Disappeared News

Why 17? Well, it's the most arbitrary number I could think of.


I'm sure that you have questions as good or better than mine. Anyway, here's my year-end list. Posting it is something of a catharsis, why keep this stuff bottled up inside? That's why bloggers blog.


Environment

Q: Why is it that the Manoa Innovation Center and the University of Hawaii, since they are located in rainy Manoa, still do not use rain water to flush toilets? Why can't the rest of us use this abundant, free resource in our homes?

Q: Why are we requiring ethanol to be mixed with gasoline when it isn't made here, so we must burn foreign oil to bring it to Hawaii? Growing corn for fuel generally requires more energy input than you get out. Even when there is a slight net energy gain, we surely lose that by importing it from outside Hawaii. Wouldn't it be environmentally ethical to require it to be used only when we are able to produce it? The Philippines requires that diesel fuel must be mixed with coconut oil starting in March. But they already have a coconut industry there, so it makes very good sense (and the oil is said to improve the efficiency of diesel engines).

Q: We've got the waves, how come still no wave power generators? Europe has had installations running without problems and we have lots more waves than they do. Wave power generators don't mess up the skyline with rotating turbines. People tend to forget they are there. Tourists hardly visit the one in Scotland anymore, according to the editor of the local paper. They don't pollute in any way. So how come we're not using waves to generate energy here in Hawaii?


Our Legislature

Q: Why do we still allow legislators to take corporate handouts while in session? It's so blatant, particularly when powerful committee chairs let corporations write their bills and vote for them while holding their hands out to receive contributions. Legislators did it last year and in previous years. Let's be honest and call this bribery, and then put a stop to it.

Q: Why are corporate executives allowed to pose as "interns" and lobby legislators right inside their offices for the entire session? These executives are either embedded lobbyists or corporate spys or both. No need for more ethics commission rulings on the subject, the legislature should just give up the practice since it brings the integrity of lawmakers into question.

Q: How come conference committee chairs can overrule months of testimony, deliberate in secret, and only announce the results at a public meeting? When will democracy come to Hawaii?


Our Governor

Q: Why does the administration persist in holding up funds for badly needed social programs? Why not pass a law to restrain this damaging practice?

Q: The people have spoken--no war on drugs in Hawaii. At meeting after community meeting, the people have said that they prefer education, prevention and treatment. So call off the dogs and get with empirically proven programs in schools, communities and workplaces.

Q: When will we reduce the number of prisoners by emphasizing treatment and rehabilitation in the community, so that we can stop shipping them to Mainland private prisons that are unregulated by the states in which they are located and problematic in so many ways?



Health and Safety

Q: When will we deal with our driving-under-the-influence problem? A very discouraging feature article in the December 31, 2006 Dining Out section of the Honolulu Advertiser headlined "'Rush Hour' now begins daily from 4 p.m." begins with an invitation to drivers to get smashed before driving home:

Honolulu motorists wanting to take a detour to avoid H-1 gridlock at the end of the work day can now steer their vehicles toward Jackie's Kitchen--Asian Grill & Bamboo Bar.

The Ala Moana Shopping Center restaurant recently introduced "Rush Hour," daily pau hana specials from 4 to 7 p.m.

.   .   .

During "Rush Hour," this means 10-ounce martinis will cost only $5 and 22-ounce draft beers (except Kona Longboard) will be priced at $4."

Well, it's an advertising section, but shame on the Advertiser anyway. According to the blood alcohol content calculators found on the Internet, a 150-pound man staying an hour and having just one oversized martini would likely be just short of legally intoxicated with a blood alcohol level of around .07. A woman would be over the limit. Having a 22-ounce supersized microbrew could result in a score of .05 or better.

Yikes! It is socially irresponsible to promote drinking and driving. Didn't anyone mention that to the editors?

Again, shame on you, Advertiser. Get with the program. People are being killed because they or others drive impaired. You can do without the few bucks you get for that article in your advertising section. And Jackie's: you can come up with a better name for your happy hour than "Rush Hour."

Q: When will we deal with Hawaii's medical insurance company problem? As insurance reimbursements decline and payment for valid medical procedures is repeatedly denied, doctors in many specialties are giving up and leaving the state. You don't want to be in an auto accident on the Big Island right now, a doctor may not be available on call to put your bones back together.

Letters to the editor and articles describe the problem, which is a national issue. Even our president alluded to it in his own way:

"Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country."
- GWB, Poplar Bluff, Mo., Sept. 6, 2004

Well, Hawaii is losing its doctors and it's no laughing matter. Insurance companies raise premium rates when they can, they also cut payments to doctors while building obscene reserves and paying large executive salaries. Why not fix this? We're not afraid to regulate insurance companies. We should deal with this problem in 2007, before a natural disaster strikes and finds hospitals unprepared.

Q: Why do we say we have a budget surplus when we still don't have a civil defense system that will protect us in emergencies? Even if you know where your nearest shelter is located, do you know who has the keys to get in or what supplies and facilities will be waiting for you? This is assuming that somehow we'll get word about the storm or tsunami in time, which is still somewhat doubtful. Sheesh. We were prepared (water, flashlights, radio, batteries) but there was no news to tune to.



The Economy

Q: What is it about "affordable housing" that our city and state governments don't understand?

Taxes and other costs of living are going up so fast, and so little is being done to make affordable housing available, that it's predictable that next year will see a surge in homelessness. Why not reduce the tax burden on homeowners and also, separately, provide property tax incentives for landlords who demonstrably rent at affordable rates? Why not discuss and implement serious measures designed to rapidly cure this problem? It really isn't rocket science.

Q: When will those state housing units that need to be repaired actually be repaired? Why not in 2007?

Q: Tourism provides us with low-paying jobs and ships profits out of the state. High-tech benefits mostly those who are promoting it, apparently. So why are we not studying how to create a model of an island economy that is sustainable?

The dependence on tourism is pervasive. While it supports us at present, we could be studying how to create an alternative future. It probably will include a little high-tech but not much. We need a plan.

There's no use complaining about our poor public educational system while it perfectly suits our current needs--that is, to prepare graduates for a life making beds, sweeping floors and waiting tables. Singapore developed and implemented a plan for economic growth that was very successful. Hawaii is not Singapore, but we could be thinking like they did and upgrade ourselves for the future.

Q: The AARP did a great job identifying intersections with walk signals that change so fast that they don't give pedestrians a chance to get across the street. Yet none of these lights, as far as I know, has been fixed.

How high must the body count go before our transportation departments fix a known problem?

Q: Speaking of intersections--why is it that you never see police enforcing the crosswalk law? What good is it to have laws if they are not enforced? Motorists know that their chances of being caught cutting in front of a pedestrian in a crosswalk are zilch, so they don't hesitate to do it. Motorists speed because, even with tough new laws, they know the chances of getting pinched for speeding or tailgating are close to zero.


Ok, that's 17, time to stop. Have a Happy Holiday and hope you'll visit here again in the coming New Year.

In 2007 Hawaii's public access TV may be discontinued or turned over to a Mainland megacorporation. Your favorite programs could disappear in favor of partisan, special-interest (or even religious) programming. This can happen if decisions made in illegal secret meetings involving several state departments are not overturned.

All of Hawaii's PEG providers are under attack at the moment, in a battle being fought largely out of sight of the newspaper-reading and commercial TV-viewing public. At the same time, the largest national phone companies are doing their best to have PEG services defunded entirely.

As a discerning consumer of alternative media you may have favorite programs on `Olelo, Akaku, or one of the other public access TV services in Hawaii. These services (referred to as PEG, or (P)ublic, (E)ducational and (G)overnment channels) make time available for local producers to get their own shows distributed on the cable systems. `Olelo and perhaps the others also stream on the Internet, so that programs are available statewide and on the Mainland as well. They also provide training, equipment and facilities to make this possible.

Public access channels bring you information, points of view, entertainment and cultural insights that you simply won't find on Fox News. Wouldn't it be sad if Fox were put in charge of this programming? It could happen--all they'd have to do is have a non-profit subsidiary come in with a low bid and demonstrate that they can do TV production. It's that simple.


Moneyed Interests Object to Broadcast Content

Earlier this year Maui PEG provider Akaku was thrown into turmoil and lost its executive director in a battle allegedly fomented by developers who objected to the content that was broadcast. This time, all the PEG providers are being targeted.

Here is a snippet from a statement by Sean McLaughlin, then ED of Akaku to its board of directors which seems particularly applicable to the current situation:

... Of even greater concern - and this is the root of the present crisis here - Akaku is often called upon to silence voices that challenge or disagree with special interests. Like many community media operations around the country, Akaku has been repeatedly threatened with unethical legal attacks. And this year Akaku was assaulted with stealth legislative maneuvers at least in part because the organization refuses to censor community voices, holding true to the free speech mission of empowering our community's voice without discrimination.

You all must remember that it is not your place as the governing Board of Akaku to curry favor or personal benefits by offering privilege to special interests - least of all when you are asked to censor or silence the voices of our community.

Do not be afraid of free speech and do not be intimidated by powerful interests that seek to control and direct our community's voice.

Please be ever vigilant and always remain aware that there are special private interests who profit from controlling media and building imbalance. Building im-balance in darkness and out of public view these interests can fatally corrupt the oversight of this organization, divert community resources to State control, undermine your guiding principles, and taint the basic open access operations of Akaku.

There are people in Hawaii who object to what is being shown on the public access channels and who seek allies in our state government, which has held a series of meetings on PEG access in violation of open meeting laws.

At these meetings (as far as we can know, because many have been held in secret) your access to free speech public access TV is being snatched away. The state plans to require that providers go through a bidding process. And they are preventing current providers from applying on equal footing to larger, even Mainland, entities. What you will get on your screen will be determined by a company of the state's choosing.

In fact, chances are fair that one day soon Hawaii public access channels could either go dark (if the FCC and phone companies have their way) or (if our state government has its way) be provided not by a local entity but by a subsidary of Fox News, Time Warner, or any other Mainland company that comes in with a winning bid on a state contract now being written for these services.

Free speech public access TV is now an endangered species. You could lose it entirely.


FCC Sells Out Public Interest

On the national scene, phone companies are in the midst of a big push to compete with cable companies. Part of that involves getting the federal government to dump the requirement that providers of TV channels have to provide funds for local public access television in exchange for the right to put their cables under the city streets, which are after all owned by the community.

The FCC recently took the first step in undermining that funding. Here is a short summary from last Thursday's Democracy Now:

FCC Hands Telecoms Victory on Cable Franchising

In media news, the Federal Communications Commission has agreed to change cable franchising laws so that local communities have less control over incoming pay-television providers. The vote was pushed for by the telecom giants Verizon and AT&T. The final was vote was three to two. Opponents are already planning a court challenge. Anthony Riddle of the Alliance for Community Media said: "The FCC, in the spirit of Christmas, has given the biggest gift of all to the giant telephone companies while the children of our cities and towns get a lump of coal in their torn stockings."

Government Agencies Conspire in Hawaii

The decision that the Hawaii PEG contracts will be terminated and put out to bid in 2007 was apparently made in a secret and probably illegal meeting held by the Procurement Policy Board on October 5, 2006. The executive session was not listed on the agenda, so it should not have been held, according to Hawaii's open meeting laws.

Who participated and what did they discuss? The minutes do not tell us. From those in attendance, it seems that the participants were the Procurement Policy Board members, the Attorney General's office (represented by Pat Ohara, Deputy Attorney General) and DCCA, the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, which regulates the cable industry and supervises the PEG providers (represented by Clyde Sonobu).

The meeting lasted 2 hours and 12 minutes, after which the PPB decided the PEG contracts must go to bidding. Keep in mind that testimony was overwhelmingly against this (see the summary of testimony at the end of the minutes).

There is a reason why Hawaii and other states have open meeting laws. Secret meetings deny the public access to the decisionmaking process and thwart accountability. We have a right, under the law, to know what was discussed at this (and previous) meetings, and if the decision was reached illegally, it should be set aside.

Since the PPB may be under pressure from groups that want to take over public access television, we need to know if they have caved in to political pressure at the expense of the public interest.

All participants were aware of the requirements of the open meeting law, yet they met in secret anyway. In particular, the Deputy Attorney General should have known the law and could have informed the participants before or during the meeting of the requirements the law places on them if they want to hold an executive session.

In order to avoid participating in an illegal activity herself, the deputy should, in my view, have left the meeting if the PPB declined to terminate it.

DCCA already regulates the PEG services in Hawaii. It is not clear why, after so many years, the contracts should be put out to bid. There is no state money involved, nor does the state gain any asset or receive any services. The procurement process doesn't fit PEG services, and is not applied to other moneys funding non-profits in Hawaii.

Viewers have every right to be suspicious of this action and how it has been conducted. And we should be questioning why our Attorney General's office participates in illegal secret meetings whether it is the Procurement Policy Board attacking free speech public access services or the Board of Education firing a popular charter school executive.


Current PEG Providers Intentionally Disadvantaged

Two provisions of the bidding process which are part of the draft RFP (Request for Proposals) deliberately disadvantage the current PEG providers. The first excludes them from using staff or facilities to prepare the bid! No other bidder is restricted similarly. The second is the rating system which favors broadcast experience but not PEG experience. By the criteria the state plans to apply, any large broadcast organization, especially one willing to buy its way into the market, can succeed by listing its years of experience on the airwaves. The need to form a non-profit is no obstacle, a non-profit can still pay huge executive salaries.

For now, if you are concerned about loss of these free speech channels or of the flagrant disregard for open meeting laws, it is a good time to write a few letters to the editor or to contact your state legislative representatives. You might also call (586-0034), fax (586-0006) or email (governor.lingle@hawaii.gov) the governor and ask that the state keep its hands off free speech public access television. You can ask the Office of Information Practices (oip@hawaii.gov) to rule on whether the decisions reached at the secret meeting on October 5 should be set aside.

Ask them to save public access TV from commercial interests and to obey the sunshine laws that are already on the books.

(Big sigh). With all the more important things we need to consider here in Hawaii (transit, disaster preparedness, whether Barack Obama is coming to visit, and so forth), the continued refusal of the Board of Education to follow the Sunshine Law should rank pretty low on the list.

Well, to many parents and advocates of the growing charter schools movement, the firing of Jim Shon was no trivial matter. You get somebody good, and because of his success, this wayward Board has to shoot him down. Won't they do that again the next time somebody good gets the job?

In the latest round, the BOE has stonewalled the release of the audiotape of their secret meeting at which Shon was fired, and the additional material the OIP directed them to release. Believe it or not, they have scheduled a future meeting to discuss the matter with their accomplice in this crime, the deputy Attorney General (see below).

Remember, the original request was sent to the BOE on September 7. Between then and now, they have had plenty of time to consult with their attorney.

The latest stonewalling move is this letter from Karen Knudsen, who was up for reelection at the time she voted to fire Jim Shon. By hiding her action despite the OIP directive to disclose it, the BOE denied citizens an important piece of information that they should have had before they went into the voting booth.

OIP responded quickly. Their letter can be found here.

The gist of Knudsen's letter is that she intends to confer with the Office of the Attorney General at another secret meeting of the BOE to be scheduled for January 4, 2007. This will be almost exactly four months since the original request. The OIP has been clear in its directives. The excessive delay in complying is simply more defiance of the law.

Hawaii's Attorney General -- Accomplice in Crime?

I'm dying of curiousity. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when the BOE conferred with its deputy AG on releasing the information to the public. Did the deputy inform them of their responsibilities under the state's Sunshine Law or not? If so, why another meeting with the BOE on the same subject?

I know that the AG's office is there to answer questions and not to tell the BOE what they must do. The BOE really are adults and can choose their own course of action. But if I were a deputy AG called into a meeting that was not properly noticed to the public or was otherwise illegal, I think I might:

1. Advise the BOE of the problem so that it could follow the law


2. Tell the BOE that the AG's office could not participate in an illegal meeting


3. Leave immediately, if they insisted on going ahead with the illegal meeting

In other words, by participating in the illegal meeting in the first place and continuing to enable the BOE's stonewalling of the OIP directive by agreeing to more meetings, isn't the AG's office an accomplice, in some sense, in what the BOE is doing?

Isn't the AG an accomplice in the BOE's disregard for the Sunshine Law? Are they not assuring the BOE that there will be no consequences should the BOE do the same thing again?

There should be justice for the charter school parents someplace here. I am disappointed to find that our state's highest authority on the law is assisting the BOE instead of the parents.

With apologies to Doug Carlson for my tardiness, here is a pointer to his blog Citizens Helping Officials Respond to Emergencies. I have also added it to the blogroll on the lower left side of Disappeared News so that you can see the last few articles he has posted.

Doug has undertaken the CHORE of tracking our government's response to its citizen's call that it plan for disasters in an open and efficient way. Remember, this is the state government that didn't inspect the dams, so the dams overflowed. This is the government that couldn't get us info when an earthquake hit. This is the government that has now set up an elite committee (excluding ordinary folk) that meets in secret to resolve communications issues.

Yup, more secret government meetings. These secret meetings may be legal, but that doesn't mean it's right. As you know, I've been advocating for a completely open process of disaster planning. The people deserve to know how (whether?) our government is taking the necessary steps to keep us safe. If everything is done in secret, we need to ask Why. In this Internet age, our state civil defense people could put together a website easily. They should also meet in public view.

Doug notes in his recent posts that the secret meeting was to produce a report, but that the due date is being fudged. Sixty days grows to 90 days grows to ???

I hope the secret committee members aren't being paid by the hour. (That's a joke.) (The delays and secrecy are not. Being unprepared for disasters is not funny.)

Doug's blog was featured in this week's Honolulu Weekly and mentioned by Ian Lind today. So it's about time I also catch up and send you Doug's way.

Tomorrow's the Honolulu Marathon. It's a bit too late for entrants in this event, but the New York Times offers a cautionary article for the future: Is Marathoning Too Much of a Good Thing for Your Heart?

Poor Junior. We know he doesn't read newspapers, so perhaps he doesn't see the political cartoons lampooning his presidency each day. Now it's become fashionable to feature highlights of his career (such as they are) on mainstream TV. Will he have to give up television as well?

Click on the picture (found on the Internet) for a clever parable starring this White House Christmas tree.

The Iraq Study Group report was written mainly for one person to read: the President of the United States. But can he really read and understand this complex report? Here's something to help him get through it.

On Thursday President Bush commented on the report after possibly being briefed on it by visiting British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Standing next to Blair, he commented:

Some reports are issued and just gather dust. And truth of the matter is, a lot of reports in Washington are never read by anybody. To show you how important this one is, I read it, and our guest read it. The Prime Minister read -- read a report prepared by a commission.

So I ask you--after reading this, the president's own words, do you think he really read the report? He sounds like a kid trying to convince the teacher that he really read The Odyssey over summer vacation.

Iraq for Dummies

The document has almost 32,000 words. 7200 are "Big Words" according to a text analysis program. Bush is challenged even by medium-sized words (e.g., "nuclear"). The same program assigns the report a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Score of almost 15, which means that someone with one year of graduate study would be comfortable with it.

Especially if one is not used to reading, it just takes time to go through something this long and with so many Big Words.

Disappeared News, as a public service and special gift to the president, has used computer technology to produce a summarization of the document that is only 10% of its full length. The entire Appendix has been skipped because who reads appendices anyway.

The summary was produced entirely by computer, without the interference of human judgment. Of course, a lot is omitted, but reading this summary might get one through the final exam. Sort of like a "Cliff Note" for the entire Iraq Study Group report.

GWB or anyone interested can find this summary at:
http://disappearednews.com/docs/IraqStudyGWBSummary.htm.

You're welcome, Mr. President.

Well, at least the real reason the US invaded Iraq has been revealed: Oil. No surprise. It's just odd to see this in writing.

It seems everyone is analyzing the Iraq Study Group report. There's little I can add to this: Oil for Sale: Why the Iraq Study Group is Calling for the Privatization of Iraq's Oil Industry.

The authors are Pappy Bush people. The report isn't about human rights or international law. Probably Pappy is trying to get his buddies access to that oil before Junior ends up facing a helicopter-on-the-embassy-roof scene in Baghdad. Or impeachment at the hands of a resurgent (insurgent?) Democrat-controlled Congress.

Will Junior listen? Who knows. He says he doesn't agree with the report but I'll bet he hasn't read it yet.

Tony Blair seems to have read it, and there's benefit to him if he acts opportunistically. The report doesn't suggest that the US or Britain "cut and run," far from it. It urges a change in the way the occupation is conducted. Check this out: Milan Rai on Iraq Study Group Report: "What is on the Table is Continued Control at a Reduced Political and Military Cost".

There's plenty of analysis out there on the Web if you read widely. Don't swallow uncritically what the daily papers say about this report. As usual, there is much more written between the lines than on them.

During his confirmation hearings Rummy's replacement Gates dropped a bomb on Bush by admitting we're not winning. Colin Powell said Iraq conflict can already be described as a civil war. Malaki cancelled a summet meeting with him, an unprecedented snub. The despised Democrats trounced his party on election day with the Iraq war as the polarizing issue. Tomorrow a long-awaited study will probably add to Bush's woes by calling for cooperation with Syria and Iran. Bush is finding it harder to suggest bombing Iran under the circumstances. And in the background, the resurgent Taliban are retaking control of Afghanistan except for Kabul.

Things are not going Bush's way. Of course he wants to put Iraq behind him.

Another way we can tell he wants out is that he still insists that our troops have to stay. He's such a consistent liar that we can interpret that to mean there will be some kind of pull back of troops.

But how to get out of the game without admitting he lost? The best way would be if someone would upset the chessboard so that playing the game is no longer an option. A raging civil war would do the trick, but there could be other scenarios.

American troops and mercenaries probably can't turn the Iraqi police force into peacekeepers. That's a police job, not a military job. American soldiers are perceived by Iraqis as murderers and torturers. Not the kind of models one wants. It doesn't matter if more troops should be added, they are the wrong people for the job, and so the job won't get done. Besides, each day sees more soldiers killed, and the magic number of 3,000 is approaching. The American public won't be too happy when that number is reached and there is no end to the killing in sight.

Perhaps the time is ripe to end the occupation and bring our troops home. Let's see what Bush does to preserve his legacy. Such as it is.