Letters to the Editor

Biotech industry motivated by greed

I wasn't surprised by the fierce corporate resistance of Hawai'i's biotech industry to resolutions heard this month on Maui and in the state Legislature recommending creation of GMO (genetically modified organisms) advisory boards.

The biotech industry has resisted attempts by local regulators to learn specifics of open-air GMO experiments under way in Hawai'i. Simultaneously, the industry puts on its brightest PR face, claiming it has nothing to hide. In an elitist insider style, industry employees repeatedly testified the public lacks technical understanding of GMOs, and that the public is irrational and frightened. Hogwash.

The public lacks only industry's conflict of interest and investment of time and capital in GMOs, which are being rejected worldwide by informed consumers.

A survey of the principal insurance underwriters in the United Kingdom found none would cover GMO crops. Insurance officials compared GMO crops to thalidomide, asbestos and acts of terrorism. The companies surveyed felt too little was known about the long-term effects of growing these crops on human health and the environment to be able to offer any form of coverage.

Yes, the unbiased public is able to look at the facts and recognize dangers. The industry, motivated by greed, has its nose stuck in a test tube and lacks the objectivity required to look at health, environmental or economic problems of agricultural biotech.

What's been shown time and again worldwide is the public becomes increasingly vocal and united against GMOs as the public becomes educated about GMOs.

Sports talk devolving into semi-literacy

There is a new semi-literacy abroad in sportscasting.

It involves the use of the redundant double subject, which used to be anathema in elementary school grammar classes. For example: "Today, Barry Bonds, he hit another homer." The double subject ("Bonds" and "he" for the one verb "hit") is unnecessary. It should be either "Today, Barry Bonds hit another homer," or, with a second reference, "Today, Barry Bonds hit another homer. He came a swat closer to Babe Ruth's mark."

Sportscasters are committing this error probably as part of their deification of jocks; their heroes are simply too "awesome" to be described with only one noun.

New buses' lack of handrails unsafe, too

I agree with the letters by Bobby Smith (April 18) and Jan Sanders (April 19) that the new buses are rider-unfriendly. I'd like to add that in my opinion, they are also unsafe.

Once you enter the new bus, there is nothing to hold on to until you reach the first row of seats. Between the handrails in the front and the first row of seats, there are no handy poles, as in the old buses, only hand rings so high up, I would guess that 90 percent of local riders are too short to reach them.

What is happening is that we try to make it to the front row of seats to have something to hold on to, but too often before we can make it, the bus jerks so we can't help falling onto the people seated on the side, who must help hold us up.

Last week, when I boarded a crowded bus, a gentleman offered me his seat on the side front, laughingly warning me to beware because so far three people had fallen on him. Having had the experience before of practically falling on a seated rider, I understood what he meant. It wouldn't be a laughing matter, however, if a person happened to fall on a fragile older person with osteoporosis, whose bones could easily be broken.

I read that the bus company is spending $5,000 per bus just to decorate the new buses with the rainbow design. I'm sure most riders would prefer better service (i.e., more frequent buses) than a pretty exterior. What a shame to spend so much money to replace the classic, better-designed buses with these outwardly pretty but inwardly poorly designed, inefficient buses.

Employees shouldn't have to bear the burden

I wanted to commend reporter Debbie Sokei for her thoughtful story (April 18) on the important labor issues surrounding Hawaiian Airlines' pending bankruptcy settlement.

While everyone wants to see Hawaiian emerge from bankruptcy as a stronger, more vibrant company, this cannot — and should not — be done by asking employees to make even more salary and benefit concessions.

Many people don't realize that our pilots have already made significant sacrifices to keep Hawaiian Airlines going. Most recently, just prior to the bankruptcy filing, Hawaiian Airlines pilots agreed to cuts in both productivity and benefits worth $8 million annually. We are working significantly longer hours with no additional pay. Approximately 25 percent of our pilots no longer have jobs.

Also, many people don't realize that pilots must — by law — retire at age 60. That's why our retirement plan is so important to us.

While our pilots are deeply committed to Hawaiian's success, it would be wrong to continue to ask airline employees to make such deep sacrifices. There has to be a better way to run the company.

We look forward to working cooperatively with the company and prospective bidders who are committed to making Hawaiian Airlines' emergence from bankruptcy a win-win for both the company and the employees.

Honolulu Triathlon inconvenienced many

I am sure the Olympic triathlon trials garnered a lot of publicity and exposure for Honolulu. However, it is really upsetting that thousands — thousands! — of residents' lives were needlessly disrupted so that a few dozen or so cyclists could ride their bikes.

I live on Leahi Avenue on the Diamond Head side of Monsarrat. I could not drive my car to the airport to get my family because Monsarrat and Diamond Head were both closed from noon to 5 p.m. on Sunday. Traffic that did try to get through was backed up, clogging up small neighborhood streets.

The planning for this event was hideous. There was not adequate notification for residents, who were trapped in between the closed streets. I heard that it was announced in the paper a few days ago. How about putting up signs for everyone to see — like they do when they are going to be working on Kalakaua or the Likelike?

Also, traffic should have been permitted to cross Monsarrat between bike laps. At least five to six minutes elapsed between bikers on their laps.

Pedestrians were crossing, people on bikes were crossing, people walking their dogs were crossing. I believe the HPD officers are skilled enough to let one car go at a time when there are no bikes coming down the hill.

No Child Left Behind Act benefits Hawai'i children

I did indeed visit a school on the Big Island last year with Congressman Ed Case and was impressed with it ("Appropriate flexibility, financing can help public schools succeed," April 18). However, I do believe that the Kanu o ka 'Aina school and its students can benefit — like all other children throughout Hawai'i and the rest of the nation — from the No Child Left Behind Act.

This year, our nation passed a milestone in support for education. For the first time, we invested more than $500 billion on elementary and secondary education at the local, state and federal level. Yet, despite these massive outlays, student achievement has remained flat and students in other developed nations are leaping ahead of American children.

Many young people are not receiving the high-quality education they deserve. That's why President Bush and both parties in Congress had the courage and vision to pass the No Child Left Behind law. They have said the old ways of doing things cannot stand.

And the president and Congress have provided the funds to get the job done. The president's proposed education budget for 2005 increases federal education funding in Hawai'i to $340.5 million — 50 percent more than when the president took office. That includes an additional $128.1 million to help Hawai'i implement the reforms of No Child Left Behind. And the law gives states and local school districts the flexibility they need to tailor programs that best suit local needs.

The only federal "mandate" in this law is one that should be the goal of public education anyway: that children read and compute math at grade level, that they should have the skills expected for their grade. The federal government didn't add a burden that the states did not already have, if they really wanted to provide a quality education for all children.

The children seem to be a sidebar in this fight among adults. We must stop playing politics with our children's lives and futures. Every single child who receives a better education is a child who will have a future full of opportunities.

Where's the education reform?

The Legislature has passed SB 3238, which has been hailed as education reform by its supporters. The bill contains many of the buzzwords that have been frequently used during the public discussion on the subject.

However, those few people who actually read the bill will find that, rather than advancing education reform, the bill dilutes and delays the changes needed to improve Hawai'i's school system. By diverting attention from needed changes, the bill stifles true reform.

One of the maxims about gamesmanship understood by legislators is that the appearance of progress can be created — without making any actual progress — by creating a committee. SB 3238 is full of committees. There's a committee to develop the weighted student formula that will allocate money to the individual schools. There's a committee to plan for performance contracts for principals. There's even a committee to reduce the bureaucracy. These are key components of education reform, and the Legislature has shown that it is not serious about reform by leaving them to committees.

The weighted student formula is supposed to maximize resources available to principals by allocating funds to individual schools. One section of the bill states that at least 70 percent of the operational funds for education will be expended by principals. But another section of the bill states that the committee developing the weighted student formula will determine the funds to be allocated through the formula. Presumably, the remainder will continue to be allocated by bureaucrats in the Department of Education. The committee will be appointed by the Board of Education, whose commitment to education reform is questionable at best.

As such, it is likely that the weighted student formula will not change the status quo much. Moreover, the bill inexcusably delays the implementation of the formula until the 2006-07 school year.

The bill also has the appearance of addressing accountability by giving principals more decision-making authority. However, the bill does not assure accountability because it does not provide for ineffective principals to be removed from their positions. The committee that will develop the plan for performance contracts will include representatives of principals. These committee members are not likely to agree to the removal of principals from their jobs, no matter how poorly any principal performs. Inexplicably, the implementation of performance contracts will also be delayed until the 2006-07 school year.

With a two-year timeline for the implementation of key elements of the bill, another year or two will have to elapse before any results can be generated to evaluate it. In this way the Legislature may think it has put the issue of education reform aside for three or four years.

I have to admit that sometimes I'm overly pessimistic about things. I hope I'm wrong in this case, and I hope that the bill will be successful beyond even the most optimistic pronouncements of its supporters. But I can't help but feel that the Legislature has created committees and has extended the timeline for implementation in hopes that the public's interest in education reform will go away — and that the public will once again resign itself to tolerating the dismal state of education in Hawai'i.