Subsidized birth control would keep women off welfare

The state currently has $118 million in unused welfare funds. Instead of using it for corrective action, we should look into using it in preventive ways. Instead of paying people after they have children and have fallen on hard times, why not offer some money to use long-term birth control (LTBC) such as Norplant?

Imagine if the state allocated money to clinics so that LTBC would be free and the women volunteering for it would receive $500. This would greatly appeal to college students, those on financial aid, the hungry/homeless and the drug addicted. None of these people are in a position where having a child would be beneficial.

In New York City a program like this was implemented. In the first nine months 838 women took advantage of it. Prior to having LTBC those women had a combined total of 1,322 abortions, with some having had 15. When a "drug baby" is born the medical costs often exceed $100,000, and the child is prone to strokes, seizures, ADD, heart and respiratory problems. The cost of the implant (around $500) and the money paid to the woman for getting it is a small price to pay to avoid these abortions, medical costs and all the children's suffering.

Often a family lives paycheck to paycheck. A family like this might not be able to afford $500 for birth control, and if they have another child it could be enough to financially break them. LTBC could help a family like this avoid going greatly in debt and keep them from having to receive financial assistance in case of another child. The money given to take LTBC would be enough to feed a family for a month and ensure the future financial safety of this family.

Women in college who get pregnant are much more likely to drop out than other women. A woman who drops out of college due to pregnancy is much more likely to need welfare later, so the government is better off paying $1,000 now instead of $800/month later. The average college student doesn't have an extra $500 to spend on LTBC, so a program like this would help them afford it, along with giving them money for school. This would guarantee a better future for the woman. Since LTBC can be removed at any time, the woman could change her mind and start a family when she wants.

The time has come to stop only being responsive and start being preventive. A voluntary program that offers incentives to women who use LTBC combined with thorough education programs in school will help greatly reduce the number of accidental pregnancies each year. The benefits are vast without any drawbacks.

Kuhio sure looks nice, but for how long?

I was on Bus E the other afternoon as it was driving down Kalakaua Avenue, and I noticed the beautiful, colorful flowers in hanging pots along the sides of the road. It looked so beautiful. I walked down Kuhio Avenue and noticed how wonderful it was to have sidewalks wide enough to walk on and wonderful shade trees to cover me. Kuhio used to be the hottest street in all of Oahu and it was miserable walking down the narrow sidewalks. But I suppose all of this will disappear with the new mayor in his mission of destruction.

Senator doesn't deserve to be attacked

I am deeply saddened about the recent events surrounding Sen. Brian Kanno ("Isle GOP questions senator's ethics," Star-Bulletin, April 12). I am a longtime Makakilo resident and personally know Kanno. He is a breath of fresh air to politics. He is a well-rounded, deeply concerned individual who goes out of his way to make our community a better place to live.

On numerous occasions, I have called Brian's office, house and cell phone to share my concerns with him. He is always more than welcome to listen to my concerns, and acts accordingly. He is supportive and helpful; he makes you feel proud that he is our senator.

Everyone knows politics, especially in our neighborhood. It just seems to me that this is nothing more than other politicians trying their best to oust a man who gives so much for his constituents.

Why did Kanno back a convicted abuser?

I have been a resident of Hawaii for more than 40 years and a registered Democrat even longer. I cannot think of any occasion where I might have shared Fred Hemmings' political musings, until today.

I think "Sonny" has suggested a rather benign remedy to Sen. Brian Kanno's outrageous display of abuse of office. Kanno should be impeached.

Then I would be interested to know just what it was that caused a state senator to publicly go to bat for a convicted child molester whose record of lengthy imprisonment in the Philippines for that offense was on the Internet for anyone to see.

He then had the audacity to try to shake down the offender's former employer, a cruise line, by threatening it with a hotel room tax, after the company fired him for yet another charge of sexual misconduct. Maybe it was just a misunderstanding. Perhaps Leon Rouse was confused about what was meant by a "cruise line."

As noted by the Star-Bulletin's April 13 editorial, Rouse doesn't even live in the senator's district.

Democrats want high or higher taxes

I distinctly remember Senate President Bunda's opening day speech at the Legislature because he promised to cut taxes, an unusual step for our Democratic legislators. Then, a month or two later, despite a booming economy and vastly improved tax revenues, Democrats started talking about how we couldn't quite afford tax relief this year, but hey, maybe next year.

Last week, all 20 Democratic senators voted for a massive $150-million-a-year increase in the excise tax, plus a bunch of smaller tax increases, while the House Democrats went for a $300-million increase.

Are Democrats unaware that they are the party of higher taxes and big government? Are they in severe denial, or are they trying to deliberately deceive us? A few months ago, I was a guest on Sen. Donna Kim's radio talk show, and she startled me during a commercial break by declaring that she was a "fiscal conservative." My question for her is, do Democrats like her define a "fiscal conservative" as "someone who proposes somewhat lower whopping tax increases than the House Democrats?"

Fluoride doesn't prevent tooth decay

The Star-Bulletin favors fluoridation (Editorial, March 19). I am a senior citizen; my friends and I all oppose fluoridation.

Only a small percentage of water is used for drinking. Water is used for washing clothes and dishes, watering the lawn and other industrial uses.

Basel, Switzerland, just stopped fluoridation because after it was begun, kids' tooth cavity rates increased. By contrast, rates in the rest of fluoride-free Europe declined.

Fluorides make your body absorb extra aluminum. Aluminum is one cause of Alzheimer's disease. Fluoride also is used in insecticide and rat poison.

A better way than fluoridation to improve the dental condition of young people is for the schools to hire more dental hygienists to teach the children good health habits and how to care for their teeth.

How to write us 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. 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