All posts by Malia Blom

Uncategorized

Really, More of a Shelbeyville Idea

Leave a comment

How about a little round-up of Hawaii-type news?  No?  Too bad, here we go . . .

Sadly, the bid to save the Honolulu Star-Bulletin (and the integrity of journalism in Hawaii) has failed.  Though the proposal put forth by Sam Slom and Malia Zimmerman was the “last bid standing,” it didn’t meet the undisclosed (and presumably ridiculously high) asking price demanded of the owner, Black Press of Canada.  (Is it me or is that a strangely ominous name for a news organization?  I thought Canadians were supposed to be nice, not gloomy and forbidding.)  This means a few things: 1.) A bunch of people in Hawaii just lost their jobs; 2.) Honolulu just became a one-newspaper town; and 3.) We’ll be depending more than ever on the good folks at Hawaii Reporter for an alternative source of news.

Stressed out budgets in Hawaii are about to see one more hit to their pocketbooks, as the “barrel tax”–possibly the worst outcome of an already abysmal legislative session–raised from $.05 to $1.05 a barrel of imported petroleum.  As is always the way, these legislative efforts to rake in revenue will hit the little guy the most.  Especially on an island where nearly ever single thing that we consume has to take a long trip just to get here.  The new tax means that we should be seeing a rise in gasoline, electricity, food, and delivery prices shortly.  In other words, nearly everything.  The Governor had vetoed this tax, but was overridden by the legislature.  Perhaps we should just be grateful that they haven’t figured out how to tax Aloha spirit.  Yet.

Things are still pressing forward on the $4billion Honolulu Rail project–one suspects the fell hand of Lyle Lanley.  (“What about us brain dead slobs?/You’ll be given cushy jobs/Monorail, Monorail, Monorail!”)  Of course, one hates to drag things like logic and feasibility studies into an ambitious government project, but there’s a first for everything, so why not give it a shot.  The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii sponsored an economic study of the plan, which demonstrated a drop in tax revenues.  It would be good to see the legislature push for a legitimate economic impact study.  It would be even better to see a study that took into account any pending legislation that would radically alter Hawaii’s social and economic structure–like, say . . . oh, I don’t know . . . the Akaka Bill.

Hey, as Hawaii marches on towards economic implosion, someone ought to be standing athwart history, yelling, “Ahem!  You guys! Are you really sure this is a good idea?  Guys?”

And as a closing note, for those who need a little remediation on today’s pop culture reference–and for those who are just annoyed that the Monorail Song is now stuck in their heads, here you go:

Akaka Bill

A Feeling of Recognition

Leave a comment

Interesting things are happening in Hawaii politics when it comes to support for the Akaka Bill.

Actively opposing it still takes a measure of political courage.  (Which, believe it or not, is not necessarily an oxymoron.)  But slowly, enough concerns have been raised about its effect on the Islands that some of those aspirants to office that aren’t completely beholden to the Akaka supporters are searching for some other language to express their reservations.  Consider it the political equivalent of backing quietly away from a terrible potluck dinner, saying, “No, I’m pretty full.  I think maybe I’ll just have this roll.”  (This might not be the best analogy, in that I’ve never been to a bad potluck dinner in Hawaii.  You all are luckier than you know.  Maybe everyone should have to do a year-long mission to the Mainland so that they can learn about the horrors of the mysterious gooey casserole and wet, salty, mushy rice.)

The result is a move towards ambiguity.  Look for statements that support, “some form of recognition for Native Hawaiians,” and yet stop short of endorsing Akaka.  Putting aside for the moment, all of the debate about how comparable the situation of Native Hawaiians is to that of Native Americans, there is (at heart) a genuine and admirable impulse here:  No one wants to underrate the contribution of Native Hawaiians or the importance of Hawaiian culture.  And when combined with the difficult socio-economic situation of many Native Hawaiians, there is a clear desire to assist that community–heck, this entire website calculates the millions and millions of dollars spent on all of these motivations.  But warm feelings do not make necessarily make good law.  In fact, all of this vague charity comes perilously close to that “soft bigotry of low expectations” thing.  I’m starting to wonder whether all of these well-intentioned feelings aren’t more destructive to the future of Native Hawaiians than anything else.  Stopping short of creating a separate governmental system, but still wanting to give “something” to Native Hawaiians . . . isn’t that pretty close to where we are now, only without making it official with Presidential signatures and much patting-ourselves-on-the-back?  (Then again, if I was Hawaiian, I’d be happy to just get a check for my share of the millions in federal, state, OHA, and Bishop Estate money spent to help me.  Because I’m starting think that I could do a lot more to help myself than any of those groups.)

Hawaii Legislature

The Hawaii Legislature–Working for you. Sort of.

Leave a comment

How often do you get to see an actual politician explain how counter-productive and useless this legislative session was?  Not very often, that’s for sure.  It requires a degree of honesty that (let’s face it) is not exactly plentiful among those with one finger in the prevailing political winds.  And that’s why, if you want a real rundown of the accomplishments (or lack thereof) of the Hawaii Legislature this year, you definitely want to watch Hawaii Senator Sam Slom’s legislative round-up.  It’s certainly worth viewing in its entirety, but I’ll hit the highlights for you:

Downsides to this Legislative Session: They balanced the budget only by raising taxes and fees, raided the hurricane relief safety net to try to prop up the teacher’s union and the state school system (which isn’t exactly reaching new heights in education . . . except to hit a national record for shortest school year), and generally handicapped business and enterprise in the Islands.

Accomplishments of this Legislative Session: Feel-good bills about sharks and monk seals.

You know, some people might question a legislative session that only lasts a few months, but I’m starting to be grateful that the window to really foul things up is so small.

Uncategorized

OHA–Peeling back More Layers

1 Comment

Like many people in the islands, I have (for a long time) only had the vaguest notion of what OHA actually does.  Other than pour huge amounts of money into various projects and promote Native Hawaiian culture.  Those are all well and good as far as they go, but (especially where the huge amounts of money are concerned) one starts to wonder after awhile how they really help the average Native Hawaiian.  Your Kimo on the street, if you will.

No, I don’t have an answer to that.  I’ve looked at hundreds of OHA grants, many of which are in our database and wiki, and learned that (as with so many things in OHA) there are more questions than answers.  We’re working to try to fill in the gaps of knowledge about the OHA grants, but it’s slow work.  (Which is why we could use your help! Hint, hint!)  After all, OHA isn’t shy about deciding what is good for Native Hawaiians in Hawaii, but that’s not the same thing as finding out from the Hawaiians themselves.  Nor are Native Hawaiians some monolithic, homogeneous group that agrees on everything.

Consider the Akaka Bill.  Yes, again.  OHA and others would have you assume that all Native Hawaiians are uniformly in favor of it.  But why should that be?  The concerns about Akaka go beyond race to the future economic and cultural health of Hawaii.  Certainly, there are people of all ethnicities that harbor serious reservations about the push to pass Akaka.  And yet, OHA, speaking for Hawaiians, doesn’t seem aware of the possibility of dissent within that community.  Is this a responsible position for agency with OHA’s scope and influence?  More and more, I wonder how much Native Hawaiians are used as political tools by groups who have a lot more on their mind then just helping out.

Uncategorized

Isn’t That Special

Leave a comment

Ah, the “special interest.”  It’s every politician’s favorite bogeyman.  So convenient as a target for political diatribe–not least of all because it’s so vague.  After all, what is a “special interest” really?  When it comes right down to it, it’s a group with political currency that you don’t particularly care for.  After all, the ones you like are “legitimate and necessary issues or expenditures.”

Witness Rep. Oshiro’s recent opinion article in the Advertiser (on April 20th, 2010).  In it, Rep. Oshiro talks about the difficulties of the budget process and blames special interests for the “hard decisions” that are part of that process, especially when so many of those aforementioned special interests benefit from tax credits or tax exemptions.  Not to be insensitive or anything, but it’s not like there’s all that much to being a legislator.  (Believe me, anyone who has watched C-SPAN for more than 10 minutes and retained consciousness throughout would agree.)  So pardon me for not being overcome with sympathy over the difficulties of occasionally having to make a hard budgetary decision.  We regular folks do that every day.  It’s called, “trying to get by.”  Only when we mess up, we don’t get to make exculpatory speeches about it.  Instead, we get our electricity disconnected or the car repossessed.  So yeah, we elected you all to make the hard decisions.  Make them.

But that’s not actually the worst part.  After all, “special interests” are just the ones you feel don’t deserve any financial help or breaks.  So some politicians would call businesses that get incentives to stay in Hawaii and employ people “special interests.”  Others would say that political groups or specific classes of citizens (including those that get a lot of government funding) are special interests.  And some might point out that the legislature gave itself a raise, making it one of the special-est interests of all.

What would be nice (other than being able to vote myself a raise–what a great gig that is) is if our representatives stopped trying to manipulate us with their have-my-cake-and-eat-it-too talk about special interests and instead were more honest about where our money was going.  Because I may not be that special, but that’s where my interest really is.

Uncategorized

Save the Bulletin!

Leave a comment

I confess that I’ve always kind of liked the Honolulu Star-Bulletin the best.  Nothing against the Advertiser, but I always felt like there was a little less editorial bias at the Bulletin.  And also there’s just something about the name.  “Star-Bulletin.”  It sounds dreamy, but newsy.  Just what I want out of a Hawaii newspaper.  (Well, that and good, fair news coverage of course.)

But the Bulletin is actually in danger of shutting down–maybe even as soon as next week.  Why is this bad news?  Well, on a practical level, that means that hundreds of Hawaiians are in danger of losing their jobs.  And that stinks no matter how you cut it.  But beyond that, losing the Star-Bulletin will make Honolulu a one-newspaper town.  And if you want to encourage fair, responsible, and hard-hitting reporting, a little competition is important.  The internet may have changed news forever in letting people choose to get their news from a source they trust, but without the journalists on the ground, it gets harder and harder to find good information.  (And this goes double for the outer islands.  Feel a little overlooked now?  Imagine how much worse that can be with only one major paper in Hawaii’s capitol to cover your news and concerns.)

It just so happens that there are two highly-respected local figures who have put forth a bid to buy the Star Bulletin–State Senator Sam Slom and Hawaii Reporter’s Malia Zimmerman.  I won’t bore you all with their bonafides, but believe me when I say that if you’re local and wish that there was a Hawaii newspaper run by people who lived here, understood Hawaii, understood our concerns, and would promote accurate and unbiased reporting, then it would be hard to do better than these two. (And for all y’all on the outer islands, take note that part of their plan for the Star-Bulletin, should their bid succeed, is to expand its coverage of the outer islands and make it less Oahu-centric.)

As to why that matters to those of us concerned about transparency and fiscal responsibility?  Well, it should be obvious that if we want to ensure an independent voice in the community for issues like this, we need to save the Star-Bulletin.

(Want to learn more?  Go to http://www.savehawaiinews.com.)

Taxes

Check Yourself Before You Wreck Yourself (& end up looking foolish)

Leave a comment

With tax day looming tomorrow, how about something that reminds us of how much we all loathe the IRS and the politics of taxation?  (Not you–IRS employee who reads this blog and could conceivably audit me.  I think you’re a fine, upstanding person, a great dancer, and have fabulous hair.  I’m talking about a completely different IRS person who would never be so cool as to be reading this.)

For awhile now, candidates for office who have wanted to demonstrate their commitment to not taxing us into oblivion have signed the ATR (Americans for Tax Reform) Tax Pledge, the gist of which is that the candidate promises to oppose any net increase in taxes, corporate or personal.  (I know, I know.  The horror!  Why, with a philosophy like that, one might leap to the conclusion that the candidate in question wasn’t in favor of driving away business and could even want to improve the economy.  What will those crazy fiscal conservatives come up with next?)

Well, in a move so disingenuous that I wouldn’t be surprised if their pants were actually on fire while they did this, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee started running an attack ad against Charles Djou (a Republican running for Congress in Hawaii’s 1st District) based on his pledge.  Of course, they couldn’t claim that Djou was opposed to higher taxes.  (Well, they could, but this would tend to undermine their efforts to not get him elected.)  So instead they twisted his anti-tax pledge into a claim that he supported tax breaks for companies moving jobs overseas.  As FactCheck.org explains, this is a complete misrepresentation of the anti-tax pledge that can only be explained by political sneakiness or crack addiction.  (Ok, I added the part about sneakiness and crack.  But FactCheck really did take the DCCC to task for the blatant misrepresentation of Djou, which, in this time of high unemployment, amounts to little more than a smear tactic.)

So let that be a reminder of a few things:

Don’t be swayed by outrageous claims when it comes to where the candidates stand on important economic issues.  Tax issues are almost always more complicated than can be explained in a 30 second commercial.  And falling for tactics like the DCCC tried with Djou will just teach politicians that making pledges isn’t worth the fallout.

While we can all agree that the employees of the IRS are a lovely group of people who should each individually get to date Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie, April 15th still stinks.

Transparency

Transparency Shouldn’t Have “Annoyance” Exceptions

Leave a comment

Hawaii Reporter currently has a good summary of the effort to pass a law that would allow the Hawaii Department of Health to ignore requests for the President’s birth certificate.  (As you can imagine, there have been quite a few requests, and the DOH claims that it has become a waste of staff resources.)

Well, cry me a river.

A word of explanation: I once worked in a government FOIA office–for the Army as it so happened.  This was not long after two extremely unpopular Army decisions–the adoption of the Ranger beret for all soldiers and the awarding of the “Army of One” contract.  To say that we were besieged by requests for information about both of these things was an understatement.  Let’s just say that a large section of America was not at all happy about it and made that very clear as they sought more information about the decision process.

And “vexatious” requesters?  Well, I challenge the DOH to beat some of the doozies I encountered.  Processing something so simple and straightforward as a request for information about the microchips implanted by the Army in everyone’s brains was an easy day.

But I do have a point here–it didn’t matter what we in the FOIA office thought about the legitimacy of the requests we got.  We processed them.  Because that is the right thing to do.  Because an open and transparent government needs to treat all requests with respect–not just the ones that don’t annoy us.  And when we had to deal with the same question over and over and over and over again (like the beret), we did the logical thing–we made everything as open and easily available as possible and then streamlined the response process so that it didn’t use up too many of our resources.  (Hint to the DOH–Copy machines.  Use them.)  Did we gripe in the lunch room?  Sure.  But we never would have dreamed that someone would ever try to create a legal exception to the principle of transparency just out of annoyance.

As to why this is all important to the Native Hawaiian project–well, it should be obvious.  This is not a good precedent to set–especially in a state government that has made a lot of promises about sunshine and openness, but hasn’t always followed through.  If the legislature can carve out one exception to transparency policy out of reasons that amount to little more than bureaucratic irritation, then there’s not much to stop them from deciding that there are plenty of other things that they don’t much care to share with the public.

Making transparency a pick-and-choose option in the hands of bureaucrats violates the principle of open government and sets us on a slippery slope.

Uncategorized

Census Nonsense

Leave a comment

Like most everyone else, I have been feeling the mild irritation that comes with getting a long questionnaire from the government accompanied by vague threats and even vaguer promises about the importance of filling it out.  Apparently, we should all be eager to take advantage of this chance to get “our fair share.”

Has it really come to that?

Are we so greedy, so eager to get our share of the government pie that the advertising wizards behind this year’s census marketing decided that a naked appeal to greed, and social/cultural divisions was the best motivator to use?  Especially in light of the fact that the “fair share” here is really the fair share of my own tax dollars.

Call me cynical if you must, but my experience hasn’t let me to believe that a lot of those tax dollars are coming back to me.  Especially in light of recent legislative efforts.  So when I see the “fair share” ads, all I can think of is the government urging people to fill out their census so they can be certain to get some of my money.

And when we throw race into the equation, it gets even more complicated.

Because (as this site makes so abundantly clear) race and ethnicity and monetary “fair share” is almost an industry in this country.  And the net effect is not to bring us together, but to deepen racial divisions and resentments.

I highly recommend Sam Slom’s recent article about the census in the Hawaii Reporter about the census.  As Senator Slom points out, the census was originally about the reapportionment of the US House of Representatives.  Not the all-out entitlement grab that it seems to have become.  And by standing by and allowing it to be a more and more intrusive process, we’re basically condoning it.  No, I’m not advocating refusing to fill out your census form.  But I think that everyone who has an issue with big, intrusive government and with the business of federal entitlements and grievances should begin asking questions of their elected representatives about the appropriateness of the ever-expanding census.

And don’t even get me started on what it costs.

Uncategorized

Can a Governor Be Beyond the Law?

Leave a comment

Our Lt. Governor, Duke Aiona has stated his support for the Akaka bill and urged its passage despite the many reservations held by others in the administration and among the people of Hawaii.

It’s not that we don’t understand the sentiment behind the support–we love Hawaii.  We recognize the richness of Hawaiian culture and sympathize with the desire to protect it and support Native Hawaiians.  But (as our grants database clearly shows) intentions are one thing . . . practice is another.  We’ve seen hundreds of millions of dollars spent to help Native Hawaiians–and evidently to little effect, from the picture painted by most Akaka supporters. Despite that, outreach to Native Hawaiians is practically its own industry in the Aloha State.

An even more interesting consideration . . . Lt. Governor Aiona (who is running for Governor, of course) could be part of the new Native Hawaiian tribe created by the Akaka Bill.  That means that he would be subject to different tax schemes, different justice–in essence, different law than the vast majority of his constituents.  (If he should win, that is.)  While Aiona is busy trumpeting his support for the Akaka bill, it would be good to for him to address the glaring questions of how his membership in an Akaka-based tribe would affect his governance.