|
On Politics Richard Borreca |
On guard over
executive securityBack when Tom Gill was lieutenant governor, he got to work by slipping into his VW Beetle and driving himself down Tantalus.
Even for Gov. John A. Burns, security was a lone state officer trailing the tall, white-haired Democrat as he walked to daily Mass. Later, in 1970, when Sen. Larry Kuriyama was shot to death coming home from a political rally, security for Hawaii's top political executives intensified.
A pattern of executive protection evolved that had Hawaii's leaders driven to and from work by state security officers.
When John Waihee was lieutenant governor he pedaled his own bike to work from his Kalihi apartment until the security force took over.
When former Lt. Gov. Mazie Hirono went for a morning jog, a security officer trailed her in the state limo.
State executives learned to live in the unreal world of chauffeur-driven luxury. Some security officers would get the governor's schedule a day ahead and map out the best route and even practice driving it. Lieutenant governors, who had little to do, were secure in knowing that when they edged back from the lunch table, an officer would alert a driver to bring up the limo.
When Gov. George Ariyoshi retired there was a standing joke about how his expired driver's license had never needed to be renewed during his term in office. Security officers, however, didn't laugh when they were used by some governors and first ladies to run first-family errands.
The children of Hawaii governors and lieutenant governors had the mixed blessing of security details taking them to school and to and from movies and sometimes dates.
Now the state Senate has decided to review exactly what the duties of the security detail should be. The first bill called for withdrawing the protection from Lt. Gov. James "Duke" Aiona's family.
But Sen. Colleen Hanabusa, Judiciary Committee chairwoman, immediately seized on the gap in security protection, noting that the executive protection unit is supposed to protect not only state executives and their families, but members of the Legislature, judges and visiting officials.
Hanabusa reasoned that the security should be "by criteria and not class." What is left unmentioned is the cost. Today the "protective services" portion of the state budget is $2,879,230 a year. But John Peyton, director of public safety, citing security concerns, is reluctant to reveal how much actually is spent. Peyton asked to meet in executive session with the committee, but Hanabusa says she can't find a legal provision that allows her to take the committee behind closed doors.
Republicans have been quick to politicize the debate, as even Governor Lingle said the proposed security cutback falls in the category of "why now" legislation being proposed when the state has a Republican governor for the first time in 40 years.
But a healthy debate about what the state security officers once did for the chief executives and what they should be doing is all about the competition of a two-party system, and that is a benefit that neither Lingle nor the public should shun.
See the Columnists section for some past articles.
Richard Borreca writes on politics every Sunday in the Star-Bulletin. He can be reached at 525-8630 or by e-mail at rborreca@starbulletin.com.