Marshall's integrity needed on Council
Barbara Marshall was a member of an AFL-CIO-affiliated union for many years and yet the HGEA turned its back on her. Barbara has consistently promised that she will listen to all parties, but she cannot promise she will vote the way they want her to. The endorsements she has received from the other labor unions, business organizations, environmental groups and civic groups prove that others believe she is honest and fair.This is what integrity is all about. The City Council needs Barbara Marshall!
L. Muramaru
Kapolei
Dems' attack mailings don't tell true story
This is in response to several recent mailings sent by the Democrat Party of Hawaii on behalf of my opponent. These mailings accuse me of being a sellout and a puppet, and distort my voting record.The voters in my district can size up the mailings for what they are. I believe they know that I am not a sellout or anyone's puppet, and that my loyalty is to them.
I am also disappointed that my opponent turned down two televised discussions, one with Bob Rees on Olelo, the other with Dan Boylan on "Island Insights." These appearances would have allowed the voters to view my opponent and me side by side. They would have heard what we support and why. My opponent's decision to avoid these televised discussions has left the voters without that opportunity.
I have enjoyed my two years as a state representative. The work is interesting and I like the challenge. And I enjoy working with the many dedicated individuals and groups in Waimanalo, Kailua and Lanikai.
When I was elected I made a commitment to try my best and to do what I thought was right. I have kept that commitment, and it is one I will stick to if I am re-elected for a second term.
Rep. Joe Gomes
51st House District
Waimanalo, Keolu Hills, Lanikai
Don't vote 'yes' on ballot question No. 3
Neither the media nor the Office of Elections has sufficiently emphasized the fact that ballot question No. 3 does not ask voters to decide whether "information charging" should become law. Instead, it asks voters to let the Legislature decide for them.We are being told that information charging would permit prosecutors to submit a statement similar to a complaint, supported by affidavits of police officers or others, for a judge to consider in determining whether there is probable cause to charge someone with a felony. But the ballot question only asks whether the constitution should be amended to permit felony charges "to be initiated by a legal prosecuting officer through the filing of a signed, written information setting forth the charge" under procedures to be specified later by the Legislature. There is no requirement for affidavits or that a judge approve the charge, no requirement even for probable cause. As worded, the ballot question gives us no idea what information charging will really look like.
The Legislature should have passed a bill giving us the specifics and should have ensured that neither the amendment nor the bill would take effect without approval of the other. Instead, we are being asked as individuals to let the Legislature decide later, in a process dominated by special interest groups -- police, prosecutors, civil rights groups, the criminal defense bar -- what we meant if the constitution is amended as proposed by ballot question No. 3.
That prospect should be enough to make anyone vote "no" on ballot question No. 3.
Ted Baker
The Star-Bulletin welcomes letters that are crisp and to the point (150 to 200 words). 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 and include a daytime telephone number. How to write us
Letter form: Online form, click here
E-mail: letters@starbulletin.com
Fax: (808) 529-4750
Mail: Letters to the Editor, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, 7 Waterfront Plaza, 500 Ala Moana, Suite 210, Honolulu, HI 96813
