TAX HIKE

FORGET MINOR FLAW, SIGN CIGARETTE BILL

I am writing in response to the letter by Lowell Kalapa regarding the cigarette tax. He states that it is "ironic" that the funds accrued from the cigarette tax will go in part to fund the Cancer Center. This is not ironic. It is common sense.

One of several costly effects of cigarettes is that they can cause cancer. To use the tax on cigarettes to help the state pay for this healthcare burden makes good common sense and good fiscal sense.

What does not make sense is to veto a good bill with substantial support from the healthcare community because it contains a minor textual flaw. For example, it currently reads as giving 1 cent in the first year to the Cancer Center instead of 1 cent per cigarette sold in the first year. To use this mistake to kill this important bill truly smells of politics.

I urge the governor to sign the bill and put the state's interests first. The lawmakers can add the words "per cigarette sold" back later. Maybe the Legislature should get a good copy editor, too.

GROWTH, TRANSIT

DETERMINE WHAT LEVEL OF POPULATION WORKS

Mahalo to Mike Leidemann, Robbie Dingeman and Kevin Dayton for their excellent articles on growth and transit in the June 23 paper. We have to remember that sometimes there is not always more and more and more.

According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, fresh water, food and shelter from the elements are physical needs for just about everyone; love needs and security needs are secondary. Therefore, our planners should determine exactly what population level is sustainable.

Are we going to assume, like fools, that the Mainland will always send more and more food to Hawai'i? Are we to assume, like fools again, that water will always flow from our faucets?

People would do well to visit the Board of Water Supply's Web site for an overview of our fresh-water supply. Also, with more and more people demanding food, the price of food will continue to increase. As far as I know, there are not any quick fixes for the fresh-water and food-supply problems.

As concerns transit, I favor mass transit for several reasons. Mass transit would reduce global warming. Petroleum reserves are limited, and ethanol requires farmland that otherwise could be used to grow food. Mass transit would hopefully alleviate some of the traffic congestion. I think toll roads, on the current roadways, would also help with traffic congestion.

The "Tragedy of the Commons" is a political science term for when everyone does what he wants to and, overall, everything becomes screwed up.

ETHICS

WATADA'S MOTIVES SHOULD BE QUESTIONED

I do not believe we should condemn nor commend Ehren Watada for his refusal to follow the lawful orders of his superior (our country), because our laws will. We should, however, question his motives.

We are at war. Americans recognize that freedom is not free.

My son served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He joined to support the American dream and preserve our way of life, which we are hopeful the people of Iraq may enjoy in the future. Ehren Watada had an opportunity to make a difference by leading young men and women in a moral and ethical manner against unjust tyranny. Our freedom has been challenged by terrorism.

When I read that Ehren Watada is a hero, I say no: The firefighters who gave their lives during the attacks of 9/11 are heroes. A coward? No, I believe he's totally confused.

We join with a vision to make a difference; we pledge an oath to uphold the Constitution and possibly sacrifice our own lives in the pursuit of freedom. I wish Ehren Watada had looked at his duty as an opportunity to make a difference and stop some of the immoral and illegal actions that are happening in this war. Do what is ethically correct.

WATADA

THERE'S BRAVERY, AND THEN THERE IS BRAVERY

I've seen numerous letters in The Advertiser describing Lt. Ehren Watada as behaving bravely by refusing to ship out to Iraq. May I respectfully request those letter writers watch the movie "United 93," then ask themselves: Was it bravery when those unarmed, untrained passengers on a hijacked jet on 9/11 fought back against ruthless armed terrorists?

If so, is it also bravery when a well-armed, trained soldier, who took an oath to protect our country, shrinks from fighting such terrorists? How can two completely opposite actions both be considered bravery?

KAMEHAMEHA

FULL-BLOOD HAWAIIANS SHOULD BE TAKEN FIRST

The letter by Makoa Jacobson, a former Kamehameha student, praising the school really just goes to show the fraud and racial preferences committed by this institution.

Jacobson goes on to praise the "diversity" at Kamehameha. What Jacobson really shows us is that Kamehameha isn't interested in helping the Hawaiian people. Full-blooded Hawaiians should be at the top of the list for entrance into this school, but they are not.

The children picked to attend Kamehameha are the best students academically in Hawai'i. All they need to get into Kamehameha is not that they are Hawaiian, but that they have at least one drop of Hawaiian blood in them, along with whatever other nationalities they are, and that they are top students already.

If Kamehameha were really interested in the future of Hawaiians, it would pick the most at-risk Hawaiian children — the ones with the most to gain from a Kamehameha education. This school is a fraud, and every full-blooded Hawaiian who has had children turned away from this school will back me up on this point.

Let's hope the 9th U.S. Circuit Court also sees this and shuts this fraud down so that it is forced to stop cherry-picking the brightest children (with at least a drop of Hawaiian blood) and do the right thing for the neediest Hawaiian children in the Islands.

STATEHOOD

THERE'S NO GOING BACK

In response to reader Eric Po'ohina's June 23 letter ("Kamehameha would favor independence"), I would just like to say that the past cannot be changed. Like it or not, Hawai'i is a part of the United States. People from the Mainland can move here just as easily as they can move to California, Oregon, Texas or anywhere else they choose.

SECESSION

IT'S TIME FOR OHA TO BE DISMANTLED

After reading the June 24 article entitled "OHA now working toward nationhood," it has become clear to me that the OHA must be dismantled.

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs was born of the 1978 state Constitutional Convention with a mandate to better the conditions of both Native Hawaiians and the Hawaiian community in general. OHA has gone far beyond its 1978 mandate and is now supporting a process that could lead to secession.

Perhaps it is time for another state constitutional convention to deal with this situation. Are there any politicians left in Hawai'i who will stand up for the U.S. Constitution, for Hawai'i's Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and thus the rights of all of Hawai'i's citizens?

U.S. COMPACT

THERE'S HISTORY BEHIND MICRONESIAN FISHERMEN

I was given a copy of the recent Advertiser article by Dan Nakaso and David Waite regarding the working conditions of Micronesians on some Hawai'i longliner fishing boats. Being from Hawai'i and currently living in Micronesia, I was very disturbed by the article. Here's some perspective for attorney Michael Ostendorp's "sashimi grandmas" to consider: