CAMPAIGN SIGNS

LEGISLATURE PULLS A FAST ONE ON OUTDOOR CIRCLE

The Legislature has pulled a fast one on the Outdoor Circle's effort to reduce the ugly influence of political campaign signs on neighborhoods across the state.

For two years it repeatedly took action to refine and massage a bill, and then lawmakers killed it for reasons never raised during those two years of hearings and open debate.

It's as if they never intended to let the legislation pass. What a coincidence. What a waste. What a shame.

REMEMBER THIS SELFISH DECISION IN NOVEMBER

Thank you for your March 28 editorial, "Limits on campaign signs a beautiful thing," which asked the Legislature to pass the Outdoor Circle bill designed to strike "a smart balance by allowing freedom of expression with sensible limits on the size of the placards."

Too bad the Legislature wasn't listening. Why? Because they don't believe campaign signs are a problem in Hawai'i. That's funny, the rest of us know better.

How could our lawmakers miss the billboard-size banners with huge photographs of themselves and their colleagues on fences across our Islands?

Have they never seen the intersections plastered with dozens of campaign signs?

With another election just around the corner, maybe the can refresh their memories.

When it's time to vote in November, remember the selfish, self-serving vote that continues to allow our Islands to be overrun with campaign signs.

LEGISLATORS MUST BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR VOTE

Many people on the Big Island are extremely disappointed that the 2008 Legislature chose to help themselves instead of their communities by killing the bill to restrict campaign signs.

Some lawmakers act as if the eyesore created by large and excessive numbers of campaign signs is a problem only on O'ahu.

Wrong! Excessive, large campaign signs are plastered all over the Big Island during each election, and it sometimes takes months for them to be removed.

I encourage voters to hold these lawmakers accountable for putting their interests above yours and for acting to protect themselves rather than protecting the irreplaceable beauty of our Islands.

CAMPAIGN-SIGN VOTE A BIG DISAPPOINTMENT

It is such a disappointment to hear that the campaign-sign reduction bill died of mishandling.

How can voters allow legislators to continue in office when they allow such things to occur?

Each of the dozens of election signs will be another reminder that we must vote for legislators who refuse to destroy the beauty of their state.

FAILED PROPOSAL

DRUG POLICIES SHOULD NOT CREATE MORE HARM

Your April 27 article, "Lawmakers struggle to aid crime victims," gave an all too superficial reason for the failure of the proposal requiring the state to investigate within 24 hours any report of drug use in homes with children.

The proposal failed because its many requirements would have created more harm for the children and families involved, not merely because of practical concerns about manpower and state resources.

It would have also replaced treatment assessments and recommendations of healthcare professionals with requirements written by lawmakers, who are not qualified to determine individual treatment needs.

The bottom line is: When trying to address the problem of drugs in our community, our drug policies should not create additional harm, nor should they be more harmful than the drugs themselves.

ELECTIONS

PUBLIC FINANCING HAS TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD

I was quoted in an April 30 article, "Lingle budget slashed by $44M," and it is important that readers understand the broader context in which my remarks were made.

SB 661 authorizes a pilot program for publicly funding campaigns for Hawai'i County Council. During the floor debate on Tuesday, the representative from the Big Island, Robert Herkes, used the term "slush fund" to describe the $300,000 per member per year that each Hawai'i County Council member receives to use, as Rep. Herkes said, to "go out and buy votes with."

I am a strong supporter of public funding of political campaigns, but am opposed to this type of double-dipping that Rep. Herkes alluded to in his floor remarks. Public financing is meant to level the playing field for all candidates — incumbent and challenger alike; this bill would make the uphill climb for challengers even steeper. Not only would the incumbent Hawai'i County Council member have $300,000 to spend as he liked, public financing would kick in with an additional amount.

With this background in mind, consider my entire statement: "I came here to support this bill, but after hearing my colleague I wonder, are we being set up to support a slush fund — I've really been very surprised by the $300,000 under the incumbent's control and if we are going to give more public money to more incumbents to get more ingrained rather than encouraging those on the outside."

My statement highlights my problem with this bill, and what people who want clean elections need to know about Big Island politics, which is being held up as a model for the state to follow.

GOVERNMENT

ABERCROMBIE SHOULD STAY OUT OF STATE ISSUES

I am sick of U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie overstepping into state affairs.

His letter to the governor urging her to issue an emergency declaration serves as a recent example. Not only does Abercrombie not seem to grasp the divide between federal and state government, his insertion into state politics appears awkwardly calculated.

Remember when the University of Hawai'i Warriors were invited to play in the prestigious Sugar Bowl? Abercrombie's response was to publish an open letter in the newspaper demanding an investigation into the inner workings of the BCS.

And when a bill concerning kidney disease was before the Hawai'i Legislature Abercrombie rallied on its behalf at the state Capitol (although by my count only about 30 people showed up for his address and the bill died).

Abercrombie's job is to represent us in Congress, not to micromanage the state from Washington.

Rather than priming Hawai'i voters for a campaign, maybe Abercrombie should spend his time tackling federal issues that benefit the people of Hawai'i. Unless, of course, he is too busy writing to the pope about torture.

EMERGENCIES

LEAVE LEFT LANE ON FREEWAY FOR PASSING

On our island's freeways, many drivers have no concept of the emergency/passing lane and slowly "cruise" in it. It often makes one think: "There should be a law."

I used to feel this poor habit shouldn't be punished with a citation. Now, what was annoying has turned to infuriating.

At home in 'Aiea on Sunday evening, April 20, my pregnant wife was having unusual pain and discharge. Doctors told us to go immediately to Kapi'olani Medical Center.

On H-1, there were only three cars within sight, but they were traveling alongside each other at the same speed. I approached the dark SUV in the emergency lane and had my emergency lights blinking, high beams flashing and horn honking. Nothing. After minutes, thankfully, the truck in the middle lane realized the situation and slowed so I could pass the woman "cruising" in the emergency lane.

Immediately after arriving at the hospital, my wife underwent emergency surgery.

Doctors said that if we had arrived later, not only could my daughter have died but also my wife.

Now I wholeheartedly agree: There should be a law!

TRANSIT

HONOLULU CAN'T AFFORD $4 BILLION RAIL PROJECT

We can't afford this $4 billion rail project. This huge sum is meaningless unless someone individualizes it. When the federal contribution, overruns and interest payments are combined, the cost could be $10,000 for every man, woman and child in Hawai'i. This is in addition to ongoing maintenance costs and the financial shortfalls for our roads, sewers and water treatment obligations.

Tell me I'm wrong.

The worst thing is that we won't need rail when it is completed in 10 years. Kapolei will be a large independent city where people can work, shop, play and go to school on the Leeward side. There will be little need to commute to Honolulu. Traffic is intolerable now, but we must think of the future.

We haven't tried simpler things like rescheduling University of Hawai'i, school and business hours. (My office opens at 7 a.m. with good results).

We should try free buses, staggering traffic by license plates/names. Other ideas?

In five years, gas will be $6 a gallon and we will be driving smaller cars. This will leave more space on the freeways and parking lots. What are the implications?

And traffic consultants tell us the rail system will not significantly reduce traffic congestion in the future. And we are spending $4 billion?

Please tell me I'm wrong.

O'AHU RACETRACK

THOUSANDS OF RACERS WANT A MOTOR TRACK

I strongly disagree with the idea that our hopes are dimming for a new racetrack on O'ahu.

The motorsports community is not just the half dozen mentioned in a recent Advertiser story. It is made up of thousands of racers who want a track.

The article showed our community as being divided, when in reality we're pushing as hard as ever to make something happen.

If people say that they are "really for the racers" then they should drop their petty arguments and work toward a common goal. I personally don't care who owns the lease — I only care about making it happen. I think everyone should if they want a place to play.

The news should stop concentrating on a chosen few, and take the questions to the people. Head out to a cruise night, attend a few get-togethers, and ask people who and what they support. It will give you a chance to talk to the real heart of what's driving this. Maybe then we'll see articles that promise hope instead of gloom and doom.

ENERGY

U.S. CONSUMES MUCH MORE OIL THAN CHINA

Your column by Michael Klare (Commentary, April 30) about the coming worldwide shortage of oil was very informative. And Klare was sound in advocating U.S. cooperation with China in the search for alternative sources of energy rather than fighting China for oil.

I wish to point out, however, that although China's oil consumption is rising fast, there is still an immense difference in the per capita consumption of oil by these two countries.

For while America's oil consumption in 2007 was only 2.7 times higher than that of China, the latter had four and a half times as many people as did the U.S. This means that the average American was consuming 12 times more oil than the average Chinese! This figure is reached by the correct method of multiplying 2.7 by 4.5.