Editorials
Friday, November 22, 1996
Senate co-chairmen plan
could backfire
NORMAN Mizuguchi, having survived a strong challenge in the last election, has retained his position as state Senate president. But several of his key allies - Milton Holt, Donna Ikeda and Rey Graulty, all chairmen of major committees - fell by the wayside and the Democrats are regrouping. Unfortunately, their plan seems badly flawed. The tentative plan, reports the Star-Bulletin's Mike Yuen, is to reduce the number of committees from 17 to 10 and appoint co-chairmen for each committee. This could dilute the authority of individual committee leaders and is evidently a response to complaints that some have abused their power. It could also be an attempt to deflect some of the political pressure from chairmen dealing with controversial subjects such as same-sex marriage.
The all-important Ways and Means Committee is tentatively to be headed by Carol Fukunaga and Lehua Fernandes Salling; Judiciary by Avery Chumbley and Matt Matsunaga; Consumer Affairs by Rosalyn Baker and David Ige. These are the committees previously headed by Holt, Ikeda and Graulty. In the last session, Consumer Affairs and Judiciary handled the auto insurance reform and same-sex marriage issues, which dominated the proceedings and provoked the wrath of voters when the lawmakers failed to break the deadlocks between the Senate and House.
Trying to solve chairmanship problems by creating co-chairmen seems dubious. If the co-chairmen can't agree, the committees may be paralyzed. This could be a formula for disaster. The voters who were unhappy with the lack of results on key issues in the last session may be equally disappointed after the next if this plan is retained.
Hold off on Con Con
ATTORNEY General Margery Bronster has issued her opinion that the voters on Nov. 5 authorized a constitutional convention, but she doesn't expect that her view will be universally accepted. Proponents of same-sex marriage and native Hawaiians concerned about potentially adverse actions by a Con Con are expected to challenge her opinion in the state Supreme Court. That is where the issue should be resolved.
Cocaine sentences
WIDELY disparate penalties for powdered cocaine and crack cocaine offenses have resulted in a racially skewed sentencing pattern in federal courts. A new medical study concludes there is little difference between the two forms of cocaine and recommends that penalties for crack cocaine offenses be sharply reduced. Penalties for the two types of offenses should be revised to provide more balance, although a better answer may be to increase penalties for powdered cocaine.
Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership
Rupert E. Phillips, CEO
John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher
David Shapiro, Managing Editor
Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor
Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors
A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor