Debate over age of consent

Legislature was following public will

Raising the age of consent was arguably the most sensitive and emotional issue passed by the 2001 Legislature. Hawaii is the only state in the country to place the age of consent at 14.

However, the measure that passed, House Bill 236, was not created to criminalize consensual teenage sex. Rather, it sought to address the community's concerns that young people were being sexually preyed upon and exploited by adults. Disparity in age between sexual partners, especially when one partner is very young, is troubling and problematic. It goes to the very core of our society's moral standards. This is why Governor Cayetano's veto of H.B. 236 is difficult to fathom.

Despite the governor's objections, H.B. 236 is a step in the right direction. It directly addresses the issue of age disparity in sexual relationships by specifying that adults who engage in sexual relations with a minor at least five years younger shall be subject to criminal penalties. This bill criminalizes sexual penetration and sexual contact with a minor who is at least 14 years of age, but less than 16 years old, if the other person involved is 19 years or older, and not married to the minor, irrespective of gender.

The measure also requires:

1. The prosecuting attorney of each county to maintain a record of all sexual assault cases in the first degree and in the third degree which are received and prosecuted during an 18-month period;

2. The Legislative Reverence Bureau to review the effectiveness and impact of this act, based on the data provided by the Honolulu prosecuting attorney, and report its findings to this body; and,

3. A comprehensive study related to the issues of age of consent to allow us to better address these issues in future legislative sessions, by requiring the attorney general, with the aid of the Coalition for the Prevention of Sex Assault, to convene a task force to conduct a comprehensive review.

There is no doubt that this is an issue about which reasonable people can disagree. Public testimony and discussion the Legislature received from parents, women's advocacy groups, the law enforcement community and social service and religious groups were sincere, well meaning and reflected the many an disparate views on the matter.

The Legislature took pains to ensure that H.B. 236 represented a meaningful response to the widespread community concerns. But one thing is abundantly clear -- the public's desire to raise the age of sexual consent was overwhelming and non-negotiable. This is what makes this veto so troubling.

Rep. Marilyn Lee
D, 38th District (Mililani-Waimanalo)

Will someone please explain 'Why?'

Regarding the story "Governor's age-of-consent bill veto sparks fire among legislators," Star-Bulletin, June 22:

I know I am not alone in my outrage over the news of the veto by our governor to not raise the legal age-of-consent to 16. It is my understanding that we are the only state in the union to allow our precious 14-year-old children to sleep with adults! I have a daughter turning 14 and a son turning 12 this year, and even if I didn't I would still be outraged.

What I really want to know is "why?" Please help me understand the reasoning behind this. Why not raise the legal age-of-consent to 16? I would like to see it be 18 even. We have way too many young girls with babies. We are giving our children adult privileges and responsibilities without psychological, emotional and physical maturity to handle them, and it is just wrong.

Our governor's job is to serve us -- to uphold what is best for us. I am sure most of us disagree with his decision. So what's his reasoning? I just want to understand, please. My only salvation, thus far, is knowing that our/my legislators are outraged as well. I put my trust in them and if necessary will testify myself on behalf of all children.

Julie Kinhult

Raising age will not give added protection

The Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women supports Governor Cayetano's veto of House Bill 236 on the age of sexual consent. While we are deeply concerned about the motional and physical well being of adolescents and believe that they should be well protected from sexual predators, we strongly believe that House Bill 236 would not accomplish these goals. This important issue has been politicized to further an agenda that is not related to the protection of Hawaii's adolescents.

Hawaii already has some of the best sexual assault laws in the country. It is already a criminal offense to engage in sexual contact with anyone, including adolescents, without their consent. As the law stands today, any person who threatens, coerces or otherwise engages a teenager in sexual activity without consent has committed a serious sexual crime. The parents of any teenager who discloses sexual victimization should report the crime to the police.

While proponents' spin on this legislation suggests that it targets the 34-year-old male predator who is preying on 14- and 15-year-olds; the bill is more likely to make a number of young adolescent males in our community into Class A felony sex offenders, who must register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives.

Factual information and "best practice" should be the basis of new legislation. Without reliable information on the nature and scope of the problem, it is impossible to make sound public policy. This necessary information was not available to the Legislature when the bill was passed. Other jurisdictions that rushed into similar legislation now wish they had consulted with agencies and experts who deal with sex assault prior to changing their laws. Rhetoric and emotion are not the foundation of good laws.

Jeanne Y. Ohta
Executive Director
State Commission on the Status of Women

Let's raise standards, not age limits

I support the governor's decision, although I'm not sure of his motive behind it. Why is it that so many believe that raising the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16 is going to solve a problem? Let's consider for a moment the real problem. The youth in our schools have been counseled that there are no moral absolutes. Instead, what's moral or immoral is a matter of personal opinion. So-called sex education classes are simply indoctrination that undermines family/church strictures against pre-marital sex. Lessons of abstinence are considered passe and replaced with lessons about condoms, birth-control pills and abortions. Therefore, the undermining of parental authority came with legal and extra-legal measures to assist teenage abortions with neither parental knowledge nor consent. Who is teaching and encouraging these things? Adults!

Parental teachings, traditions, morality and godly examples, not laws and government regulations, are what makes for a civilized society. The importance of morality is that people behave themselves even if nobody's watching. It appears that the theory behind raising the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16 is to protect our youths from amoral adults. But if our youth are actually consenting to have sex at the age of 14 with an adult, why are we so surprised?

Where did they learn that it was OK? From educators and lawmakers who see such things like abstinence as demeaning and valueless.

So now lawmakers want to fix it all by raising the age of consent. Let me offer another alternative: Let's try raising the standard of morality and traditional values that our grandparents and great-grandparents had. And let's start with us. Then our youth will have good examples to pattern their lives after.

Rich Wilbur

Is Cayetano trying to make party look good?

Has Gov. Cayetano gone completely mad or are there some Democratic Party shenanigans going on?

A bill that would have raised the age of consent from 14 to 16 was vetoed by Cayetano because he was concerned that a 19-year-old (male) might have consensual sex with a 14-year-old (female) and that would result in the male being prosecuted and labeled a sex offender.

Doesn't he understand that that is the meaning of statutory rape? It means that a 14-year-old girl -- who cannot drive a car, legally drink and is a freshman in high school -- is too young to give her consent to have sex, and the state serves as her guardian in some legal respects. A 19-year-old male can just as readily be a sex offender as a 50-year-old pervert. The state is required to protect the young and the innocent from predators.

Cayetano seems content trying to be the best lawyer in the country rather than being the protector of our children. Could it be that Cayetano is merely playing the dupe so the Democrats can finally brag about overriding his veto after 44 years of Democrat Party despotism?

Maybe it's time a non-lawyer became governor so common sense might prevail.

Fred Gartley

[Quotables] "Up to his last day he was joking around. He could hardly breathe and he hadn't been able to eat but he had a smile on his face." John Hirokawa, Night club magician and one of the many island entertainers managed by legendary promoter Kimo McVay, who died Friday of cancer. "The performance standards are carrying out the content standards. It's what kids are going to be taught. It gives more direction and guidance to teachers, many of whom have already implemented the content standards." Denise Matsumoto, Chairwoman of the Regular Education Committee, on documents approved by a Board of Education as part of its quest to improve reading in the public schools.

Garden cultivates ways to battle stress

Your June 21 editorial "City plans to root out community garden" and the same day's Editor's Scratchpad: "Stop the world, I want to get off" by Burl Burlingame, show the contrast between our deteriorating human relationships as lamented by Burlingame, and our sustaining relationship with creation that may be found in an urban community garden (and is inherent in the garden of biblical fame).

The forces that would displace the Foster garden plots: The short-term, essentially selfish mentality manifested in corporate/government power are the same as those that foster the social stresses of which Burlingame complains.

As your editorial points out, the societal benefits of community gardens are many. Many cities have responded to this knowledge with garden-programs. High-profit commerce-oriented cities such as New York continue to destroy them. For our people's thriving garden plots to be replaced by orchids is an arrogant mani- festation of elitist trickle-down economics. Marie Antoinette, when informed that the people had no food, said, "Let them eat cake." Here we have "Let them smell orchids."

Realization of the integrated nature of our place as individuals in society and the Earth's total ecology, as nurtured by community gardens, is essential to reverse the trend that may fulfill Burlingame's request for the world to stop. It is vital that the "garden" grows in Honolulu for him, as well as for the rest of us.

Andrew Jones

Campaign reform needs local support

The League of Women Voters strongly supports the Shays-Meehan campaign finance reform bill which will soon be voted on by the U.S. House. This strong, bipartisan bill will stop corporations, unions and wealthy individuals from giving unlimited amounts of money to candidates' campaigns and the political parties.

The voices of citizens should be heard in Washington, D.C. Too often, however, special interest contributors have the access and influence to overwhelm the voices of citizens. From health-care reform to energy and environmental policy, special interests have too big a role. We need the Shays-Meehan bill to help fix this problem.

President Bush says he will sign campaign finance reform into law if Congress passes it. The League of Women Voters call on Rep. Neil Abercrombie and Rep. Patsy Mink to support the Shays-Meehan Bill.

Maile Bay
President, League of Women Voters of Hawaii

Quarantine fee is hard on military families

As the senior enlisted adviser of U.S. Pacific Command, I am disappointed that Governor Cayetano has vetoed the pet quarantine bill. This quarantine fee has a negative financial impact on our junior service members, as they must already pay for other pet-associated costs such as shots, blood tests, microchip installation and shipping, adding from $300 to more than $1,000 to their out-of-pocket expenses. The quarantine fee is a complaint I hear frequently and loudly from our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines.

Service members were grateful for the generous relief provided by the State and Federal government from quarantine fees this past year. That's why we were surprised and disappointed that the governor vetoed continuing state support for one more year, while our senior military leaders pursued an increase in the amount of Federal reimbursement.

Military members sacrifice much in service to their country. They go where they are ordered without question to high-cost areas such as Hawaii. Most enjoy their tours here while giving back much to the community in volunteer efforts and community service.

Our service members and their families do not understand the politics of the veto but all understand the financial burden the quarantine fees impose. The Governor is sending the wrong signal to the military community in Hawaii.

Sgt. Maj. Barbara S. Smith
Headquarters United States Pacific Command
U.S. Army

China's thinking seems reasonable

In his June 24 "The Rising East" column, Richard Halloran says Chinese perceptions of America are often mistaken, and that Americans "chose to govern themselves with elected officials who are to reflect the wishes of their constituents, not the views of specialists."

From John Adams, et. al., to Brandeis, our view of government is that reasonable men in open discourse will govern best. We are based on reason and information, not wishful thinking. So the Chinese, in response to internationally proposed environmental restraints (which are, to be frank, wishful thinking) have asked that the already developed countries do it first to prove it can be done.

That is reasonable. They also don't want developing nations to be saddled with restrictions that were never part of the formative stage of the already developed countries. That too is reasonable. A healthy, productive economy will provide the profits that pay for environmental improvements.

I am not saying we should allow environmental damage that would be extremely costly to restore. We should be flexible enough to make pragmatic, ad hoc decisions on pollution standards vis-a-vis immediate needs. China has reduced coal-industry pollution while it has increased production and productivity. The Chinese have done this on their own.

Limited by editorial space, I can only make brief praise of Mr. Halloran's observation that Chinese leaders have postulated a view of America for their own internal reasons and that view is a "strange combination of images." So reason and irrationality are often wedded.

Daniel M. Finley

.

---

Letter guidelines The Star-Bulletin welcomes letters that are crisp and to the point on issues of public interest. The Star-Bulletin reserves the right to edit letters for clarity and length. Please direct comments to the issues; personal attacks will not be published. Letters must be signed, must include a mailing address and daytime telephone number. Letter form: Online form, click here E-mail: letters@starbulletin.com Fax: (808) 529-4750 Mail: Letters to the Editor, Honolulu Star-Bulletin 500 Ala Moana Blvd., No. 7-210, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813