employment picture, but rather at the discriminatory practices that abound within the state's hiring practices.

As Dannenberg stated, we should not simply lament the fact that our sons and daughters choose not to return to work and live here, but we should examine and change the discriminatory practices that prove to be "not worth the aggravation" of living here.

Terry S. Akana
Kapolei

Discriminatory practices frustrating, despairing

I read James Dannenberg's "Bureaucratic wall of shame" with great interest, recently having gone through a similar fiasco myself.

I was born and raised here, but went to a California university. While a student, I attended an emergency medical technician academy and obtained a California EMT license, working part time in San Bernardino County. Returning home after graduation, I called around to see what I could do to transfer my certification to Hawai'i so I could find work here. I was given the same runaround Dannenberg described — I was told that only Kapi'olani Community College students qualify for local positions and was advised that there was no way to make up the requisite amount of "ride-along" training hours, although I had two years of emergency experience.

I was so frustrated that I eventually gave up and tried to sign up to retake the entire EMT program at KCC the following semester. No such luck — the program was full.

I will be returning to California to take back the job I previously held. I, too, hope Hawai'i is able to find ways to reform its barrier mindset, especially when its own kama'aina are among those it excludes.

Oren Bernstein
Hale'iwa

Misguided posturing makes wall impenetrable

The "misguided protectionism" of which James Dannenberg spoke is even more "self-defeating" than he described.

Our politicians seem to have none of the awareness "shame" presumes. Rather, the "dearth of media stories about local residents moving to the Mainland to pursue more fulfilling and remunerative careers" falls on the deaf ears of a virtually impenetrable "bureaucratic wall" of denial. And denial, once it gets its lethal fangs into us, builds its own self-protective walls that guarantee its survival and our demise. We become caught in a self-unfulfilling prophecy.

A recent personal example drove this point home. Upon arriving in Honolulu from an overseas flight, the flight crew made their usual announcement about the filling out of U.S. Immigration papers. The senior crewperson making the announcement then added: "Ladies and gentlemen, if you've made even the slightest error, please ask for another form as U.S. Customs in Hawai'i are very unforgiving."

With that kind of "aloha spirit," our bureaucratic wall of misguided protectionism ultimately will turn Kapi'olani Park into Jurassic Park.

Irwin Rubin
President, Temenos Inc

Commission violating state Constitution

The state Reapportionment Commission, which consists of nine people on O'ahu, has violated Hawai'i's Constitution grossly.

Article IV of the Constitution spells out the rules for redistricting, yet the commission has gone out of its way to do what the Constitution tells it not to do. The Constitution specifies that there will be no districts split between islands except for island groups, and it enumerates the Island Groups. The commission has violated this rule by combining an area on the Big Island with an area on Maui, also an area on Kaua'i with one on O'ahu.

The Constitution says that only permanent residents will be counted toward the voter base. Yet the commission has counted military families stationed in Hawai'i, even though military families vote in their home state by absentee ballot.

There is an Internet site, which can be viewed using Acrobat Reader, that spells out the various rules for the process of redistricting. I urge concerned citizens to attend reapportionment public meetings in September on your island and to bring everyone you know with you.

Don Tinker
Kea'au

Self-financing industry has proven track record

The Advertiser's editorial staff should get real.

In the Aug. 27 editorial column, "Hawai'i economy can't rely solely on others," the statement is made, "If we do not push hard to build a domestic, sustainable economy, we will always be subject to the boom and bust cycles of others."

Isn't the state already providing almost unlimited subsidies to the following "less than satisfactory" businesses, including aquaculture, the high-tech industry, film-making, industrial parks and the feast or famine tourism industry?

The Advertiser should go on record in support of legalized gambling, a self-financing industry with a proven track record.

James Lam


Billing city, state over legal fees in bad taste

In regard to the story on Aug. 31, "ACLU bills city, state $87,000": Although the American Civil Liberties Union does many good things and although I may not always agree with them, I feel this is wrong. They shouldn't be taking money from the community this way to pay for their lawyers.

This is in extremely bad taste, even though it may be legal.

Donald G. Allen
Wahiawa

Stricter laws don't make it harder for criminals

In response to the Johns Hopkins University study on guns and criminals, I believe that the researchers got only part of the point of this study. Only a criminal without a brain would walk into a gun shop and legally try to buy a gun. The criminal with at least half of a brain would try to obtain it illegally.

Here's one thing to remember: Crime always will exist.

Stricter firearms laws have made it more difficult for law-abiding citizens than for criminals to purchase a firearm. Enforce the laws already on the books. We don't need more laws to restrict our rights as gun owners.

It is a right to own a firearm to protect ourselves, loved ones and, most of all, our freedom.

Ivan Nishimura

Signs needed to help people find streets

After a 12-year absence from Hawai'i, I noticed upon my return that many changes have occurred, but also that some things have not.

Of those things that have not changed, the most annoying is the lack of street signs on some city streets. Classic example: the intersection of Auahi and Kamake'e streets. At this busy intersection, there is not a single street sign. That may be fine for people who have lived in the area all their lives, but it certainly is not the case for the rest of us.

How many millions of dollars were proposed to build a new stadium? How about a few bucks for some street signs?

Ted Plaister

Difference between quackery, medicine

One should take care to not be swayed too swiftly by arguments that proponents of marijuana legalization offer. (When I speak of marijuana, I am referring to the illegal substance that is commonly smoked and not cannabis preparations such as dronabinol and levonantradol.)

Reasons for legalization, according to Robert Sharpe, Thomas C. Mountain and Roger Taylor (Letters, Aug. 28) can range from unfair crime and punishment to medical benefits to one's inherent right of freedom.

First of all, Sharpe's argument that "children have an easier time buying marijuana than beer" is hardly convincing. Children also have easy access to crystal methamphetamine and cocaine. Does that mean we should make them available at a store?

Taylor and the Libertarian Party feel that "responsible" adults should be able to do as they please, as dictated by our right of freedom. True, but freedom without limits is equivalent to anarchy, and the last time I checked, marijuana was still against the law.

But let's not talk about politics and the law. As a medical, student, I'm more interested in the health benefits offered by Mountain.

Mountain rattled off a laundry list of medical conditions, including spinal cord injuries (I'm curious as to how marijuana can help a paraplegic regain the use of his legs) that can benefit from marijuana, but he did not offer any evidence to back up his claims.

Anyone who has done homework on marijuana would know that it has a narrow therapeutic index, meaning that there is not much leeway between the amount that may help and the amount that may harm a given patient.

Demonstrated effects can include decreased blood pressure, increased heart rate, airway narrowing, as well as chronic bronchitis, which one can get from smoking tobacco. Everything from feces to Aspergillus has been found in samples of marijuana, things that probably would not be good for immune-suppressed patients who are getting che-motherapy or who have AIDS.

Just because something works does not mean that it is better or safer than treatments already available. The difference between quackery and medicine is that one is claimed, and the other proven.

Of course, all medications have side effects. But the point is that medications in use already have passed through the rigorous approval procedures of the Federal Drug Administration. Marijuana has not.

Evidence in support of marijuana's use is largely anecdotal, and randomized, control trials (the gold standard of research) are lacking.

Emotional issues of patient care should spur, but not supplant, well-conducted research. Physicians should be empathetic, but at the same time should not allow that empathy to overrule evidence-based medicine.

The same should apply to politicians, who have no more business in deciding on health-care issues than physicians do in rewriting the Constitution.

I am not against marijuana itself. Amphetamines and opioids have found their use in medicine, and I believe that one day evidence will allow marijuana to do the same. When that day comes, I will be more than happy to prescribe it to patients who need it.

Until then, I will not deviate from the standard of care that I swore to follow from the moment I first put on my white coat.

Frank Yuan
John A. Burns School of Medicine