[ OUR OPINION ]

---

State should move to give
information on birth control

THE ISSUE Governor Lingle has approved rules on dispensing emergency birth control.

THOUGH it took almost two years, Hawaii will finally join four other states in dispensing an emergency contraceptive that will give women a safe method of avoiding pregnancies and will decrease the likelihood of abortions.

The obstacle now is to provide information about where women can get the nonprescription contraceptive. If this isn't done, the value of the law, approved by the state Legislature and signed by Governor Lingle in 2003, will be negated.

Implementation of the law was delayed by a complicated rule-making process the Lingle administration required. The rules became a point of contention among Hawaii advocates, particularly after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration earlier this year refused to permit nonprescription sales against the overwhelming recommendation of its advisory panels.

The so-called "morning after" pill has been deemed safe for over-the-counter sales by two FDA boards made up of medical experts and by the American Medical Association. It contains a stronger dose of hormones that have been used safely in ordinary contraceptives for more than 30 years and prevents pregnancy if taken within 48 to 72 hours after intercourse.

Anti-abortion advocates derailed the FDA's initiative even though the pills could actually prevent as many as 1.5 million unintended pregnancies annually and reduce abortion rates. The FDA was expected to take up the issue again next year.

The state law, effective Dec. 25, allows individual pharmacists to dispense the contraceptive in collaboration with a licensed physician.

However, women will need to know where the contraceptive will be available and it appears the state will leave it to family planning groups, pharmacies and clinics to take this on. Since the state is responsible for the law's passage and its administration, it should also provide women with this information. Legislators and the governor need to follow up on this effort.

---

BACK TO TOP
|

Leadership change
needed in Pentagon

THE ISSUE Leading Republicans have criticized Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

REACTION to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's dismissive response to a National Guardsman's concern about lack of battle armor has escalated to resounding criticism. Confidence in Rumsfeld's leadership has plunged to the point where his resignation is necessary. A fresh approach is needed in the Pentagon to cope with the problems that Rumsfeld and his top deputies failed to anticipate in Iraq.

President Bush continues to stand by Rumsfeld, but pressure is likely to grow for Rumsfeld to resign after the Jan. 30 elections in Iraq. When Rumsfeld finally makes his exit, he should be joined by Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary who called for invading Iraq days after the 9/11 attack and predicted that Iraqis would "greet us as liberators," and Douglas Feith, the undersecretary who directed the Pentagon's prewar efforts to review Iraqi-related intelligence.

Rumsfeld's recent explanation to soldiers lacking armor that they "go to war with the Army you have" triggered sharp reactions from Bush supporters. Sen. John McCain, a probable contender for the Republican presidential nomination in four years, said he has "no confidence" in the secretary.

Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott said he is "not a fan of Secretary Rumsfeld. I don't think he listens to his uniformed officers." Other harsh words have come from Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., and retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who led U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf War in 1992 and twice campaigned for President Bush.

The most striking slam came from William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, a conservative magazine. In a Washington Post op-ed piece, Kristol wrote that American soldiers "deserve a better defense secretary than the one we have." Kristol, who supported going to war in Iraq, accused Rumsfeld of "arrogance" and "buck-passing" while clinging to a flawed strategy involving too few troops.