Each week Editorial and Opinion Editor Jeanne Mariani-Belding hosts The Hot Seat, our opinion-page blog that brings in elected leaders and people in the news and lets you ask the questions during a live online chat.

On The Hot Seat last week was Senate President Colleen Hanabusa.

Here is an excerpt from that Hot Seat session. To see the full conversation, go to The Hot Seat blog at hotseat.honadvblogs.com.

Janice: My question for Sen. Hanabusa is about priorities. In this economy, what are the top three priorities of the Senate?

Sen. Colleen Hanabusa: Balancing the budget is the top priority, preserving as much of the safety net as possible and planning for the future, in particular, your energy needs.

NoSpeeches: Senator, you said on the radio that you don't know which proposals being floated here might put the transit project in jeopardy. Wouldn't it be wise to know what might do just that, such as your suggestion to "take" the tax set aside for transit, before you go public with these ideas? The congressional delegation, led by Sen. Inouye, has said repeatedly that we shouldn't rock the boat (regarding) the local funding mechanism.

Hanabusa: When we are facing a critical budgetary crisis and we are looking at cutting safety-net programs and balancing our budget, everything is on the table, including transit. It is open for discussion and we are not going to shy away from the discussion until we are certain that the project is in jeopardy. In addition, the environmental impact statement has not been finalized and for any project to proceed the EIS must withstand both review and challenge. At this point, it is responsible for us to keep the discussion open.

Nahoaloha: This is a rough budget year, to be sure, but how can it make sense to divert or defer money raised by the rail tax? The voters in your district overwhelmingly support this project. Aren't you concerned that disturbing the funding mechanism will endanger the federal funds — with needed construction jobs — that should be coming our way soon?

Hanabusa: There are different sources of federal funds including the stimulus package, which will also pay for major construction projects such as schools and infrastructure. These will require state matching funds. The issue of whether these federal funds are coming our way has still not been confirmed by the federal government. The stimulus package is expected to create jobs. We need to keep all of our options open when it comes to federal funding.

Nolan: Coming out and saying that you want to take the rail tax and use it for the state shortfall sounds like a political play against Mufi (Hannemann) for the upcoming congressional race. After all we went through to get the rail transit on track and now for you to hamstring it sounds fishy. Please let us know the real reason behind this move.

Hanabusa: This is not a political play against the mayor for the upcoming congressional race. The rationale for it is set forth above.

2shedlight: I read that Rep. Neil Abercrombie will run for governor next year and that Mayor Mufi Hannemann is also considering the prospect. Is that something you might consider, too?

Hanabusa: We have important work to do in the Legislature right now addressing our state's economic situation. Questions about future races can wait.

Harold: Is it a political play for the 2010 governor's race? The transit project is too important for that kind of thing. Please say it isn't so.

Hanabusa: It isn't so.

F3: How she can even suggest that monies provided for transit only be used to balance the budget. Does she not realize this will really weaken the position of the city with the federal government in its quest to receive the most possible federal funds to get the transit project on line as a reality finally. Did she not remember the people's vote of yes on the project and particularly the residents in the area she represents!

Hanabusa: I did not suggest that the money be used only to balance the budget. What I did say was that all the various issues are there to meet the crisis. Whether we do it by transferring the funds to the state or giving the taxpayer a holiday for a year, it's up to the respective committees to debate. Not all people in the area voted yes on the project.

NoSpeeches: Your response to F3 begs more questions: It was a majority vote in favor of rail. Your (reply): "Not all people in the area voted yes on the project," implies you're unimpressed with the principle of majority rule.

Hanabusa: Not everyone in the area voted yes on rail but everyone in the area is facing tough economic times.

NoSpeeches: Have you examined the economics of using transit vs. ownership, maintenance and operation of a private automobile? Backing transit would be the best thing you can do for your constituents facing tough economic times — especially when oil prices go through the roof.

L.Wong: I think it's foolish to jeopardize rail. Besides being critical transportation infrastructure for O'ahu, you have the job creation and federal funding. The drivers on the west side, your constituents, will benefit the most. And the people voted for it. This really fits the bill for an economic stimulus. So why put that in jeopardy?

Hanabusa: Our proposal is not to jeopardize rail. We believe that adequate funding will still be available. There are two years of GET collection that remain in the fund to pay for the early stages of the rail project. However, we do have a responsibility to ensure that we are being fiscally responsible and looking at all possible solutions for our current economic situation.

Mattchu: What happens to the laborers, construction workers, carpenters, architects, and the other 10,000 jobs that are dependent on the rail project if your proposal to suspend the GET tax passes? How do you expect Hawai'i to make it through these tough economic times with out a public works project like the rail?

Hanabusa: The 10,000 jobs should not be affected. This is due to the fact that the GET, whether it is suspended or applied to state revenues, would be only for a year or so. And with the two years of GET collection still in the fund, there will be time to ensure that all of the project costs that the GET is to cover will be met. Also, the GET is cash. If the city chooses to bond the rail project, there will be more than adequate revenues to ensure payment of those bonds through GET collections.

Karen: I'm still upset about the Legislature being willing to accept a pay raise. I did read your column in The Advertiser. Do you understand how out of touch you appear on this issue? You say it's the law, but you folks pass laws for a living. Can you explain this to taxpayers, please?

Hanabusa: The pay raise issue is a constitutional amendment enacted by the people of the state. My position on the pay raise has been that the (state) Constitution requires us, if we are to decrease pay, it has to be across the board. This means, the Legislature, judiciary and executive branches. It is my understanding that the governor and the (House) speaker are taking the position that if there will be a decrease in the pay raises it should be across the board and prospective, meaning future pay raises. My position is that when we address it, we do it fairly and in compliance with the Constitution.

Makaha Retiree: With the city and state still encouraging the homeless to come out to the Wai'anae Coast, do you see any future for the homeless when they are so far from the work areas? Is it a case of out of sight, out of mind, or not in my backyard? I'm sure that Hawai'i Kai and Kahala want to do their part in helping our state resolve the homeless question.

Hanabusa: I share your concern about the Wai'anae Coast being the place where the homeless appear to be finding their only shelter. I have always opposed the fact that the homeless shelters appear to only be built in the Wai'anae area. It does take the will of other communities to recognize that they too should do their part in assisting in the resolution of the homeless question; however, most practice NIMBYism and because the people of Wai'anae have been so welcoming and understanding, we have tended again to carry this burden for the rest of the island.

Lisa: Do you think it would be a bad idea to repeal Act 221? Why or why not?

Hanabusa: Act 221 is set to sunset in 2010. Whether it is a good or bad idea to permit the sunset is the subject of hearings and debate presently in the House and Senate. I believe the Legislature will make their decision on whether 221 has accomplished what it was intended to do. The proponents believe the information provided is incorrect and unfairly presents 221 as a major revenue loss for the state. I will await the committees' recommendations as to 221.

Shirley: My question is about the ceded land case. Do you think Gov. Lingle should drop her appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, or do you agree with her argument that she has no choice but to appeal?

Hanabusa: I believe Gov. Lingle should drop the appeal and I have discussed this issue with Attorney General Mark Bennett. I do not agree that the governor has no choice but to appeal.

Rowdy Roddy Piper: What about the Hawai'i 2050 Sustainability Plan? Our Islands need to become more sustainable in everything from energy production to agriculture to affordable housing. I remember the plan had good recommendations for all those — will it be reintroduced this year?

Hanabusa: The sustainability plan remains a high priority of the Senate. I could not agree with you more on your assessment of the future of Hawai'i. I anticipate that the recommendations will be reintroduced this year and I also anticipate new ideas to also become part of the package.