Posted on: Monday, February 23, 2004

Letters to the Editor

Why does paper give 'expert' own column?

I take exception to the seemingly exclusive use of your editorial page by one vocal opponent of the BRT solution. How is it your paper has become a private forum for Cliff Slater?

The Honolulu Advertiser has erroneously anointed Mr. Slater an expert of mass-transit projects in Honolulu.

Mr. Slater often fills his column with a litany of explanations and concerns; however, he never offers any specific alternatives that are realistic or justifiable or supports any plan of action other than to do nothing.

I, and many others, do not see traffic jams and crowded freeways as a vision for the future Honolulu that is attractive, but perhaps it is — to Cliff Slater and his group.

While I think that the free exchange of information is both useful and important to the public, these one-sided viewpoints that are against any improvements to public transit are bothersome and shortsighted and do not benefit your readers.

Kawamoto critics are in wrong venue

In reference to the Feb. 11 letter from John Radcliffe, "Honest, honorable: Criticism directed at Kawamoto undeserved": I agree with Mr. Radcliffe that almost all letters published by both our local dailies have been without exception virulent and over-the-top.

I repudiate these letters and their irresponsible attack on a man in the press when it should be in a court of law or before the Campaign Spending Commission, out in the open. A person so attacked in the papers can only respond by writing one letter for publication each month, in each daily.

Regarding the Senate rule that permits a conference committee chair to boycott a bill or resolution that has survived the hearing processes: It might be kept in mind that the majority of the Senate (16-plus senators) adopted this rule yet again. Also, it is a rule that other senators have exercised, some to kill "bad" bills as well as "good" bills.

Vietnam War reference doesn't equate to Iraq

Richard Halloran didn't frame President Bush's popularity in terms of his Vietnam service, although the "syndrome" was reinvoked. It remains to be seen whether George W. Bush is elected to a second term. (I won't vote for him because of the economy.)

Halloran wrote that casualties among GIs are unacceptably high, and that a recent doubling of the number of body bags could reasonably be expected to make or break a president in an election year. Halloran claims that only "the most hardened cynic" would disagree, yet the difference between more than 50,000 dead GIs (in Vietnam) and more than 500 (in Iraq) is a factor of 100.

The Japanese prime minister has doubtless prepared a press release to accompany some further remarks on television in the sad event of the first casualty among Japanese self-defense forces. Will the Japanese constitution be changed? Halloran writes that Iraqis have reason to be grateful because of an increase in energy supplies and fresh drinking water. But what they want is jobs, same as in the United States.

Let's debate the war, but let's keep it honest

David Shapiro may be right that the war in Iraq is fair game in the upcoming presidential election. However, he then proceeds to offer a list of loaded questions aimed at narrowing the public perception of the circumstances surrounding the war rather than fueling a rational public debate.

His piece is an example of what we can expect to see more of from the liberal press and from President Bush's adversaries.

Cooler heads than Mr. Shapiro's might have come up with the following additional questions: Was our Middle East policy (containment of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction ambitions) on a path to failure? Would or could Saddam resume production and field WMD if containment failed? If so, would other Middle East countries race to produce WMD in self-defense? Would stateless, undeterrable terrorists then have an increasing likelihood of getting access to WMD if proliferation were allowed to continue?

In my opinion, the answer to all of these is yes, and had not Bush acted, we would be facing a nightmare of a future.

By all means, let's debate the war, but the great danger of using Iraq as the major issue in this presidential campaign is that extreme political partisanship, the burning desire to defeat Bush at all costs, may overshadow what is truly best for the country.

Give principals what it takes for success

As principal of McKinley High School and president of the state's educational officers bargaining unit, I agree with my colleagues' comments and concerns reported in your newspaper ("Principals in eye of reform storm," Feb. 12).

Reformers are focusing on the public-school principal, which validates that the principal is key to a school's success. My colleagues and I do not hide from this attention, nor from the new responsibilities and changes that will come. But if we are to lead the battle to reform our schools, then we must have the troops and resources to win. We will not settle for stalemate or retreat, and neither should the public.

In turn, we need the public's support to help us overcome the problems we face today and tomorrow. We need more parental involvement and more time to spend with teachers and students. We need up-to-date textbooks and qualified teachers. We need training and resources for ourselves and our staffs.

What we don't need are more political meddling and tugs-of-war that distract, divide and demoralize.

Take racing to tracks, be responsible drivers

Auwe to speeders! As long as there are cars, there will be people who take advantage and are careless.

I agree with education and opening up the track to have these guys race there, as I did when I lived there.

Sorry to the families who lost loved ones.

The police have their hands full with all the problems with ice and trying to do a decent job. It's time for people to step up to the plate and be responsible for their actions.

It's attempted murder

I have a simple solution to curb the street racing that is plaguing Hawai'i and claiming lives: Anyone caught street racing should be charged with attempted murder, even in the absence of bodily harm or injury.

A foolproof solution

I have the perfect solution for stopping speeders and racers on our freeways: Install speed bumps every 50 feet. End of subject.

Focus should be on roads, not marriage

I find it really hard to believe that instead of focusing on trying to start up some type of highway patrol, the Legislature is focusing on civil unions. It's hard for me to fathom that this is its top priority.

The state of Hawai'i needs some type of highway patrol system. I feel so sad for the family of Mr. Melvin Salangdron Sr. I also feel for Mr. Sonny Koonce, who no doubt feels survivor's guilt. However, I don't feel sorry for the speeders.

That's why I find it hard to believe that the focus of the Legislature is on civil unions. While civil unions are important to a minority of individuals, the safety of Hawai'i's roads is important to the majority of individuals. The road problem should be taken on first. I can't believe that the police officers are spread so thin. If there were a highway patrol, the police could concentrate on criminals instead of having to ride the freeways looking for speeders.

I'm sure there will be some nasty responses to this letter, but honestly, most people here travel the highways. I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling that this should be taken on first given the most recent accident.

For the record, I don't have a problem with civil unions. I have relatives who have traveled to Vermont to participate in a ceremony, and I hope one day they won't have to travel there anymore. I welcome their partners as I would any spouse whom anyone in my family would take for their life partner. I just think our priority should be the roads.

Medicaid does pay for flu vaccine, services

We agree with Dr. Pradeepta Chowdhury in her Dec. 9 letter that the flu vaccine is a cost-effective prophylactic measure for avoiding more severe complications, hospitalizations and even death. In fact, the Medicaid program strongly encourages physicians to administer the vaccine.

However, Dr. Chowdhury is incorrect when she says that "Hawai'i's Medicaid program will not pay physicians the cost of the vaccine if we were to administer it to our patients in the office." Medicaid does, in fact, pay for the actual drug given, for the medical services performed during the visit and for the administration of the vaccine.

We hope that this clarifies the importance of what we do in Medicaid to improve the health and well-being of our customers.

Same-sex marriage OK

When I first heard about this same-sex marriage movement, I was totally against it. I wasn't going to start dating guys. Then I found out it wasn't forcing me to marry another guy, but was just wanted to give same-sex couples the same legal rights that I had. It wasn't threatening me or my marriage. So, as long as I don't have to divorce my wife and marry a guy, I'm all for it. Legislators, stop throwing stones.

Bravo for deferring arbitration award bill

I applaud Rep. Marcus Oshiro and the House Labor Committee for deferring Gov. Lingle's bill to cap arbitration awards for the HGEA. The public understands that negotiations are fair only if the playing field is level for both sides.

If Lingle knew that any pay award would be no higher than 1.5 percent, the governor would have no reason to negotiate at the table. She would drag her feet and leave the decision to the arbitrator, even if the state could afford more.

Hawai'i must better care for its mentally ill

Recently, I met with Dr. Alan Radke, director of the Adult Mental Health Division of the state Department of Health, who took the time to explain the current mental health laws and how they are interpreted. I was appalled to learn that treatment in Hawai'i is reserved only for those severely mentally ill who have committed crimes or who have physically been harmful to themselves.

Those who have severe cases of schizophrenia cannot be treated unless they voluntarily seek it. Unfortunately, the nature of schizophrenia, particularly the paranoid type, prevents such people from realizing they need help. Their brains receive messages that are confused, threatening and unrelated to the real world. Some experience altered smell and taste. Some may even see nonexistent objects.

More often than not, they gravitate to the streets, where they lead subsistent lives.

Fortunately, science has discovered medications that can adjust the chemistry of the brain, permitting the person to live a normal life.

It is unfortunate that in our state a person with a diseased mind is expected to find the help needed. If a mentally ill person is fortunate in doing so, he is then required, while not capable of understanding the benefits derived, to make a choice between taking and not taking medications.

As a consequence, in the homes of many of our families, mentally ill loved ones are leading lives of total dependence; in our streets, disheveled and dirty, mentally ill persons are pushing grocery carts with their belongings.

It is time that Hawai'i joined states such as Massachusetts, where the laws help the families and the mental health professionals focus on mentally ill people as well as their illness will allow, rather than on the right of a person with a diseased mind to make a choice as to whether to accept treatment.

Binding arbitration cap is fair

I am concerned about the misstatements in Leilani Soakai's letter about binding arbitration, published Feb. 9. The administration's binding arbitration proposal to impose a ceiling on arbitration awards is fair to employers, the unions and, most importantly, the taxpayers.

Since 1973, arbitrators have ruled in the employers' favor on only two occasions: Dec. 1, 1983, and Nov. 21, 1997. Binding arbitrations result in lopsided awards at taxpayer expense.

The recent example set by the City and County of Honolulu, involving SHOPO, in having to raise taxes to meet the demands of a recent arbitrator's award illustrates the structural unfairness in the present law.

In times of economic difficulty, the employers have nothing to bargain or negotiate with. As a result, the unions have no incentive to bargain and prefer binding arbitration. An arbitrator, even in the worst economic times, will award the union some or all of its salary and wage demands. From 1996 to 2000, during Hawai'i's economic malaise, arbitrators increased the salaries and wages of HGEA members by over 17 percent. That level of increase, during that period of time, was unmatched in the private sector.

The bill heard by the House Labor Committee simply provides some incentives and disincentives for the public-sector unions to remain at the negotiating table and conduct meaningful, substantive negotiations.

In good economic times, when the state and other employers have more than sufficient balances, the union leadership could decide to take the "safe bet" and go to arbitration, knowing that the most they could receive by way of a wage increase would be about 1.5 percent per year. If, after weighing the circumstances, the union leaders decided to remain at the bargaining table, they could receive more than 1.5 percent through the process of trading language and provisions in a collective bargaining agreement that have been detrimental to government operations, in exchange for higher wages.

In the event that negotiations break down, the parties would go back to binding arbitration with a cap or limit on the size of the award.

The taxpayers, employers and union members are best served when both parties are willing to engage in a free exchange during negotiations where each party is able to win something and gain something during the negotiation process.