Food manufacturers must be accountable

I wholeheartedly agree with Hector Valenzuela's concerns (" 'Rainbow' imperils other papayas," Oct. 31). It raises other concerns that have not been resolved.

Many countries, such as Japan and those in the European Union, will not accept our genetically modified organism (GMO) foods as imports. Are they just being difficult? Their stand is that GMO testing has not been thorough or convincing enough to prove that these foods are safe. It would be helpful if The Advertiser provided an in-depth look at local and global health concerns on this issue.

Here's what to address: Who funds UH studies on pro-GMOs? Who are the major funders for other GMO university research? What studies have been suppressed in marketing GMOs as safe? How pervasive are GMOs in the food we eat? What major objections are raised by the global scientific community?

It is our government's responsibility to protect our people's health. However, our government's agency, the Food and Drug Administration, shifted the burden of responsibility to GMO manufacturers to prove their products are safe. Isn't that like asking a drug company to prove that a new drug is safe without the real scrutiny of checks and balances? Look at failed drugs, extensively used, that have been recalled recently.

Our government is held hostage by those who own the drug industry and now our food, too.

Bush bashers are displaying arrogance

The arrogance of some people is amazing! Tracy Shiraishi, Greg Puppione, J.M. Comcowich (Letters, Nov. 4) — let me get this straight: Some of us did not agree with your opinions as to who should be president, so that makes us "faithless," "uninformed," "disgusting" and "stupid"?

Must be great to be so intelligent that you know your opinion is the right one.

Well, we stupid voters are really sorry. Perhaps for the next election you could write letters to the editors telling us whom to vote for so that you don't have to suffer so much from the "wrong" votes of so many less intelligent people.

Bipartisan system is perfectly fitting

After thinking about the elections of 2000 and now 2004, I contacted a local news agency to find out exactly how the elections process was overseen here in Hawai'i. I was relieved to discover that our elections officer is appointed by a bipartisan commission vote rather than by any single Democrat or Republican.

I was disappointed to read in the Nov. 4 article "Elections officer says voting went smoothly" that Gov. Lingle would prefer the office be brought under her control in order to attain "accountability." It seems to me that Mr. Dwayne Yoshina is perfectly accountable at present. The office has a four-year term; if it turns out that there isn't enough confidence in his abilities, Republicans and Democrats will appoint someone else better qualified next time around.

In my opinion, better the system we have now than to join Florida and Ohio's swamp of recriminations over political appointees and heads of state party campaigns who also oversee public elections — that coincidentally turn out to be hotly contested and challenged in court. In these divided times, bipartisanship is more desperately needed than ever.

Best of luck to Hee

Congratulations to Sen.-elect Clayton Hee. I wish him, and the good people of Senate District 23, the best of luck. Mahalo to all those who supported my campaign. Aloha!

Recycling opponent has his facts wrong

Justin Tanoue, like many recycling opponents, chooses to ignore the facts when they don't match his opinion (Letters, Nov. 1). Here are the facts about the bottle law:

First, bottles and cans make up 4.4 percent of the total waste stream, according to a 2002 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study. That's a significant dent in the landfill burden and cost on our Islands.

Second, the bottle law will vastly increase recycling of beverage containers. The 10 states with bottle laws recycle, on average, 80 percent of beverage containers, while Hawai'i currently only recycles about 20 percent.

Finally, unlike a tax, Mr. Tanoue can rest assured that he will get his $1.20 back — as soon as he recycles his case of cans.

The bottle law is the single most effective tool Hawai'i has to increase recycling and decrease littering of bottles and cans, regardless of one's opinion.