Editorials
Monday, June 7, 1999Film industry proves
its worth to HawaiiEven though Hawaii's economy is still struggling, you wouldn't know it from the film industry. More money was spent on film production here last year than ever before. And the outlook is good for this year.The issue: State assistance to the movie industry by providing a film studio has been criticized in the past.
In 1998, spending on film and television production here reached $99.1 million. The best previous year was 1994, when revenues reached $97 million. In 1997, spending was only $70.7 million.
Last year, three TV series -- "Fantasy Island," "Wind on Water," and the Japanese program "Hotel" spent a total of $28 million in Hawaii. Neither "Fantasy Island" nor "Wind on Water" lasted a full season, but they still provided some prime-time exposure. Feature film productions -- "Father Damien," "Nemo" and "Dinosaurs" -- spent about $12.6 million. Revenue from commercial productions totaled $5.8 million.
This year looks promising despite the cancelation of the two network series filmed last year.
The world's most widely viewed television series, "Baywatch," now renamed "Baywatch Hawaii," is filming 22 episodes here and is expected to spend $22 million. The TV series "Pacific Blue" has filmed two episodes at a cost of $1.5 million. PAX TV will film a talent show in August and September.
"Baywatch" could give Hawaii the long-running TV series the state has lacked since the end of "Magnum, P.I."
The film industry has a double benefit for the state. It provides employment for local actors and technicians, income for local supply companies and tax revenue for the state.
And it gives the islands a lot of free publicity on the mainland and in foreign countries that can attract visitors and help tourism.
Thus the state has a strong incentive to attract film productions. Expansion and improvement of the state film studio at Diamond Head several years ago drew early criticism, but now that the film industry is thriving the critics are silent. No wonder. The studio has proved itself as a valuable asset in the competition for the movie business.
Appointment of first
gay U.S. ambassadorTHE Senate Republican leadership did itself no credit by blocking the confirmation of James C. Hormel, an openly gay San Francisco businessman, as ambassador to Luxembourg.
President Clinton has evaded GOP obstructionism by making the appointment during a congressional recess. Hormel can serve in the post through the current session of Congress, to the end of 2000, which coincides roughly with the end of Clinton's term. He will be the first openly homosexual U.S. ambassador.
This circumvention of the Senate's confirmation authority is not the best constitutional practice but it is justified by the Senate's shameless bowing to religious conservatives. The Foreign Relations Committee approved the nomination 16-2 in 1997, but Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott refused to let the full Senate vote on it. Hormel's supporters contend he would easily win confirmation if the Senate was permitted to vote on his nomination.
Hormel, 66, is an heir to the Hormel food fortune and a former dean at the University of Chicago Law School. He has been endorsed by both of California's senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, but incurred the wrath of conservatives by advocating gay rights.
Lott himself is an example of retrograde thinking on this issue. He has likened homosexuality to alcoholism, kleptomania and sex addiction.
The appointment was possible only because Congress was in recess for its 10-day Memorial Day break. The process is rarely used for high-profile appointments because it annoys senators, who value their confirmation prerogatives.
Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Okla., a leader of the opposition to the nomination, accused Clinton of "utter contempt of the Senate and its role in the confirmation process." He called Hormel "an inappropriate representative of our country."
Andrea Sheldon, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition, a conservative Christian group, said, "Recess appointments were not designed as subterfuge for appointing shady individuals to high office." She accused Hormel of being "a purveyor of smut" and of "cheering on child molesters and transvestite nuns."
At the White House, spokesman Joe Lockhart said, "It came down to a couple of senators who thought that he shouldn't be ambassador because he's gay. And the president thinks that's wrong and discriminatory and that's why he moved ahead with the recess appointment."
Early in his first term, Clinton angered gays who had supported his election when he backed away from an initiative to end the military's ban on homosexuals, settling on the compromise "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Hormel's appointment could be a way to make amends.
Hawaii's vote last November rejecting same-sex marriage was an indication that public opinion isn't prepared to fully accept homosexuality. But an appointment to an ambassadorship is not nearly as intimate a matter as marriage.
It's time to stop treating homosexuals as pariahs and give them the opportunity to contribute fully to society.
Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited PartnershipRupert 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
