The House Agriculture
By Mike Yuen
Committee passes the bill despite
widespread criticism
Star-BulletinA bill legalizing cockfighting, which critics insist would pave the way for state-approved gambling, has narrowly passed the House Agriculture Committee. After the 4-2 vote yesterday, the measure's sponsor, Rep. Robert Herkes (D, Volcano), conceded the bill would have died if House Agriculture Vice Chairman Jun Abinsay (D, Kalihi) had not supported it with reservations.
Herkes is convinced the bill, which he touts as an economic stimulus initiative, would have received greater public support if a hearing on it had been in a rural area -- such as Pahoa on the Big Island or Waianae on Oahu -- where cockfighting is a major, albeit illegal, activity.
Instead, the bill was opposed at a state Capitol hearing by the Honolulu Police Department, the Agriculture Department, the state Democratic Party, the Hawaii Green Party, the Hawaii Coalition Against Gambling, the Hawaii Association of International Buddhists, Animal Rights Hawaii and former state Rep. Eve Anderson (R, Waimanalo).
The only testimony in favor came from Big Island businessman Ken Fujiyama, who intends to establish a nonprofit organization to register all gamecocks participating in cockfights, as required under Herkes' bill.
"It stinks," said Rep. Michael White (D, Lahaina), who voted against the bill, which now advances to the House Judiciary Committee. "It clearly sets up gaming."
White and Rep. Hermina Morita (D, Hanalei) cast dissenting votes on the proposal even when it was watered down.
For example, a provision that would have granted immunity from anti-gambling laws to breeders participating in cockfights was deleted.
A section also was amended so gamecocks would wear tiny boxing gloves instead of razor-sharp "gaffs," also known as "slashers."
Fujiyama said legalizing cockfighting has the potential of making entrepreneurs out of "a large group of our lower-income segment of our population" who will be able to export fighting birds, generating "millions of dollars of new money coming into our state."
"Do it legally," Fujiyama said. "They do it in the bushes now."
Fujiyama is seeking a $750,000 state grant-in-aid for his for-profit Hamakua Pacific Agriculture Corp. to turn gamecock breeding into a major local industry that would export the fighting birds worldwide.
Fujiyama claimed isle gamecocks have the potential of becoming a $100 million industry that would have a five-fold ripple effect through the state's economy.
Under Herkes' bill, "tournaments" will be held to test the "bloodlines" of the gamecocks.
Honolulu police Sgt. Glenn Yoshida said "tournament" is the key word in the bill.
"You can't have gambling without the birds engaging in combat," he said.
"The tournaments would legalize gambling."
Ira Rohter, state Green co-chairman, testified: "If farmers and others want to raise gamecocks, as a hobby or for sale, we have no objection.
"But to legalize cockfights, under the guise of economic development, cultural practices and 'testing their roosters' bloodlines in tournaments,' is frankly laughable."
Here's the breakdown of the 4-2 vote by the House Agriculture Committee approving a controversial bill to permit cockfights: The cockfight vote
For: Democratic Reps. Merwyn Jones, Jun Abinsay (with reservations), Jerry Chang and Robert Herkes.
Measure would tighten
rules for HMSA, othersThe bill's backers criticize
By Pat Omandam
health insurance providers
Star-BulletinFor the past 21 months, Thomas Russi and Christine Paul have waged a battle with their health insurance provider on how it justifies its rates. The Kailua-Kona couple want the Hawaii Medical Service Association to show in detail why it paid only $10,000 of the $24,000 bill for Paul's emergency appendectomy in May 1996. Numerous letters and a challenge in Small Claims Court have been unsuccessful.
"We have been unable to obtain these figures from HMSA because, as our state government puts it, HMSA is an 800-pound gorilla with a take-it-or-leave-it attitude, and they answer to no one," Russi said.
The two were among doctors and health coalitions who supported a Senate bill yesterday that adds new sections to the state insurance code to tighten regulation of mutual benefit societies such as HMSA, the state's largest health insurer, and some smaller health insurance providers.
Senate Bill 2583 requires these companies to act in good faith, provide accurate and complete information, take reasonsable measures to prevent unfair and deceptive acts and practices, and to render all services in a fair and equitable manner.
State Insurance Commissioner Rey Graulty told the Senate Consumer Protection Committee yesterday the measure requires mutual benefit societies -- associations which provide benefits specifically to their members and are exempt from every state, county and municipal tax, except unemployment compensation -- to act in the public interest.
With these groups now feeling the pressure from for-profit health maintenance organizations, Graulty said he's beginning to see them "employ concepts and mechanisms" similar to the HMOs. Such action detracts from their long-established relationships with health-care providers as well as their mission, he said.
"They must either convert to for-profit status or engage in chameleonic behavior," Graulty said.
Last year's failure of Pacific Group Medical Association is another reason the state wants to assert tighter control.
The committee is expected to vote on the measure today. Committee Co-chairman Wayne Metcalf (D, Hilo), a former state Insurance Commissioner, told the audience it's fair to assume measures that deal with unfair and deceptive practices will be approved by his committee.
Dr. Malcolm R. Ing testified the state needs to give doctors and patients a place to turn when they feel health insurers act against a patient's best interest.
"We, as physicians in this community, are virtually at the mercy of any unilateral decisions made by HMSA's administration and have no legal sounding board in the state to which we can submit our concerns," Ing said.
For instance, Hilo pediatrician Ruth H. Matsuura said a health insurance carrier called a procedure to correct a condition known as pectus excavatum, a caved-in chest, as primarily cosmetic, even though the deformity causes a dysfunction of the heart and/or lungs. A second opinion of her 14-year-old patient -- with a depression of the sternum nearly halfway back to his spine -- agreed with hers.
"We as physicians should be allowed to exercise our medical judgment rather than to abide by decisions made by insurance carriers as to which conditions will or will not be eligible for coverage," Matsuura said.
Although no one from HMSA testified on the bill yesterday, HMSA Assistant Vice President Stacy Evensen said in written testimony it seems unnecessary because mutual benefit societies are already protected under other state and federal regulations.
Evensen asked health maintenance organizations be included in the measure if lawmakers decide to forward the bill.
2002 gov’s race may
By Craig Gima
be funding test
Star-BulletinThe governor's race in 2002 could be one of the first statewide elections in the country in which some candidates get all their campaign funds from taxpayers contributions. Proponents of the "clean money" bill before the Senate Judiciary Committee believe giving candidates the option of refusing special interest money could restore confidence in government.
Under the measure, qualified candidates who agree to limits on fund raising and the length of campaigns would qualify for total public funding.
"Candidates and contributors alike are trapped in the current system," said Toni Worst, president of Hawaii Clean Elections. "Neither one can get off the treadmill."
The Senate Judiciary Committee will decide tomorrow whether the amended bill advances or is held in committee.
Worst had been advocating total public financing of all races. But Judiciary Committee Co-Chairmen Matt Matsunaga (D, Palolo) and Avery Chumbley (D, Kihei) were concerned about the cost, which Worst estimated could be as much as $25.3 million per election.
Instead, Sen. Mike McCartney (D, Kaneohe) amended the bill to make the governor's race in 2002 a test of whether "clean money" elections work.
Worst believes total public financing of the governor's race would cost about $6 million, but the figure could vary depending on the number of candidates who qualify and whether they are facing a candidate who takes private money.
Candidates who agree to the "clean money" requirements would qualify for $500,000 for the primary election and $500,000 for the general. If a "clean money" candidate is facing an opponent who accepts private contributions and spends more than $500,000 per election, the "clean money" candidate can get up to $1.5 million for the primary and $1.5 million for the general. The three candidates for governor in 1994 spent about $3 million each.
"What we're trying to do is reduce the escalating cost of campaigns," Worst said.
The amended bill also provides for matching funds and more timely spending requirements to counter "soft money" ads, financed by political parties and independent supporters, against a "clean money" candidate.
Worst agreed it would be difficult to estimate how much "soft money" would be spent in the governor's race, but said she believes limits on contributions to political parties and political groups other than the candidate's campaign committee would limit "soft money" efforts.
To qualify for public funds, candidates would need to raise between $2,500 to $12,500 in $5 contributions. "Clean money" candidates would not be able to spend their public funds on ads until 30 days before the general election.
Candidates from parties which get less than 20 percent of the ballots cast in the previous election would qualify for less than $500,000 per election, depending on the percentage of votes cast.
Worst hopes pressure from voters will limit the number of candidates seeking private donations.
"Private candidates may see some disadvantage to be known as the candidate who is funded by special interests," she said.
LEGISLATURE UPDATE
A calendar of tomorrow's hearings -- to be held at the state Capitol, 415 S. Beretania St., unless noted:
HOUSE
SENATE
