No excuses for bad roads in fair Hawai'i

The heads of the transportation departments for the state and city should hang their heads in shame. There is no excuse for our roads being in the rotten shape that we endure every day.

Every time the people of Hawai'i complain about the potholes, they are told it is because of the rain. I drove about 4,500 miles in 12 states and and untold number of counties over the last year. These states have to contend with rain just like us. They also have to deal with snow, ice, freezing temperatures and blistering heat — in some areas over 100 degrees.

What I find disgusting is the fact that in about 4,500 miles of road in these 12 states, I saw fewer potholes than I do in a 20-mile round trip to work and back each day in Hawai'i. I suggest we invest in some rainproof blacktop.

Once-serene coast becoming nightmare

I am a resident of Wahiawa and I enjoy going to the West Shore, particularly Ko Olina. I have enjoyed the Ko Olina area and its coves for years.

I am concerned about the over-building that is taking place there. The area already has the Marriott hotel complex, along with the Paradise Cove Luau facilities and Roy's restaurant.

There is a wedding chapel at another cove, and at the far end, a huge timeshare has gone up with a parking structure that is an eyesore.

Now another high-rise will mar the coastline and bring in more traffic and pollution. The once-quiet area is becoming a repeat Waikiki nightmare.

When will our politicians wake up to saving the environment first and make big business responsible for its greedy over-construction?

Increasing jobs can be done without our shorelines being abused.

Redemption center setup is ridiculous

I totally agree with opinion writers who state that the bottle law, as set up by our state "leaders," needs more than tweaking.

I don't know which of these guys and gals organized the redemption center hours of operation and the number of centers available, but I wonder how much they really thought about the logistics of the system.

Aside from the ludicrously limited hours of operation, I'd bet that nobody thought of the elderly bus riders or families without vehicles dependent on the bus and how inconvenient it will be for them to travel to some of these locations, hauling large bags full of cans, bottles and plastics. As the system is currently set up, it's more money for the state government.

Out of curiosity, I'd like to see how much money has been collected by the state's bottle law against how much the state has actually paid out in terms of bottle redemptions, but I doubt we'll see such statistics.

Mahalo to librarians for Hamilton reopening

Thanks for running the front-page article about the reopening of the University of Hawai'i's Hamilton Library. That is certainly good news! The collection and the librarians are the heart and soul of research and learning at UH. Our teaching and scholarship would not be possible without the labors of the staff and the volumes of archival and secondary materials available on a regular basis.

A very big mahalo to the many librarians who raced to rescue materials and donated countless hours amid the wreckage and muck to save what could be saved. They often did so over long hours and in the face of possible health and safety hazards.

I know that the work is not done and that some of the losses are irreplaceable, but much work has been done and much has been saved, more often than not as a result of the librarians, both the professional staff and the students.

Make no mistake about appointee's character

In response to Miles A.P. Kahaloa's Jan. 11 letter "Hannemann should continue his search":

Patrick Kubota has not been charged with any wrongdoing; he simply worked for Unity House and has been called to testify before the grand jury in that case as an employee. Patrick Kubota's integrity and honesty are above reproach. I worked with him for four years on Mayor Hannemann's campaign; he is honest, trustworthy and a very caring person.

Mr. Kubota committed no crime or wrongdoing by being employed by Unity House. He should not have his reputation besmirched for simply working for an organization that is now having problems with the law.

We need to get real about aiding homeless

If you look around the state of Hawai'i, you'll find many homeless people. They are survivors, living on everything they have and making ends meet. Some live in their automobiles, under a tree or a bridge, and sometimes in bushes. Rental units are costly, and cost of living continues to be on the rise.

Legislators want to improve the beauty of the land, but what about helping the homeless people? There are camps for mobile homes on the Mainland; why can't we have a few in the state of Hawai'i?

We need to take control and help these people. They get evicted, and we offer no alternatives. No matter where they go, they continue to be evicted. Are they a bother or are they a contributing factor to the beauty of the land? They do have choices to make, like getting a permanent home or a job, but the process is slow and frustrating. It depresses them when property owners and employers are so selective.

Solution is as simple as work-for-shelter

Philip Mangano, President Bush's homeless program coordinator, expressed some good ideas regarding homelessness in Sunday's article "Point man for Bush pushes new cure for homelessness." There is, however, a simpler solution to the problem of homelessness: work assignments in exchange for housing.

With the exception of single parents, everyone can do some kind of job, whether it's picking up trash in public areas, sealing envelopes, sweeping floors, etc. If all social welfare was conditional on some type of labor output (regardless of how "symbolic," as opposed to pragmatic, it needs to be), the problem would be virtually solved.

No one could claim "I can't get a job"; it would be as simple as getting a work assignment. Nobody would "fall through the cracks" except those who refuse to work, which is exactly where society should draw the line.

Criticism of U.S. aid has no basis in fact

I have talked with Keith Haugen many times over the years and have always considered him decent, honorable and intelligent. He did not appear the type who would use every opportunity to bash President Bush and the United States in letters to the editor. His latest example: America's delayed response to Asia's tsunami relief effort.

I was recently in Phuket and departed for home 12 hours before the tsunami struck. I was unaware of the disaster until 30 hours after the waves hit when a relative rang to inquire about my safety. I immediately called a friend who was still in Phuket since his place is on a lagoon with only the beach and about 200 yards of water separating him from the Andaman Sea. His reply: "No big deal. Only a few drops of water on the grass." The full extent of the devastation did not become known for days, even for some of those who live in the region.

America is under no obligation to give money or assistance to foreign countries, although most of us are proud it does. On the other hand, little, if any, outside help is offered America when it's harmed by terrorists or natural disasters.

It's also puzzling why Haugen would target the United States for its delayed response to the disaster but fail to mention the lack of aid coming from most Middle Eastern countries to help their Muslim neighbors.

GMOs getting critical review

In response to Don Gerbig's Jan. 1 letter, I would like to point out that yesterday's sound bite he claims has no scientific basis — that "GMOs may pose potential long-term risks to the environment and humans" — is today supported by current discoveries, reported and adopted by prominent scientists.

They are petitioning the U.S. Department of Agriculture to envision a whole new regulatory system and technology for genetically modified organism (GMO) food crops that produce pharmaceuticals, vaccines, chemicals or plastics.

The 2004 research, sponsored by MIT's Union of Concerned Scientists, shows that GMOs cannot be grown without contaminating the human or animal food supply.

As for the government regulation that Mr. Gerbig refers to, the 2004 Pew Trust Initiative on Food and Biotechnology reports that the USDA's Animal & Plant Health & Inspection Service regulations allow GMO developers to produce commercial scale plants in field trials even if the plants might pose identifiable environmental or human health risk. Except to receive testing done by biotech firms on their own products, the FDA does not regulate GMOs. The EPA will impose monetary fines on biotech firms after contamination has occurred, but it has little regulatory impact. Our state Department of Agriculture allows secret open-field testing without requiring any impact statement, putting Hawai'i's agriculture and 'aina at risk.

Proponents of a safe food supply are not returning to the Stone Age, as Mr. Gerbig implies, but they do have a long and effective track record when it comes to revealing hazards caused by modern science and technology such as unsafe pesticides that leave toxic residues in food, rivers and lakes and kill the magnificent animals living in those environments.

Their commitment has helped multinational corporations to be responsible to families they have injured after contaminating water wells in "cancer cluster" communities bordering their industrial facilities.

They have worked to identify food-processing chemicals and additives that cause allergies and illness in babies, pregnant women, elderly and immune-compromised people.

And they have brought attention to industrial toxins in ocean environments that support the aquatic food supply.

Today, the positive results of their campaigns have become a natural part of the mainstream society. The same concerned citizens are taking a closer look at GMOs.

Mr. Gerbig's beliefs that the government is regulating scientific technology in the best interest of the people and that GMOs will use less residual herbicides and toxic insecticides are utopian in their idealism.