Editorials
Wednesday, August 13, 1997THE state's new reciprocal beneficiaries law has aroused concern among Hawaii businesses that it could sharply increase their health insurance costs -- so much so that five companies filed a suit in federal court challenging the law on the ground that it conflicts with federal retirement law. The law applies to any two people who cannot legally marry -- potentially a much larger number than same-sex couples, although no one knows how many might apply for benefits. In view of Hawaii's stagnant economy, the prospect of additional costs of doing business here is particularly disturbing. Reciprocal benefits
cost may be reducedHowever, the law is being interpreted in a way that would exempt most businesses. The basis for this contention is that the reciprocal benefits law is included only in the section of state law covering commercial insurance companies -- not mutual benefit societies such as HMSA or health maintenance organizations like Kaiser Permanente.
Attorney General Margery Bronster says she views the law in this way and that it would require only employers using private plans -- covering only a few thousand employees -- to extend benefits to reciprocal beneficiaries. The attorney general's office is expected to release its opinion within two weeks.
That interpretation could result in the dismissal of the federal lawsuit. But the attorney for the companies involved in the suit says it's premature to say how the court might act.
State Rep. Terrance Tom, a key figure in the drafting of the reciprocal beneficiaries law, says the attorney general's opinion conflicts with the Legislature's intent. He said the Legislature could address any problems in next year's session.
Tom probably wants to close the loophole and extend benefits to all companies, which would be precisely the wrong approach. The need is to tighten the language of the law to avoid additional expense -- or reduction of benefits for other employees -- to companies already struggling in a sluggish economy.
REPORTS of campaign contribution violations by Asians and Asian Americans have proliferated during the past year. The most publicized is John Huang, the former Clinton fund-raiser and Commerce Department official linked to an Indonesian conglomerate, but there are several others. Campaign donations
The facts must be reported, distasteful though they may be to persons of the same racial or ethnic group. Those who have broken the law should be prosecuted, regardless of their race.
CITY officials are getting a taste of what private developers have had to confront in obtaining approval for building projects. However, the city Department of Housing and Community Development reacted in a way that a private developer wouldn't dare; it bulldozed ahead with site preparation without first having received a building permit. Building permits
The City Council gave its approval in late 1985 for a $4.73 milliOnly after the Star-Bulletin's Gordon Y.K. Pang reported the violation was construction brought to a halt. The delay is likely to be costly to taxpayers, in the same way that bureaucratic delays are costly to private developers anxious to get their construction projects under way.
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
