Editorials
Tuesday, May 22, 2001
THE state Republican Party has signaled its intent to embrace a more moderate political stance, a move that would expand its appeal to reform-minded voters. Such a shift also would strengthen its ability to challenge Hawaii's long-dominant Democratic Party, creating a good prospect for a vibrant two-party state. Isle GOP hovers
on the edge of changeThe issue: An energized
Republican Party can transform
Hawaii's political landscape.At their convention last weekend, isle Republicans became the first in the nation to present a member of the Log Cabin Republicans, the largest gay and lesbian GOP organization, as a featured speaker. By alIowing the group recognition, Hawaii's Republicans showed they can be more inclusive and diverse than its conservative national membership.
Chairwoman Linda Lingle, who is likely to again carry the GOP banner in the gubernatorial campaign next year, has been instrumental in focusing public attention on the party's accomplishments, particularly in the state Legislature. Although Republicans numbered only 19 among 51 House members, they were able to put pressure on the Democrats to take up some government reform measures.
Lingle showed her strong leadership by keeping the convention centered on wresting power from the Democrats rather than on squabbling over school prayer, abortion and other divisive issues. She also has worked diligently since 1998, when she narrowly lost the governor's race, on broadening the party's base to include younger people, independents and disenchanted Democrats.
Lingle should be careful to not alienate the more conservative elements of her party. She has been criticized for being too heavy-handed in trying to influence which Republicans run for what office. Lingle herself felt she was hampered in her bid for governor by a running mate not of her choosing.
Still, the Republican Party has maneuvered itself away from the fringe of politics in Hawaii to a more centrist position, one that it can now use to stir debate and stimulate change in a state where the mindset is too entrenched in how things used to be.
ADVANCES in electronic communication have taken the issue of balancing free speech with privacy to a new level. In a case stemming from the interception of a cellular telephone call, the U.S. Supreme Court has opted for First Amendment protections in a privacy case involving public affairs. The court held to the delicate but practical tenet that the media may report information about matters of public significance without being punished unless the media itself obtained the information illegally. Supreme Court rules
for responsible free pressThe issue: The U.S. Supreme Court
has protected the media in the release
of important information illegally
obtained by someone else.The case before the high court arose from a telephone conversation between two teachers' union officials in Pennsylvania. A person whose identity remains undisclosed recorded the call, and the recording fell into the hands of a radio talk-show host, who broadcast it repeatedly. The inflammatory conversation regarded ongoing labor negotiations.
The union officials sued the talk-show host for broadcasting a conversation that he knew had been intercepted in violation of federal wiretapping laws. In addition to forbidding interception of electronic communication, those laws impose civil liability for disclosing the contents of illegally intercepted communication. However, whether public officials like it or not, the balance between privacy and free speech comes into play in situations involving public affairs.
"In this case," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the 6-3 majority, "privacy concerns give way when balanced against the interest in publishing matters of public importance...One of the costs associated with participation in public affairs is an attendant loss of privacy."
In another case, Rep. John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, is suing Rep. James McDermott, D-Wash., for releasing to the public a conversation in 1996 between Boehner and then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The ruling in the Pennsylvania case should result in the dismissal of Boehner's lawsuit.
Honolulu media generally have acted responsibly in deciding whether to report information that may infringe on a person's privacy when that person is a public figure. They declined to report on explosive allegations against 1986 gubernatorial candidate Cec Heftel that was contained in a confidential state Attorney General's Office document anonymously mailed to the media, until Heftel complained publicly after the election about distribution of the "smear" document. Several years later, the Star-Bulletin published the contents of a confidential police report about an encounter between then-state Sen. Steve Cobb and a male transvestite prostitute after Cobb was charged with soliciting prostitution in an unrelated incident, and other media repeated the information.
In reporting the news, the media is obligated in these situations to consider privacy concerns along with the public interest. The Supreme Court decision to apply that principal to interception of cell-phone communication should logically should extend into e-mail and other avenues of cyberspace.
Published by Oahu Publications Inc., a subsidiary of Black Press.Don Kendall, President
John Flanagan, publisher and editor in chief 529-4748; jflanagan@starbulletin.com
Frank Bridgewater, managing editor 529-4791; fbridgewater@starbulletin.com
Michael Rovner, assistant managing editor 529-4768; mrovner@starbulletin.com
Lucy Young-Oda, assistant managing editor 529-4762; lyoungoda@starbulletin.com The Honolulu Star-Bulletin (USPS 249460) is published daily by
Oahu Publications at 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 7-500, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
Periodicals postage paid at Honolulu, Hawaii. Postmaster: Send address changes to
Star-Bulletin, P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, Hawaii 96802.
