Mixed messages
Most Capitol observers praised the House for its work this past session.
And while the latest poll found Say has a higher favorable and a much lower unfavorable name recognition than Mizuguchi, that did not carry over in terms of the public's regard for the House.
Say is viewed favorably by 21 percent; Mizuguchi, 5 percent. Only the ousted trustees of the Bishop Estate had unfavorable ratings higher than Mizuguchi. Mizuguchi engendered an unfavorable reaction from 44 percent of voters; Say, 20 percent.
The poll numbers further convince Donna Alcantara, who earlier this week stepped down as Hawaii Republican Party chairwoman, of one thing: Voters are not happy with their Democratic-dominated leadership and they want change.
"I believe that in the 1998 elections, the public made it clear that it wants change," Alcantara says.
"Well, it looks like -- in spite of Governor Cayetano saying he got the message and the Senate president saying he got the message -- that they didn't get the message. Nothing has changed. It has gotten worse. And it will continue to do so until we get new leadership."
Majority want more limits,
total ban on fireworks
Poll also finds that fewer plan to celebrate
the year 2000 with pyrotechnics
By Pat Omandam
Star-Bulletin
"You probably remember the wind was so light that trying to get out of Honolulu Harbor and then back into Keehi Lagoon, you really couldn't see anything," said Tucker, an Ewa Beach resident who favors restrictions on fireworks.
"There were a number of boats out there to see the fireworks, and I think it was pretty lucky there was no accidents."
Like Tucker, two out of three Hawaii residents favor more limits on fireworks, and a majority of people now support a ban, according to a new Honolulu Star-Bulletin/NBC Hawaii News8 Poll.
The survey also shows only one-third of residents expect to shoot off fireworks as part of the upcoming millennium-year celebration.
The telephone poll was conducted among 428 registered voters statewide May 13-18 by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. of Washington, D.C. The margin for error is plus or minus 5 percentage points.
The results show eight out of 10 people age 45 and older support limits on fireworks, while about half of those between the age of 18 and 29 don't want any.
And 55 percent of respondents favor a total fireworks ban, up from the 48 percent recorded in a poll taken just three months ago.
The numbers are encouraging to state Sen. Cal Kawamoto (D, Waipahu), who said lawmakers felt hard-pressed to pass any fireworks legislation this year after polls by news media showed Hawaii residents split on the issue.
A bill which dealt only with aerial fireworks made it to the final day of a conference committee, but stalled because it was not what some senators wanted, Kawamoto said.
Kawamoto, who favors a fireworks ban, said health and safety issues relating to fireworks must be documented so lawmakers can see the statistical impact of any fireworks legislation.
As public sentiment for a ban increases, he hopes so will legislative support.
"So if your polls are correct, I hope that next year there is a desire to go total ban," Kawamoto said.
In the meantime, two-thirds of poll respondents said they will not use fireworks on New Year's Eve. A breakdown shows 79 percent of those older than age 45 do not plan to set off fireworks, while about half of those younger than age 44 will.
The breakdown doesn't jive with the experience during the past celebration of poll respondent Tracy Rodriguez of the quiet community of Waimea on the Big Island.
"I went to a party and it was all the old people doing it," said Rodriguez, an office worker for a nonprofit group. "I don't set off any fireworks; I don't like them personally."
Neighborhood board leaders of areas most affected by last year's fireworks smoke said there hasn't been an uproar within the community to resolve the fireworks problem.
Tucker, chairman of the Ewa Beach Neighborhood Board, and Maeda Timson, who heads the Makakilo/Kapolei/Honokai Hale board, said there have been no demands by residents that their boards adopt resolutions to limit or ban fireworks.
"Surprising or not, it was never an issue that anyone voiced for the board to take a position in the community," said Timson, who said the only related concern that has come up is the danger of fire.
Weather conditions will play a major factor on how bad the next New Year's Eve fireworks celebration will be, said Acting Assistant Fire Chief Kenneth Word. Word said if the weeks before Dec. 31 are dry, it increases the chance for brush and structure fires.
In any case, he hopes people remember what happened last year.
"Some people will curb what they've done in the past," he said. "Others are just not going to pay attention to it. They're just going to do what they want to do.
"The year 2000, that's a pretty big thing. People are going to be in a very partying mood."
State leaders speak up
Star-Bulletin staff
The Star-Bulletin recently asked Gov. Ben Cayetano, Senate President Norman Mizuguchi and House Speaker Calvin Say to assess this year's legislative session and issues still confronting state lawmakers.
All three were asked the same questions. Mizuguchi (D, Aiea) and Say (D, Palolo) answered in writing. Cayetano chose to meet with Mike Yuen, Star-Bulletin Capitol bureau chief, and responded verbally.
The answers were revealing as to where Cayetano, Mizuguchi and Say agreed or disagreed. Cayetano, apparently still upset over the Senate's refusal to reconfirm Margery Bronster and Earl Anzai as attorney general and budget director, respectively, used several of his answers to fire shots at the Senate.
|
Here are the questions and the answers.
Question: What do you think were the top accomplishments of the Legislature?
Cayetano: The tobacco settlement fund was a good accomplishment. There were some mild successes in education -- the "new century" charter schools and the school performance bills. I say mild because they were watered down from what I originally wanted.
I think the House should be credited with the two-year freeze on wage increases, even though I didn't think that was necessary. But the House has made its point: That's what they want the public workers unions to adhere to.
Mizuguchi: We provided significant tax relief through the depyramiding of the general excise tax on goods and services. This was the cornerstone of our tax relief package. The reduction would be phased in over six years beginning Jan. 1, 2000, and would reach $150 million annually by the year 2005. In addition, excise taxes on professional services performed out of state have been eliminated.
We also passed a high-technology omnibus bill that will provide tax credits for those wanting to invest in the high-technology industry. We balanced the budget, made good on the retroactive collective-bargaining pay raises negotiated for government workers last year and provided well-deserved judicial pay raises.
The Legislature satisfied the state's obligation to pay for the Felix vs. Cayetano consent decree to cover the health and education services for special-needs children. We established the Hawaii Tobacco Settlement Special Fund for tobacco prevention and control and children's health programs. It also creates a "rainy day" fund for emergencies.
We enacted provisions to allow the creation of up to 25 new century charter schools. We also made great strides in the prevention and reduction of domestic violence and child abuse.
Say: 1) Finalizing and adopting a two-year financial plan that is fiscally responsible, meets our mandated and other obligations, provides for core services and supports business stimulation. 2) Continuing to meet the public's expectations of education as the top priority. 3) In the House, establishing and sustaining a climate of openness and collaboration that fostered frank, honest discussions of even the most controversial issues.
Q: Where do you see the Legislature failing?
Cayetano: They didn't hit any home runs -- or even try to. The House's pay freeze legislation is a double. Home runs would have been in areas like education. But there were none.
Mizuguchi: We still have unfinished business. The House and the Senate have agreed to work hard on civil service reform during the interim. I also plan to make education reform a priority during the interim and want to work with the House in developing a plan to downsize and restructure government. Downsizing government would be consistent with the Senate position of reducing state government by voluntary separation legislation, cutting vacancies and other program reductions, which the House would not agree to.
Say: From a procedural standpoint, I'm disappointed in the way some bills were handled, particularly during the final, conference portion of the session. I think that it is incumbent upon the House and Senate to make improvements and ensure that the bills we pass meet certain basic criteria.
Q: What, if anything, should the Legislature have done differently?
Cayetano: Lawmakers should have paid a little more attention to the 1998 election. People wanted change. They wanted big changes. They don't want change in itsy-bitsy steps that the Legislature came through with. They wanted big change. That, I think, was a failing.
Mizuguchi: The changed demographics of the Legislature this session -- newly elected members, new leadership and committee chairs -- certainly posed challenges. Also, I believe with the increased amount of bills this year, it made it difficult for legislators to prioritize important issues. I have always been a proponent of limiting the number of bills introduced each session. I will propose such a measure for consideration next year.
Say: I believe the people would have been better served if we had focused our efforts more strongly on containing and reducing the size of government. There is substantial interest in this area on the part of many individual legislators, but I'm saying that there should have been more consensus and urgency regarding this issue on the part of both chambers.
Q: How will the Senate's rejection of Margery Bronster as attorney general affect the long-term relationship between the governor and the Legislature?
Cayetano: Well, we're all supposed to be professionals, and we're answerable to the voters. As long as a legislator has a good idea that's going to benefit the public, I can work with anyone. But I think we all know each other better now because the Senate's rejection of Bronster and Budget Director Earl Anzai revealed a lot about some of the senators. It revealed the mentality held by too many in the Senate -- they're more concerned about their own internal politics than the general welfare of the public.
Mizuguchi: I'm hopeful that the governor and the Senate can put the Bronster issue behind us. We shouldn't let the past affect the future legislative process.
Say: Not much. I think both sides recognize that we cannot let something like this sidetrack us from addressing the crucial issues, such as economic revival and downsizing government.
Q: Do you think the rejection of Bronster will contribute to voters' cynicism with their legislators in particular and the Legislature in general?
Cayetano: Yes, absolutely. I can't remember when there's ever been such a public outcry over the rejection of a Cabinet appointment.
Mizuguchi: I cannot speculate on what individual voters or special-interest groups will do. My hope is that voters will make their decisions based on the overall performance and accomplishments of their respective legislators and the Legislature in general.
Say: Yes, definitely. Even though the House is not involved in confirmation of executive appointees, I think the people look at the Legislature as a single entity. What one side does definitely affects the public's perception of the Legislature as a whole. I have a sense that the Bronster issue diminished people's confidence in elected officials.
Q: Given the isles' continuing anemic economy, is state government headed toward further reduction of services, or will there be a need for revenue enhancements?
Cayetano: One, the economy is beginning to come back. Two, there will always be a need to make government more efficient and productive; it's a never-ending task. Three, there may be a need for revenue enhancements. My view has always been that we tax the people who don't live here. When they come, they use more of our precious resources and natural assets than the local people in the short time that they're here. Example: I haven't been to Waikiki Beach in 35, 40 years. Some guy who comes from the mainland or Japan uses that beach more in a week than I would do in a lifetime, I bet.
Mizuguchi: Government cannot be all things to all people. People often think of "government" in terms of the state, but policies imposed at the federal level have had an adverse impact on the state's financial resources. The city and county governments must also be responsible for reducing spending by improving operational efficiency.
We also need to encourage the unions to become full participants in and partners on economic development. Unions need to become more sensitive to the issues and concerns of the private sector. This should not be a situation of "us vs. them."
Certainly, the government must be responsible to help stimulate the economy. But government has no control over the "big box" retailers from the mainland that have dramatically changed the retail industry in Hawaii. Nor can it dictate where people should spend their disposable income, as many isle residents don't stay here for their vacations.
Say: Without some real and tangible gains in the economy, I would say yes, so we must look to cutting services or raising taxes and fees to balance the budget. That is why we placed such a high priority over the past few years in putting more money back in the hands of consumers and businesses. We want these efforts to bear fruit very soon.
Q: How realistic is it to have pay freezes and less generous fringe benefits for government workers?
Cayetano: Very realistic. It is something that has to be done in order for us to get through the next couple of years. The newspapers reported on the auditor's report on the Public Employees Health Fund. If current trends continue, the fund could be costing taxpayers $1 billion annually by 2013. That's what Earl Anzai has been saying for years. That thing is exploding beyond our control.
All of the measures we have sent to deal with the problem have died in the Senate. That tells the people where the problem is. But eventually it is going to get to the point where there is a crisis that will force these people to make hard decisions. Either that, or the next election will cure many of the problems we have there.
But new Republicans are never a cure because they are ineffective. The Legislature will continue to be dominated by Democrats. What we need are new Democrats who place the public welfare above organizational or internal politics.
Mizuguchi: We cannot take away from existing collective-bargaining laws pay raises and benefits that have been negotiated and agreed upon in good faith. The issue of pay freezes should be viewed in the context of a prospective approach where we hope to lay the foundation for the future while we still grapple with government belt-tightening.
Say: I think we have no choice but to seriously consider these options. As long as our economy continues to struggle, we have to look at holding down the biggest cost areas in our economy: the wages and benefits paid to public employees.
Question: Our sense is that the majority of lawmakers are opposed to tax increases and gambling. Is there anything else that can immediately add funds to state coffers?
Cayetano: I think the tobacco settlement will add about $40 million a year. So that's going to help quite a bit. I'm really confident that we're going to win the oil case, the state's lawsuit against gas companies for allegedly conspiring to set high gas prices. I feel very good about our chances. If those settlements bring in big chunks of money, there will be no need to do anything else.
Mizuguchi: I've gone on record for a long time expressing my support for gaming, specifically, shipboard gambling. It is my belief that with proper management and controls, gaming would give our state the major economic boost we need. Gaming and related activities would create untold numbers of jobs and bring in millions in nontax revenues to the state -- something we desperately need. Thousands of island residents go to Las Vegas every year to gamble. Why not encourage them to stay home to spend their money?
Say: I can only speak for the House. The consensus in our majority caucus is: no across-the-board tax increases and no gambling. We hope that our efforts to stimulate the economy through personal income tax reductions and business tax relief measures will begin to pay off very soon. On a personal note, gaming and other ideas that allege immediate economic recovery are knee-jerk reactions to our problems. We must think these ideas through very carefully and look at the long-term benefit or harm we are doing to our state.
Q: Can lawmakers do anything about controlling fireworks?
Cayetano: Fireworks is one of those issues where the Legislature should remember that in our system of government, elected officials are duty-bound to protect the minority. The majority of people in this state probably favor fireworks. But the fact of the matter -- and it is becoming more and more apparent every New Year's Eve -- is that the burning of fireworks causes property damage, hurts people physically and creates health problems for people who suffer from respiratory illnesses. That's a minority. In our system, elected officials are supposed to make sure that minorities are protected. They haven't done that because they haven't had the will.
Mizuguchi: With the community equally divided on this issue, it is no surprise that those representing the community were as equally divided. Toward the close of the 1999 legislative session, there was too great a disparity between the Senate's position of an outright ban and the House's proposal of delegating authority to each county. However, both houses made significant progress in discussions. I'm confident this matter will be resolved by next session.
Say: I think there is agreement that something must be done. The House and Senate differ in approach. We recognize that this is a divisive issue where even members of the community do not agree. We believe that the counties are the appropriate governmental bodies to regulate fireworks. Each county -- each community -- is different. It would be inappropriate to pass a blanket law for the entire state when that law does not reflect clearly the wishes of the majority of voters.
Q: After last year's election, Democratic lawmakers said they were given a mandate for change. Did you think Democratic lawmakers fulfilled that mandate? If the answer is yes, what specifically?
Cayetano: The answer is no. Obviously, the Senate's refusal to reconfirm Bronster and Anzai, two of the leading Cabinet members who have really tried to be agents of change, and the failure of the Senate to pass bills that deal boldly with education, civil service reform and paring the government show that they haven't gotten the message. Put it this way: Too many of them haven't gotten the message. But there are some who want to make change -- the Matt Matsunagas and the Avery Chumbleys. Those kinds of people.
Mizuguchi: Yes, I believe we kept to my objective of "promises made, promises kept." On opening day I promised this would be a session to rally around business. The Senate stood firmly beside businesses and supported the depyramiding of the general excise tax and the elimination of the excise tax on exported professional services.
Last year we gave the largest personal income tax cut in Hawaii's history. That tax cut, coupled with the excise tax depyramiding in 1999, will save taxpayers millions of dollars over the coming years. Also, the $100 million-plus in retroactive collective-bargaining payments to state and county public employees should boost the economy.
Say: That's a difficult question. In my opinion, yes, we have responded to the call for change. Over the past few years, we have substantially reduced the governor's spending requests, we have made our educational system the top priority, and we are putting money back in the hands of people and businesses to turn our economy around. But the problem lies in the fact that while people called for change, they did not specify what "change" they wanted. The word "change" is like "development" or "sovereignty." Each person has his or her own sense of exactly what those words mean. Some people will be very happy with the changes we have made, while others will be very dissatisfied. It just depends on each person's personal definition of change.
Q: What should be the Legislature's top priorities for next session?
Cayetano: Education reform. Civil service reform. That ties into this whole thing about government productivity. Those two are very, very important. I think in terms of the economy -- providing incentives, breaks or support for industries which will help us diversify the economy -- that will also be important.
Mizuguchi: The economy will continue to be the top priority. Also, civil service reform. I plan to make education reform a top priority for next session as well.
Say: 1) Education. 2) Reducing the size of government. 3) The environment. 4) Jobs. 5) Restoring public confidence in government.
