Hemmings invited to an ethics debate

Sen. Fred Hemmings has questioned the wisdom of those UH faculty members who invited professor Ward Churchill to speak at Manoa recently, on the grounds that Churchill is "a very evil person" and that we are "more interested in propaganda than truth."

Well, I'm pleasantly surprised that someone in the Legislature is more qualified to judge the academic credentials of professors in the academy than those of us at the university who have the training and professional responsibility for exercising such judgments — and can even instruct us concerning the formidable topic of truth into the bargain.

Since Sen. Hemmings doesn't know professor Churchill personally, I assume that the "very evil person" epithet is based on a reading of the book of his (" 'Some People Push Back': On the Justice of Roosting Chickens") that has been causing such a stir. Yet, having read the book and heard the speech last week, I come to the opposite conclusion: that Churchill is a very good scholar who is passionately concerned with reducing the amount of violence in the world. (Surely a good rather than an evil aim.)

Giving Sen. Hemmings the benefit of the doubt, however, I'm going to order a hundred copies of Churchill's book for my Introduction to Ethics course next semester, in the hope that discussing it with that number of students will lead us all to a more accurate judgment of its worth. And in the spirit of fairness and balance, I cordially invite Sen. Hemmings to visit the class after we've read the book, so that he may enlighten us with his expert opinion on it.

Chance encounter brought tears to eyes

While driving home from downtown the other night, I saw a convoy of soldiers on their way back to base. I couldn't help but notice the bus all decked out with ribbons and welcome-home banners.

One soldier who sat at the back of the bus had his head out the window with a solemn look on his face. As I passed the bus, I gave a thumbs-up to the soldier. To see his face light up brought tears to my eyes.

I have many friends and family members serving here and overseas. It makes me proud to be an American and realize what so much of us take for granted — freedom!

The consequences of killing can be extreme

Veterans, their families, friends and health professionals who read William Cole's report on Department of Defense plans for follow-up care for returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans (Advertiser, Feb. 16) will be interested in an important new book by research psychologist Rachel M. MacNair, "Perpetration-Induced Traumatic Stress: The Psychological Consequences of Killing" (Praeger 2002).

She distinguishes perpetration-induced traumatic stress of soldiers and others who have directly killed from PTSD (post-traumatic stress syndrome) of those who have not. Her study confirms the earlier finding of Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, "On Killing" (Little, Brown 1986), that only 2 percent of soldiers can kill "without regret or remorse."

The reported remarks of Marine Lt. Gen. John "Mad Dog" Mattis (Advertiser, Feb. 4) that "it's fun to shoot some people" may be an example of this.

Hawai'i was annexed; it's time to move on

Many Hawaiians are still angry about their loss of independence 107 years after the annexation of Hawai'i to the United States. Yet they still fight for sovereignty even though they have no idea what a sovereign Hawai'i would be like.

The annexation happened such a long time ago, so why haven't the Hawaiian people let it go? America has apologized, even if that was only relatively recently. There isn't much the Hawaiians can do now, but certain strong-willed individuals are still fighting. All they know is that their ancestors were mad. They don't know if they would have been mad themselves, and they probably don't clearly understand the circumstances and times under which Hawai'i was annexed.

By now, the issue of our annexation should not be debated. I can see that the Hawaiians are unsettled and that they want to make things right again. But honestly, what's done is done. Nothing will ever change the fact that we were annexed, and so, instead of wasting time and energy fighting for independence that we'll never gain, we should enjoy the benefits of America and look toward the future.

It's a shame Mahi's warmth not returned

How Aaron Mahi's name and reputation have been soiled by his detractors has been hurtful, if not disgraceful. Aaron's knowledge of a wide genre of music, abilities as a musician, fluency in Hawaiian, understanding of the Hawaiian culture and history, and warm way with all people make him a treasure.

Aaron's plate is always full because he is constantly helping others, and perhaps that took time away from administrative details. But it could be easily argued that every minute he spent as a volunteer helping the community reflected well on the band. He loved the band and was its ambassador. Did the band truly appreciate how, every year, Aaron volunteered to organize and cook a lu'au for the Friends of the Royal Hawaiian Band's fund-raiser dinner, which raised money for things like a trip to Carnegie Hall, new uniforms and hats?

Despite all the pilikia, Aaron has taken the high road. On his final concert at Kapi'olani Park, he said remarkably kind words about the band members and the new bandmaster. It's really a shame that they and the mayor could not do the same for him in return.

Show us the beef in mass-transit plan

The Feb. 15 commentary "Freeway overload: We must raise the GET" by Rep. Marilyn Lee completely misses the point when she points out the savings for those who would use the rail system versus the expenses in using a private vehicle.

Many of the same savings would be realized if people used the present alternate means of transportation such as carpools, the express buses or the Vanpool program. The picture that accompanied the article says it all. It shows four lanes of bumper-to-bumper traffic, but not one vehicle is in the zipper lane.

The potential of saving money does not get people out of their cars. Many of the people I've talked to who will never use the rail system are saying "prove to us that the system will have the ridership that will eliminate the problem." We don't want something that will require us to subsidize it for the rest of our lives.

Alcohol idea reeks

The City Council proposes selling alcohol in three of our city parks, Central O'ahu Regional Park, Waipi'o Soccer Complex and Hans L'Orange Park, all to offset the high cost of park maintenance. Wrong already.

There would be more irate parents at Little League games, more game-time fights between parents and referees, litter, and the chances of DUI drivers after games.

Who thought up this absurd idea?

Higher admission prices are a drag on attendance

The University of Hawai'i and Koa Anuenue are driving UH sports fans away. They keep driving the price of admission up, and they rely on the fans to cover the cost for athletic scholarships, maintaining facilities, paying coaches' salaries, etc.

I have been a season-ticket holder of two seats in the lower section of Stan Sheriff Center for men's volleyball since the arena opened. Those first few years were special because of the new arena and Yuval Katz. The men's volleyball team brought excitement to the university. The arena regularly brought in 7,000 to 8,000 fans. A lot of the fans were young, screeching kids. The players were easily accessible to the fans. The players were also upstanding student athletes without academic problems, police blotter news and conduct detrimental to the team.

Season-ticket prices had been steady for a number of years, but then Koa Anuenue started charging a "premium seat contribution" fee, of which 80 percent is tax deductible. Now UH and Koa Anuenue are saying that if a lower-level season-ticket holder wants to add seats or relocate, he or she would have to be a Koa Anuenue member or join Koa Anuenue.

This is what it would cost a lower-level season-ticket holder who is not a Koa Anuenue member: season ticket price, $165; premium seat contribution, $80; Koa Anuenue membership, $300; handling charge, $10; optional season parking pass, $50.

For years, coach Mike Wilton has stressed that he wanted lower ticket prices so that students could come to the matches. Before this season began, UH didn't want the players to hang around after matches with fans but to head immediately out to do a post-match press conference. Attendance has steadily declined, and UH and Koa Anuenue don't seem to be doing anything to win back fans. I know several people, even diehard fans, who gave up their lower-section season tickets because of the price. Not a lot of people, especially students and young kids, can afford the ticket prices.

UH shouldn't only be concerned about dollar signs. It should also be concerned about the fans.

Land Reform Act in danger

Slithering silently along under the media smokescreen for the controversial rail transit 20 percent general excise tax increase is an equally significant legislative proposal. Maui's alert state representative, Chris Halford, R-11th (S. Maui), recently advised me of House Bill 1523, which, if enacted, would repeal the Land Reform Act of 1967.

A product of intense community debate during the initial years following statehood, the act primarily provided: (1) a procedure for lessees' purchase of single-family residential leasehold properties through a state condemnation procedure, and (2) a comprehensive regulatory regime governing the residential lessor-lessee relationship.

In testimony on this year's repeal bill, Stephanie Aveiro of the Housing and Community Development Corp. pointed out that the law "has helped more than 14,600 families (or, using a family of four, close to 60,000 people) purchase their leased fee interest at a reasonable price and has influenced the sale of the leased fee interest in thousands more."

The landed estates that fought the Land Reform Act tooth and nail have ironically benefited mightily from the tremendous infusion of cash that lease-to-fee conversions have produced. The alternative "never sell" policy would never have provided these financial resources and would have led to increased social and economic strife and even more radical reform.

As the act was carefully crafted with input from IRS officials in Washington (with whom our bipartisan legislative delegation met), the landed estates did not lose their charitable status for being in the land-sales business. They did, however, lose their appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld the constitutionality of the act in its entirety.

Today, according to Ms. Aveiro, there are at least 1,200 families who could qualify to purchase their residential fee interests. They, too, deserve that opportunity with the alternative leverage provided by the Land Reform Act procedure. There is no guarantee that Kamehameha Schools will continue its current "voluntary sales policy." Residential lessees deserve the continued protection provided by Part III (Lessee's Bill of Rights) more than ever if the mandatory conversion provisions of the 1967 act are repealed.

Repeal of other sections of the act may also have unintended consequences — e.g., definitions included by reference in other laws and loan provisions. By giving serious consideration to outright repeal of the Land Reform Act, today's Democratic legislators reveal how far they have strayed from the reformist roots that enabled them to achieve power in the mid-'50s and early '60s.

Were former state senator, and chief sponsor of the Land Reform Act, David McClung still alive, I believe that he would join me in saying to today's Hawai'i Democrats, "For shame!"