Abercrombie to resign from Congress to run for governor

U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie dropped an early Christmas bombshell on Hawaii: He is leaving Congress to fire up his campaign for governor full time.

In a message to supporters on the Internet yesterday, Abercrombie said he was returning to Hawaii to campaign and will resign from Congress.

The longtime Hawaii political leader said the announcement makes him "all in for Hawaii."

"We will present ambitious, achievable plans for job creation, economic recovery, educational reform, food and energy independence, public health and safety, and government efficiency," Abercrombie said.

Leaving his office of nearly 20 years gives him more time to campaign but immediately opens the door for criticism.

U.S. Sen. Dan Inouye was first to rebuke Abercrombie, saying Hawaii was losing valuable political clout.

"It leaves us a vote shy in the House at a time when major policy changes like health care reform, a war spending measure, the Akaka Bill and others are shaping up for debate and passage," Inouye said in an e-mail.

Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann, Abercrombie's expected opponent in the 2010 Democratic primary, agreed.

"He is leaving the state in a lurch. He has become a very influential member of Congress. I think he put a lot of people in a difficult situation, including the city," Hannemann said yesterday during an interview.

***

[4/14/09, posted 12/31/09] With the impatience of someone who at 70 has finally decided what he wants to do in life, Neil Abercrombie sits in his Kakaako campaign office anxious to get on with what he considers the most important campaign of his political life.

U.S. Rep. Abercrombie is leaving a 20-year career in Washington politics at the time when his Democratic Party controls Congress and when he is close enough to President Barack Obama to have been in the tight crowd along with Oprah Winfrey to celebrate the inauguration upstairs at the White House.

The battle is for governor of Hawaii, a goal more than 18 months away but one Abercrombie is already fighting.

For Abercrombie, who came to Hawaii in 1959 as a graduate student and first ran for office in 1970, the governor's race is to be his last quest.

"I have a renewed sense of energy and joy. This is my 50th anniversary of coming to Hawaii. It is as if this incredible gift has been given to me.

"Everything I have learned about Hawaii makes me who I am today, and I want to bring a culmination in this run and I feel joyous about it.

"I will be able to say I gave every bit of energy and all of my sense of aloha to this campaign, and I will be content," Abercrombie said last week in an interview with the Star-Bulletin.

Abercrombie went from being a left-wing campus orator and graduate student to serving in the state House and Senate and the Honolulu City Council before winning an office in Congress.

"He has name recognition and a well-tested political operation," said Neal Milner, University of Hawaii political scientist and ombudsman. "He is formidable."

Hannemann would be Abercrombie's strongest rival, said Milner, because the Honolulu mayor also brings a skillful campaign style and the ability to raise campaign cash to the race.

"With Abercrombie," Milner said, "you have someone who is already tested. It is not like you are suddenly going to find out something about him."

***

[3/6/09, posted 12/31/09] U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie has ended political speculation by telling Washington leaders he will run for governor of Hawaii next year.

The 70-year-old Democrat has also discussed it with political supporters in Honolulu, but has not officially announced.

In November, Abercrombie told the Star-Bulletin that he had reached the “zenith” of his power in Washington, D.C., but stopped short of declaring for governor.

Since then key supporters have been meeting regularly in Honolulu to map out strategy for a possible campaign.

This morning the Associated Press in Washington reported Abercrombie told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of his intentions last night. The AP said the information came from an official who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

Abercrombie’s announcement is to be made via an Internet video Sunday, according to the AP.

Obama defends war

Newly enshrined among the world's great peacemakers, President Barack Obama offered a striking defense of war.

Evil must be vigorously opposed, he declared as he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize on Thursday. At the same time, he made an impassioned case for building a "just and lasting peace."

"I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people," Obama told his audience in Oslo's soaring City Hall. "For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world."

He lauded previous Nobel winners Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., preachers of nonviolent action. But he added, "A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida's leaders to lay down their arms."

"To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism, it is a recognition of history."

The president laid out circumstances in which war is justified — in self-defense, to come to the aid of an invaded nation, on humanitarian grounds such as when civilians are slaughtered by their own government.

At the same time, he also stressed a need to fight war according to "rules of conduct" that reject torture, the murder of innocents and other atrocities.

"We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend," he said. "And we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it's easy, but when it is hard."

He emphasized a need to exhaust alternatives to violence, including worldwide sanctions with teeth to confront nations such as Iran or North Korea that defy international demands. He pushed himself away from George W. Bush in defending diplomatic outreach that engages even enemies. He defined peace as civil rights, free speech and economic opportunity, not just the absence of conflict.

"Let us reach for the world that ought to be," Obama said. "We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace."

***

Doonesbury 12/22/09
Doonesbury 12/23/09
Doonesbury 12/24/09
Doonesbury 12/25/09
Doonesbury 12/26/09

Hawaii news 2009

HONOLULU (AP) — The hard economic times brought on by the global recession continued to plague Hawaii during 2009.

Each week seemed to bring more bad news about layoffs, cutbacks, cancellations, unemployment and foreclosures. Drops in tourist numbers were reflected in falling tax revenues.

Hundreds of state workers lost their jobs as officials slashed payroll in order to cope with a nearly billion-dollar budget shortfall. Furlough Fridays entered the vernacular, with public school teachers and other state workers forced to stay home without pay.

But 2009 also had its uplifting moments that made headlines across the world.

Hawaii marked its 50th anniversary of statehood in August, and Pope Benedict XVI elevated Molokai's own Father Damien to sainthood in October.

The year began with President-elect Barack Obama and his family ending their Hawaiian vacation and returning to Washington, where the Honolulu native was sworn in as president.

January also saw Hawaii become the first state in the nation to switch from analog to digital TV broadcasts.

In February, the Pearl Harbor-based USS Port Royal ran aground on a reef off Honolulu International Airport. It took four tries over as many days to refloat the $1 billion warship that destroyed centuries-old coral colonies.

February's Pro Bowl ended a 30-year run at Aloha Stadium, with the 2010 game set for Miami. But in March, the Hawaii Tourism Authority accepted the NFL's offer to return the Pro Bowl to Aloha Stadium in 2011 and 2012.

Also in March, the state Senate rejected an effort to force a vote on same-sex civil unions, even though most senators claimed they supported such unions. And the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the federal government's apology for the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom didn't strip the state's right to sell or transfer 1.2 acres of former monarchy land.

In April, the University of Hawaii announced Jim Bolla was out as women's basketball coach. He had been under investigation for allegations of kicking one of his players in practice. The same month, UH men's volleyball head coach Mike Wilton coached his final match after 17 years.

In May, state officials announced Hawaii's first three cases of swine flu had been confirmed. Meanwhile, a military helicopter crashed at Wheeler Army Airfield during a test flight, killing both soldiers aboard.

Hawaii Superferry filed for bankruptcy in May, two months after a state Supreme Court ruling effectively shut it down. Meanwhile, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Lloyd King denied Mesa Air Group's attempt to acquire and use the name of Aloha Airlines for its interisland subsidiary go! airlines because of what he said was Mesa's role in Aloha's demise in 2008.

A consortium of U.S. and Canadian universities announced in July that it had decided to build the world's largest telescope in Hawaii. Thirty Meter Telescope Observatory Corp. picked Mauna Kea over Chile's Cerro Armazones mountain.

July also saw Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou visiting Hawaii. Later that month, Warriors football coach Greg McMackin received a 30-day suspension for making a homosexual slur while describing a Notre Dame chant.

M.R.C. Greenwood succeeded David McClain as the president of the University of Hawaii in August. And Hurricane Felicia threw a scare into Hawaii residents, but wound up reaching the state as a lowly tropical depression.

Public school teachers voted in September to accept furlough days as part of the state's plan to balance its budget. The first furlough Friday came Oct. 23.

Also in October, University of Hawaii women's volleyball coach Dave Shoji became just the second coach in NCAA history to attain 1,000 victories. The Rainbow Wahine went on to make it to the semifinals of the NCAA Tournament, losing to Penn State, which would claim its third straight national title.

Maui Land & Pineapple Co. announced in November that it would cease pineapple operations by the end of the year. Also in November, Hawaii's Michelle Wie recorded her first LPGA Tour victory at the Lorena Ochoa Invitational.

In December, waves grew so large along Oahu's North Shore that the big wave surfing contest called "The Eddie" was held for the first time in five years. Former Hawaii coach June Jones returned to the islands, guiding SMU to the Hawaii Bowl, its first postseason game in 25 years.

The year is ending with now-President Barack Obama bringing his family back home to Hawaii for their Christmas vacation.

Meanwhile, 2009 saw the passing of former Lt. Gov. and Congressman Tom Gill; former state lawmakers Henry Takitani, Ted Mina and Stanley Hara; former state Supreme Court Chief Justice Herman Lum; former state Adjutant General Alexis Lum; Honolulu City Council members Barbara Marshall and Duke Bainum; University of Hawaii political science professor and a founder of the Green Party of Hawaii Ira Rohter; Merrie Monarch Festival co-founder George Naope; director, performer and choreographer Jim Hutchison; former state schools superintendent and former University of Hawaii women's athletic director Donnis Thompson; Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial cartoonist Corky Trinidad; former Honolulu Star-Bulletin reporter and editor Phil Mayer; and a trio of well-known TV personalities — "Hawaii Five-0" cast member Harry Endo, "Fishing Tales" host Mike Sakamoto and legendary sportscaster Les Keiter.

European health care

European health care is universal, but contrary to popular perception, it is not all nationalized. Facing rapidly aging populations, many European countries have gone much further than the United States in using market forces to control costs. At the same time, regulations are stronger and often more sophisticated.

Most of Europe spends about 10 percent of its national income on health care and covers everyone. The United States will spend 18 percent this year and leave 47 million people uninsured.

Europe has more doctors, more hospital beds and more patient visits than the United States. Take Switzerland: 4.9 doctors per thousand residents compared with 2.4 in the United States. And cost? The average cost for a hospital stay is $9,398 in relatively high-cost Switzerland and $17,206 in the United States.

"In Switzerland, rich or poor, they all buy the same health insurance," said Regina Herzlinger, chairwoman of business administration at Harvard University and a leading advocate of the Swiss system. "The government gives the poor as much money as the average Swiss has to buy health insurance."

The Swiss and Dutch buy their own coverage from competing private insurers. Both systems address market failures that pervade U.S. health care: Insurance companies must provide a core benefit package and everyone must buy coverage. Consumers can shop for value and pocket the savings, as opposed to U.S. patients who hand the bill to someone else. Switzerland does not have a public program like Medicare or Medicaid.

Far from leading to poor quality and rationing, both countries and Germany, where government has a much larger role in health care, outperform the United States on many quality measures. These are not just broad measures such as life expectancy that could reflect higher U.S. poverty or obesity.

health care debate deja vu

... these same arguments we hear today against health reform were used even earlier, to attack President Franklin Roosevelt’s call for Social Security. It was denounced as a socialist program that would compete with private insurers and add to Americans’ tax burden so as to kill jobs.

Daniel Reed, a Republican representative from New York, predicted that with Social Security, Americans would come to feel “the lash of the dictator.” Senator Daniel Hastings, a Delaware Republican, declared that Social Security would “end the progress of a great country.”

John Taber, a Republican representative from New York, went further and said of Social Security: “Never in the history of the world has any measure been brought here so insidiously designed as to prevent business recovery, to enslave workers.”

-- Nicholas D. Kristof

Obama's strategy in Afghanistan

President Obama said Tuesday that the deployment of 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan is part of a strategy to reverse the Taliban's momentum and stabilize the country's government.

"There is no imminent threat of the government being overthrown, but the Taliban has gained momentum," Obama said at the U.S. Military Academy. "Al Qaeda has not re-emerged in Afghanistan in the same numbers as before 9/11, but they retain their safe-havens along the border.

"And our forces lack the full support they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan security forces and better secure the population. ... In short, the status quo is not sustainable."

Obama said he'd begin sending the additional troops "at the fastest pace possible" starting in early 2010 "with a goal of starting to withdraw forces from the country in July 2011."

The president said additional U.S. forces bolstered by NATO troops "will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces."

Senior administration officials said Tuesday that Obama has a goal of withdrawing most U.S. forces by the end of his current term, which ends in January 2013.

In his speech Tuesday, Obama said his strategy had three objectives:

• Deny al Qaeda a safe haven

• Reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow Afghanistan's government

• Strengthen Afghanistan's security forces and government

The additional troops was one way to achieve these, he said. Other strategies will include holding Afghan government leaders accountable for corruption, focus assistance on areas that could help the lives of Afghans, and securing the country's border with Pakistan.

***

[12/3/09] President gets elected, moves in and drinks the water — and becomes a clone of the previous occupant, pursuing the same disastrous policies.

President Barack Obama is a case in point. The announcement of his plan to send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan and to escalate the war there — in the name of supposedly ending it sooner — is double-speak and doubly wrong.

Obama, in explaining his decision, has apparently decided to continue the misguided and illegal Bush doctrine of preemptive war by asserting the U.S. has the right to make war anywhere to prevent a possible future "terrorist" threat.

Where is the change we voted for — and that Obama promised? His decision to escalate the war in Afghanistan will waste billions more and continue the cycle of death, hatred and destruction. This will become Obama's war and will doom the possibility of any real change. We need to speak out and mobilize to bring the senseless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to an earlier end than is envisioned by Obama, his misadvisers and the Pentagon brass.

John Witeck
Honolulu

Paul W. Thiesen on health care reform

With the increasing cost of health care, the government's answer is to socialize it without looking at the root causes of the increasing costs. If the government had applied root-cause analysis, it would discover that it was the source of rising costs as it has tried to regulate health care since the 1960s. Socializing health care will only increase costs and reduce services.

What should happen is a review of government regulations to discard those that are restrictive. One example of this is to allow all insurers to compete in all states; this is the only way to achieve the goal of choice and competition. But unless the citizens speak up, government will go on to serve special interests that only serve a few at the cost of the people.

Government-run health care has never reached the goal of targeted costs and services whether at a national level (Medicare) or state level (Massachusetts/Tennessee). If the tests have all failed on smaller scales, then why would we attempt to expand it to a national level?

Paul W. Theisen
Aiea

Oprah Winfrey Show to end in 2011

CHICAGO (AP) — Holding back tears, Oprah Winfrey told her studio audience Friday that she would end her show in 2011 after a quarter-century on the air, saying prayer and careful thought led her to her decision.

Winfrey told the audience that she loved "The Oprah Winfrey Show," that it had been her life and that she knew when it was time to say goodbye. "Twenty-five years feels right in my bones and feels right in my spirit," she said.

Winfrey, 55, is widely expected to start up a new talk show on OWN: The Oprah Winfrey Network, a joint venture with Discovery Communications Inc. that was first announced last year. It will replace the Discovery Health Channel and debut in some 80 million homes.

defining moment for health care reform

O.K., folks, this is it. It’s the defining moment for health care reform.

Past efforts to give Americans what citizens of every other advanced nation already have — guaranteed access to essential care — have ended not with a bang, but with a whimper, usually dying in committee without ever making it to a vote.

But this time, broadly similar health-care bills have made it through multiple committees in both houses of Congress. And on Thursday, Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, unveiled the legislation that she will send to the House floor, where it will almost surely pass. It’s not a perfect bill, by a long shot, but it’s a much stronger bill than almost anyone expected to emerge even a few weeks ago. And it would lead to near-universal coverage.

As a result, everyone in the political class — by which I mean politicians, people in the news media, and so on, basically whoever is in a position to influence the final stage of this legislative marathon — now has to make a choice. The seemingly impossible dream of fundamental health reform is just a few steps away from becoming reality, and each player has to decide whether he or she is going to help it across the finish line or stand in its way.

For conservatives, of course, it’s an easy decision: They don’t want Americans to have universal coverage, and they don’t want President Obama to succeed.

For progressives, it’s a slightly more difficult decision: They want universal care, and they want the president to succeed — but the proposed legislation falls far short of their ideal. There are still some reform advocates who won’t accept anything short of a full transition to Medicare for all as opposed to a hybrid, compromise system that relies heavily on private insurers. And even those who have reconciled themselves to the political realities are disappointed that the bill doesn’t include a “strong” public option, with payment rates linked to those set by Medicare.

But the bill does include a “medium-strength” public option, in which the public plan would negotiate payment rates — defying the predictions of pundits who have repeatedly declared any kind of public-option plan dead. It also includes more generous subsidies than expected, making it easier for lower-income families to afford coverage. And according to Congressional Budget Office estimates, almost everyone — 96 percent of legal residents too young to receive Medicare — would get health insurance.

.. this is the moment of truth. The political environment is as favorable for reform as it’s likely to get. The legislation on the table isn’t perfect, but it’s as good as anyone could reasonably have expected. History is about to be made — and everyone has to decide which side they’re on.

-- Paul Krugman

public plan projected to cover 2%

What's all the fuss about? After all the noise over Democrats' push for a government insurance plan to compete with private carriers, coverage numbers are finally in: Two percent.

That's the estimated share of Americans younger than 65 who'd sign up for the public option plan under the health care bill that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is steering toward House approval.

"The public option is a significant issue, but its place in the debate is completely out of proportion to its actual importance to consumers," said Drew Altman, president of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "It has sucked all the oxygen out of the room and diverted attention from bread-and-butter consumer issues, such as affordable coverage and comprehensive benefits."

The latest look at the public option comes from the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan economic analysts for lawmakers.

It found that the scaled back government plan in the House bill wouldn't overtake private health insurance. To the contrary, it might help the insurers a little.

The budget office estimated that about 6 million people would sign up for the public option in 2019, when the House bill is fully phased in. That represents about 2 percent of a total of 282 million Americans under age 65. (Older people are covered through Medicare.)

The overwhelming majority of the population would remain in private health insurance plans sponsored by employers. Others, mainly low-income people, would be covered through an expanded Medicaid program.

To be fair, most people would not have access to the new public plan. Under the House bill, it would be offered through new insurance exchanges open only to those who buy coverage on their own or work for small companies. Yet even within that pool of 30 million people, only 1-in-5 would take the public option.

Lou Dobbs leaves CNN

CNN's Lou Dobbs stepped down from his controversial role as an advocacy anchor at the network at the end of his show Wednesday night, saying he plans to seek a more activist role.

"Over the past six months, it has become increasingly clear that strong winds of change have begun buffeting this country and affecting all of us, and some leaders in media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond the role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem-solving as well as to contribute positively to a better understanding of the great issues of our day and to continue to do so in the most honest and direct language possible," Dobbs said during his 7 p.m. broadcast.

Dobbs, 64, said he had discussed the issue with CNN President Jonathan Klein, who had agreed to a release from his contract "that will enable me to pursue new opportunities."

Dobbs, who is the last of the 29-year-old network's original anchors, said he was considering "a number of options and directions."

He cited the growth of the middle class, the creation of jobs, health care, immigration policy, the environment, climate change and the U.S. military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as "the major issues of our time."

In an e-mail to CNN staff members, Klein described the parting as "extremely amicable," and said Dobbs' replacement would be announced soon.

Dobbs was with Cable News Network from its initial broadcasts in 1980, acting as chief economics correspondent and host of the business program "Moneyline."

His coverage of the 1987 stock market crash won him the George Foster Peabody Award for excellence in broadcasting. That was one of many awards he received while at CNN, including an Emmy for Lifetime Achievement that he received from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences in 2005.

Dobbs left the network in 1999 to found SPACE.com, a Web site devoted to space-related subjects. He returned to the network in 2001 as anchor and managing editor of CNN's Moneyline News Hour, which became Lou Dobbs Tonight. He also acted as lead business news anchor for CNN/U.S. and CNNfn, the forerunner of CNNMoney.

During his second stint at CNN, Dobbs positioned himself as "tough, relentless, independent," lashing out at what he described as the deficiencies and "partisan nonsense" of both major political parties, and injecting advocacy journalism into his coverage of topics ranging from free trade to immigration.

His no-holds-barred, sometimes acerbic style brought him a loyal following, but also attracted controversy both to him and to the network, especially over the subject of illegal immigrants.

Dobbs will continue as anchor of The Lou Dobbs Show, a daily radio show that began in March 2008 and is distributed to more than 160 stations nationwide by United Stations Radio Networks Inc.

***

In his first TV interview since resigning abruptly Wednesday night, former CNN anchorman Lou Dobbs told Bill O'Reilly Monday that it was the presence of President Barack Obama in the White House as much as a commitment to fact-based, objective presentation at CNN that led to his troubles with management in recent months.

While pointing out that Dobbs had criticized both the George W. Bush administration and Obama White House on matters of immigration, O'Reilly asked Dobbs why it wasn't a problem then, but it is a problem now for CNN.

“You know, I discern more of a difference between then, which was under the Bush administration whom I was criticizing, and now, when it is the Obama administration and an entirely different tone was taken," Dobbs said.

furlough fridays

[12/5/09] Both the governor and an attorney who filed a lawsuit seeking to end Furlough Fridays are blaming the Hawaii State Teachers Association for blocking a deal that would restore lost public school days.

"The only obstacle at this point is the teachers union," attorney Eric Seitz said yesterday at a press conference. "The public needs to know and teachers need to know how badly the teachers union is acting in this matter."

Seitz said he plans to add the HSTA as a defendant in a class-action lawsuit seeking to end Furlough Fridays.

Meanwhile, Gov. Linda Lingle called on the union to continue bargaining next week or put her proposal to end the furloughs up for a vote.

HSTA President Wil Okabe countered that it is the Governor's Office that has dug in its heels.

"The governor and her team have shown no flexibility and have adopted a take-it-or-leave-it approach," Okabe said in an e-mail statement. "The HSTA has made viable offers to provide an interim solution, but they have all been summarily rejected by the governor."

Okabe said the governor's proposal would force schools to operate with a skeleton staff, without administrators, health aides, security and others.

"We will not return on furlough days if it means that the quality of instruction will (be) severely degraded or the health and safety of our students will be put at risk, all of which would be the case under the governor's proposal," Okabe said.

***

[11/25/09] this week I have a letter from Abe, who wanted to make a point about teachers’ involvement in the current furlough fiasco.

“I am a teacher and when the union rep came to talk to us, she told us we could accept the offer, or we could go on strike. If we had gone on strike, we probably would have missed more than 17 days. We also faced the possibility that schools would just shut down because (Governor) Lingle had only released enough money to run the schools until December.

No teacher was presented with, “What do you want to do about it?” They told us this is the best offer we can get, if not we will go on strike, or the schools will just shut down, because the money has not been released to run them. The reason so many teachers ratified the contract is not because they were happy to do it, it’s because they felt it was the lesser of all evils.

***

[11/16/09] Gov. Linda Lingle plans to eliminate 27 Furlough Fridays at Hawaii's public schools by tapping the so-called rainy day fund and switching teacher training days to class time.

She said yesterday her plan would restore stability among families and allow the state to focus on quality of education rather than the number of days students are in school.

Under Lingle's plan, furlough days would be restored starting Jan. 1 by using $50 million from the fund, formally the Emergency and Budget Reserve Fund, and converting noninstructional hours to instructional hours, totaling 15 school days. Noninstructional time includes Wednesday afternoons, when students are let out early to allow for staff meetings.

Parents, state legislators and the teachers union praised Lingle's plan, saying it is a step in the right direction.

"I'm glad that she came around and is making education a high priority," said Garrett Toguchi, chairman of the state Board of Education.

***

[11/13/09] Education Secretary Arne Duncan says that because of the furloughs, Hawaii faces "a heck of a challenge" in qualifying for $20 million to $75 million in federal funds under the Obama administration's $4 billion "Race to the Top" grant program.

Duncan said he is "highly aware" of the actions taken by Hawaii to close public school classrooms 17 days this academic year and an equal amount next year because declining tax revenues have contributed to an estimated $1 billion shortfall in Hawaii's state budget.

He added that the actions of Gov. Linda Lingle, the Hawaii State Teachers Association and the state Board of Education mean eliminating 10 percent of island school days. He said, "To have Hawaii eliminate 10 percent of their day(s) is mind-boggling."

***

[11/11/09] It is not the kind of publicity Hawaii wants, but the state's decision to shut public schools for 17 Furlough Fridays has made a big media splash.

"Hawaii's Children, Left Behind," declared the headline of a New York Times editorial. At the Washington Post, education columnist Jay Mathews wrote a piece with the scathing title "Idiocy in Paradise: Hawaii Handles School Budget Cuts Badly."

***

[10/29/09] As a public school teacher I am unapologetic about the decision to accept furloughs over layoff or pay cuts. Let's recap the last year.

***

[10/26/09] Misunderstanding persists about the Hawaii State Teachers Association contract with the state, which was recently ratified. This is apparent in quotes from several individuals appearing in Star-Bulletin articles, as well as in the letters to the editor. Some writers have seized upon misinformation to attack the HSTA, going so far as to state that HSTA negotiated a new contract with no pay cuts to teachers.

Several writers and even a former governor appear to think the DOE could have balanced its budget merely by cutting teacher salaries. This is simply wrong. It takes a lot more than the money for teacher salaries to run schools. It takes millions of dollars to keep the lights on and the computers and other electrical equipment running and campuses safe. It takes money to operate cafeterias and other services.

Teachers may run their classrooms, but custodians, administrators and a lot of staff are required to keep an entire school operating effectively and safely. These workers also need to be paid. The DOE cannot balance its budget by cutting teachers salaries 8 percent, while continuing to keep schools open the same number of days, with all of the other labor and operational costs that entails.

-- Wil Okabe is president of the Hawaii State Teachers Association

[10/25/09] Gov. Linda Lingle startled other leaders on Friday when she said she goofed by allowing the school teacher furloughs and then blamed the union and Department of Education for approving them.

"I assumed that they would do what was in the best interest of the students, and I don't think they did.

"Looking back, I think it would have been better to stand up and say, 'Well, we just can't settle it this way,'" Lingle said Friday as parents of hundreds of public school students rallied in the Capitol rotunda to protest furloughs.

Wil Okabe, Hawaii State Teachers Association president, yesterday shot back saying furloughs were Lingle's idea as was the 14 percent DOE budget cut that prompted them.

"Let's be honest. The governor got the furloughs ... she asked for. And now the community is angry, she wants to point the finger at others," Okabe said.

* * *

The state's decision to save money by shutting down Hawaii's public schools for 17 Fridays this year has angered parents so much that they are planning to march on the Capitol next week, and some are considering lawsuits.

"When I first heard about the furloughs, we were all shocked and furious because this is going to have the largest impact on the students, and they, of course, are defenseless," said Debbie Schatz, who has a sixth-grader at Aikahi Elementary.

"So parents and community members, an amazing amount of them, are coming forward and voicing their opinions."

A new organization, Hawaii Education Matters, is planning a march at the Capitol from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. Oct. 23, the first scheduled "Furlough Friday" for public schools. Its Web site is hosting a petition drive to "Stop Furlough Fridays." The petition is addressed to the governor, Legislature, Department of Education, school board and teachers union.

"None of us are political activists," said Jennifer Moy, volunteer coordinator for Hawaii Education Matters, formed three weeks ago in response to the furloughs. "We're pretty new at this. We just want a better education for our kids. Our goals are to have the class time restored and to give parents a voice in the debate."

***

[10/19/09] Sandra Togashi is "angry and upset" and feeling the squeeze from all sides. She teaches social studies at Kawananakoa Middle School and has two children in public school.

"Furloughs personally affect my 143 students, my own children, my colleagues and me as a single parent," Togashi says.

So she is watching Hawaii's leaders closely for their response to Furlough Fridays, a budget-cutting plan that is shaping up as a political disaster.

***

[9/23/09] Hawaii's public school year will have 17 fewer instructional days under a two-year contract ratified yesterday by the Hawaii State Teachers Association.

The reduction will result in a 7.94 percent pay cut for teachers, as the state attempts to ride out a slow economy and balance its public education budget.

The ratification came with criticism from union President Wil Okabe, who said last night the state should have maintained a commitment to the children and funded their education at appropriate levels with 180 days of instruction.

Okabe said the union is asking state legislators to do the right thing and restore the educational budget.

Cal Thomas on heath care

(or Cal Thomas on the CATO Institute on health care)

The CATO Institute remains a primary resource for ideas that will work in reforming health insurance. It recommends four steps Congress could take and the public should demand.

(1) give Medicare enrollees a voucher and let them choose any health plan on the market that fits their needs, not what the government dictates. Vouchers would be means-tested, would include Medicare spending and are, says CATO, the only way to protect seniors from rationing.

(2) Congress should reform the tax treatment by allowing large health savings accounts. This would reduce the number of uninsured Americans, would free workers to buy secure health coverage from any source, and would effectively give workers a $9.7 trillion tax cut without increasing the deficit;

(3) Congress should breakup state monopolies on insurance and clinician licensing. CATO estimates allowing people to buy insurance from other states could cover one-third of the uninsured without new taxes or government subsidies.

(4) Congress should reform Medicaid and the State Children’s health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) the way it reformed it in 1996 when it block-granted the programs. This would help reduce the deficit and encourage states to target resources to those most in need.

Hawaii's health care

Imee Gallardo, 24, has been scooping ice cream at a Häagen-Dazs shop at Waikiki Beach for five years, and during that time the shop has done something its counterparts on the mainland rarely do: it has paid for her health care.

Ms. Gallardo cannot imagine any other system.

“I wouldn’t get coverage on the mainland?” Ms. Gallardo asked. “Even if I worked? Why?”

Since 1974, Hawaii has required all employers to provide relatively generous health care benefits to any employee who works 20 hours a week or more. If health care legislation passes in Congress, the rest of the country may barely catch up.

***

Some politicians have hailed Hawaii's law, which mandates businesses provide health insurance for employees working more than 20 hours a week, as a model for national health care reform, but Slom said there is a reason no other states have adopted it.

"It's a job destroyer," he said. The law is an added burden for small businesses, and it would force companies to shift full-time employees to part-time or not fill openings, he said.

Obama departs from Bush on pot

The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday.

Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws.

The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

Snowe votes with democrats

After months of relentless courting and suspense, Senator Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine, cast her vote with Democrats on Tuesday as the Senate Finance Committee approved legislation to remake the health care system and provide coverage to millions of the uninsured.

With Ms. Snowe’s support, the committee backed the $829 billion measure on a vote of 14 to 9, with all the other Republicans opposed.

“Is this bill all that I would want?” Ms. Snowe said. “Far from it. Is it all that it can be? No. But when history calls, history calls. And I happen to think that the consequences of inaction dictate the urgency of Congress to take every opportunity to demonstrate its capacity to solve the monumental issues of our time.”

Ms. Snowe’s remarks silenced the packed committee room, riveted colleagues and thrilled the White House. President Obama had sought her vote, hoping that she would break with Republican leaders and provide at least a veneer of bipartisanship to the bill, which he has declared his top domestic priority.

a day in the life of Hillary

“We’re going to work you to death,” Hillary Clinton promised me with a laugh. She was taking me—and PARADE’s readers—along on a typical day in the life of the U.S. Secretary of State. Our 24 hours together would prove both grueling and inspirational, full of diplomatic pageantry, big meetings with policy brainiacs, small sessions with trusted aides, a stream of time-consuming formal duties, and, of course, phone calls and more phone calls.

[She's a busy lady filled with important activities. It's like she's doing more important activities in one day what I would do in ten years -- or more.]

Jim Cornette on health care reform

It's a fact that the cost of health care, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security amounts to the largest percentage of our annual Federal budget, that this system is unsustainable and that something must be done before it's too late. Social Security, at this rate, will be broke before I get to collect it, and if the amount of taxes I have paid over the past 25 years leaves me with little or nothing, imagine what it will be like for the average worker. Obama recognized this, and for all the Republican talk about "bankrupting our children and grandchildren", he's the ONLY one to recognize a need to do something for the countrys' long-term good instead of worrying about what the voters care about immediately. This man wants to be remembered in 100 years for having made a difference in the quality of our lives, not whether he gets reelected in four.

So what happens when he puts forth a plan to revamp the single most expensive and important obstacle facing Americans today? The Republican party, bought and paid for by special interest lobbyists and the big pharmaceutical companies, looking out for their future election prospects, their old, rich, white constituency, and their insistence that the United States of America remains the only country in the developed world with a health care system that discrimates against it's own people at the expense of it's citizenry and the benefit of it's richest two percent, does what it does best--engages an obstructionist, fear-mongering campaign against reform. It mobilizes the misguided, the uninformed, and the extremists to gin up controversies where none should exist, and engages in a misinformation campaign to obfuscate and outright misrepresent the intent of said reform under the guise of patriotism and preserving the "American Way". And all the while, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the sick get sicker, and all Americans lose their chance at a better way for another generation. For all of you who benefit from the Medicare program, get on your computers and google some information on what the Republicans said about Medicare before Democrat Lyndon Johnson was able to pass it. Look familiar? It should, you're hearing it today.

... I'm Jim Cornette, and that's my opinion.

Fox News believers

In a previous commentary I described how Fox News' focus on ratings at the expense of truth and accuracy amounts to a massive disinformation campaign, misinforming gullible Americans on the crucial issues of our day. This week, our observations were echoed by the White House, who stated, "Let's not pretend they're a news network".

But how can a cable "news" network successfully fool so many people with such blatantly inaccurate, biased reporting? As it turns out, it's really easy.

First, most Fox believers are not sophisticated listeners. In just one example, Fox reported that 80% of their viewers polled after the 2008 Joe Biden-Sarah Palin debates actually favored Palin. Say what?? Since then, I've concluded that most of their dedicated audience may also think the earth is flat.

-- J. Stephen Wilson

new storm moving toward Phillipines

A new typhoon gathered strength today off the Philippines while nearly 700,000 people still sought help in badly stretched relief centers from massive flooding caused by Ketsana, one of the region's most destructive storms in years.

Ketsana prompted the worst flooding in the northern Philippines in 40 years when it struck Saturday, and then continued its deadly path across Southeast Asia, blowing down wooden villages in Cambodia and crushing Vietnamese houses under mudslides Tuesday.

The death toll climbed to 362 today, and was still rising.

"We're used to storms that sweep away one or two houses. But I've never seen a storm this strong," said Nam Tum, governor of Cambodia's Kampong Thom province.

another quake hits Indonesia

A second powerful earthquake rocked western Indonesia today as rescuers struggled to reach survivors of the previous day's temblor, which killed at least 467 people and left thousands trapped under collapsed buildings.

The death toll from yesterday's undersea quake of 7.6 magnitude was expected to rise further after rescuers dig through the rubble in heavily populated towns of Sumatra island.

"This is a high-scale disaster," Health Minister Siti Fadilah Supari told Metro TV.

The temblor yesterday started fires, severed roads, and cut off power and communications to Padang, a coastal city of 900,000 on Sumatra island. Thousands fled in panic, fearing a tsunami. It was felt hundreds of miles away in Malaysia and Singapore, causing buildings there to sway.

In Padang, the capital of West Sumatra province, the shaking was so intense from yesterday's temblor that people crouched or sat on the street to avoid falling. Thousands of frantic residents fled the coast in cars and motorbikes, honking horns.

At least 500 buildings in Padang collapsed or were badly damaged, said Disaster Management Agency spokesman Priyadi Kardono, adding that 200 bodies had been pulled from the rubble. Indonesia, a sprawling nation with limited resources, was cobbling together an emergency aid response, preparing for the possibility of thousands of deaths.

Padang's mayor appealed for assistance on Indonesian radio station el-Shinta. "We are overwhelmed with victims and ... lack of clean water, electricity and telecommunications," Mayor Fauzi Bahar said. "We really need help. We call on people to come to Padang to evacuate bodies and help the injured."

Hundreds of people were trapped under collapsed buildings in Padang alone, including a four-star hotel, he said. Other collapsed or seriously damaged buildings included hospitals, mosques, a school and a mall.

Search-and-rescue teams were working in heavy rain when the second strong quake struck, causing widespread panic and badly damaging 30 houses in Jambi, another Sumatran town. It was not clear if there were injuries, but frantic parents could be seen rushing to schools in search of their children.

socialist or capitalist?

According to Agnes

tsunami strikes Samoa

APIA, Samoa » A powerful Pacific Ocean earthquake spawned towering tsunami waves that swept ashore on Samoa and American Samoa, flooding and flattening villages, killing at least 82 people and leaving dozens missing.

Cars and people were swept out to sea by the fast-churning water as survivors fled to higher ground, where they remained huddled hours after the quake struck early yesterday.

Signs of devastation were everywhere, with a giant boat washed ashore lying on the edge of a highway and floodwaters swallowing up cars and homes.

Rescue workers found a scene of destruction and debris with cars overturned or stuck in mud, and rockslides hit some roads.

health care reform and Medicare

Medicare is looking like a big fat piggy bank for health care overhaul.

President Barack Obama and the Democrats want to pay for much of their plan to cover the uninsured by cutting hundreds of billions from the Medicare budget over the next 10 years.

From its inception, the health plan for seniors has been kept afloat by taxes out of workers' paychecks. Now, Medicare savings would count toward helping uninsured working-age children and grandchildren afford their own coverage.

Most seniors are willing to help younger generations. But having reached that point in life when you have to spend more time in the doctor's office than you'd prefer to, older Americans worry the cuts will mean lower quality care.

Benefits under traditional Medicare won't be cut. But seniors who've signed up for private insurance plans through Medicare Advantage could lose valuable extra benefits, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

For years, the government has been paying the private plans more than it costs traditional Medicare to deliver similar services. The plans used the money to provide extra benefits — mainly lower copayments and deductibles. Seniors on tight budgets responded by signing up, and now nearly one-fourth of Medicare recipients are in private plans.

As Obama and the Democrats wean private plans off their subsidies, beneficiaries will suffer the consequences.

"Some beneficiaries will lose additional benefits they have been fortunate to have been receiving," said Robert Berenson, a physician turned Medicare expert at the Urban Institute public policy center. "They are likely to see higher out-of-pocket costs, and it's likely that some plans will drop out of the program."

On the other hand, everyone on Medicare will save a little on their monthly premiums as payments to private plans are scaled back.

Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

President Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday, a stunning decision that comes just eight months into his presidency.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee said it honored Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

The decision appeared to catch most observers by surprise. The president had not been mentioned as among front-runners for the prize, and the roomful of reporters gasped when Thorbjorn Jagland, chairman of the Nobel committee, uttered Obama's name.

***

President Obama on Friday said he was "surprised and deeply humbled" by winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

"I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership," Obama said from the White House Rose Garden.

"I will accept this award as a call to action."

***

A vision for approaching the world's major conflicts through dialogue and engagement rather than confrontation – one seen to contrast starkly with that of the previous American president – won US President Barack Obama this year's Nobel Peace Prize.

In announcing its surprise decision, the Norwegian Nobel Committee cited Mr. Obama's "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." The word "efforts" hints at the view from around the world – from laborers in Baghdad to world leaders – that awarding the prize to an American president in office just nine months was recognition more of Obama's aspirations than of any particular accomplishments.

The award, which caught the White House off guard, reflected a particularly European appreciation for Obama. After what Europeans widely called a dark period for America under President Bush, they see Obama as a leader who is returning the United States to a place of global leadership in challenges such as nuclear disarmament, the West's relations with the Islamic world, and climate change. "Thanks to" Obama, the committee said, "the USA is now playing a more constructive role" in international diplomacy.

That appreciation was captured in the words of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who said the peace prize for Obama recognizes the "return of America into the hearts of the people of the world."

The Nobel Committee's award to Obama was unusual in that the annual peace prize has traditionally recognized accomplishments or a life's body of work. But as the committee recognized in announcing the award, its own agenda is one "for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman."

"Obama's agenda – a world of zero nuclear weapons, fighting climate change, addressing Middle East peace, repairing relations between the US and the rest of the world, seeking rapprochement between the US and some if its major adversaries – seems so consistent with the purposes of the Nobel Peace Prize that even though Obama is in the early stages, the committee felt his presidency warranted recognition," says Charles Kupchan, an expert in US foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.

***

A surprised world greeted the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to U.S. President Barack Obama with a mixture of praise and skepticism on Friday.

In its announcement, the Norwegian Nobel Committee hailed Obama's "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg made clear the award carried big expectations, saying: "This is a surprising, an exciting prize. It remains to be seen if he will succeed with reconciliation, peace and nuclear disarmament."

Afghanistan's Taliban mocked the choice, saying it was absurd to give it to Obama when he had ordered 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan this year.

"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians'," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.

Japanese President Yukio Hatoyama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel both said the prize should encourage everyone to help Obama rid the world of nuclear weapons.

"I think the peace prize was given with such a hope," Hatoyama told reporters on a visit to Beijing.

Merkel said Obama had shifted the tone toward dialogue in a very short time. "There is still much left to do, but a window of possibility has been opened," she said in Leipzig.

In the Middle East, chief Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat said the award could be a good omen for the region.

"We hope that he will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East and achieve Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders and establish an independent Palestinian state on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital," he told Reuters.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told army radio the prize should enhance Obama's ability "to contribute to establishing regional peace in the Middle East and a settlement between us and the Palestinians that will bring security, prosperity and growth to all the peoples of the region."

The Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, was more skeptical.

"Unless real and deep-rooted change is made in American policy toward recognizing the rights of the Palestinian people I would think such a prize would be useless," Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas prime minister in the Gaza Strip, told reporters after Friday prayers.

REAL CHANGE

Saleh al-Mutlaq, a senior Iraqi Sunni Muslim lawmaker, told Reuters: "I think he deserves this prize. Obama succeeded in making a real change in the policy of the United States -- a change from a policy that was exporting evil to the world to a policy exporting peace and stability to the world."

In Indonesia, Masdar Mas'udi, deputy head of the largest Muslim organization Nahdatul Ulama, said: "I think it's appropriate because he is the only American president who has reached out to us in peace. On the issues of race, religion, skin color, he has an open attitude."

In Pakistan, Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party, said: "It's a joke. How embarrassing for those who awarded it to him because he's done nothing for peace. What change has he brought in Iraq, the Middle East or Afghanistan?"

In Lebanon, Hezbollah member of parliament Hassan Fadlallah said he had seen no signs of peace from Obama yet. "We were waiting for deeds, not words that soon vanish," he said.

Irene Khan, secretary general of Amnesty International said the award raised expectations of Obama.

"We look to him for decisive action to pursue peace with justice in the Middle East, end the rollback on human rights in the name of counter terrorism and reinforce the fight against poverty at a time of economic crisis," she said. Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter called the award a bold sign of support for Obama. "It shows the hope his administration represents not only to our nation but to people around the world," Carter, who won the prize in 2002, said in a statement.

Poland's Lech Walesa, former leader of the pro-democracy Solidarity trade union that toppled communism, said it was too early. "So soon? This is too soon. He has not yet made a real input. He is proposing, he is starting, but he still has to do it all," Walesa, who won the prize in 1983, told reporters.

South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu, awarded the prize in 1984, said the latest choice was "a magnificent endorsement for the first African American president in history."

From Obama's ancestral village of Kogelo in western Kenya his uncle Said Obama told Reuters: "It is humbling for us as a family and we share in Barack's honor. We congratulate him."

Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangarai, who had been among the favorites to win this year, said Obama was an extraordinary example.

"I wish to congratulate President Obama. I think he is a deserving candidate," he told Reuters during a visit to Spain.

***

President Obama's Republican adversaries reacted with swift disbelief to news that he had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize Friday, with many in the party scoffing that the accolade was hardly justified by a record they described as incomplete at best.

"I think this may be way too preliminary," Republican strategist Ed Rollins told CNN moments after the prize was announced.

"At the end of four years, maybe he has accomplished something and deserves it," he added. "I think it has diminished the award itself. I think certainly you have to give him an "A" for trying, but at the end of the day, what has he accomplished? Who on the world stage are his allies at this point in time?"

In an official statement, the Republican National Committee said: "The real question Americans are asking is, 'What has President Obama actually accomplished?' It is unfortunate that the president's star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain -- President Obama won't be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action."

Obama's worldwide celebrity became a campaign issue last year, after his Republican opponent, Arizona Sen. John McCain, produced sneering ads describing him as "the One" and comparing him to the Messiah.

The McCain ad ran after then-candidate Obama toured Europe, promising an open hand to the world and a break from the cowboy-style diplomacy he accused then-president George W. Bush of practicing. And for a time, the ad worked, raising questions about whether Obama's promises were just lofty rhetoric.

Friday morning, Republicans were shaking their heads at what they described as reality imitating art. Several people who worked in the Bush White House said the choice of Obama -- lauded by the Nobel committee for, among other reasons, his call for a nuclear-free world -- primarily represented a condemnation of the Bush era. Some Republicans pointed to concrete gains Bush made in reducing the nuclear stockpile during his two terms in office -- he cut the supply by more than half -- as evidence that the Nobel committee had made its judgment based on politics rather than solid facts.

"At first I thought the announcement of the prize was a joke," said Michael Gerson, a former Bush speechwriter. "On further reflection, the Nobel Committee has made itself a joke. It has decided to give a ribbon before the race, a trophy for aspiration, a gold star for admirable sentiments."

Watada discharged

First Lt. Ehren Watada, the first commissioned military officer to refuse deployment to Iraq because he believed it was an illegal war, has won his three-year legal battle with the Army.

With little fanfare the Army at Fort Lewis, Wash., accepted the resignation of the 1996 Kalani High School graduate, and he will be discharged the first week in October.

Rather than seek a second court-martial against the artillery officer, the Army will grant Watada a discharge under "other than honorable conditions."

Joseph J. Piek, Fort Lewis spokesman, said, "This is an administrative discharge, and the characterization of Lt. Watada's discharge is not releasable under the privacy act."

Watada, 31, told the Star-Bulletin in a phone interview yesterday that he was "glad to finally bring this chapter to a close and to move on."

"The actual outcome is different from the outcome that I envisioned in the first place, but I am grateful of the outcome."

Watada said he was "thankful to the people from all walks of life that supported me and agreed with my stand."

Ken Kagan, one of Watada's Seattle attorneys, said last night, "Lt. Watada had previously tendered his resignation on more than one occasion, and each time, it was rejected. This time, however, it was accepted, apparently only when the Army realized it could not defeat Lt. Watada in a courtroom."

Kagan described Watada as "a hero and a patriot. Lt. Watada took a lonely stand as a matter of conscience, never attempted to spread discord within the ranks and never sought to evangelize about his ethical convictions. More importantly, he never disparaged the service and the sacrifices made by countless other soldiers and officers who obeyed their orders. He realized that each member of the armed forces must make her or his own decision, according to the dictates of conscience, just as he did. He always understood it to be an intensely personal decision.

"It is our belief that history will treat Lt. Watada far more favorably than the United States Army sees fit to regard him now."

Before he was charged, Watada, an artillery officer, had requested to be assigned to Afghanistan instead of Iraq and even offered to resign from the Army. Both requests were denied.

Initially, Watada was charged with missing the 2nd Infantry Division's 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team's deployment on June 22, 2006, considered by the Army as the most serious charge, and conduct unbec- oming an officer.

Watada participated in anti-war rallies here and on the mainland and held numerous interviews denouncing Bush. Two of those activities were the basis of the charges of conduct unbecoming an officer. Conviction on all counts would have meant six years in prison and a dishonorable discharge.

Dan Maffei on health care

Dan Maffei is the first Democrat to represent upstate New York’s 25th Congressional District in two generations.

That makes him a cautious, middle-of-the-roader from a swing district as he approaches the most contentious political decision of his young congressional career—whether or how to reform the nation’s broken health care system.

And he’s swamped. Before a vote has been cast, he has received 1,700 letters, phone calls and e-mails full of advice. Like all of his Capitol Hill colleagues, Maffei has been cajoled, lectured and feted by special interests: Drug companies, doctors, hospitals, labor unions and other stakeholders, including AARP, have already spent $126 million on lobbying this year.

Since he took office, the message from constituents has been consistent: “Costs are out of control,” Maffei said. “Patients can’t afford this. Our hospitals are just reeling. We’re having a heck of a time recruiting primary care physicians.”

His constituents’ advice, he says, emphasizes the two extremes—either implement a single-payer, government-run system or leave the best health care system in the world alone (and don’t raise taxes!). “The truth is,” Maffei said, “that it’s not the best health care system in the world. We are paying more for less care, for less healthy people, and with lower life expectancy.”

Maffei is part of a group of moderate Democrats generally sympathetic to business. But he said he is influenced more by what he knows best. His wife had to battle her insurance company over treatment for a kidney infection three years ago. The issue was not whether the treatment was covered. It was. But she had not called the company’s 800 number for preapproval. The company denied her claim, then hired a private investigator during an extended appeals process. Eventually, she won her appeal, but not before Maffei became convinced that there were layers of administrative waste in the system. “That crystallized the whole thing,” he said.

“We need a bipartisan, lasting health care reform,” Maffei said. “Otherwise, if it’s not bipartisan, it’ll just be ripped up in a few years, and we’ll have to do it again.”

Nikki White fell through the cracks

In the debate over health care, here’s an inequity to ponder: Nikki White would have been far better off if only she had been a convicted bank robber.

Nikki was a slim and athletic college graduate who had health insurance, had worked in health care and knew the system. But she had systemic lupus erythematosus, a chronic inflammatory disease that was diagnosed when she was 21 and gradually left her too sick to work. And once she lost her job, she lost her health insurance.

In any other rich country, Nikki probably would have been fine, notes T. R. Reid in his important and powerful new book, “The Healing of America.” Some 80 percent of lupus patients in the United States live a normal life span. Under a doctor’s care, lupus should be manageable. Indeed, if Nikki had been a felon, the problem could have been averted, because courts have ruled that prisoners are entitled to medical care.

As Mr. Reid recounts, Nikki tried everything to get medical care, but no insurance company would accept someone with her pre-existing condition. She spent months painfully writing letters to anyone she thought might be able to help. She fought tenaciously for her life.

Finally, Nikki collapsed at her home in Tennessee and was rushed to a hospital emergency room, which was then required to treat her without payment until her condition stabilized. Since money was no longer an issue, the hospital performed 25 emergency surgeries on Nikki, and she spent six months in critical care.

“When Nikki showed up at the emergency room, she received the best of care, and the hospital spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on her,” her step-father, Tony Deal, told me. “But that’s not when she needed the care.”

By then it was too late. In 2006, Nikki White died at age 32. “Nikki didn’t die from lupus,” her doctor, Amylyn Crawford, told Mr. Reid. “Nikki died from complications of the failing American health care system.”

“She fell through the cracks,” Nikki’s mother, Gail Deal, told me grimly. “When you bury a child, it’s the worst thing in the world. You never recover.”

We now have a chance to reform this cruel and capricious system. If we let that chance slip away, there will be another Nikki dying every half-hour.

That’s how often someone dies in America because of a lack of insurance, according to a study by a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. Over a year, that amounts to 18,000 American deaths.

Pat Buchanan on Obama on healthcare

We should have "an honest debate" on health care, said Barack Obama in his Aug. 22 radio address, "not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions."

Among the "phony claims" made against the House bill, says the president, are that it provides funding for abortions, guarantees coverage for illegal aliens, contains "death panels" and represents a federal takeover of the health-care system.

Is Obama right? Are critics misleading and frightening folks with falsehoods about Obamacare?

Well, let us inspect each of those "phony claims."

Does the House bill fund abortions? No.

As for illegal aliens, Obama is right again. They are not covered in any of the five bills.

What about the "death panels." No, they are not in the bill. Nor is there any doctor's right to perform euthanasia or mercy-killing.

[OK, Buchanan obviously throws in a lot of howevers in the article, so obviously I intentionally slanted his slants.]

Obamas speech inspires some, unheard by others

On the very first day of the school year, 12-year-old Mileena Rodriguez was reminded by President Barack Obama himself that hard work can take you places.Mileena listened to Obama's plea to study hard and stay in school Tuesday, watching along with several of her classmates at Thurgood Marshall Elementary School and students across the country. For all the hubbub among adults over the back-to-school speech, many youngsters took the president's message to heart.

"He said that we're the future, and he's right," said Mileena, who wants to be a forensic scientist. "That's a president telling you, `I care about you getting your education.' Just imagine what kids like us can do if we actually listen."

Schoolchildren from coast to coast watched on classroom TVs and computer screens. Others did not hear the message at all, either because their parents pulled from them from class or their schools refused to carry the speech over complaints from conservative groups and others that it smacked of political indoctrination.

In his speech, which aired on C-SPAN and the White House Web site, Obama used examples from his own life to urge students to study hard. He told them to stop chasing dreams of being athletes or reality TV stars.

"The truth is, being successful is hard. You won't love every subject you study. You won't click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won't necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try," Obama said.

Other presidents, including Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, delivered similar speeches to students, but some conservatives accused Obama of trying to promote his policies, and they urged schools and parents to boycott the address. Florida Republican Party chairman Jim Greer initially called the speech an attempt to "spread President Obama's socialist ideology."

The Department of Education was also criticized for proposed lesson plans distributed to accompany the speech, including a section — later changed — that asked students to write about how they could help the president.

Schools were not required to show the speech, and the White House posted an advance transcript on its Web site on Monday. After they got a look at the text, many critics, including Greer, backed off, and some schools agreed to show the speech after all.

Missouri Lt. Governor Peter Kinder, a Republican, had originally criticized the speech and its suggested lesson plans as "steps never before seen by any presidency in the realm of government intervention." But he said his concerns eased after some of the lesson plans were changed.

"It was perfectly innocuous and a praiseworthy message," he said Tuesday.

David Brooks on health care reform

If I were magically given an hour to help Barack Obama prepare for his health care speech next week, the first thing I’d do is ask him to read David Goldhill’s essay, “How American Health Care Killed My Father,” in the current issue of The Atlantic. That essay would lift Obama out of the distracting sideshows about this public plan or that cooperative option. It would remind him why he got into this issue in the first place.

Goldhill’s main message is that the American health care system is dysfunctional at the core. He vividly describes how the system hides information, muddies choices, encourages more treatment instead of better care, neglects cheap innovation, inflates costs and unintentionally increases suffering.

The essay is about the real problem: the insane incentives.

B.O. bill raises stink

A proposal that raised a stink nationwide over an apparent attempt to criminalize body odor on public buses has been shelved by the City Council.

Bill 59 was deferred by the Council's Transportation Committee yesterday.

Honolulu gained nationwide attention, criticism and ridicule over Bill 59, which proposed a new code of conduct for users of the city's planned rail mass transit system. The code also would have applied to existing transit systems, including TheBus.

Civil rights groups and others criticized a provision that would have made it a crime -- punishable by a fine up to $500, six months in jail or both -- to have offensive body odor.

***

For a radio talk show host and newspaper columnist like me, Honolulu City Councilman Rod Tam is the gift that keeps on giving. His latest legislative faux pas, that harebrained idea that we should outlaw smelly people from TheBus and any other public transit systems will provide fodder for conversation and chuckles for ages.

If you were too busy working for a living and raising your children, you may have missed that Tam, along with colleague Nestor Garcia, announced their facilitation of legislation that would make it illegal to “bring onto transit property odors that unreasonably disturb others or interfere with their use of the transit system, whether such odors arise from one’s person, clothes, articles, accompanying animal or any other source.” In other words, no stink for you!

Yes, ladies and gentlemen of Oahu, you have duly elected leaders who are dedicating their time, resources and your dollars to the identification, extrication and prosecution of people who smell bad.

Thank goodness. For a while there, I thought they would be concerned about the looming city budget deficit, the deterioration of our roadways, the potential of a billion-dollar judgment on secondary wastewater treatment and the management of a multibillion-dollar transportation project. Naturally, these areas of concern are mere distractions when we have the scourge of B.O.-emanating, toe jamcrusted and halitosis-disseminating citizens riding TheBus. Somebody, please, elevate the Homeland Security threat level to “Skanky.”

But who is truly surprised this idea has Tam’s fingerprints all over it? While in the state Legislature,Tam cooked up the “Naps and Snacks” proposal. Tam also championed that great idea that Koko Head Crater would make a wonderful alternative to the Waimanalo Gulch landfill.

Councilman Nestor Garcia, co-author of the bill with colleague Rod Tam, said he would work on a new proposal to address constitutional issues raised by the language of the bill. The provision on odor is unlikely to be included.

"One person's smell is another person's perfume, I guess," Garcia said. "We need to try to figure out exactly how we go about that if we are to continue that kind of procedure."

Tam defended the bill, saying it arose out of constituents' concerns.

"It's our job to do it, whether we like it or not, and whether people want to criticize," said Tam, who previously faced ridicule as a state senator for introducing a bill authorizing naps and snack breaks for public workers.

***

Councilman Rod Tam has a long-standing record of listening to his constituents and supporting their legitimate concerns. Tam is a man ahead of his time. For example, he once supported a "naps" bill that would allow workers to take a short nap on their lunch hour or during a coffee break. Research, including a Harvard University study, shows that a power nap boosted performance back to morning levels.

I applaud Councilman Tam for his courage in representing his constituents' wishes as far as protecting the right to breathe Hawaii's pure, fresh and clean air while riding buses.

'bipartisan' healthcare plan attacked by both sides

Centrist Democratic senators introduced their long-awaited “bipartisan” healthcare plan on Wednesday without the public option favoured by President Barack Obama or the support of a single Republican.

The $856bn 10-year bill, which was unveiled by Max Baucus, Democratic chairman of the Senate finance committee, went a long way towards meeting Republican objections after a summer of increasingly emotional conservative allegations against healthcare reform.

But Mr Baucus, who had spent months with three leading Republicans trying to hammer out a compromise, was greeted with a unanimous thumbs down. Even Olympia Snowe, the moderate Republican from Maine who seemed most likely to come out in favour, declined to show her support.

Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate leader, said: “This partisan proposal cuts Medicare [the programme for seniors] by nearly a half-trillion dollars, and puts massive new tax burdens on families and small businesses, to create yet another thousand-page, trillion-dollar government programme.”

Mr Baucus, whose bill is considered the most likely among the five circulating on Capitol Hill to resemble whatever might finally be enacted, was also attacked by liberal Democrats on Wednesday for diluting key elements of the bill, both by lowering the cost of the reform from the initial plan of more than $1,000bn and by junking the controversial “public option”.

Mr Baucus’s plan would extend health coverage to 30m Americans. He said: “This is a unique moment in history. Now we can finally pass legislation that will rein in healthcare costs and deliver quality, affordable care to the American people.”

The White House emphasised that the Baucus bill was not a final draft, but a “building block” that would change.

The polarised response to Wednesday’s announcement suggests that Mr Obama’s hopes of getting a bipartisan healthcare reform bill passed are almost certainly dead. Any further concessions to Republican critics would alienate already-disenchanted liberal supporters. The main question now is whether the White House pushes for the bill to be enacted under the budget reconciliation rule, which would enable its sponsors to pass the reforms with a simple majority of 51 – against the 60 needed to shut off an opposition filibuster.

Republicans say such a move would kill hopes of cross-party co-operation on other issues. Many Democrats worry it would force the bill’s sponsors to strip out non-budget related items, including the proposal to set up a  healthcare  insurance exchange and regulations that would prevent insurers from denying coverage on the basis of health, race, age and geography.

MidWeek slanted

Slanting right

Although I enjoy reading most of your news and articles, I get extremely tired of the mostly drivel from such right-wingers as Jerry Coffee, Michelle Malkin and Pat Buchanan. I would have thought the MidWeek would have dropped Malkin years ago! She is more on par with the likes of Rush Limbaugh. I am for balanced news, but your slant is too obvious.

Paul Mizue
Aiea

* * *

Slanting left

MidWeek has become so liberal - between Dan Boylan, Bob Jones, Arianna Huffington and even in the letters to the editor section, I am on the verge of canceling my subscription. Lose the slant or lose me as a reader.

Art Miller
Honolulu

* * *

I had to chuckle when I read the two letters this week (9/2) from Paul Mizue, “Slanting right,” and Art Miller, “Slanting left.” To have an intelligent discussion on any issue, both sides must be willing to listen to the other’s opinions and ideas with an open mind. Today, unfortunately, too many on either side of the political debate are unwilling to come to the table with an open mind. Instead, like Paul and Art, they are quick to demonize and seek to silence the opposition.

That MidWeek has the courage to publish the thoughts and opinions from both sides of the aisle, week in and week out, make it the jewel that it is. Please do not change a thing.

John Baughman
Kailua

Obama on health care reform

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Obama on Wednesday made a passionate call for Congress to fix the nation's ailing health care system in the same spirit that created Social Security and Medicare in difficult times.

In a joint speech to Congress heralded as vital to his push for a health care overhaul, Obama offered his most detailed outline for legislation while challenging Republican opponents to build on issues of agreement rather than play politics to exploit differences.

He called for serious proposals from Democrats and Republicans to address chronic health care problems and rising costs, but warned he would not "waste time with those who have made the calculation that it's better politics to kill this plan than improve it."

"I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are," Obama said to growing applause from Democrats. "If you misrepresent what's in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now."

Obama, offering his first real blueprint for a bill, touched on issues that have dominated the health-care debate at town hall meetings across the country during the congressional recess in August.

All Americans would be required by law to have health insurance under his proposal, Obama said. He noted the requirement would be similar to mandatory auto insurance in most states and also would mandate businesses to either offer health care coverage to workers or contribute to covering their costs of obtaining coverage.

"There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements," Obama said. "But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees.

"Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part."

Obama also defended his proposal for government-run public health insurance as an option for consumers, saying it would force private insurers to lower costs. However, he called the provision one alternative for increasing competition for health insurance and signaled his openness to alternatives.

But he added, "I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can't find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice."

"And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need."

Republicans are unanimous in opposing a public option, calling it an unfair competitor that would drive private insurers from the market and lead to a government takeover of health insurance. Obama rejected that claim as a false allegation intended to scare people. iReport.com: Did Obama's speech hit the mark with you?

"Let me be clear -- it would only be an option for those who don't have insurance," he said. "No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5 percent of Americans would sign up."

Obama called for a reasonable approach from both liberal Democrats who demand a public option and Republicans and some moderate Democrats who oppose the provision.

"To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it," he said. "The public option is only a means to that end -- and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal.

"And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have."

Obama also confronted another concern expressed by opponents of Democratic proposals, pledging that any health care bill approved by Congress won't increase the federal deficit. He repeated past statements that savings in the existing health care system would cover most of the cost of an overhaul bill.

The president also sought to assure the elderly that cutting costs and finding savings in the Medicare program for senior citizens won't diminish the level of service currently provided. In particular, he said "not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund" would pay for the bill.

However, Obama provided few details of how that would happen, saying the plan would eliminate "unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies" and create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts to identify further waste.

"These steps will ensure that you -- America's seniors -- get the benefits you've been promised," Obama said. "They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations."

He urged the elderly to ignore what he called "scary stories about how your benefits will be cut -- especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past."

In a gesture intended to display his commitment to a bipartisan approach, Obama directed his administration to set up demonstration projects in several states to move toward medical malpractice reform -- an issue pushed by Republicans as way to bring down health care costs.

His mere mention of the topic prompted lengthy applause from the Republican side of the chamber.

"I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs," Obama said.

He proposed demonstration projects -- considered by the Bush administration -- "on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine."

In an emotional conclusion, Obama invoked the late Sen. Edward Kennedy -- a leading advocate of health care reform until his death last month -- by citing a letter in which the senator called providing health care to all Americans "above all a moral issue."

" 'At stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country,' " the president said, quoting the letter that Kennedy wrote in May and asked to be delivered after his death.

"I've thought about that phrase quite a bit in recent days -- the character of our country," Obama said to the hushed chamber. "One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our healthy skepticism of government."

Kennedy recognized, however, that with all of the drive of Americans to stand strong, there comes a time when government must step in to help, Obama said.

"When fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand," the president said, citing "a belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgment that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise."

Initial public response among those who watched the speech was positive, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll. Two out of three Americans who watched the speech said they favor Obama's health care plans -- a 14-point gain from before the speech -- while 29 percent oppose the president's proposals, according to the pollsters.

However, the audience for the speech appeared to be more Democratic than the U.S. population as a whole, causing the poll organizers to warn the results may favor Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tuned in.

In addition, the pollsters noted, the results don't reflect the the views of all Americans, only those who watched the speech.

Sarah Palin on health care reform

Writing in the New York Times last month, President Barack Obama asked that Americans “talk with one another, and not over one another” as our health-care debate moves forward.

I couldn't agree more. Let's engage the other side's arguments, and let's allow Americans to decide for themselves whether the Democrats' health-care proposals should become governing law.

Some 45 years ago Ronald Reagan said that "no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds." Each of us knows that we have an obligation to care for the old, the young and the sick. We stand strongest when we stand with the weakest among us.

We also know that our current health-care system too often burdens individuals and businesses—particularly small businesses—with crippling expenses. And we know that allowing government health-care spending to continue at current rates will only add to our ever-expanding deficit.

How can we ensure that those who need medical care receive it while also reducing health-care costs? The answers offered by Democrats in Washington all rest on one principle: that increased government involvement can solve the problem. I fundamentally disagree.

Common sense tells us that the government's attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones. Common sense also tells us that a top-down, one-size-fits-all plan will not improve the workings of a nationwide health-care system that accounts for one-sixth of our economy. And common sense tells us to be skeptical when President Obama promises that the Democrats' proposals "will provide more stability and security to every American."

With all due respect, Americans are used to this kind of sweeping promise from Washington. And we know from long experience that it's a promise Washington can't keep.