Archive for the ‘ Hawaii Policy ’ Category

John Carroll

John Carroll

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Media Contacts:

Barbara Hester – PR Coordinator  (808) 384-5907

Gayle Gardner – Campaign Chairman (808) 595-7127

Alice Paet-Ah Sing - Campaign Director (808) 542-2902

John Carroll – Candidate (808) 526-9111 (808) 545-3800 fax

Gubernatorial Candidate, John Carroll, Former State Senator and Former Chair of the Republican Party of Hawai‘i, announced today that he and Honolulu attorney Christopher Dias have filed a precedent setting law suit.  The suit requests for injunctive relief from the United States Government, relief from the provisions of the Jones Act, which created shipping restrictions that adversely apply to only one State in the Union; the island State of Hawai`i.  Carroll stated that the restrictions are excessively expensive for Hawai`i’s people and are in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments as well as the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Carroll stated that he had originally intended to instruct his Attorney General to file a class action on behalf of the people of the State of Hawai`i when he took office as Governor.  He now states he sees no reason to delay.  Carroll believes in getting things done.  Carroll explained,  “One of the purposes of enacting the Jones Act was to ensure that the United States of America would be well equipped with a maritime fleet that could compete in a worldwide economy.  Unfortunately, it created unconstitutional restrictions on commerce between the State of Hawai`i and worldwide shippers as well as on interstate commerce.”

Since Hawai`i is separated from the continental United States by 2,300 miles of ocean and, of course, has no highways, railroads or pipelines from the continental United States, Hawai`i is dependent on ocean shipping for at least 90 percent of every commodity used and consumed in the state.

The Impact of the Jones Act on the People of Hawai‘i

The Jones Act requires that for a ship to operate in interstate commerce, (between states), it must be built in America, owned by Americans, 75 percent manned by an American crew, and maintained and flagged in the United States.  The net effect of the enforcement of the Jones Act on the State of Hawai‘i’s population has been wide-ranging.

Examples:  The expense of agricultural production became prohibitive, not only because of the inbound shipping cost of fertilizers, herbicides, and farm implements but also due to the outbound shipping costs for our locally grown fruits, livestock and ornamental plants.  Hawai‘i cattle ranchers are faced with an intolerable situation.  They often have to transport their cattle, from Kawaihae to Vancouver B.C. on a Canadian owned Corral Lines to remain profitable.  The cattle must then be trucked (often for 500 miles)  into the U.S. to be fattened and sold.  To go direct, some are flown on Boeing 747 aircraft.

There has emerged a monopolistic control of shipping in and out of the State of Hawai‘i, eliminating the cost reduction benefits of competition.  As will be shown at trial, the cost of everything from automobiles to paper towels is significantly higher because of the enforcement of the Jones Act provisions.

By comparison, the tiny islands of Singapore and Hong Kong, which do not have similar trade restrictions and with less than 1/20th the land mass of Hawai’i, enjoy a Gross Domestic Product in excess of two billion (2,000,000,000.00) U.S. dollars per year. That is 40 times greater than Hawai`i’s GDP of fifty million (50,000,000.00) U.S. dollars per year when government spending and tourism are excluded. This is an absurdity for Hawai‘i’s economic viability.

The Fundamental Purposes of the Commerce Clause

The fundamental purposes of the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution are, among others, “…to assure the unrestricted flow of commerce throughout the several states,” 282 NE2d 336,  “…to assure to the commercial enterprises in every state substantial equality to access to a free national market,” 517 P2d 691.  Further, the “…power granted is a positive power to legislate concerning transactions which, reaching across state boundaries, affect the people of more states than one, and to govern affairs which the individual states,with their limited territorial jurisdictions, are not fully capable of governing.” 322 US 533.  Clearly, the Jones Act and its provisions are in direct violation of the spirit of the Commerce Clause.

H.C.R. 100 Does Not Honor Extreme Terrorists

By Rep. Kym Pine

Republican State Rep. Kymberly Pine says State Senator Sam Slom’s statements on Islam Day are insensitive and wrong.  Rep. Pine said, “Slom equated the Legislature’s passage of H.C.R. 100, entitled “House Resolution Proclaiming September 24, 2009, As Islam Day.” to the honoring of extreme terrorists.  Slom’s statements marginalize significant and peaceful Hawaii citizens.  Our Hawaii and U.S. Constitutions recognize liberties and rights not favoring one personal faith over another.  Recognition through a House Resolution of one faith group’s contribution to our multi-faith Hawaii has been common practice.  Groups have been recognized through House Resolutions including the fourth Saturday of July as an annual Kupuna Recognition Day, April 6 as Tartan (Scottish heritage) Day and Sept. 28, 2007 as Confucius Day in Hawaii.  As leaders we must be very clear that not all Muslims are terrorists.  Terrorists have very different backgrounds and beliefs than Hawaii Muslims.”

Powerful, free website empowers citizens to track activity of state legislature and individual lawmakers

March 24, 2009 — Citizens now have a powerful, online tool to track the actions of Hawaii’s state legislature and individual legislators. HawaiiVotes.org is a free website that provides concise, non-partisan, plain-English descriptions of every bill, amendment and vote in the Hawaii House and Senate. These are all sortable by legislator, issue category, keyword and more, allowing a citizen to quickly create a custom “voting record guide” for any legislator on any issue.

How did a state representative or senator vote on an issue or bill that you care about? What bills and amendments did each legislator sponsor? What legislation actually became law this year – and what did not? What would all these bills actually do (vs. what their sponsors intend)? Which legislators have missed the most votes, and how many did yours miss? The answers to all those questions and more are at citizens’ fingertips 24 hours a day on HawaiiVotes.org.

HawaiiVotes.org is a free public service from the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii (GRIH), a nonpartisan, nonprofit research and educational institution. The purpose of the new site is to inform citizens, media and public officials about legislation that affects their families, schools, jobs and communities.

Grassroot Institute President Jamie Story says it’s a great tool for anyone who is either frustrated with the performance of elected officials or is just plain curious about the process. “The new website empowers citizens to actually participate in the democratic process,” she said. “HawaiiVotes.org will shed great light on our state legislature and government.”

The site also provides other features, including a comments section/forum where citizens can share their views about particular bills or other state public policy issues. A blog aggregator displays the most recent post of the state’s leading political blogs both left and right, and “LegislatorPedia” and “JudgePedia” shed additional sunlight on the Aloha state’s elected officials and judiciary.

“State government is involved in so many areas of our lives and economy; HawaiiVotes.org has never been needed more,” said GRIH Communications Director Tom McAuliffe. “It’s free, easy to use, fast and informative. Think of it as a giant spyglass on the Hawaii State Legislature!”

For more information please visit www.Hawaiivotes.org and www.grassrootinstitute.org

By Russell Pang

HONOLULU – Governor Linda Lingle today submitted to the State Legislature the Administration’s plan to meet a projected $650 million revenue shortfall for the remainder of the current fiscal year (FY09) and biennium budget fiscal years 2010 through 2011.

The Administration’s plan balances the budget without raising taxes, without any layoffs or furloughs of state employees, and without making significant cuts to essential public services or programs.  It combines the use of federal stimulus funds, tobacco funds, interest from and charges to various special funds, adjustments to selected benefits for state employees, and further tightening Act 221 tax credits.

“While we are working to take maximum advantage of the federal funds available through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, the additional federal funds alone will not be sufficient to close the projected revenue shortfall,” said Governor Lingle.

“In developing this balanced budget plan, our top priorities were to ensure we do not take any more taxpayer money out of the economy to support government, that we not add to the state’s unemployment by laying off employees, that we preserve essential public services, and that we continue to invest available resources in projects that will create jobs in the near term and achieve our long-term priorities such as energy independence.  This budget accomplishes those goals,” the Governor added.

In December, Governor Lingle submitted her Administration’s FY10-FY11 biennium budget which included a detailed plan to make up for a $1.1 billion revenue shortfall projected by the Council on Revenues.  On January 9, 2009, the Council lowered its revenue projections further by an additional $650 million for FY09, FY10 and FY11.

The Governor subsequently submitted an $81 million plan to close the FY09 shortfall through a combination of transferring funds from various special funds, including the rainy day fund, implementing additional restrictions on discretionary spending and utilizing additional federal reimbursements for Medicaid.

“Over the past year, we have made difficult but necessary decisions to reduce spending to ensure the state lives within its means,” the Governor said.  “At the same time, unprecedented national and global fiscal and economic challenges continue to impact our local economy and these realities mandate that we cannot continue to operate in a business-as-usual manner.

“We also must resist the impulse to raise taxes and fees because Hawai‘i’s families and small businesses are facing unprecedented challenges. We must ensure they keep as much of their money as possible.”

The Governor pointed out that additional budget adjustments will likely be needed when the Council on Revenues meets again on March 12, because it is anticipated that the Council will revise its revenue forecasts downward.

In addition to the plan to close the FY09 shortfall, the Administration is proposing the following nine action items to provide the state with additional general fund revenues needed to close the revenue shortfall:

  • Utilize federal stimulus Medicaid funds. Nearly half of the shortfall will be covered by an estimated $320 million in Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) funds. The matching federal funds for treating Medicaid patients are part of the $15 billion in Medicaid assistance being made available to the states under the recently passed federal stimulus plan. Hawai‘i is scheduled to receive $106.7 million for FY09, $142.2. million in FY10 and $71.1 million in FY11.  As of last week, states were allowed to start accessing FMAP funds (Impact: $320 million, FY09-FY11.)
  • Redistribute a portion of the Tobacco Settlement Funds. The Administration supports a bill (HB1731) currently before the Legislature to reallocate the distribution of the Tobacco Settlement Special Fund, including depositing 14 percent into the state’s general fund.  This action would add $7 million per year to the state’s revenues.  (Impact: $14 million, FY10-FY11.)
  • Transfer tobacco tax revenues to the general fund. The Administration supports a bill (HB1732) currently before the Legislature which would allow the use of tobacco tax revenues. The redistribution of the tobacco tax is expected to add $33 million to the state’s general fund in the upcoming biennium. (Impact: $33 million, FY10-FY11.)
  • Advance the general excise tax filing date. The Administration supports a bill (HB1735) currently before the Legislature to change the filing date for the general excise monthly tax return from the last day of the calendar month following the month in which taxes accrue to the 20th day of that month.  The earlier collection of taxes within the fiscal year will generate a one-time revenue gain of $40 million in FY11.  (Impact:  $40 million, FY11.)
  • Remove the exemption for certain special funds from assessments. The Administration proposes removing a provision that currently exempts certain special funds from paying their fair share of assessments to support central services and departmental administrative expenses.  A bill (HB1740) currently before the Legislature would remove the exemption for all but a handful of special funds, including the Hawai‘i Hurricane Relief Fund, Convention Center Enterprise Special Fund and Tourism Special Fund.  The Administration supports this measure, but proposes also allowing the following special funds to retain the exemption from assessments:  State Educational Facilities Improvement Special Fund, Hawai‘i Health Systems Corporation Special Fund and University of Hawai‘i Special Fund.  This action would result in an additional $9.8 million annually. (Impact: $19.6 million, FY10-FY11.)
  • Transfer interest earned on certain special funds to the general fund. The Administration supports a measure (HB1733) before the Legislature to allow the transfer of interest earned on investments of special funds, revolving funds and special accounts into the general fund.  This action would not impact the amount in these funds that are generated through user fees or charges.  The use of the interest earnings would result in an estimated $38.2 million in general fund revenues. (Impact: $38.2 million, FY10-FY11.)
  • Discontinue employer-funded group life insurance. The Administration supports a bill (HB1726) currently before the Legislature to prevent the Hawai‘i Employer-Union Health Benefit Trust Fund (EUTF) from providing group life insurance benefits if the premiums are paid for by the state or a county.  Currently, the employer (the state or a county) pays the entire premium for the life insurance benefit.  Premiums are more expensive than paying death benefits directly to survivors.  Discontinuing this practice would save the state $4.1 million in FY10 and $4.3 million in FY11.  (Impact: $8.4 million, FY10-FY11.)
  • Seek adjustments to the EUTF health benefits plan. The Administration will seek adjustments to the current Employer-Union Health Benefit Trust Fund health plan through collective bargaining negotiations. If the current health benefits plan is sustained, with the state covering 60 percent of the cost, the premiums will increase by an estimated 29.4 percent.  This proposal would not affect retirees and their dependent beneficiaries. This effort would provide a cost savings of approximately $48 million per year.  (Impact: $96 million, FY10-FY11.)
  • Further tighten Act 221 to reduce tax credits to investors in technology businesses. Rather than allowing investors to get back a full dollar for each dollar they invest, investors will receive 50 cents for each dollar invested, sharing their risk with state taxpayers.  This effort will save an estimated $43.9 in the biennium. (Impact: $43.9 million, FY10-FY11.)

In addition to closing the revenue shortfall over the next two years, the Administration is also focused on ensuring long-term fiscal stability for the state.  The Administration supports a bill (HB1715) currently before the Legislature to increase by five years the minimum retirement age and minimum length of service before a state employee can receive full service retirement benefits.  The measure would only apply to employees who enter public service on or after July 1, 2009.  The annual savings for this proposal starting in FY2013 is approximately $39 million.

The U.S. Supreme Court released the full transcript from this morning’s hearing.

http://www.inversecondemnation.com/files/07-1372.pdf

Two Hawaii State Capitol insider blogs, The Notebook and Poinography have generated the most activity on the subject of the Civil Union (HB444) legislation over the past several days with state and even city officials weighing in both in pseudonym and in name.  Proponents and now opponents near and far have there eyes on this bill.

Testimony in the House last week was dominated by proponents of HB 444.  It is now in Senate Judiciary committee with it’s members receiving a wave of emails and calls after opponents of HB 444 began organizing efforts this past weekend.

Former LIUNA union representative, Jimmy Kuroiwa, estimated around fifty church and faith community leaders attended the meeting called by Hawaii Family Forum within 24 hour notice.  Former state Representative Dennis Arakaki is the current head of Hawaii Family Forum.  A rally at the Capitol has been scheduled by the group for this Sunday, February 22 at 2p.  Thousands are expected to attend.

The civil unions for same-sex couples battle in our State Capitol just turned up a notch this weekend.  A new website, http://protectourkeiki.com/ has targeted Waipahu/Pearl City/Crestview Senator Clarence Nishihara as “RUINING HAWAII” and “WANTS YOUR KEIKI TO BELIEVE THAT SAME SEX MARRIAGE IS OK.”

As reported in the Honolulu Advertiser, Nishihara supports HB444.

If a firestorm of opposition now erupts because of this bill as this issue erupted in ‘98, how will it effect gubernatorial and lt. gubernatorial hopefuls Hanabusa, Hooser and Bunda in the Senate?  What about House members looking at their options?

It was in ‘98 that then Senator Rey Graulty was defeated by Senator Norman Sakamoto in the Democratic primary.   Graulty was a proponet of same-sex marriage while Sakamoto, a socially conservative Democrat, campaigned strategically on the same-sex marriage issue.  Mailouts went to every voting househould with pictures of two wedding cakes.  One cake with two men on it saying Graulty supports same-sex marriage and the other cake with a man and a woman on it saying Sakamoto supports traditional marriage.

The focus of the traditional marriage proponents message in ‘98 emphasized that same-sex marriage would be taught to children as equal to opposite-sex marriage.  This is similar to messaging now used on the new site targeting Nishihara.  Whoever the mind or minds behind the “Protect Our Keiki” site are, they (and ambitious politicians) should soon see how effective their messaging is 11 years later.

Hawaii is mentioned as one of 20 states where lawmakers have moved to reclaim sovereignty in this worldnetdaily.com.  Jerome Corsi lumps Hawaii’s sovereignty movement in with more recent movements reacting to the new $1trillion Obama stimulus package.

.

Part I addressed the history and purpose of the Jones Act in this series.

By Daniel Brackins

Proponent Argument

In addition to national defense, proponents argue that the Jones Act provides additional benefits to the United States.  Among these include job protection due to unfair competition by from other nations.

Job Protection

Phillip Grill (1996) says that job protected by the Jones Act is 124,000 (as cited in The Hidden Costs, 1996).  Grill further says that these jobs must be protected in order to prevent the loss of jobs to foreign competitors, who charge less than fair wages for similar work done by U.S. workers.  This is a claim to unfair competition.  Indeed the wages of a merchant marine are incredibly high compared to their counterparts.  A U.S. longshoreman or marine clerk can earn upwards of $100,000 to $137,000 per year (Longshoremen, 2002).  Indeed this is a much greater salary found in such places as China.  This increased cost of wages will be further analyzed.

National Defense

In the wars of this century, commercial shipping has been critically important. The relevant question is not whether future threats might require that fleets of commercial-type ships be available. The question is whether present programs provide such a capability effectively and efficiently.  If the U.S. flagged fleet is fully employed during peacetime serving commercially important domestic and international trades, it is neither an entirely reliable nor a low-cost military reserve. This was verified during the Gulf War (Ferguson, n.d.).

Some security justification for transporting war material in peacetime exclusively on U.S. flagged ships is valid. The fact that a large fraction of military preference cargo consists of household goods and private automobiles dilutes any such basis for incurring the high costs of cargo preferences. Further, cargo preference does not buy much reserve military capability; the cargo preference largely supports bulk carriers and container ships that are of limited military use (Ferguson, n.d.).

The higher than competitive prices that are permitted under the antitrust exemption for conference ratemaking may be important, given present regulatory constraints, in sustaining the U.S. flag fleet. However, more than 80 percent of traffic in American international liner commerce is carried by foreign companies. Therefore, whatever military gain is achieved through conference price fixing accrues predominantly to foreign governments (Ferguson, n.d.).

The defense-related rationale for present policies presupposes that, despite the enormous capacity available on the open market, only U.S.-flag service could be relied on in an emergency. In contrast, the Military SealiftCommand made extensive use of foreign ships and crews in the Gulf War, and representatives of the Department of Defense have recently declared that there is no need to rely on the U.S.-flag commercial fleet in any foreseeable wars (Ferguson, n.d.).

Analysis

Operating Cost Differentials

Vessel costs are primarily comprised of capital and operating costs. Capital costs refer to vessel construction costs.  Operating costs include wages paid to crews, direct fuel charges, insurance, maintenance and repair, and other administrative expenses. Of these, labor and maintenance costs are typically higher in absolute terms for U.S. vessels than for foreign-flagged vessels (table 1). U.S. crew costs generally account for most of the differences in operating costs between U.S. and foreign flagged vessels. For example, manning costs account for 77 percent of the operating cost differential for a typical oil tanker and 81 percent of the cost differential for a typical containership (The Economic Effects, 2007).

Table 1.

Expense Category

U.S. Flagged

Foreign Flagged

Crew

12,705

2,940

Fuel

4,410

3,045

Maint. & Repair

2,310

1,470

Insurance

13,335

13,335

Other

1,500

1,400

TOTAL

$34,260

$22,190

Source:  The Economic Effects, 2007

The above table indicates a large crew expense for U.S. flagged ships.  In addition to the higher salaries demanded, American ships must hire more crew members than foreign ships, often 23 or more, compared with as few as 11 on other vessels (Little, 2001).  Even ship owners willing to pay American salaries say they were forced from the fleet because of all the other expenses that the U.S. flag requires. “Foreign crews eat less, they travel economy class, they seem to use less [provisions], there’s less overtime, no workers complaints,” said Vass, who re-flagged the LNG Aquarius. “I can’t think of anything that didn’t cost more. Like the beef. They would only eat prime American beef - not choice, like your wife feeds you, but prime, U.S. beef. We had to fly it out to Japan.”I’m not saying the Americans aren’t good. They are. But the foreign crew doesn’t mind eating Australian beef” (Little, 2001). In the past 25 years 1,600 vessels have left the U.S. fleet (Little, 2001).

In Hawaii many cattle ranchers have decided to use airplanes to ship their cattle.  They find it cheaper and more efficient than shipping them on U.S. flagged ships.  These cattle fly on 747s in livestock containers at 30 cents a pound (Little, 2001).  They have no other choice since foreign flagged vessels are not allowed to ship cargo from one U.S. port to another.

If foreign vessels were allowed to participate in U.S. cabotage, some industry analysts maintain that, in addition to complying with environmental laws, foreign vessels operating in U.S. domestic waters would be required to comply with other U.S. regulations, including federal and state tax, immigration, and labor laws.  According to industry representatives, foreign vessel compliance with these laws likely would increase the costs of such vessels operating in Jones Act trade, thereby substantially decreasing the cost differential between U.S. and foreign flagged carriers.  However, only some of these laws would apply to foreign vessels if they were allowed to participate in Jones Act trade (The Economic Effects, 2007).

Job Protectionism and Unemployment

As has been noted the U.S. shipping industry attempts to increases the wages of its employers with the use of the Jones Act.  This is primarily accomplished through unions.

1800JonesAct. (2008). The Jones Act U.S.C. Title 46 (Recodified 2006). Retrieved November 21, 2008 from http://www.1800jonesact.com/maritime_statutes/default.asp

Competition in the Noncontiguous Domestic Maritime Trades (2006).  U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration.

Little, R. (2001). U.S. merchant fleets sails toward oblivion.  The Baltimore Sun.  Retrieved October 1, 2008 from http://www.mcall.com/topic/balte.bz. sealift06aug06,0,7707946.story?page=1

Longshormen, Making $100K Per Year, Won’t Reduce Demands (2002). Rense.com. Retrieved September 29, 2008 from http://www.rense.com/general30/long.htm

Maritime Flags of Convenience Visualized (2007). gCaptain. Retrieved September 29, 2008 from http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/tag/data/

McClintock, M. (2004). Merchant Marine Act of 1920. eNotes.com. Retrieved October 2, 2008 from http://www.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/merchant-marine-act

Official USDA Alaska and Hawaii Thrifty Food Plans: Cost of Food at Home (2008).  United States Department of Agriculture.

Official USDA Food Plans: Cost of Food at Home at Four Levels (2008).  United States Department of Agriculture.

The Economic Effects of Significant U.S. Import Restrains Fifth Update 2007 Investigation No. 332-325 (2007).  United States International Trade Commission.

The Hidden Costs of U.S. Shipping Laws (1996).  Public Interest Institute.

The Price of Paradise! (n.d.). Alternative-Hawaii. Retrieved October 1, 2008 from http://www.alternative-hawaii.com/overpop.htm

The World Factbook (2008).  Central Intelligence Agency.  Retrieved October 2, 2008 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

By Grassroot Institute of Hawaii

Senate Bill 659

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2009/Bills/SB659_.pdf , a measure with the potential to greatly increase transparency and accountability in Hawaii state government, has been scheduled for hearing at 9:30 am on Thursday, February 5 in conference room 211 of the state Capitol. The bill, which is being heard by the Senate Ways and Means Committee, would create a publicly-accessible, online database for all state grants and awards over $25,000. You may remember that a similar bill was passed in the prior legislative session, but the Governor allowed the bill to go into effect without her signature, and the bill was never implemented.

SB 659 addresses concerns shared by the Governor and others.

Regardless of your feelings for or against the bill, we encourage you to submit written testimony no later than Wednesday evening, or even more importantly to provide oral testimony at the hearing on Thursday morning.

The meeting notice and instructions on giving testimony can be found here

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2009/hearingnotices/HEARING_WAM_02. Please check back regularly to confirm no changes have been made. If you decide to give testimony, we would appreciate it if you could let us know, so we can keep track of the impact GRIH and its supporters are having. If you have any further questions, please contact me the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii at 808-591-9193.

One final note—The companion bill of SB 659 is House Bill 1840, introduced by Representative Gene Ward and referred to the House Finance Committee.

We encourage you to contact members

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/site1/house/comm/commFIN.asp of the committee, in particular Chair Marcus Oshiro, to share your thoughts as to whether or not this bill should be given a hearing.

This is worth re-posting from Lewrockwell.com in light of “Civil Unions”  being a hot issue this session at our Hawaii State Capitol.

By David Kramer

“In the U.K., grandparents were forced to give up their grandchildren by social services because they were considered too old. They are 59 and 46, respectively. The grandchildren were later given up for adoption to a gay couple.

I guess unlike the United States, the U.K. doesn’t have “progressive” age discrimination laws.”

Here’s an excerpt from the telegraph.co.uk article referred to:

The distraught grandfather said: “It breaks my heart to think that our grandchildren are being forced to grow up in an environment without a mother-figure.

“We are not prejudiced, but I defy anyone to explain to us how this can be in their best interests.

“The ideal for any child is to have a loving father and a loving mother in their lives.”

His wife added: “It’s so important for children to fit in, and I feel our grandchildren will be marked out from the start when they draw pictures of their two dads.”

The case raises fears about state interference in family arrangements, and concerns about the practice of adoption by same-sex couples.

NEWS RELEASE
THE GRASSROOT INSTITUTE OF HAWAII

2009 Hawaii Pork Report
Grassroot Institute and CAGW Expose Waste in Hawaii Government

Jan. 28, 2009 — Hawaii taxpayers recently paid almost $3,000 for a state employee to travel to Los Angeles for the Grammy Music Awards, according to a new report from The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii (GRIH) and premiere taxpayer watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW). In the midst of a significant state budget shortfall, the 2009 Hawaii Pork Report reveals that bureaucrats continue to spend taxpayer dollars in questionable ways. The exposé, which is the first of its kind in the state, reveals egregious waste, abuse and mismanagement of taxpayer dollars—and gives concrete examples of overspending to policymakers looking to trim fat from state and local budgets.

Some examples of frivolous spending that are sure to raise the ire of hard-working citizens include:

·       $2,829.91 for a state employee to travel to California for the Grammy Awards;

·       $875,000 to reconstruct a hiking trail that is now barred from public access at a cost of an additional $50,000 a year;

·       $130,000 to an artist for ceramic tiles adorning water coolers at the Hawaii Convention Center; and

·       $2,400,000 for substitute custodians in public schools.

Pearl Hahn, GRIH policy analyst and lead author of the report, remarked, “The only thing more shocking than the sheer amount of waste is the degree to which government officials will go to hide that waste. This report gives dozens of examples of abuse of taxpayer dollars—but there are hundreds, if not thousands, more examples waiting to be found.”

“The 2009 Hawaii Pork Report is the first step in bringing fiscal sanity to the Aloha State,” said David Williams, Vice-President for Policy at CAGW in Washington, D.C. “With an economic downturn it’s important for government to get rid of unnecessary and ridiculous programs and evaluate those essential programs making government more efficient. Before taxpayers are asked for one more dime of their hard earned money, state and local governments need to rebuild the trust they’ve lost,” he said. “Establishing a website with state and local government expenditures and creating a state Grace Commission to go through every nook and cranny in the budget would help fix that broken trust.”

The 2009 Hawaii Pork Report can be found at the GRIH website: www.grassrootinstitute.org. The mission of the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii is to promote individual liberty, free market economic principles and limited, more accountable government.

Finer Points Must Be Addressed for Hawaii’s Future Freedom

By Daniel Brackins and Dan Douglass

On Monday Governor Lingle issued her State of the State address. Politically she came across well and sensible. To her credit she connected with the public much more-so than last April when her address to the Hawaii Economic Association sparked our initial Economic Reality Check for Governor Lingle. Some things we agree with and others we don’t. Finer points must be addressed.

In her speech there were a few surprises. She called for energy independence (not a surprise) and food self-sufficiency (surprise). This is an admirable goal since the premium cost of food is an unnecessary burden for Hawaii’s people. Yet she failed to mention that Hawaii’s high cost of food is caused by two primary factors: the shipping monopoly (resulting from no Hawaii exemption from the Jones Act) and food tax. Food is an item that the consumer has no choice but to buy. Food is a necessity for life, and yet the state taxes this. The Governor must concert efforts, based on the understanding that under our current economic conditions many could use the additional 4% in their pockets.

Urging various state departments to buy local produce seems a well start, but skirts the basic problem of how the once booming agricultural industry has been incrementally destroyed in our state by the shipping monopoly. The consequence of state departments paying premium costs for local goods will increase the cost of the various departments (unless the departments are downsized) that ultimately all the taxpayers of Hawaii pay for.

The basic flaw is common in the bureaucratic mindset from county to federal. It is the false assumption that consumption/consumerism is the answer; this mantra of economic stimulus through liquidity. But where does the flow come from? It’s taken from the productive sector that generates voluntarily growing stimulus (through the free exchange of goods and services) that must be left alone as much as possible. To punish the productive sector by urging consumption on the state departmental level is utter nonsense that in effect continues to “kick the can down the road” for the longer term.

Lingle also called for a reduction in government services and pay cuts for government employees (surprise). We agree that this is a necessary step. There is a huge amount of overlap and duplication of government services. We recommend that the governor create a special task force (at no taxpayer cost) to eliminate overlap, improve efficiency, and reduce waste. We feel that this alone would eliminate the state’s projected $1.8 billion deficit.

Ultimately lasting wealth will come from entrepreneurial determination. This is something creative that almost always dies once government’s sticky fingers or iron fists get in on the action. Thus it takes courageous leadership to outsource, streamline and sunset governing agencies out of the productive sector’s way as much as possible.

Thus we stand firmly opposed to the Governor’s proposal to delay, curtail, or eliminate tax credits, exemptions or deductions. Tax cuts will allow the additional money in the consumers’ and investors’ pockets to help stimulate the economy through additional purchasing power. Moreover every proposal for tax reform should be evaluated apart from the typically exaggerated claims. How to think about any given tax reform? Here are four rules:

  • 1) If a bill reduces taxes through lower rates or increased deductions, it should be supported;
  • 2) If a bill increases taxes through raising rates or repealing deductions, it should be opposed;
  • 3) If a bill includes tax increases as well as tax reductions, it’s intellectually incoherent and therefore probably a trick;
  • 4) If a bill promises to reduce taxes and increase revenue, it should be rejected out of hand.

While we agree that a deferral of the transit tax on Oahu should be an option, it does not go far enough. The transit tax should be eliminated for similar reason stated above. Transit tax collections have already dropped by 16% since last year, a total of $2.6 million. This is in opposition to what the planners had anticipated when they claimed revenue would continue to rise each year. This makes funding the rail system without raising taxes unrealistic. We believe that the whole rail project itself should be scrapped. In the current state of economic crisis on all bureaucratic levels, Hawaii productive taxpayer base (the real golden goose) cannot finance the Honolulu Rail Cartel’s monstrosity.

Once again we must reiterate that she reconsider her own five-point economic plan. Our own plan to stimulate Hawaii’s economy would include the following:

  • Offer large tax incentives to business- this would include eliminating the corporate income tax or, at the very least, largely reducing it. This would include all industries, leaving none out. Incentives for small business development must also be explored.
  • Lowering the tax burden- a reduction of taxes across the board including the GE tax. Taxes magnify the cost of doing business in Hawaii.
  • Personalization of services- by eliminating wasteful state run services, such as the Department of Human Services (as an example), and outsourcing to non-profits, government spending can be largely reduced. This will also help with the previous point of tax reduction.
  • State exemption from the Jones Act- this would effectively terminate the shipping monopoly and lower the cost of goods substantially.
  • Free trade zones- by allowing tax free, tariff free, and duty free goods to be exchanged in Hawaii, the state could become a trading hub in the center of the Pacific connecting many areas of the world.
  • Marketing to outside business- with large incentives for business, the state should market on the mainland and in other countries in order to bring business to Hawaii.

Both Hawaii Republican and Democratic Party politicians must shun the temptation of enriching friends, families and allies at the expense of the families and businesses on the brink of moving to economically freer states or nations. Our Hawaii’s future freedom demands these bold measures from all our leadership that generates incentive for success and eliminates corruption.

Governor Linda Lingle’s 2009 State of the State Address

Senate President Hanabusa, Speaker Say, Lt. Governor and Mrs. Aiona, former Governor Ariyoshi, former Governor Waihe‘e and Mrs. Waihe‘e, members of the Legislature, cabinet members, Chief Justice Moon, Chair Apoliona, Mayor Tavares, Mayor Kenoi, military leaders, members of the Consular Corps, distinguished guests, and to the people of Hawai‘i…good morning and aloha!

It is a great privilege and a humbling experience to come before you each year to share my thoughts about where our state stands, and where we are headed.

The annual State of the State Address is a time-honored tradition in states all across our great nation.

It is a time to take stock of where we are as a state, to recognize a few successes, and to lay out a clear roadmap for our future.

In this sense, it is a fairly typical speech.

But this has not been a typical year. We are facing a time like no other in our state’s history.

And 2009 will be one of the most challenging years in our nation’s history as we confront one of the severest economic crises we have ever faced.

The daunting task we face in the months ahead is making some very difficult decisions in order to address our immediate fiscal problems.

These are not decisions that any of us want to make, but they are decisions that must be made.

They are the same kinds of decisions being made across our state by individuals, families, businesses and organizations as they too confront a near-term future with substantially fewer financial resources, and a high degree of uncertainty.

I’m an optimist by nature…and as Winston Churchill said, “An optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”

So, I come before you today with a clear understanding of the enormity of what we face in the near term, but still enthusiastic about planning for our future together and optimistic about Hawai‘i in the 21st century.

Together we will meet both our near-term and long-term obligations by making those decisions necessary to navigate through the turbulence of the current fiscal crisis and achieve our preferred future.

That future includes energy independence, increased food self-sufficiency, and a 21st-century infrastructure that supports existing and emerging industries.

Our future also includes a well-cared for environment that increases recreational opportunities across the state.

We cannot afford to merely hunker down and muddle through the next year or two.

This is a time for us to work together to address the immediate reality, while searching for those opportunities that will enable us to emerge from this situation stronger than ever.

This dual effort will take patience and courage because there will be those who want to ignore reality and continue spending at current levels.

And others who only want to deal with our immediate revenue shortfall while deferring any talk of the future.

Either approach would leave us far short of meeting our duty to the people of Hawai‘i – a duty both to live within our means and position ourselves for a brighter future.

As we face this historic challenge, it is easy to forget how much success we have enjoyed in recent years.

I want to review the solid progress we have made in several areas, including home ownership and helping those most in need.

Since May of 2006 we have built nine new emergency shelters and transitional housing projects that provide safe and clean places to live for many who previously could only find a night’s rest in our parks, beaches, doorways or in their cars.

Nearly 2,800 people, including hundreds of children, have received not only safe shelter, but social services and an outpouring of community support to help them transition from homelessness to self-sufficiency.

It took many people to achieve so much in just two-and-a-half short years. I want to thank our entire community for embracing and helping those who had lost all hope.

In an attempt to address a completely different kind of housing need, we’re all aware of the success the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands has had.

They’ve awarded more land to their beneficiaries than at any time in the history of the trust, and we all enjoy seeing families who have waited for decades finally receiving their homesteads.

But there’s a much larger DHHL story that will be fully revealed in the years ahead.

It is the story of a native Hawaiian agency that has chosen to meet its fiduciary duty to its beneficiaries by leading in a way that benefits the larger community of Hawai‘i.

Whether it’s their pivotal role in the $110 million Kroc Center, development of the future DeBartolo regional mall, kick-starting the infrastructure UH West O‘ahu needed in order to move forward, or being the first state department to move its entire O‘ahu operation to the Second City of Kapolei, DHHL has chosen to lead.

We now look to them as an important and integral part of our economic recovery, and as an example of how to develop desirable communities.

They are even blazing their own trail in our state’s efforts to achieve energy independence and provide a clean energy future for the generations that will follow.

Few could have envisioned six years ago the heights to which DHHL and the Hawaiian Homes Commission would soar.

I believe their well-recognized success has been achieved partly because of how they contributed to the broader community.

DHHL is not just about building homes, it is about building great communities.

And they have succeeded because they have demanded more of themselves and their beneficiaries.

The bottom line is that they have chosen to lead, not follow…and what a joy it has been to watch their transformation and ongoing journey.

I want to personally thank the DHHL staff and those who have served on the Hawaiian Homes Commission for showing us all what great things can be achieved when you recognize we are all part of one ‘ohana.

An important part of that ‘ohana is Hawai‘i’s keiki, especially those who are most vulnerable.

Two remarkable trends have occurred in Hawai‘i’s child welfare system since 2005.

The first is a 50 percent decline in the number of children in state care, to just 1,500 children, which is the lowest number since 1993.

At the same time, Hawai‘i’s child re-abuse rate also dropped by half to just 3.1 percent, which is one of the lowest re-abuse rates in the United States.

These positive trends were the result of a fundamental shift in the state’s approach to child welfare.

The Department of Human Services previously removed children from the custody of their biological parents at a rate four times higher than the national average, with no improvement in safety outcomes.

Today, DHS, and its community partners, uses a comprehensive assessment system to carefully weigh the risk factors in a child’s family environment, and ensure that they receive much-needed social services.

Director Lillian Koller has received national recognition for these and other achievements.

In November of last year, Governing Magazine honored her as a “Public Official of the Year” for widespread improvements at the Department of Human Services, including the overhaul of the child welfare system.

This was the first time a public official from Hawai‘i has won this prestigious national award.

I know Lillian believes that this success would not have been possible without our many outstanding social service agency partners as well as her own committed staff. Mahalo to all of you.

No matter how noteworthy these and other achievements may be, recent reductions in revenue forecasts mean that they and other worthy programs will take a back seat to our more immediate need to balance the budget.

Today’s struggling economy has created a deep hole in our budget that we need to dig out of this session.

The Council on Revenues has never in its history lowered its projections by so much in such a short period of time.

Over the past eight months, the Council has reduced its general fund revenue projection by $1.4 billion.

This downward projection reflects an unprecedented decline in tourism, construction, business activity, and consumer demand brought about by national and international events beyond our control.

These events – including sub-prime lending, frozen credit markets and volatile oil and other commodity prices – will impact us for at least the next couple of years.

Climbing our way out of this hole won’t be easy.

It won’t be quick.

It won’t be without pain; but it will be done.

The pain that will be felt by individuals and organizations both in and out of government will cause some to search for a specific reason or person to blame.

When a recently retired couple watches the value of its 401K drop dramatically…or a family struggles to make the mortgage payment now that their work hours have been cut back…or a social service agency faces the need to lay off employees because the government reduces the purchase of a service contract they were counting on…it is natural to want to understand why this is happening, and to hold someone accountable.

But we must refrain from playing the blame game because we know this downturn was not caused by any of us.

And we know we had been making good decisions in recent years to create a brighter future for Hawai‘i’s people by lowering taxes, increasing science and math education, moving toward energy independence, and preserving more of our natural and cultural resources.

We also know that we are all in this together, and it is only by sticking together that we will be able to deal effectively with the immediate fiscal crisis and strengthen our economy in the long run.

We will need a mixture of courage, compassion, and collaboration to cope with the unprecedented budget gap we face.

Collaboration doesn’t mean we will see all issues the same way, it means that for the sake of Hawai‘i’s future, we must acknowledge our predicament and find an acceptable way to move ourselves forward.

In order to do this, we must start by accepting the fact that in this new economic and fiscal environment, there is simply no possible way to continue operating and spending the way we have.

Although I am extremely optimistic about Hawai‘i’s long-term prospects, I am not going to sugarcoat the immediate challenge we face.

In order to maintain the public’s confidence and trust, we must be open and honest about the nature and magnitude of what we are facing.

The reality is that we will have to make some unpopular choices that will reduce some services and cause others to be delivered in a different way.

Not because we want to, but because we can’t afford business as usual.

A number of projects will likely be delayed, curtailed, or possibly eliminated.

Not because we want to, but because we can’t afford business as usual.

We will have to ask government employees, like those who work in the private sector, to accept some reduction in wages and benefits.

Not because we want to, but because we can’t afford business as usual.

Some who currently enjoy special tax credits, exemptions and deductions will see them reduced or eliminated.

Not because we want to, but because we can’t afford business as usual.

This is a time of shared sacrifice when everyone must be willing to give up something.

This is a time when we must rely on each other, because no one is coming to rescue us.

We must also keep in mind that the economy will likely continue to soften in the near-term, perhaps causing the Council on Revenues to further reduce projections at its March meeting and then again in May after the budget is adopted.

We are not alone in facing this new reality and near-term uncertainty.

Families and businesses across the country and throughout our state have had to come to terms with this same situation.

But we should also recognize that the difficulty we face is temporary.

Our nation will regain its economic footing, and so will Hawai‘i.

How fast we recover here at home will depend to some degree on the decisions we make during this session.

Our solutions need to be decisive enough to address our immediate situation, but just as important, must prepare the way for our future.

Short-term solutions that merely defer the hard choices to those who will follow us are just as bad as no solutions at all.

We can’t meet our responsibility by kicking the can down the road.

We must make meaningful choices now that address the reality we face today while laying the foundation for a better future.

That better future is one that transitions us from an economy over-reliant on land development to one that is innovation-driven and relies on the capacity of our people.

A key area where we must bring innovation to bear is ending our over-reliance on imported foreign oil.

Oil pollutes the environment, it sucks billions of dollars out of our economy, and leaves us dependent on the goodwill of foreign countries and companies for our very survival.

We remain today the most oil-dependent state in America, but we have made great strides over the past few years.

Today windmills hum atop Kaheawa Ridge on Maui delivering clean, plentiful power and displacing the need to import 220,000 barrels of foreign oil each year.

On Lana‘i, a 10-acre solar farm now provides 30 percent of the island’s peak power needs.

A geothermal project on the Big Island that currently provides power for 30,000 homes is in discussions to increase its output by 50 percent.

And on O‘ahu, engineers are already figuring out where we will be plugging in the electric cars coming to dealer showrooms in the near future.

Last year we entered into a unique partnership with the federal Department of Energy called the Hawai‘i Clean Energy Initiative or HCEI.

It established the goal of a 70 percent clean energy economy by 2030.

HCEI experts from government, national labs, our military, utilities, universities and the private sector have recommended specific actions to achieve the 70 percent clean energy goal through indigenous renewable resources and energy conservation.

My administration and legislators will introduce several bills based on these HCEI recommendations.

These changes will significantly increase energy efficiency in our commercial buildings and residences, give consumers more control over their energy costs, transition us to alternative fuel vehicles, such as electric cars, and ban new fossil fuel power plants in Hawai‘i.

When adopted, these proposals will form the basis for Hawai‘i’s transformation to one of the world’s first economies based primarily on clean energy.

Implementing these policy changes will require a large measure of collaboration as we will need public funding, assistance from county governments, conservation by citizens, and investment by the business community.

To successfully transition to a clean energy economy, we will need the involvement of our entire community, alignment of our efforts, and a continual focus on our objectives.

I expect there will be a fair amount of spirited debate about the specific energy choices we should make, but if we recognize that we cannot go back to where we were, then I believe the choices are clear.

We can either work together toward a clean energy future or continue to operate in a business-as-usual fashion that will leave Hawai‘i vulnerable to the vagaries of world oil prices and the whims of foreign countries and companies.

As the world’s most isolated set of islands and our nation’s most oil-dependent state, a clean energy future is no longer simply a desire of environmentalists, it is an absolute necessity for our long-term economic survival.

This energy transformation is something we owe to future generations, and something they have a right to expect.

They have a right to expect energy security.

They have the right to expect stable and lower energy costs, and a cleaner environment.

They have the right to expect higher-paying, green-collar jobs that come with a thriving new energy sector.

And they have the right to expect us to stop sending up to $7 billion a year out of Hawai‘i to buy foreign oil, instead of keeping most of it here at home, to circulate in our economy.

Over the past 12 months, remarkable progress has been made toward achieving a secure energy future for our state, and we are being hailed as a national model because of our effort.

We must remain steadfast in our pursuit of energy independence and security, regardless of fluctuating oil prices.

Another area in which we must decrease our over-reliance on outside sources of supply is the food we eat.

We import 85 percent of everything we consume.

We need to take action now to increase Hawai‘i’s food self-sufficiency and strengthen and preserve agriculture for future generations as required by our State Constitution.

We must increase our efforts to protect the best agricultural lands from development.

And, we must strengthen our commitment to provide affordable water for agriculture.

Increasing our food self-sufficiency will contribute to the state’s economic recovery by keeping more of our money here at home.

If we replace just 10 percent of the food we currently import, it would create more than $300 million in economic activity, generate $6 million in taxes, and create 2,300 new jobs.

I will be asking state agencies such as schools, prisons and hospitals to take the lead by purchasing locally grown fruits, vegetables, poultry, eggs and meat.

Under new rules, Hawai‘i farmers will receive a 15 percent price preference when placing their bids for state purchases.

If we each make an effort to buy more locally produced food we will be contributing to our economic recovery, helping Hawai‘i farmers lower their unit costs, and protecting our open spaces.

Agriculture keeps Hawai‘i green, it recharges our aquifers and promotes a healthy lifestyle and good nutrition for families.

It also diversifies our economy and supports small businesses and rural communities.

Another requirement for a strong and innovative economy is an advanced communications infrastructure that will serve as the backbone for connecting us to the global economy.

This 21st century infrastructure is essential to creating the kind of high-paying jobs we are striving for in the coming years.

The communications infrastructure we have in place today barely meets our current needs.

We need to be planning for tomorrow’s needs.

We shouldn’t be limited in our thinking to believe that what we have in place today is acceptable.

We need to dream about tomorrow, and begin now to lay the groundwork for getting there.

We need a communications infrastructure that will allow us to achieve competitive advancements in the areas of: education, health care diagnosis and treatment, public safety, research and innovation, civic participation, creative media, e-government, and the foundation for overall economic development.

We have been working with the Legislature’s Broadband Task Force to craft a bill that recognizes the convergence of technologies that are used to provide voice, data and video services through wireline, wireless, cable and satellite communication.

The bill consolidates regulation and advocacy of communication services under one agency, a new Hawai‘i Communications Commission, in order to make attainable the latest communications services at the earliest possible time.

The Commission will not increase the size of government.

It will be funded from existing fees, and will focus on achieving specific goals, including: creating broadband access on a competitive basis at reduced prices…streamlining the permitting process…and providing access to businesses and residents by 2012 at prices and speeds that will make us a world leader and a place that will attract investment, while empowering our residents with enhanced communications capability.

This exciting, high-tech proposal couldn’t have moved forward without the hard work over the last two years of the Broadband Task Force, and I applaud the Legislature for the foresight shown in establishing it.

Although I have been discussing ideas that will position us well for the future, I think you would agree that the problem that bothers residents the most today is the everyday annoyance of sitting in traffic.

Sitting in a seemingly endless line of cars, burning expensive fuel, missing an appointment or your child’s soccer game, is not the way any of us want to spend our time.

The status quo has become intolerable, so we have joined with legislators in proposing a six-year, multi-island, Highways Modernization Plan to address known traffic problems with proven solutions.

This plan is intended to save lives…save time…and save money.

The program combines road building, highway and bridge safety improvements, anti-congestion traffic management, and a pavement maintenance program, in addition to safety legislation and increased public outreach and education.

The bulk of the near-term projects will be started using existing funds and anticipated federal fiscal stimulus funding.

The longer-term projects will be paid for by increases in highway-related taxes and fees that would be triggered at a future date if steady job growth indicates that our economy is growing again.

In other words, we will have a plan in place that is ready to go to construction when our economic situation improves. This innovative recommendation to tie future increases to measurable economic results in order to address a long-festering problem is the kind of creative approach being used by departments and agencies throughout government.

I have challenged every one of our departments to find new and creative ways to improve our quality of life in these tough economic and fiscal times.

The Department of Land and Natural Resources has risen to this challenge, and developed a comprehensive proposal to renew our state parks, small boat harbors and trails as well as the very way we care for these precious places – a true “Recreational Renaissance” that will benefit all residents and visitors.

The heart of the plan is $240 million in capital improvements over five years for both land- and ocean-based recreation.

The Department will fund this innovative plan by dedicating rents from some existing commercial properties to pay debt service, and developing now-vacant industrial and commercial lands that will fulfill the high demand for light industrial spaces in areas suitable for those uses.

Additional funding to support maintenance and operations will be generated from leases and concessions in parks and harbors combined with a small entry fee paid by visitors at a limited number of high-destination parks.

The plan’s final piece is the development of new land and ocean recreational opportunities through a public-private partnership to develop the long-proposed Ke‘ehi Lagoon Triangle adjacent to Lagoon Drive in Honolulu.

This centerpiece initiative will include 119 acres of light industrial space as a long-term source of revenue, coupled with new marina slips, canoe club storage and practice areas, boat ramps, storage and dry docks, beach parks and picnic areas.

I want to thank the staff at DLNR, DBEDT and Budget and Finance who developed this creative and comprehensive proposal which creates brand new, non-tax revenues and a better way of managing and caring for our recreational, natural and cultural resources.

It’s sure not business as usual at DLNR!

Working together, we can set the stage for this long-overdue “Recreational Renaissance” that will provide residents and visitors across our state with new and better recreational areas that are well-maintained, secure and enriching.

I am especially enthused about working with the Legislature on this and other proposals as a colleague rather than an adversary.

I will do more than reach across the aisle; I will walk across the aisle, and my door will always be wide open to you.

Our collaboration will demonstrate to the people of Hawai‘i that when history called on us to do so, we rose to the occasion.

I firmly believe that only by working together can we produce the kind of significant results that will enable us to exit this temporary downturn, and to position our economy for a stronger and more sustainable future.

Before concluding I want to take a moment to speak about the case pending before the United States Supreme Court involving the issue of ceded lands.

The issue involved in this case is not whether ceded lands should or should not be sold.

Rather the issue involves the fundamental question of whether the State of Hawai‘i has clear title to the land transferred to us by the federal government at the time of statehood.

The roots of this case date back to a decision made by former Governor Waihe‘e in the 1980s to sell certain ceded lands on Maui and Hawai‘i for the construction of affordable housing.

It was a decision he believed was in the best interest of all the people of Hawai‘i.

It is a decision that former Governor Cayetano defended in court because he believed it was in the best interest of all the people of Hawai‘i to do so.

And it is a decision that we are appealing to the United States Supreme Court because I believe it is in the best interest of all the people of Hawai‘i.

Acting in the best interest of all the people is the same standard I applied when supporting the Akaka Bill, fighting to protect federal programs benefiting native Hawaiians, or expediting Hawaiian Homestead leases.

And I will continue to advocate for these issues in the coming years just as passionately as I have in years past.

I call upon all who cherish what is the essence of Hawai‘i to come together with a willingness to understand and respect the nature of this case and its importance to the future of our state.

Our current fiscal crisis and the ceded lands issue arise during the same year that we commemorate our 50th anniversary as a state.

It is a time when we can reflect on just how unique we are among the 50 states.

But it is more importantly a time to remind ourselves that regardless of the short-term decisions we must make in this moment of economic difficulty, we should remain firmly anchored on the sure footing of Hawai‘i’s rich culture, diverse heritage and sometimes complicated history.

Governors of Japanese, Hawaiian, and Filipino descent have delivered State of the State addresses at this very podium.

Hawai‘i elected the first Asian American to the United States Senate.

And, less than a week ago, Hawai‘i’s heart swelled with pride as one of its own, Barack Obama, became the first African American to take the presidential oath of office when he was sworn in as our nation’s 44th president.

We have so much to be proud of in our history, and so much to look forward to in the coming years.

We are indeed the most unique among all the 50 states, and we are certainly capable of meeting this current challenge.

In my heart, I know that if we work together to make these difficult budget decisions, the people of Hawai‘i will understand that these weren’t the decisions we wanted to make but that we had to make.

The people of Hawai‘i are counting on us to lead our state through this unprecedented time – and that is exactly what we are going to do.

When the curtain comes down on our time on this stage, I want our collective legacy to win reviews as a story of pulling together for the good of all rather than being written off as a cast of characters who was each acting in their own one-man show.

If we deal decisively with the current crisis while keeping our eyes open to the opportunities that these kinds of challenging times create, then the people of Hawai‘i will conclude that we have lived up to our obligation.

Now, let’s get to work.

… and deferring the transit tax for a year or more to provide relief to Hawaii tax payers. Everything is on the table for debate and discussion.

~ Colleen Hanabusa, from Senate President speech (01/21/09)

Read the complete article in The Filipino Chronicle.

By Danny De Gracia

John F. Kennedy once observed that when written in Chinese, the word “crisis” is composed of two characters, one meaning danger, the other meaning opportunity.  As Filipinos begin the new year, crisis, danger, and opportunity abound.

According to the International Monetary Fund, the world is experiencing “the most dangerous shock” that financial markets have seen since the 1930s, and is on the verge of a global recession which, many believe, is inescapable despite frantic measures by governments and banking institutions alike to avert it. In the Philippines , the National Statistics Office reported last month that 2.5 million are now unemployed, an increase of 6.8 percent.  In the United States , the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicated in December that 91,000 jobs were lost in retail trade; 85,000 jobs were lost in manufacturing; 82,000 in construction; 76,000 in leisure and hospitality; 150,000 in accommodation and food services; and 101,000 in professional and business services. Filipinos were hit especially hard as the same report indicated that the number of Asian Americans without work has increased to 343,000.  In addition to a weakening economy, Filipinos are still faced with challenges in the areas of under representation in government, stagnation in upward social mobility, preserving a cultural identity in America , as well as security and safety concerns as the global War on Terror enters its eighth year.  Many Filipinos can’t help but wonder: are the best days ahead, or behind us?

The Economy

Abroad, numerous countries are implementing or considering the implementation of massive tax cuts to save their economies. In the Philippines, while only four years earlier national leaders were looking to increase taxes to procure higher revenues, today there are plans to cut the corporate income tax from 35% to 30% to help the private sector retain more employees, encourage investment, and in the words of Ralph Recto, Secretary of Socioeconomic Planning, make the Philippines “more competitive in the long term”.  In the People’s Republic of China – one of the last remaining bastions of communism after the Cold War ended nearly two decades ago – a tax cut amounting to $17.5 billion U.S. dollars (120 billion yuan) is likewise being considered for corporations.  Here at home, a growing number of individuals believe that our national and local leaders should follow the rest of the world and reduce taxes to help ameliorate our economic crisis.

“The macroeconomic model known as the Laffer Curve teaches us that there is an optimal point of taxation, beyond which people and businesses produce less, revenues fall, and economies cool,” said Sarah Hunt, host of the new local television talk show Better Government. “I believe that the [state legislature] should pay specific attention to this notion, seeing that we have some of the highest taxes in the country. We even place a tax on food and medicine! I think it resides in the interest of the people of Hawaii to pay more attention to what goes on at the State legislature and start holding their elected officials accountable. Somewhere down the line, legislators started reflecting their own self interests and not of that for which they represent.”

Jamie Story, president of the Grassroot Institute, an Oahu based public policy think tank, believes that low taxes is an important part of a healthy economy. “Members of the Filipino Caucus and all state legislators in general should work to repeal taxes and place a freeze on new spending in the 2009 legislative session,” Story commented: “ Taxpayers, small business owners, and families all need tax relief now more than ever.  Economic stimulis or bailout packages don’t remedy the poor economic situation, in fact they exacerbate it by increasing government debt and taxes, which take money from taxpayers when they need it most and cause the money we do have to lose value.”

Grassroot Institute, which conducted a simulation last year to determine the effects of the increase in Hawaii ’s General Excise Tax, or GET, released a policy brief in October 2008 in which it was projected that some 6,054 local jobs could be lost as a result in 2009.  By 2010, the same study suggests that there could be a decrease in private investment by $159 million, a decrease in personal income by $360 million, and a decrease in disposable income by $765 million all as a result of the 0.5% GET increase.

“Employers are forced to lay off workers because of decreased business and increased taxes, and families have fewer resources to spend on necessities like food and clothing,” Story noted. “Instead, members of the Filipino Caucus should take the lead by proposing tax relief along with cuts in wasteful spending – that will allow struggling families to keep more of their hard earned dollars in these difficult economic times.”

By Tom McAuliffe

HONOLULU, HAWAII — The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii (GRIH) has released a new study from the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University.

The Economic Impact of the Akaka Bill: Unintended Consequences for Hawaii estimates that the Akaka bill could cost the state up to $690 million per year in lost revenue.

The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 (S.310 and H.R.505) in the 110th Congress, also known as the Akaka Bill after sponsor Senator Daniel Akaka, proposes to create a sovereign Native Hawaiian Governing Entity (NHGE) within the state of Hawaii. This is the first study on the economic impacts of the proposed bill, which is expected to be re-introduced in the new session of Congress.

The Economic Impact of the Akaka Bill: Unintended Consequences for Hawaii is a straightforward look at how passage of the bill would hurt Hawaii business while pitting neighbor against neighbor,” said Grassroot Institute President Jamie Story. “Regardless of one’s feelings about the Akaka Bill and its benefits or shortcomings, it is vital to examine the economic impact of the bill on Hawaii’s people. This study demonstrates the irreversible economic damage the Akaka Bill would do to Hawaii, and we hope Washington DC officials will take this into consideration.”

Among the study’s findings:

• The bill could exempt Native Hawaiians living or shopping on land ceded from the state from paying state income and sales taxes.

• There may be a transfer of state-owned lands to persons designated as native Hawaiians to the detriment of non-Native Hawaiian taxpayers and, correspondingly, to the state economy. The resulting tax increases would have large, negative impacts on the state’s economy leading to a possible reduction of 20,793 private sector jobs, a loss of $417.2 million in investment and a loss of $1,461 in real per-capita disposable personal income annually.

“We’ve looked at the bill, as introduced in the last session of Congress, from many different angles and have provided an objective in-depth analysis of what the economic impacts might be on Hawaii and its citizens,” said Dr. David Tuerck, Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute and co-author of the study. “In The Economic Impact of the Akaka Bill: Unintended Consequences for Hawaii we’ve identified the most likely effects of the Akaka Bill on the Hawaiian economy. By almost any plausible interpretation of the bill, those effects are uniformly negative,” adds Paul Bachman, Director of Research at Beacon Hill.

The new The Economic Impact of the Akaka Bill: Unintended Consequences for Hawaii study is available free of charge at the Grassroot Institute web site. Please visit: http://www.grassrootinstitute.org/studies for more information.

Tom McAuliffe is the communications director for the GRIH. The mission of the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii is to promote individual liberty, free market economic principles and limited, more accountable government.

The Beacon Hill Institute engages in rigorous economic research producing readable analyses of current public policy issues for voters, taxpayers, opinion leaders and policy makers. Please also visit: http://www.beaconhill.org for more information on that organization.

By George L. Berish

Perhaps Hawaii Transit Tax to Plummet [12/30] will force economic rationality on Hawaii’s office holders whose only response to all problems is “more debt”. In good times to leverage good intentions: In bad times to “fix” the economy.

It may also cause voters to back out of the trees — the choices itemized in Honolulu Rail Enters Defining Year [1/3/09] – so they can see the forest – Hawaii can’t afford Rail.

Why? For starters, during the Administration’s “vibrant” economy, Hawaii added a couple billions to general obligation debt, and from 2000 to June 2007 it added $5 Billion to the Government Retirement System’s underfunding (certainly several Billions higher today).

And bond raters have already “taken notice” by recommending “investors … bet against debt issued by … Hawai’i” [Business Briefs12/11/08], so a bond rating cut looms.

Just add up the Mayor’s facts:  Rail’s cost is $5.2 Billion;  A federal bureaucrat “hopes” Hawaii will get $1.2 Billion from the federal government (that just spent multiple Trillions it doesn’t have?);  Rail’s ticket sales will pay less than half of its operating costs;  Rails useful life is about 15 years, so repaying the $4 Billion net cost in that time at 4% will cost about $30 million per month – more with a bond rating cut;  But the transit tax that only produced $16 Million per month in “vibrant” 2007 and  has since plummeted to $13 Million.

So before the trees (details) distract us from the real question: Mayor Hannemann, who pays, and how, for $14 - $17 Million per month debt repayment shortfall, and the more millions of ticket sale shortfall?

By Panos Prevedouros

This second part provides excerpts from the last 12 commentators and our brief conclusions.

12. Ed Wytkind, President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
“Transit investment will relieve road congestion and offer environmentally sound transportation alternatives to increase economic efficiency and global competitiveness.” Sad to see that unions simply copy-paste boilerplate half truths.

13. Steve Van Beek, President & CEO, Eno Transportation Foundation
“Input straight-line assumptions about behavior today and out will come results which suggest public transportation will play a marginal role in the future. (Such an analysis when the Model T was invented would have led to a future replete with horses and buggies and with underbuilt road networks.)” Unfortunately Mr. Van Beek not looked into Bureau of Transportation Statistics showing that public transit share of trips is very small and diminishing, and that the increasing share of telecommuting begins to dwarf rail transit.

14. John D. Porcari, Secretary, Maryland Department of Transportation
“We have to start by leveling the playing field. While we get highway funds by formula, states and metro areas fight for transit monies primarily through earmarks, and the race to the bottom known as the New Starts program. End the false dichotomy between highway and transit funding by making system preservation needs the first call on federal dollars (whether highways and bridges, transit, aviation or port needs) and then using local, regional and state land use plans to drive new capacity (transit or highway) investment decisions with the remaining unified federal formula dollars.” Highways, bridges, airports and harbors generate their own revenues from user fees and are rarely subsidized by taxpayers. Electricity, telephone, water and sewer services break even and can be profitable. Where is the revenue stream for rail and bus? It is remarkable that people who charge one dollar for a trip that costs over ten dollars are in leading and expert prositions.

15. Greg Cohen, President and CEO, American Highway Users Alliance
“The current funding arrangements are set up so that federal highway user fees subsidize transit expenses — thus creating the unfortunate reality that transit does compete for funding at the expense of highway programs. It is important for policy makers and the public to recognize that (excluding air travel) between 98 and 99% of all passenger miles and vehicles miles of travel occur of our nation’s aging roads. Both private auto use and efficient public transit use in most areas is largely dependent on a good network of safe and efficient roads.”

16. Robert L. Crandall, Retired Chairman and CEO, AMR and American Airlines
“In the furor over finding ways to increase and sustain employment, and the understandable desire to use infrasturcture investment to attach that problem, we need to remember that money invested in the wrong tools is the equivalent of money wasted. Bob Poole’s thoughts on how to use buses and rapid transit lanes strike me as worth very careful thought.”

17. Bob Poole, Director of Transportation Studies, Reason Foundation
“For the 22 Metropolitan Planning Organizations whose long-range plans were reviewed, transit spending averages 41% of the total, while transit’s projected mode share is just 5.5%. Something is wrong with this picture. First, MPOs project only modest increases in transit’s mode share by 2030, despite devoting more than 40% (on average) of all transportation dollars to transit. Second, they project that traffic congestion in 2030 will be significantly worse than it is today. There is a direct connection between under-funding the highway infrastructure that buses, car-poolers, and individual motorists depend on and continued increases in congestion. The key is to use congestion pricing for these express lanes. More than a decade of experience with HOT lane projects in half a dozen states has demonstrated the power of congestion pricing to provide reliable, high-speed, uncongested traffic flow on such lanes. Transit agencies would love to have exclusive busways, but a congestion-priced lane is, in fact, the virtual equivalent of an exclusive bus lane. The pricing simply allows enough paying automobiles to share the use of the lane, without degrading its uncongested performance.”

18. Geoff Anderson, Co-chair of the Transportation for America Campaign, President and CEO of Smart Growth America
“There is an undeniable linkage between our broken economy, our broken energy/climate policy, and our broken transportation system. Investing in a 21st Century transportation system with an emphasis on mass transit solutions – while creating safe streets for walking and biking to with them — is a three for one deal: it kick starts our economy and generates jobs, gives hungry Americans transportation options, and begins to solve our climate crisis.” Pure “smart growth” nonsense. There is no significant link between broken economy, walkable streets, bikeways and the ozone layer. You can, however, wordsmith good looking paragraphs and drive up the deficits in the absence of cost-effectiveness and accountability.

19. Deron Lovaas , Federal Transportation Policy Director, Natural Resources Defense Council
“The short answer is that yes, the time is ripe for making a larger commitment to public transportation than has been the case in the last 50 years.” Why? Spending 20% of the transportation budget in the last 20 years on transit systems that carry 5% of the public has not been bad enough?

20. Paul M. Weyrich, Chairman and CEO, Free Congress Foundation
“I have my doubts about the effectiveness of stimulus bills, but since it is clear President elect Obama is intent on advocating one,I certainly hope the Congress will include $8 billion of American Public Transportation Association short-term transit projects in whatever bill they come up with.” This is $8 billion nationwide. Relatively tiny Honolulu would like to build a $5 billion rail … pretty please Mr. Obama.

21.Robert Puentes, Senior Fellow and Director, Metropolitan Infrastructure Initiative
“Although almost all of our buses serve the top 100 metro areas but half are concentrated in just 10 large metros. Heavy rail (subways) exist in only 11 metros like Philly and San Francisco. Commuter rail is in only 14 metropolitan areas – primarily in the Northeast and California. And light rail can be found in only 26 – like Minneapolis, San Diego, and Denver. Based on the admittedly simple inventory of transit infrastructure available, 54 of the 100 largest metros do not have any rail transit service and also have relatively weak bus systems. As employment has dispersed through metro areas, lower income workers are finding themselves increasingly isolated and therefore need to spend higher proportions of their income to reach their jobs.” So how can a single rail line with 20 stations help them? Did I mention that it costs $5 billion?

22. Rich Sarles, Executive Director, NJ TRANSIT
“At NJ TRANSIT, we have experienced five consecutive years of record-high ridership with nearly one million trips taken on the system each weekday. Ridership continues to be strong, despite lower gasoline prices, especially on rail service on our busiest lines serving Manhattan. In the next 25 years, we expect ridership on these lines to more than double, creating new challenges to acquire the infrastructure (station capacity, track, rail yards, etc.), rolling stock (rail cars and locomotives) and resources needed to support this demand.” This is really where the nation should be spending its transit monies.

23. Pete Ruane, President and CEO, American Road & Transportation Builders Association
“According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT), there is $20 billion annual shortfall at the federal level between current highway investment levels and what is necessary just to maintain road conditions. For public transit at the federal level, the shortfall is about $4 billion annually.” It is too obvious that priority one is maintenance and restoration of what we have, and cautious investment in new priced roadway capacity including exclusive busways and exclusive truckways.

To answer the original question in the subject line: All cases of rail transit in the U.S. excluding Chicago, New York City, and a few other legacy systems have been hyper expensive dinosaur resuscitations at taxpayer expense.

It would be a remarkably poor and expensive choice of President Obama to sink taxpayer dollars in rail transit New Starts. We can barely afford to keep the CTA, MARTA, BART and other metro rail systems alive. Let’s please leave all future dinosaur resuscitations to the movies.

By Panos Prevedouros

The title is paraphrasing a 1983 paper title by Dr. Joseph Schofer, Associate Dean, College of Engineering, Northwestern University. I think it is a more appropriate title than the biased question “Has Mass Transit Finally Arrived?” posed in the NationalJournal.com’s transportation expert panel discussion.

Of course the majority of the 23 commentators answer that the time for transit has come (as it did in all previous oil/global economy crises.) We know that the results were poor from most of those deployments. But learning from history is not a priority in modern society.

If you have about an hour, do read the original text which includes a handful of well thought out positions and concerns.
If not, here are some highlights from each commentator. This part provides excerpts from the first 11 commentators.

1. Eric Britton, Managing Director, New Mobility Partnerships
“Before rushing out to pour many billions of dollars into mass transit, we will do well to recognize that as a phrase, it is a relic of another day, another way of thinking about cities. And indeed another way of thinking about people (mass?).

Here is what we can counsel with confidence to the incoming Obama team about “mass transit” and its appropriate role for the critical 2009-2012 period.

If you have it already in place, your main challenge is to get a lot better at using what you have in a cost-effective manner.

If you do not have it, forget about using scarce taxpayer dollars to build yourself a new one from scratch, because there are far better ways of getting the job done.”

2. Nancy LeaMond, AARP’s executive vice president of social impact
“To leave their cars behind, boomers will require the same level of convenience as they have had in their car-centered world.

A coordinated strategy of public transportation, paratransit, coordinated human services transportation, transit-oriented development, and “complete streets” sidewalk networks accessible to transit, can yield a multitude of benefits for people of all ages.

…making stops and vehicles more accessible and user friendly, helping newcomers understand how and where to access schedules and their closest transit with easy to use information, training drivers to understand and pleasantly accommodate the limitations of aging and in some areas offering neighborhood circulators or door-to-door service to grocery stores or shopping malls.”

3. Robin Chase, CEO, GoLoco, Meadow Networks
“If we think back to Katrina, the lack of alternatives for people without cars to evacuate the New Orleans proved disastrous. Some policy experts claimed that the solution was to make sure the poor and carless had access to cars. A few weeks later, another hurricane demanded that Houston evacuate. The highways were backed up and people sat motionless in their cars for hours. Today, as I write this note, a huge snow storm is bearing down on Boston. Planes are canceled and roads will be dangerous. My homeward-bound college age son is stuck in Washington DC.

My point is not that we should build trains and transit to accommodate one-day freak storms, just as I do not advocate building parking lots to accommodate Black Friday shopping demand. But real diversity and redundancy in transportation systems is mandatory. This nation needs to accommodate the transportation needs of people of all incomes, of all ages, of all development densities. The last 50 years of supporting one mode — cars — to exclusion of others, has not served us well. It is time to right the balance.”

Somebody needs to tell her that a few days after hurricane Ike hit Houston, all systems were up and running except for its rail that took two and a half weeks.

4. Michael A. Replogle, Transportation Director, Environmental Defense Fund
“Established rail systems need to be revitalized. But pouring money into poorly conceived transit projects will not make transit a viable alternative for the majority of Americans living in auto-dependent suburban areas.

The most cost-effective way to expand high performance mass rapid transit is Bus Rapid Transit, or BRT. … And BRT can be used like rail to anchor transit-oriented development. … A big advantage of BRT is that the bus can go anywhere. The same bus can operate in mixed traffic where there is no congestion, enter a busway in a congested area, and then leave the busway again.

Performance-based transportation investment plans should be required as a condition for funding, including operational plans for both highways and public transportation.”

5. Bill Graves, President and CEO, American Trucking Association
“Although mass transit performs many important uses, particularly for certain niche communities in large urban areas, it cannot replace our nation’s need for good highways. While mass transit effectively moves people, infrastructure investment is critical to the safe and efficient movement of freight.”

6. Judith Bergquist, Associate Director of Rural Programs in the Denver office of the Colorado Center for Community Development
“Sometimes we look past some simple and very viable alternatives to multi – modal transit for bigger glitzy solutions: We should look at road and bus systems that could effectively be started today and get buses to run every 10 minutes from suburb to suburb and suburb to work centers and downtowns. We need the buses to run often with lots of quick stops to increase this ridership before other transit is even in place. We will lose the cars because there will be ease of access.”

7. Paul Yarossi, President, HNTB Holdings Ltd.
“Public transit supporters definitely have the clout to influence the next transportation bill. In no way will this effort to fund more public transit projects replace the much needed investment in maintaining and expanding our national highway system.”

Solid advice for worsening the already huge budget deficits (to the benefit of mega contractors.)

8. Christopher B. Leinberger, Real estate developer, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution, Professor and Director of the University of Michigan graduate real estate program
“Why rail transit? Middle class Americans like it far better than bus transit. In addition, real estate developers and investors have increased confidence in it since rail transit implies permanence; it is easy to change a bus route but not so with fixed rail. The combination of middle class preference and the permanence of rail transit have resulted in far more real estate development being sparked around rail stations than bus stops.”

Great paragraph but there is little proof that any of this is true. Most US cities developed quite well in the complete absence of rail.

9. Emil H. Frankel, Director of Transportation Policy, Bipartisan Policy Center
“How can transportation best serve national goals and purposes like economic growth, environmental and energy sustainability, national connectivity, metropolitan accessibility, and safety?

Before we allocate funding - whether to give transit or highways more money - let’s ensure that we have a performance-based approach that can help us identify and prioritize programs that achieve national goals.”

10. Frank Busalacchi, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Transportation
“The current transit programs send much of the funding to mass transit systems in our largest metropolitan areas. Our metropolitan areas rely on mass transit to provide a needed mobility option for those who don’t want to use their cars or don’t have cars to use. However, in many parts of the country bus fleets are old, far beyond the time frame in which they should have been replaced.”

11. Tim Kaine, Governor, Commonwealth of Virginia
“Transit and rail investments are expensive up front and even more so when operation and maintenance costs are factored in over time. These long term financial commitments only make sense if there are different land use patterns to take advantage of the transit and rail investments.

Increased funding should not come at the expense of other modes, particularly given the dire need to repair and replace our existing bridges across the country.”

==========

A few common themes emerge from these diverse opinions:

* Need to maintain what infrastructure we have and expand it.
* Look into buses, BRT and other affordable solutions first.
* Performance-based decision making and accountability for infrastructure projects.

The latter means that a systematic way is used to look at urban transportation problems and address the issues in a cost-effective away.

This is the opposite of what occurred in Honolulu where a politician was elected in 2004 and made rail the number one priority: Total top-down dictum. The lack of accountability is obvious in that there is no accounting of $107 million spent on rail studies and the shameless use of taxpayer money to defame those opposing the system and produce an avalanche of TV, radio, newspaper and home-mailed ads and fliers.

By Panos Prevedouros

As you know, I strongly oppose the proposed rail for Oahu. The proposed city charter amendment for rail that obtained 50.6% of the yes vote is a recommendation not a demand upon elected officials. It was obtained after a multimillion dollar misinformation campaign at taxpayer expense. The rail project exemplifies the most wasteful and irresponsible use of taxpayer monies.It is very important to send a letter to the City for the rail Draft EIS. The letters must be post marked February 6, 2009.

No matter how brief, they will need to read and respond to it. And we need to make them aware of our concerns. Let your friends know about this.

Some guidance is here: “Read the Rail Study and Comment so City Can Design the Best System

Your letter does not have to be negative. You can declare support if you support rail but ask for clarifications and raise concerns. If you know journalists here or on the mainland, let them know of your concerns too.

Of course too many things are going on during the holidays. (They count on it!) Please don’t drop this ball

Aloha and Best Wishes for the Holidays!

By Russell McGuire

If Hawaii plans on enacting a new federal ID (REAL ID) program, expect to stand in more lines to get a new federally approved ID before you travel. Sen. Daniel Inouye claims the new federal ID card is to help combat terrorism. Unfortunately, this new documentation does more to monitor US citizens than to combat terrorism.

Well-funded criminals will continue to get documents forged and this legislation will negatively affect law abiding citizens since these new IDs will be required to board an airline to leave the island. More importantly, while the federal government is providing nearly $756,000 for the implementation of the program here in Hawaii, the remainder of the costs will be footed by Hawaii taxpayers.

Hawaii’s elected officials have already passed a resolution opposing the REAL ID (In 2007, S. C. R. No. 31 S.D. 1), but ultimately the power of non-compliance lies with Governor Lingle. Hawaii’s legislators have already rejected the REAL ID because of the enormous burden on consumers and taxpayers, infringement of civil liberties, and infringement of privacy rights.

The Governor should stand beside her legislators and reject the REAL ID. Hawaii can do better.

Russell McGuire is a Kaimuki resident and is the new State Coordinator for the Hawaii Republican Liberty Caucus.

Derek DePledge wrote this article in the Honolulu Advertiser on the latest local developments in gubernatorial campaign fund-raising.

Observers have speculated that the national donor restriction was passed by lawmakers to limit Lingle’s coffers in 2006.  Now that 2010 is shaping up to be competitive primary and general elections legal manipulations that further jerk around the election process would come as no surprise.  If the restriction is lifted a nationally connected potential gubernatorial candidate like democratic Congressman Neil Abercrombie could tap into his big national special interest donors and Barack Obama connections to overcome his severe unattractive image disadvantage to possible opponents Ed Case, Colleen Hanabusa and Duke Aiona.

By Kenli Schoolland

Article originally published in Hawaii Reporter on 11/28/07.

Isn’t it rather pathetic that a majority (56 percent) of 8th grade Hawaii students have “below basic” knowledge of Science? Mathematics and Reading are only slightly better, with more than 40 percent of Hawaii students in the “below basic” knowledge category in those subjects.

These are abysmal results, and one wonders who is at fault. Hawaii consistently ranks in the lowest five states in the nation for the quality of education. How can this be when the government in 2002-2003 was spending $1,489,092,000 on education? Where does this money come from? Why from the taxpayers, of course! The National Education Association, or NEA, conducted a study of the individual states and found that with a 2 percent increase in government spending on education, the results of the increased consumption tax would decrease the number of jobs in Hawaii by at least 500.

The NEA concluded that:

Tax revenues are simply being taken out of the economy and not being respent. As would be expected, an increase in taxes affects jobs negatively in all states and in all years. This negative effect on jobs increases over time, as businesses and individuals continue to make location decisions favoring areas offering greater opportunities.

The people being affected by such a poor education system and decreased number of jobs are primarily those with lower incomes. Also, those who can afford to send their children to private schools still have to help pay for the miserable public school system as well, even when they aren’t using it. Is that fair? I don’t think so.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least 15 percent of the students in Hawaii attend private schools; which is one of the highest proportions in the nation. This is no wonder considering how poor the government school system is on the islands.

The government spent an average of $8,100 per student in 2002-2003 (most likely that amount has grown in recent years). That is sufficient for tuition in quite a few private schools in Hawaii. For example, according to a recent article on private school tuition costs in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, $8,100 could cover the tuition for Sacred Hearts and Damien. Undoubtedly the quality of education in those schools are much higher than in government institutions.

Wouldn’t it be best for people to keep that money that the government spends for them and choose their own schools? If the government still wanted to make sure that education was compulsory for all minors then they could return the money to the rightful owners in the form of vouchers. These vouchers would go toward tuition for private schools, and then the government would no longer need to waste money on its failing school system.

The voucher system would help the education of Hawaii’s students tremendously. One article in the Hawaii Reporter talks about the possibility of the voucher system:

Eight studies on the benefits of these choice initiatives find significant academic benefits for students using the programs to attend private schools… Charter schools in Hawaii are saving taxpayers about $34 million per year in per pupil costs, because the state funds charter students at only half of traditional public school students. Miraculously, charter school students still outperform traditional public school students, despite operating on a shoestring budget.

Hawaii’s charter school success only hints at the heights to which student achievement could soar if a wide range of choices were available to parents — including public, private and home schooling — through tax-credits, vouchers and scholarships.

Milton Friedman was a highly revered economist and a Nobel Prize winner for economics. He was wise in his advice about moving away from government schools to private schools. A voucher system is one way to achieve that, but definitely not the only way. If the government really wants to help the children of Hawaii, then that is the best first step.

By Bobbie Slater

First, thank you to everyone who helped the initiative effort. Being on the ballot gave us good visibility with the press, and made 140,000 people aware of the fact that they don’t want rail transit. What a huge success!

A month had passed since the election, and there is much happening on the rail transit front.

Several important local organizations are making their voices heard loud and clear:

·         Na Leo Pohai, the public policy affiliate of The Outdoor Circle has done excellent research on the DEIS and the “concerns” they have raised should have everyone up in arms.

* Hawaii’s 1,000 Friends is equally upset, and has written a very forceful critique of the project.
* The Hawaii chapter of the American Institute of Architects is in opposition to the elevated structure downtown and has done an eloquent and well thought out paper on their concerns
* The League of women Voters has voiced their opposition to this project from the start.

All of these organizations are in favor of public transportation, but given this particular rail transit project, with its huge cost and unparalleled environmental blight, have felt compelled to speak out.

Honolulutraffic.com, which has always been the research arm of the stop rail initiative will continue to be the “mother ship” of the movement with the aim of continually educating the public on the most important public works issue in our history, and what the real solutions are.

Currently, we are working on a detailed response to the Federal Transit Administration on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. It is very important that you all prepare statements to them as well.

This is truly a grassroots effort of real people, as we saw in yesterday’s morning Advertiser. Go Rail Go and the other pro rail groups all received their money from big developers including Infraconsult and Parsons Brinkerhoff. The donations to stoprailnow were all from individuals – concerned citizens like you.

We want to reach out to all of the 140,000 new supporters who voted against rail in the election in any way possible.

Starting within our group, ask everyone you know that voted against rail to do two things.

1.      Make sure that you and everyone you know who is opposed to rail are members of honolulutraffic.com. It’s easy. Just go to honolulutraffic.com, click on “who we are” and add your name to the many that are there. It is important as we go forward that we represent thousands of Honolulu citizens who realize that this boondoggle will unalterably ruin our Honolulu. All stoprailnow people should also be honolulutraffic.com members.

2.      Ask people to respond to the DEIS. They do NOT have to be versed in the document itself.

Merely ask people to write to the Federal Transit Administration and express whatever concerns they have. The huge issues of course are the elevated rail downtown and the visual blight that will result, and the environmental justice issue of the most regressive tax in the country used to fund the project.

These letters should be emailed or postmarked on or before January 7th and addressed to:

Mr. Wayne Y. Yoshioka

Department of Transportation Services

City and County of Honolulu

650 South King Street, 3rd Floor

Honolulu, HI 96813

808-768-8303

Email: wyoshioka@honolulu.gov

Mr. Ted Matley

FTA Region IX

201 Mission Street, Suite 1650

San Francisco, CA 94105

415-744-3133
Email: ted.matley@fta.dot.gov.

In addition, it would be most helpful if copies were sent to:

Governor Linda Lingle

Executive Chambers

Hawaii State Capitol

Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

Email: Governor.Lingle@hawaii.gov

City Council members:

http://www.co.honolulu.hi.us/council/ccl.htm

These letters don’t need to take much time. Ask people to speak from the heart. As always, we are available to answer questions any time.

Our very best wishes to everyone for this Holiday Season. We hope the New Year brings to you, and to our Honolulu, only the best.

By Kenny Lee

Governor Linda Lingle’s request for all departments to provide a budgetary reduction plan is causing heated debate among stakeholders in Hawaii’s public education system. As the Board of Education struggles to make $46 million in cuts on a $2.4 billion budget, it is an ideal time to review the money that has been spent and the results of this investment. The Department of Education Operating Budget has grown from $972 million in FY 99-00 to $2.4 billion in FY 08-09.1 The current proposed reduction of $46 million represents a mere 1.9% cut of the entire budget.

As funding has increased, enrollment has decreased. Public school enrollment peaked in ’97-’98 with over 189,000 students and since then has steadily declined (Figure 1). For the current school year, the DOE’s official enrollment figure is 177,871.2

This increase in funding and decrease in enrollment means that the DOE spends $13,782 per student per year. This rivals the tuition of all but the most expensive private schools in Hawaii.

Despite the significantly increased funding, Hawaii public schools lag national averages on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. The SAT is a widely accepted predictor of a student’s success in college. *

Hawaii’s scores are declining while the gap widens between Hawaii’s performance and US performance. In 2002, Hawaii public school students scored 65 points below the national average. Today, they score 88 points behind the rest of the country (Figure 2).3

Our public education system is not just failing to prepare our children for college. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, is the “gold standard” of educational testing for grades K-12. It is administered by the US Department of Education and serves as a common yardstick across all 50 states. Hawaii’s performance has consistently lagged behind national averages, most recently finishing second to last in 8th-grade mathematics and third from the bottom in reading.4

Hawaii’s performance is particularly alarming considering that many students in Hawaii do not even complete high school. Examining enrollment numbers by grade level, it becomes clear that more than one-third of children who enter the 9th grade do not receive a diploma four years later. The national statistics are clear on how education level affects income. A person without a high school diploma earns on average $19,915 per year. This compares to $29,448 per year for those with high school diplomas, and $54,689 per year for those with Bachelor’s degrees.6 With 5,000 students failing to graduate each year, Hawaii is losing $3.6 billion in lifetime earnings with each non-graduating class.7

When it comes to Hawaii’s public schools, it is clear that we have spent more and more and received less and less. In the late 1990’s, the Superintendent’s office pointed out repeatedly in its annual reports that the State of Hawaii did not devote a large enough percentage of its budget to education. At the time, the DOE received 14% of the state’s budget.8 Today, the DOE consumes 23% of the state’s annual funds, receiving almost $500 million more than any other department.9

Taxpayers have fed the public education system well over the last 10 years. The problem lies with the system itself. Continually increasing funding to an ineffective bureaucracy will do nothing but waste our time, our money, and our children’s future.

Key Facts

• Hawaii taxpayers spend $2.4 billion per year on public education, up from $972 million just 8 years ago.

• Hawaii spends almost $14,000 per student per year, more than the tuition at most private schools.

• Over the last 8 years, test scores have gotten worse.

• One-third of 9th graders don’t receive a diploma 4 years later.

Kenny Lee is a policy intern at the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. He is currently a student at Hawaii Pacific University majoring in finance. See more about the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii at http://www.grassrootinstitute.org.

REFERENCES

By Panos Prevedouros

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) of the City’s proposed rail system is the document that should provide answers to all reasonable impacts. It is available at all public libraries. It is also available at the city’s website honolulutransit.com along with a lot of the rail propaganda that your tax dollars paid for.

Below I list 20 simple but important questions. Does the DEIS answer them clearly?

  1. The bus routes will change. What happens to your route? What happens to express buses?
  2. Lanes will be taken away, some temporarily for construction and some permanently. Where are those lane closures and what is their duration? Are there traffic rerouting plans?
  3. Will there be bike racks on the train and where will they be located? Will bikes be allowed on the train? Will there be a place for surfboards? What about luggage? What about construction workers’ tools? Will there be a place for people to put large items they purchase at a big box retailer? What’s the size limitation?
  4. Will there be washrooms at the stations? How about convenience stores, vending machines? Will the platforms have seats? How many?
  5. Under land use, Aloun farms needs to relocate. Is that possible? Where will they go?
  6. A relatively simple job of sewer upgrades in Kailua and Kapiolani lead to the loss of businesses and jobs. Are details provided about similar effects during the construction of the rail?
  7. Is there a detailed plan for the effect of rail construction on water, sewer, gas and electric utilities? Will there be disruptions of service? Who pays for all these?
  8. About $107 million will be spent on the soft costs of this project. This “paperwork” cost is rather exorbitant for a single 20 mile rail line. How did $107 million get spent?
  9. The DEIS list of preparers for technical content shows that it was done almost exclusively with out-of-Hawaii engineers, planners and specialists. (See this document under Consultants: http://www.honolulutransit.org/library/files/end.pdf.) H-3 freeway was designed mostly with Hawaii based engineers. If Hawaii engineers are not able to design rail, who will supervise and build this unfamiliar-to-Oahu infrastructure?
  10. Rail construction involves unique skills and certifications that Hawaii construction workers do not have. How will this be addressed?
  11. The city has declared that in many cases only a portion of a parcel needs to be condemned and taken away. Can the business survive with the remaining portion? Are they forced to mandatory downsizing and some loss of employment?
  12. There are 16 schools that are adjacent to the alignment. Will the overhead structure, the continuous high current exposure and the intermittent noise and vibration affect the learning environment? Is it prudent to relocate the schools?
  13. Does rail fit our Hawaiian Sense of Place? How was the impact to tourism and local quality of life by a large elevated structure through town been assessed?
  14. Does the DEIS address the impacted vistas and scenery? Are the aesthetics of the structure and each station explained and presented adequately?
  15. What will happen in the event of a hurricane? Will the train operate? The train in Houston was shut down for 10 days due to hurricane Ike.
  16. BART in the Bay Area uses rail cars made of aluminum to combat corrosion. Is the city’s position that corrosion is not an issue?
  17. It appears that General Excise Tax surcharge proceeds for rail will be much lower than expected for at least four years in a row. How is this deficit going to be made up?
  18. If ridership turns out to be lower than forecast, then what? If the city is forced to provide free train rides like in Puerto Rico, how is the shortfall going to be covered?
  19. I heard that the Ala Moana station will now be at a lower elevation, at the west end of Kona Street and not above Nordstrom’s. What is the exact plan for the Ala Moana Center station and how is the train going to Waikiki and UH afterwards?
  20. Starting construction in Kapolei makes little sense. It may be expeditious and convenient but it is not smart. Why can’t a temporary rail yard be established near the airport or Aloha Stadium and build rail east into the city and west out to Kapolei simultaneously?

The billion dollar question that no DEIS could address is this: With President Obama at the helm and Senator Inouye chairing the Senate Appropriations Committee can we get four billion for rail? How about splitting the bill 50-50 with the feds? Other cities got a 50% or better federal match. Why does Honolulu get less than 25%?

These and many more questions require simple and clear answers.

In addition to the 429 page DEIS, the following files contain information and visuals. The City distributes them on a DVD.

  • Historic Resources.pdf
  • Land Use.pdf
  • Transportation Tech Report.pdf
  • Street Trees.pdf
  • Electric and Magnetic Fields Technical Report.pdf
  • Visual and Aesthetic Technical Report.pdf
  • Historic Appendix B.pdf
  • Cultural Resources.pdf
  • Economics.pdf
  • Geology, soils, farmlands, and natural hazardsTech Report.pdf
  • Haz Waste and Mat Tech Report Appendix A.pdf
  • Natural Resources.pdf
  • Noise&Vibration.pdf
  • Haz Waste and Mat Tech Report.pdf
  • tEISTravelForecasting ENTIRE.pdf
  • Community Impacts.pdf
  • Archaeological Resources.pdf
  • Water Resources.pdf
  • AQ&Energy.pdf

The City released this huge document just before the November 4 elections and in a period that includes the most holidays and days off. (The deadline for comment is January 7, 2009.) The hearings on the adequacy of the Alternatives Analysis were also conducted and concluded in the late November to late December 2006 period to make it as hard as possible for citizens to participate. (If it looks like a Banana Republic and acts like a Banana Republic …)

Honorable Linda Lingle

Governor, State of Hawaii

Subject: Oahu Regional Transportation Plan 2030

Refs:     a) Oahu Regional Transportation Plan 2030 (ORTP 2030)

http://oahumpo.org/ortp/index.html.b) Tampa Elevated reversible -

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/172c) Managed Lane Study “Transportation Alternatives Analysis for Mitigating Traffic congestion between Leeward Oahu and Honolulu. The full report is available at

www.eng.hawaii.edu/~panos/UHCS.pdf.d) DEIS Honolulu High-Capacity transit Corridor Project Nov 2008

Dear Governor Lingle,

President elect Obama is meeting with State Governors today to encourage the Governors to submit public works projects to create 2.5 million jobs and to stimulate the economy. Below are two highway projects that are very much needed to eliminate the severe Central Oahu traffic congestion on H-1 at the H-1/H-2 merge and at the Middle Street Merge.

The Oahu Regional Transportation Plan (ORTP) 2030, reference (a), lists State Project No. 52 , Nimitz Flyover (2.2 mile, Estimated cost - $250 million) will substantially remove the Middle Street bottleneck. However, to increase traffic capacity while reducing the cost of this project, it is strongly suggested that the Nimitz Flyover structure be built similar to the Tampa Elevated three-lane Reversible HOV as described on reference (b). The actual 2005 cost for the 10 mile Tampa Reversible is $420 million or $42 Million per highway mile. Using a geographic and escalation factor of 100 percent, the 2.2 mile Nimitz Flyover at $80 million per mile would cost $175 million for three HOV reversible lanes.

Reference (c) recommends the Tampa Reversible type highway over this Nimitz segment and provides the downtown terminal connections from the Nimitz HOV Flyover via an elevated busway from Iwilei to Hotel Street and a single lane underpass to both Alakea St/Halekauwila Streets. Note that one of the three lanes would exit the Flyover at Waikamilo Rd. to provide access to job centers in Kalihi, resulting in the Flyover having only two lanes entering downtown.

The planned ORTP 2030 Project No. 45, Interstate Route H-1, “Widen the Interstate Route H-1 by one lane in the eastbound direction, from the Waiawa Interchange to the Halawa Interchange (cost estimate $251 million)”. A better highway project would be to build a three-lane reversible HOV “Kamehameha Flyover” which has three times higher traffic capacity for a slightly higher cost. The solution is to build a 4 mile, elevated, three-lane reversible HOV “Kamehameha Flyover” over the median of Kamehameha Hwy from the H-1/H-2 merge to the H-1 Viaduct east of Aloha Stadium. Again, the three-lane “Kamehameha Flyover” structure should be similar to the Tampa three-lane reversible, reference (b), which should cost about $80 Million per mile for a total cost of $320 million. Reference (c) provides the highway connections between the “Kamehameha Flyover” and H-1, H-2, Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway at the Waiawa Interchange.

The DEIS, reference (d), shows the rail route over Kamehameha Highway between Pearl City and Aloha Stadium which could conflict with the proposed three-lane “Kamehameha Flyover” route outlined above. If the rail is built, it is suggested that both the Kamehameha Highway “Flyover” and the Rail be built within the elevated Kamehameha Highway corridor. In this case, only a two-lane “Kamehameha Flyover” is needed ( instead of three-lanes) to be built alongside and parallel to the Rail transit. The rail with a capacity of 6,000 commuters per hour and the two-lane “Kamehameha Flyover”, with a capacity of 4,000 vehicles per hour, should be adequate to substantially reduce the bottleneck at the H-1/H-2 merge.

You will note that a three-lane HOV Flyovers on Kamehameha Highway and on Nimitz Highway will not need Rail to eliminate the two bottlenecks at Pearl City and at Middle Street merge.

I strongly urge you to appeal to President elect Obama to provide federal funds for these two Sate highway bypasses around the  H-1 bottlenecks to eliminate the Central Oahu traffic congestion and to support Oahu’s slumping economy

Sincerely,

Ben Ramelb P.E.

Honolulu

By Dan Douglass

Permaculture is a dual combination of the words permanent and agriculture as well as permanent and culture.  It was coined in the 1970s and has since been most promoted by Bill Mollison.  To find out more about Bill and his work visit his site.

Urban Permaculture in Chicago, Illinois.

Urban Permaculture in Chicago, Illinois.

Farms in unused plots of land is a concept I was introduced to by a Salt Lake neighbor here in Honolulu.  In his profession he analyzes trends in non-profits.  He expressed his deep concern for food supply in Hawaii.  The food banks experienced significant decrease in consumables donated while a significant increase in need.  He recommended unused land be put to wise use through community farms where the governing jurisdiction lease land for low or no cost to the willing and able public to grow fresh produce.

Urban Permaculture in Brooklyn, NY.

Urban Permaculture in Brooklyn, NY.

The following videos demonstrate that Urban Permaculture is not only possible, but that it has been successful in a variety of municipalities in the U.S. and world.  Why not here in Honolulu and the rest of Hawaii?  Many of our schools are adjacent to City or State parks where even as little as five thousand square feet of land allocated to permaculture could yield year round produce and instruction opportunities to our children.  The City could offer property tax incentives to associations that implement urban permaculture.  And forget the politically and economically bankrupt ‘Transit Oriented Developments’ that destroy Honolulu’s beauty, Hawaii as a whole needs ‘Agriculturally Sustainable Development.’ With our ideal tropical conditions and nutrient rich soils permaculture can be a reality here to the benefit of our environment, economic and consumable needs, cultural enrichment and the next generation.

Parts 1-4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpyocn1Vc5U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCyDN9nAnVQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmW4nIgjkb4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYhCtpJY1NI

By Ed Case

The price of crude oil is down to $50/barrel from its high of almost $150 just a few months ago. Many are tempted to place our long-sought goal of energy conservation and diversification back on the shelf yet again. But does anyone really expect it to last, and isn’t it far better to prevent another crisis rather than react to it?

I just participated in Hawai‘i Energy Challenge 2008, organized by the Hawai‘i Leeward Planning Conference. An outstanding public-private assemblage, including national and local energy experts as well as leaders of Hawaii’s principal utility (Hawaiian Electric/HECO), alternate energy providers, landowners (interested in agriculture for energy) and business and labor sectors (as energy consumers), met for two days to consider, for Hawaii’s energy needs, where are we today, where we’ll be if we do nothing, and where we can be if we work together.

Every great debate faces the initial challenge of getting the facts straight, and few subjects have more factual confusion and denial than our energy future. Matt Simmons, international expert who wrote the best-seller Twilight in the Desert, opened with a compelling recitation of the evidence for “peak oil”, referring to the point at which international petroleum production hits its maximum and, not being a renewable resource, begins its decline.

This is, of course, a crucial point, as, with our world (and Hawai‘i) heavily dependent on petroleum-based energy, worldwide supply declines plus demand increases (e.g., China and India) equal irreversibly accelerating prices. Mr. Simmons’ conclusion is that we’re either at peak oil or, if we’re not, it’s rapidly approaching, and either way the cost of extracting remaining petroleum reserves is rapidly accelerating. His views have been questioned by oil producers, but just this month a report by the International Energy Agency, an organization of the major oil-importing countries, essentially agreed.

Hawai‘i is particularly impacted and exposed by reason of our geographic isolation and lack of fossil fuel-based energy sources, compounded by many factors including our current inability to transmit electricity between islands. Even today, blessed as we are with the best alternate energy resources and potential in our world (solar, wind, ocean, hydro, geothermal and biomass, for starters), we import and use fossil fuels for some 90% of our energy needs and pay the highest energy costs in our country. For each and all segments of our community, from tourism to construction, transportation, small businesses, government employees, social services and beyond, the question of where we’ll be without collective action was a no-brainer for conference participants, and it wasn’t pretty.

How, then, do we forge our own better energy future rather than let another future just happen? Much, of course, depends on our national energy policy, especially in the areas of renewable energy development, energy conservation and greenhouse gas/carbon emissions. In this, I welcome President-elect Obama’s focus in his recent economic recovery speech on incentivizing jobs in clean energy research and development, as well as his administration’s anticipated cap-and-trade emissions control initiatives. (His remarks also dovetailed with a report to our conference by Lisa Gibson of the Hawai‘i Science and Technology Council that technology jobs are growing in Hawai‘i, with energy-related jobs growing fastest.)

Here at home, we’ve at least begun to create our different future. The renewable portfolio standards on which I worked as a state legislator (requiring an increasing portion of our utilities’ energy production from renewable sources) and our second-in-the-nation carbon emission standards law are two such efforts.

But most of our conference discussions focused on the Hawai‘i Clean Energy Initiative, a joint effort between our state and the U.S. Department of Energy whose ambitious but doable goal is 70% clean energy for Hawai‘i by 2030, with 40% from renewable energy and 30% from enhanced energy conservation. There are many moving parts to this initiative requiring various legislative, regulatory, business and community efforts. Most immediate, however, are proposals for major change to our state energy statutes and regulations to be considered shortly by our legislature and Public Utilities Commission (our state agency regulating utilities including the rates we pay). These proposals arise largely from an October 2008 Energy Agreement among the State, HECO and PUC. Both agreement and subject are complicated and replete with various terms of art like avoided costs, feed-in tariffs, decoupling and interconnectivity. But what it amounts to is establishing a level of longterm stability and predictability in the price of Hawai‘i electricity which accelerates development of renewable energy and its delivery infrastructure and ends up costing us all a lot less than had we done nothing (plus caring for our environment).

In all this, the devil is very much in the details. Much depends on whether our government, utilities and others have really seen the future and feel a sense of urgency in molding it, as I hope and believe is the case. It also must be accompanied with further energy conservation, emission, and renewable R&D initiatives. And we will all be called upon to make some tough short-term choices to achieve inescapable longterm goals.

What is crucial at this point is that the discussion expand rapidly beyond the walls of the State Capitol, PUC and HECO boardroom and into the communities where we live and work. Because, as Dr. Makena Coffman, UH economics professor and co-founder of Kanu Hawai‘i, reminded participants, in the microcosm of our Hawai‘i we not only experience external factors first and acutely, but have better potential than elsewhere to collaborate toward solutions. We all have a stake in our energy future, and, if Hawai‘i Energy Challenge 2008 is any indication, we are ready, willing and able to chart it.