Close vote expected today as Senate decides on Hong
By Lynda Arakawa and David Waite
Advertiser Staff Writers
A close vote is expected today as the state Senate decides whether to approve Gov. Linda Lingle's controversial nomination of state chief labor negotiator Ted Hong as a circuit judge on the Big Island.
Senate President Robert Bunda, D-22nd (North Shore, Wahiawa) yesterday said the outcome in the 25-member Senate possibly could be resolved by a single vote.
Groups of senators continued to meet into the evening to discuss the nomination. A preliminary count of votes last night appeared to indicate that Hong's nomination would be narrowly rejected, although some senators still planned to deliberate on the matter.
Today's vote comes just two days after an unusual marathon hearing before the Senate Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee that lasted almost nine hours. The seven-member committee endorsed Hong's nomination, but two members voted against the nomination and two expressed reservations.
Hong, also an interim University of Hawai'i regent, and Lingle made rounds on the State Capitol's second floor yesterday to talk to senators in the final hours before the vote.
Meanwhile, Sen. Lorraine Inouye, D-1st (Hamakua, S. Hilo), has been pushing her views against Hong's nomination, saying that many of her constituents oppose it and that other nominees for the position are more qualified and established in the community than Hong.
Hong grew up on O'ahu, but he has lived on the Big Island since 1991.
Inouye, a former Big Island mayor, was defeated in the 1992 and 1996 mayoral races by Steve Yamashiro, who employed Hong as assistant corporation counsel. Inouye said yesterday that she is friends with Yamashiro and that her opposition to Hong has nothing to do with her political career.
At the same time, Sen. Russell Kokubun, D-2nd (S. Hilo, Puna, Ka'u), who worked for Yamashiro, is publicly supporting Hong.
'Unqualified' rating cited
Some senators said their concerns largely surround whether Hong has the right "judicial temperament." They pointed to the Hawai'i State Bar Association's rare and controversial move by its board of directors to rate Hong as "unqualified" because of concerns about his judicial temperament.
But Hong's supporters contended that attorneys are expected to be passionate and zealous advocates for their clients. They said Hong is well qualified for the bench and has the right temperament to be a judge.
The debate raised the issue of what actually constitutes the appropriate judicial temperament, a general catch-all qualification for judges.
According to the bar association, board standards for evaluating judicial appointments, based upon American Bar Association guidelines:
"A candidate should possess judicial temperament which includes intelligence, common sense, compassion, decisiveness, firmness, humility, temperance, open-mindedness and impartiality, patience, tact, understanding, freedom from bias, and commitment to equal justice under the law."
Former Hawai'i Supreme Court Justice Frank Padgett yesterday said he is not an authority on judicial temperament.
"People used to say I didn't have the right temperament," Padgett said, laughing.
He retired in 1992 after 12 years as a high court justice.
"I don't think a judge should be a milquetoast," Padgett said. "Your job is to sit on the bench and guide the proceedings and speak out when necessary and ask questions to keep the discussion focused. I really don't know what they mean by 'temperament' — someone who just sits there and doesn't say anything?"
Trait called subjective
Padgett said he did not respond to an e-mail survey by the Hawai'i State Bar Association about Hong's qualifications to be a judge because he could not recall ever having dealt with Hong.
"The fact that he's taken some rather strong political stands in the past does not necessarily mean he won't make a good judge," Padgett said.
And he said criticism from some that Hong was "overzealous" in representing clients could be view as a positive characteristic.
"Maybe he would be 'overzealous' in protecting and dispensing justice as well," Padgett said.
Authors George Watson and John Stookey take a more cynical view in their book, "Shaping America; The Politics of Supreme Court Appointments," published by HarperCollins in 1995.
"Judicial temperament is an ideal term for the nomination and confirmation process," they wrote. "It can mean virtually anything to anybody, making it particularly susceptible to manipulation by (those involved in) in the appointment process."
TV judges measured
But Maryland lawyer Irwin Kramer provided one explanation many can understand.
In a column posted on the Internet in November, he wrote that judicial temperament is something Judge Wapner of court-TV pioneer "The People's Court" had plenty of, but something that Judge Judy of more recent television sorely lacks.
"Controlling the courtroom with such eloquent verse as 'I'm the boss, applesauce,' Judy is truly the 'star' of her own show, with such distractions as the parties, the testimony, the evidence and, oh yeah, the law, playing a lesser, supporting role," Kramer wrote.
"Hardly a model of judicial restraint, this esteemed jurist shares her judicial philosophy in her best-selling book, which she endowed with the dignified title, 'Don't Pee On My Leg and Tell Me It's Raining.'"
On the other hand, Judge Wapner was a near-perfect example, Kramer wrote.
"Rarely losing his cool, Judge Wapner addressed litigants with respect, listening patiently as they presented their cases," he wrote, adding that Wapner asked thoughtful questions designed to test litigants' credibility and then retired to review the facts and law before rendering a reasoned decision.
Reach Lynda Arakawa at larakawa@honoluluadvertiser.com or 525-8070, and David Waite at dwaite@honoluluadvertiser.com or 525-8030.
