Posted on: Wednesday, May 12, 2004

Letters to the Editor

History would be hard on us if we quit Iraq

The recent commentary by a leading member of the Armed Services Committee in Washington reluctantly concluded that the war in Iraq was "unwinnable." What does it mean to "win" in a situation as complicated as Iraq? Is winning defined by body counts? Control over oil reserves? Absence of sensational stories of prisoner abuse?

By any measure, I can imagine the war is indeed "unwinnable."

We could of course declare victory and bring all our troops home whatever the consequences in Iraq, but history would judge us harshly both for how we went in and how we came out. The turmoil caused by the word "unwinnable" more than any other evidence indicates that to be the unavoidable conclusion. By some of the measures used to define "winning," it seems even more frightening than "losing."

Words are powerful; use them accordingly

I object to your word choice in the May 9 story "Nude interrogation OK'd." "Nude" implies willingness — as in nude beaches — or mutual agreement — as with artists' models. "Disrobe" is what you do in doctors' offices.

Rather than nude and disrobe, fairly benign words, I would suggest naked and stripped, both of which can connote coercion, vulnerability and duress. Naked interrogation, in which prisoners were made to strip, is, I believe, a more accurate reflection of the situation.

Words are powerful. Thoughtful and careful selection and usage should be part of your job. Unless, of course, your intent was to soften the impact of the story.

How to understand legislative process

Now that the legislative session is over, it gives us an opportunity to ponder the work (or lack thereof) of our mostly Democratic lawmakers. To help people new to the political process, I've come up with a short guide: 8 Simple Rules for Everything You Need to Know About How a Bill Becomes Law in Hawai'i.

1. Do the unions want it? Vote yes.
2. Did a Republican sponsor the bill? Vote no.
3. Is it a feeble attempt by Democrats to make it seem as if they are really trying to do something about something but really don't have the political guts to really do anything about it? Vote yes.
4. Will it appear that Democrats might actually agree with a Republican governor? Vote no.
5. Will it benefit the people of Hawai'i? See Rule 1.
6. Will it benefit small or big business or anything in between? Vote no.
7. Is the bill logical, reasonable and workable? Vote no. (Actually solving a problem lessens people's dependence on government.)
8. If there is any question or doubt about what should be done, always defer to Rule 1.

I hope this helps people understand the legislative process in Hawai'i.

Rainbows on buses are upside-down

While bus riders are giving the city feedback concerning impractical aspects of the new buses, it might be worth noting that the brightly colored rainbows on the sides of these vehicles are upside-down.

It is unfortunate that in a place where the phenomenon of the rainbow appears almost daily and where it is used as a symbol of our wahi pana, of our island home, that it is displayed incorrectly.

Reverse rainbows are possible, but only in connection with a true rainbow, which has the red at the top and violet at the bottom.

Let's not teach our children, who ride the bus to and from school, that spectrum physics can be so easily altered by a few inattentive officials.

Honolulu is being run into the ground

It seems just a few months ago that the city administration was riding the crest of sustainability issues, but are we really any further along with recycling programs?

The mayor is scoring points with his pilot programs for mandatory recycling from our homes. However, until commercial programs are implemented, this is just a Band-Aid solution to the problem. Inaction in keeping the island clean is symptomatic of deeper issues that will have long-term economic effects on our city and state.

The appearance of more and more illegal dumping, including abandoned automobiles, is growing at a disturbing rate while compromising the credibility of our tourism industry and integrity of our tax dollars. Meanwhile, we continue to raid funds from a decaying sewer system, finance Brunch on the Beach, and spend on feel-good — but unnecessary — projects.

The rhetoric continues as the mayor and City Council trade insults and accusations of "irresponsible" politics while accomplishing very little. The roads are in major disrepair, and once again taxes are being raised.

Oops, I forgot, not taxes, but "fees."

It's no wonder that the inmates are running the City Asylum and campaign spending violations continue to surface.

Our city is being run into the ground. Is anyone paying attention?

Plastic materials are damaging environment

I think many of us tend to focus most of our attention on local, national and international political affairs, but the May 7 Advertiser's report of the latest study about plastic waste in the world's oceans also caught my eye.

I've long been concerned about the plastic I see in the ocean and on the beaches of Hawai'i. Plastic's malleability, strength and light weight have recommended it to manufacturers, but is a virtually indestructible material really a responsible choice for a disposable container or pen or razor? Maybe we should revisit this one.

On my daily commute to work, I see dozens of discarded plastic bottles in the gutter. Guess where all those will end up? Perhaps we could at least install screens to intercept all the plastic containers that we're constantly delivering to the ocean.

Mike Gabbard doesn't represent Mink views

The memory of our own beloved Patsy Mink proudly continues through Ed Case, who espouses her time-proven qualities in Congress for a multicultural Hawai'i.

I was appalled by J. Foster's May 7 letter supporting Mike Gabbard for Congress. Gabbard's claim to fame is that he led a campaign that frightened people of Hawai'i into doing the most un-Hawaiian thing imaginable: supporting an intolerant change to our state Constitution that institutionalizes discrimination. This campaign used fear to cover prejudice and discrimination.

To think that the man behind this shameful campaign might be picked to represent us in Congress defies everything about our beloved Islands that I know and love.

Certainly Patsy Mink would not approve. We owe it to the blessing of her memory to have her successor represent the cultural diversity of our beloved Islands. I know I can trust Ed Case to continue representing Patsy Mink's values in the U.S. Congress.

San Francisco's plan for homelessness is bad

Regarding the May 7 story on homelessness: The need for new solutions to the growing homelessness was outlined and you answered with solutions grandly. Some say: Let's follow San Francisco and implement a "care not cash" program in order to deal with our homeless problem (subtract money from welfare, add more counseling services, solution: reduced homelessness).

But wait! Is this the city that we want Honolulu to follow? San Francisco has been trying to get rid of its homeless population for years and is still trying. If we follow San Francisco, will we end up down on cash and with more homeless? The answer is yes.

We all know that San Francisco is willing to try to do anything to get rid of the homeless (an eyesore to tourists), and this is just another attempt to win popularity by dealing with the homeless once and for all by politicians.

Second, this program is a proven loser. After being struck down in court and then reinstated (wasting taxpayer money in court), the program is still on a rocky road and may be cut in the future.

Hawai'i should take a detour and avoid this problem. Put the money into programs that have already proven to be worthwhile such as homeless shelters and job training. The problem of homelessness cannot be felled with a single stone, but instead we must chip away at it gradually. Only as a community can we hope to succeed.

Open marketplace disciplines the greed

Regarding Oliver Lee's May 7 letter, "There was another side to Adam Smith," which praises Bob Rees' April 26 column: There is no "other side" to Adam Smith. He was a moral philosopher and adhered to his basic understanding of individual human nature, which included the pursuit of self-interest.

While it is true that he mentioned business people wanting to collude for personal gain, he understood that genuine competition wiped out such threats. But, should he look today, he would see that government college professors collude to get higher pay and pensions with less productivity and no accountability for performance. The same is true of the AFL/CIO, etc.

What is missing is an open marketplace to inject competition to discipline the greed. There again, the invisible hand. It can and will work unless the government conspires to thwart it.

Teachers: Vote 'No' on contract

Tomorrow, teachers are being asked to ratify a contract that is not good for teachers and not good for education in this state. Touted as a 7 percent raise for all teachers, it is actually only a 4 percent raise for teachers with master's degrees and equivalents (more than half of all teachers), and a 1 percent raise for those with Ph.D.s.

In the last contract, 2001-2003, the union won extra pay for teachers with advanced degrees — 3 percent for those with master's degrees or equivalent, and 6 percent for Ph.D.s. Because this extra pay "differentiated" those with advanced degrees from others, it was called a pay "differential."

The differential was a great incentive for teachers to pursue further studies. It was a tool that would greatly increase knowledge of subject matter for a very large part of the teaching workforce, a smart move to get better-educated teachers into classrooms fast.

We negotiated for the pay differential, went on strike, won it, and fought for it and won it again through arbitration. It was worth fighting for, and it was ours by right.

This year, the HSTA didn't even bargain for it. And they are ignoring its loss when they claim to have won a 7 percent raise.

But isn't it clear that if you had 3 of something, and someone took those 3 away and then gave you 7 back, wouldn't you only be ahead by 4? When more than half of your members are getting raises of 4 percent or 1 percent, how can you tell the public that everyone is getting 7 percent?

Since the pay differential was not reinstated, the 6,675 teachers with advanced degrees have taken a 3 percent pay drop throughout the first year of the new contract, the year that we are just completing. The first increment-raise, which would come in the fall, would only get those teachers back to the pay level they were at before they lost the differential. Their only real raise would come when they get the second raise (4 percent) after the new year.

Those with doctorates, who are losing their 6 percent differential with the contract, would not equal their old pay until January 2005, when they would also get their only true raise — 1 percent. The contract punishes teachers for having advanced degrees. Teachers, this year, would fall behind all of the other workers in the state, and that fact is being hidden from the public.

What would a "No" vote mean? A "No" vote tomorrow is not a strike vote. If teachers vote to not support the settlement, the negotiations team goes back to the bargaining table.

We need to send a resounding message to the union to "Get back to the table and get teachers a raise that will do something for education." Start with reinstating the 3 percent and 6 percent differentials. Then get all teachers a step increase plus 2 percent across the board for each of the two years, totaling the 10 percent raise funded by the Legislature.