Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Editorials
Thursday, June 8, 2000Mizuguchi’s departure
could further reformNorman Mizuguchi's decision to retire from the Senate -- and probably from all elective politics -- opens the way for Honolulu Councilwoman Donna Mercado Kim, who had earlier announced that she would seek his Kalihi Valley-Aiea seat whether or not Mizuguchi sought re-election.The issue: Norman Mizuguchi is retiring after 26 years in the Legislature.
Mizuguchi's departure could also lead to a scramble to succeed him as Senate president. At this point there is no clear favorite. Robert Bunda, Avery Chumbley, Colleen Hanabusa, Andy Levin, Matt Matsunaga and Brian Taniguchi have been mentioned as potential candidates. But with 14 Senate seats at stake in November, it's impossible to forecast the eventual winner.
Mizuguchi served 26 years in the Legislature, longer than any other current legislator. He made an unsuccessful bid for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1990, losing to Neil Abercrombie.
Mizuguchi has been Senate president since 1994, when he ousted the bumbling James Aki. His tenure has roughly coincided with Ben Cayetano's two terms as governor.
The relationship has been cool at best. The nadir came last year when the Senate, under Mizu-guchi's leadership, rejected Caye-tano's nominations of Margery Bronster and Earl Anzai for second terms as attorney general and budget director, respectively.
The rejection was a humiliation for the governor. However, it produced a backlash of public indignation against the Senate, based particularly on Bronster's central role in investigating the Bishop Estate scandal. The storm of criticism couldn't have been pleasant for Mizuguchi.
This year Cayetano was frustrated when the Legislature rejected most of his proposals for civil service and collective bargaining reforms. Mizuguchi, who prides himself on his ties to organized labor, was again not an enthusiastic supporter of the governor.
Mizuguchi has also had to contend with attempts to put together the votes to unseat him as Senate president. Although those efforts were unsuccessful, they signaled discontent in the senatorial ranks. Even if Mizuguchi could have fended off Kim's bid for his seat, he might not have survived as president.
The governor, while crediting Mizuguchi with a good legislative record, said his departure opens the way for the selection of a Senate president "who is open to new ideas and willing to tread new ground."
There is indeed a need in the Legislature for greater receptivity to new ideas, as shown by the indifference and even outright hostility displayed in the last session to Cayetano's calls for reform. The public employee unions' grip on the Legislature must be broken. A Senate leadership that dared to be independent of the unions would be helpful.
Microsoft ruling
FEDERAL Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's order that Microsoft Corp. divide into two companies opens an appeal process that is expected to be fought for years.
In the meantime, negotiations may continue between the government and Microsoft. There is a question whether the Justice Department after the Clinton administration will maintain the current policy regarding competition in the computer industry.
In findings issued in April, Penfield ruled that Microsoft had violated federal antitrust law in protecting its monopoly in computer operating systems and expanding its domination of the market for Internet browsers. The judge made clear before his legal conclusions were issued this week that he would order Microsoft to be split into two companies, one to own and market the Windows operating system and the other to handle all other Microsoft software, including its Explorer Internet browser.
"Microsoft, as it is presently organized and led, is unwilling to accept the notion that it broke the law or accede to an order amending its conduct," Jackson wrote in issuing his order.
Gates said the ruling shows that "the government can take away what you have created if it proves to be too popular." But the government provided evidence that Microsoft had used anti-competitive practices that allowed it to dominate the computer industry. For example, it required manufacturers of computers equipped with Windows to use the Explorer browser instead of Netscape Communication Corp.'s Netscape.
Assistant Attorney General Joel I. Klein, head of the Justice Department's antitrust division, called Penfield's order "the right remedy for Microsoft's serious and repeated violations of the antitrust laws."
Jackson's order gives Microsoft four months to break in two -- the time recommended by the government -- but Microsoft is virtually assured of delaying the order's imposition until the case is resolved, probably in the U.S. Supreme Court.
That resolution may well not come before a new administration takes office in Washington. A Republican victory might mean a change in antitrust policy that could affect the Microsoft case. There is a real question whether the interests of the consumer would be served by breaking up Microsoft. The last word on this issue has yet to be spoken.
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
