Political Agenda for 1994
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1994-04-12
Guests: Jerry Burris (Editorial Page Editor, The Honolulu Advertiser); Chuck Freedman (Vice President of Community Relations, Hawaiian Electric Company)
Duration: 1:04:44

[00:00:04] Randall Roth: I'm Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise Radio Show. And this is a special one hour call-in version on this year's political agenda in Hawaii. The price of paradise regularly airs Saturday mornings at nine on this station, and then again Sunday mornings at eight on KHPR 88.1 and KKUA 90.7. Hawaii Public Radio recently installed equipment which allows listeners to call in their questions and comments. It's easy to participate and it's free, what a deal. The number is 955-8821, and neighbor Islanders are invited to call collect. Again, that's 955-8821. Today's topic is the political agenda in Hawaii, specifically, who's going to set that agenda? The politicians, the press, or the people? With me in the studio are Chuck Freedman, Vice President for Corporate Relations at Hawaiian Electric, and one time communications director for Governor Wahi, and Jerry Burris, editorial page editor of the Honolulu advertiser.
[00:01:04] Randall Roth: This program is live, and the phone lines are now open. The number again is 955-8821. Well Chuck, you're a self-described crony, so maybe you should begin by telling us who the politicians think should be setting the political agenda.
[00:01:19] Chuck Freedman: Well Randy, actually, I'm a crony emeritus, having graduated, but I think if you ask the politicians, they would say that the public sets the agenda, whether or not they really mean that, I don't know. But I think of one, one story which illustrates how true it can be, and that is in 1986 when John Wahi was running for governor the first time and was really out of it in terms of the polls, no less a person than Sterling Morita, who was a tough reporter back then and is now city editor for the Star Bulletin, told me there's no way your guy can win, and unless maybe he meets everybody in the state. And I took it seriously and actually, by the time he was through running that time, I think John Wahi did meet everybody in the state, did some active listening, [unintelligible — audio glitch] won two two elections, the primary and a general where he was behind, and I think that that the public had a lot to do with it and him listening to what they had to say and a lot to do with it. So there's still some truth to it.
[00:02:17] Randall Roth: When you say the the politician should set the agenda, what do you mean by set the agenda?
[00:02:22] Chuck Freedman: Well, I think in in the case of the the politician, their their real job beyond active listening is to make the public arguments, to get out there and say where they stand on the hard choices, what they're going to do about them and and how they uh plan to be measured, what the yard sticks would be used. Now that when they when they get around to being elected and doing uh their thing. That has not always been the case in campaigns and everybody can get jaded and say I don't, it'll never happen. But think about the last presidential campaign and how that became a largely issue oriented campaign and in a way a a mandate for Clinton, regardless of what you think about him, to to turn toward domestic issues in particular healthcare.
[00:03:09] Chuck Freedman: So that was a case where I think a real agenda emerged despite the tendency to get into negative campaigning and and the old school Republican and Democrat sort of back biting, that fell by the wayside and between between the reporters covering it and the candidates talking about it, we had a real discussion of issues.
[00:03:28] Randall Roth: Jerry, what do you think the media's role in this thing is?
[00:03:31] Jerry Burris: Well the media's role is is what it always has been, and I think which is to to reflect what's going on out there and I think what what's happened, what the media is doing, Chuck and I once sat at a dinner party with David Broder from the Washington Post, who kind of kicked the press in the in the rear end and and reminded them that their job wasn't simply to do the best job of covering the negative ads or the best job of finding out who'd flubbed on the campaign trail and who said the wrong thing, but the press's job was to was to listen to what really concerns people, what's really on their minds, and then as their job a sort of intermediary to carry that message to the politicians and demand that the politicians respond to the people.
[00:04:13] Jerry Burris: Now, politicians have always said, listen to the people as part of their campaign, they'd be dumb not to, but what they've done in all in too many cases is listen to the people, take polls, find out what's on people's minds and then sort of to to be crude about it, sort of demagogue it, to lace stuff out there that appeals [unintelligible — audio glitch] people's sentiments and emotions without really responding to what they really want to hear. So what Broder suggested and what a lot of the press and the media have done over the last several years is is try to be a more active intermediary, to truly understand what people are concerned about and then hold the the candidates responsible for responding to that. Not just talk about it, not just put ads on television or on the radio or in the newspapers I hope once in a while, but actually to respond to the questions and I think that's our role.
[00:05:02] Randall Roth: In case you've joined us late, this is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth and my guests are Chuck Freedman, former communications director for Governor Wahi and Jerry Burris, editorial page editor of the Honolulu advertiser. The topic is the political agenda in Hawaii and the phone lines are open. To ask a question or make a comment, just dial 955-8821. Neighbor Islanders may call collect. The number again is 955-8821. Well Jerry, if it's the media's job to to listen to the people, uh what is it that they're saying?
[00:05:37] Jerry Burris: Uh in Hawaii? What I think it's pretty clear what they're saying. They're uh there's the the underlying theme, I'd say and I don't know Chuck, you could disagree with me but I think the underlying theme is a sense of uh powerlessness and frustration, a feeling of lack of any ability to control your life to control uh how much it costs to live, to control your time, and to to the degree that it's true, to control government, to have government be responsive. There's a feeling that things have drifted out of control and I think that's the dominant theme.
[00:06:07] Randall Roth: Chuck, is is that what you're hearing from the politicians?
[00:06:10] Chuck Freedman: I don't know if I don't know if I'm hearing it from the politicians yet because for them to to talk about it means they're going to have to have some hard choice ideas as to what they're going to do about it. But I did tell Jerry that that's indeed that the loss of control issue has for some time in these little islands been been snowballing and and we are at a point now where where people don't feel like they have much control over their their immediate environments or uh the long-term environments. And that's scary because if if people don't feel they have control and aren't willing to exercise personal responsibility for the actions they're taking and get out there and do something about it, then you've got apathy [unintelligible — audio glitch] maybe worse.
[00:06:58] Chuck Freedman: um you you could have situations where people are sort of blaming everybody else for their inability to get control of their own lives and when we have a situation like that, we may lose the the very marrow of Hawaii, which is our our good feeling for one another and the sense that collectively we're we're a special people who can do things. And I think a lot's on the line in this election if between the candidates and the and the public they're they're appealing to we can't get to that issue in some real real ways. Uh we may lose the wonderful thing that we've got here.
[00:07:32] Randall Roth: What do you think, Jerry?
[00:07:33] Jerry Burris: Well I just something occurred to me that this uh this powerlessness issue, which is out there, can can work in two different directions. It could be a tremendously liberating thing if if uh candidates running for office can find ways, substantive ways, to give people the feeling that they do have power, that they do have an ability to influence things and draw them into the political system like Chuck was saying, and make them feel that it's worth participating. It's also, uh you know, it's a chance for people to be a true demagogue and say, uh you're mad as hell and you're not going to take it anymore and so am I, so by God, I'm going to kick over the traces and be the mean rough guy and be on your side without really saying anything substantive. And that's, uh you know, in Russia, we see Zhirinovsky who is basically saying that to the Russians is is you're frustrated, you're hungry, you're mad and then I'm going to stand up for you.
[00:08:21] Jerry Burris: So there is a dangerous path that this can take and I hope that we take the other one. The one that uh that the candidates empower the people rather than just uh play on their frustrations.
[00:08:31] Randall Roth: We're talking to political guru, Chuck Freedman, and newspaperman, Jerry Burris. The topic is the political agenda, specifically, who should set it. We're live and your calls are welcome. The number is 955-8821. Chuck, you mentioned hard choices. Can you give us some sense for what you mean by hard choices?
[00:08:52] Chuck Freedman: Yeah. First of all, let's start with the premise that all the easy ones have been made already. So there are only hard ones left, and I think that's part of the dilemma out here. And I think there's a the classic case has just in over the last couple of weeks where there was a news story about, I believe, it was Ikahi Elementary, pushing under the school community based management plan to have more power in the decision making of of its school principal. Anybody who's ever been in a school will tell you the single most important ingredient to the success of a school is the is the strength of the school principal. A lot of things are number two, but that's tie for number two, but that's clearly number one.
[00:09:27] Chuck Freedman: And they were bumping into the bureaucracy and in large measure I think union, um, prohibitions, which which really didn't allow the the school community based group to to get empowered. That's a control issue, that's a key issue. It played one day in the papers. The candidates nobody seemed to respond to it too much even though it's emblematic of of the kind of changes we have to make in the school if we're going to get back in control. Instead, we had several days worth of coverage of HSTA endorsing and why it's an outrage or or why it's totally just and sort of the insider's game again. Um who cares? I mean, I'm not saying it's not a story, but the real story out there is who's going to control the schools and what the candidates are going to do to take something like school community based management to the next step, and we missed the beat on it.
[00:10:20] Randall Roth: Jerry, that sounds like a criticism.
[00:10:22] Jerry Burris: Well, I think I think it's it's a fair one in a way. I think the defense I would offer is that if you've read anything about the issue of school based management and control of the schools and school reform, you've read in the Advertiser uh over the last couple of years. I mean, that we have been the in terms of the media, the one place where this thing has been fought out. Uh but it is a warning. I mean, it's and all of us, Chuck enjoys it, I enjoy it, is is the political intrigue and the fighting and the uh back room dealing over uh union endorsements and the rest of that. I mean, that's kind of the the sexy side of of politics.
[00:10:55] Jerry Burris: And and you have you it's hard to resist those kinds of stories, and if you sit around at night and you're drinking coffee or having a beer, that's those are the ones you tend to talk about, not not who'd make a good principal at Ikahi Elementary. But uh but I think that that the message is, and one we should take to heart is, if we're going to expect the candidates to address school based reform and the rest of this, then we have to keep covering that issue and keep expecting that to be [unintelligible — audio glitch] context of the political debate, otherwise it will go away.
[00:11:23] Randall Roth: Chuck?
[00:11:24] Chuck Freedman: Well, and Jerry, not to just beat up on the newspapers, I think that a a strong candidate would have got out there and it had said something about it and if the community feels really strongly about the issue, they shouldn't just depend on the media to find out where the the important candidate stand on that issue. So maybe we're not over yet on that one. I guess the warning would just be that what we don't want to do is fall prey to the old sort of insider's game and image building uh kind of stuff, which looks good on a TV commercial or maybe makes a cute story on on television or the newspaper, but we passed by the hard choices that that have to be made if we're going to get control of our lives.
[00:12:02] Randall Roth: Phone lines are open. The number is 955-8821. Neighbor Islanders can call collect 955-8821. Well Chuck, in talking about hard choices, you just gave me an example having to do with the schools. Anything else come to mind in terms of hard choices that the candidates should be addressing?
[00:12:21] Chuck Freedman: Well, one one caveat, I think that's what's got to percolate out of this election so I'm not going to sit here and and declare what the hard choices are, but I'll give you some good examples. Um uh some good examples would be uh what people's positions are, what the candidate's positions are, on the effect of sovereignty on non-Hawaiians. uh what candidate's positions are on what we're going to do, I mean really do about all that green space [unintelligible — audio glitch] Eva that that now is uh maybe lost, and and what kind of choices are we really we willing to make to protect it? It's not just an economic issue. That open space out there in part defines us as a people. It makes us Oahu. What are people going to, what are the candidates going to do about that?
[00:13:10] Chuck Freedman: How much do people really care about that? Those are the kind of, I think, uh tricky questions, hard choices, that we've got to discuss openly um if we're going to have a real successful campaign.
[00:13:22] Randall Roth: Now, you don't think it's it's your role to set the agenda, you're saying these are things that will probably percolate out of the campaign. What do you mean percolate out of the campaign? Where is it going to come from? From the candidates, from the media, from someplace else?
[00:13:37] Chuck Freedman: Well, it takes three to tango.
[00:13:41] Jerry Burris: I I would hope that it would come out of the people. uh that's not always been the case. I mean, the people, the issues that are important to the people have always been there, and I think uh as Chuck was saying that that part of the problem has been that the uh the dance has been a two-person dance. You know, the media and the politicians have this wonderful waltz from uh from July to November, and then the the public sort of watches it and then at the end they they vote for some reason or another. And I think what we got to do is get the public in and have them dance with us and uh as a matter of fact, let them set the tempo and the pace and the music and everything because we it's just, it hasn't worked as well as it should have when it's just been the two of us.
[00:14:21] Randall Roth: What uh what are your thoughts about hard choices, Jerry? You you've been listening to the people, what what are the people saying that translates into one of Chuck's hard choices?
[00:14:31] Jerry Burris: Well, [unintelligible — audio glitch] can't frame [unintelligible — audio glitch] two options of this choice here, but I think the tough one, the toughest one, and maybe one that's impossible is is the concern about cost of living, about how do you survive economically in Hawaii. And uh it's that's the easiest thing for for a candidate to speak to. I'm concerned about the cost of living. I'm going to hold down costs, I'm going to hold down the size of government, I'm going to make sure that everything is affordable, I'm going to bring you lots of affordable housing. But what really can government do? And and if someone comes up with some specifics that that ring bells and say, hey, this will affect the cost of living, I think they're going to just do a tremendous job of reaching out to the people. And that's a tough, tough one because I haven't heard anybody who has any good thoughts.
[00:15:15] Randall Roth: You're listening to a live Price of Paradise discussion of the political agenda in Hawaii, who should set that agenda, the politicians, the press, or the people. My guests are Chuck Freedman, a self-described and unrepentant political crony and Jerry Burris, a fellow who thinks the news media should do more than just report the news. Phone lines are open, the number is 955-8821. We have several callers waiting, uh Stephen, you're on.
[00:15:39] Speaker Stephen: Uh for better than 200 years, Republicans and Democrats have had the opportunity to provide world-class human-centric government for all of its peoples. They haven't. What makes anybody think that it's going to change when you have the same political rhetoric that's been carried on for years, and polls that are censored through political BS and not one poll representing in any sense of the word, the depth, wants and needs of all the citizens of not only this state, but the country, the silent majority and the lost voters. So you're saying do we really have a future, and do you really care about your future and where you're you're at and where we're going today, and what are our needs and our wants, and what matters to you?
[00:16:21] Speaker Stephen: There isn't one politician that really wants to address the truth and concerns of this matter.
[00:16:31] Randall Roth: Let's see what Jerry has to say about that Stephen.
[00:16:34] Jerry Burris: You know, what Stephen said is exactly on the point that I think that were were the sort of thing we're picking up is that people feel they're not being listened to. I think that's what you were saying, that people have concerns and the politicians are kind of floating at a level above that. And uh the small thing that we can do in the news media and and we have been doing, you talked about polls, we've taken polls of course, but we've also gone out and talked to people and sat down with them in coffee shops and sidewalks and things like that. It isn't scientific, but it's part of a way of getting a truer sense of what people are thinking so that in our little messenger role we can go back and uh and carry that message back to the But are they willing to face it? I mean, true conclusions can only be reached or approached
[00:17:15] Speaker Stephen: by anyone or any system by pursuing the truth without regard to where it may lead or what its AE fects may be on different interests. Citizen input equals citizen government. Until you have that, you have nothing. You're just waving a flag. Parading everybody's little theories. We're not getting anywhere.
[00:17:36] Randall Roth: Stephen, you you don't don't sound very optimistic. Let's ask Chuck whether he's optimistic about things being different.
[00:17:42] Chuck Freedman: Well, I think raising it the way you have, Stephen, is good. By the way, you ought to read a book called Why Americans Hate Politics by A.J. Dion. It it talks about this on a national scale. And it seems to me that [unintelligible — audio glitch] problem you have when you do face the hard choices is that if we don't really focus in on them and talk about them, when it comes down to what is going to be a close call and a lot of these hard choices are, we talk about the silent majority, it may be that, you know, 52% of the people favor it one way and 48% of the other. uh it's awfully close. What are you going to do? Are you going to try to split the difference? Are you going to go solidly one way? I think that's why if people get involved [unintelligible — audio glitch] uh get the truth out there as best they can as they see it, we're more likely to get some change than not.
[00:18:26] Jerry Burris: Well, but more often than not we're blinded by our own rational inventions, and besides that we tend to be living in the past and decline. Um the problem is that too few determine the future for so many. Um it's a thankless and caring job. I can understand that being a politician. But if they don't uh distinguish between the genius of a statesman and the talents of a politician, then all you're going to have is the same continuing government in decline.
[00:18:58] Randall Roth: Stephen, it sounds to me like like your
[00:19:00] Chuck Freedman: you're critical of of us, the voters.
[00:19:03] Jerry Burris: I am. I think that I think we're a bunch of wimps. I think we've given up, I think we've compromised for less than the best.
[00:19:09] Chuck Freedman: Let me ask Chuck whether um, whether he uh, or whether he sees the politicians agreeing with that, whether the the community is is not doing the job it should be doing.
[00:19:19] Jerry Burris: Well, if you look at voter turnouts, the answer is that they're not. If you look at voter turnouts, you across the country and here in Hawaii, you'll see [unintelligible — audio glitch] there are just in way too many people who who aren't in the voting booth on election day. But I think it's more But nobody's asking them the right questions.
[00:19:34] Chuck Freedman: that's right. It's called the politics of false choices.
[00:19:37] Jerry Burris: Exactly. And how do you how do you plan on stepping ahead? There in no sense of the word could your program even use the word paradise, because if you look up the word or the meaning of the word paradise in Webster's dictionary, we do not come anywhere near that. We we we cannot even by right use that word. This is not a paradise. It's maybe better than other places. And that's the thing. Hawaii should be a paradise. It has all the ingredients to be one. I mean, whenever you put cultures together, you're going to bring out the worst first before you bring out the best. But if you continue to just allow the worst to continue to exist, then you're never going to be able to touch on the best.
[00:20:16] Chuck Freedman: Well, Stephen, I I think a step in the right direction is that that people care about it and the fact that you've called and and expressed your thoughts so so eloquently I think gives me more heart than I otherwise would have had. Uh I really appreciate your thoughts. Thank you.
[00:20:31] Jerry Burris: Yeah, by the name my my name is Stephen.
[00:20:33] Chuck Freedman: Stephen, I'm sorry.
[00:20:34] Jerry Burris: That's okay.
[00:20:35] Chuck Freedman: Okay. We have a very uh uh interesting system of communication here at Public Radio and my wife is making hand signals at me right now and the word that looks like Stephen is being crushed in the window. Thanks again.
[00:20:48] Jerry Burris: Thank you.
[00:20:49] Chuck Freedman: Uh, Jerry, you were saying that what you're hearing from the people, number one, there's a sense of powerlessness and you gave us an example of a tough choice involving the cost of living. What else are you hearing from the people and how does that translate into so-called tough choices?
[00:21:05] Jerry Burris: Well, another big one [unintelligible — audio glitch] people are facing is and I guess it ties into the economy in a way [unintelligible — audio glitch] uh and I think you've been picking some of this up is is concern about the family, about keeping families on an even keel and I'm not talking about about mom and pop and the two kids in in Saturday night around the dinner table sort of thing, but just people feel that it's becoming increasingly difficult to maintain any any kind of normal family life because both parents are working and the kids are going here and there and the traffic and the rest of it and uh so there's a lot of concern about that.
[00:21:39] Jerry Burris: How can we keep a sense of Ohana? And to to use the word. And uh and it also means family in terms of relationships to the people around you in your neighborhood or or whoever your group is and do you have time to spend with those people or are you feeling alienated from them? And again, it's a real subtle sort of philosophical thing. It's not should we uh should we should school principals be in the union or not. It's a little more subtle than that, but it's something that that's pretty heavy in people's hearts and and I don't know how uh a candidate can answer that or speak to that.
[00:22:11] Chuck Freedman: What what are the candidates talking about, Chuck, if you were to tell me today what the agenda is as set by what you've been hearing thus far from the gubernatorial candidates. What is that agenda?
[00:22:25] Jerry Burris: [unintelligible — audio glitch] think I'm sort of with Stephen on that one in that at this point, and it may be kind of early to cast too heavy a judgment. At this point, I've heard very little about policy and and uh and hard choices and more of more of what sounds like the sort of old insider stuff about uh, you know, why you got an endorsement or why you didn't, or how many people marched with you, uh uh when you signed your endorsement papers. I mean things which are are nice, but really, uh, at best, they're sound and fury signifying nothing. Um, and I think that we need as as citizens and I look at the media in this one, too, to get that changing as quickly as possible, to focus on some some key issues, uh, and to get people more involved.
[00:23:10] Chuck Freedman: Phone lines are open. The number is 955-8821. We've got several people on the line. First Jim, you're on the air.
[00:23:17] Speaker Jim Haskins: Hi, Jim Haskins calling in. Uh Welcome. Well, thank you. Uh no question for me, but I a comment I'd like to make, an observation that I'd like to make. I work in council with a number of people who are retiring and I do cash flow analysis. We look at the whether or not they can afford to retire in Hawaii. And more and more and more, the thing that's coming out of it is, well, I really want to, my roots are here, I raise my kids here, and on and on. But when it gets down to it, they're looking at the high cost of living and they're worried about taxes and where all this is leading. And they're beginning to I can tell, their their aim is to to leave Hawaii at some point regretfully and reluctantly, but they're doing that or planning to do that. And that's going into financial plans that uh that I'm I'm working on for them.
[00:24:13] Speaker Jim Haskins: The other thing they're saying is that you know, our kids really don't have a future here. They've had to go to the mainland. Their careers are over there. They're raising their families over there, which means the grandchildren are there, which means that if we stay, even if we could sort of eke it out over here, we we're stuck with a problem of we either have to travel long distances, which gets more and more difficult as we get older, or we have to bring them back here, which is prohibitively expensive. So I just want to toss that in to tell you on a real-time basis, that's what people that I encounter are saying about their future here in Hawaii at that age. We're talking people now in their 50s, late 60s. I have some in their 40s and 50s who are making plans now actively looking for retirement places on the mainland. They've given up on it.
[00:24:59] Chuck Freedman: Thank you, Jim. Jerry, I think that ties in with what you were describing earlier is perhaps the toughest, maybe even most impossible of the situations that the candidates face and that is our cost of living over here. Any additional thoughts on that?
[00:25:13] Jerry Burris: Yeah, and Randy was just wondering why Jim is listening to the radio instead of working like he should be. But uh, uh, the uh that it goes right to the very heart of of a big problem here is that uh Jim, you're talking about people moving to the mainland, young people to find their future or old older folks when they're retiring, and what you're losing are all the stakeholders in the system. Uh, the people who would have a reason to be involved in politics and try to change things are walking away from it for economic reasons, if not for political reasons. And so, I think the challenge to candidates and and politicians is to find ways to make it possible for people to stay here and be involved and be voting, be participating, feeling that they're stakeholders in the system.
[00:25:53] Jerry Burris: Because if you have the two ends walking away, you're left with sort of the apathetic middle and that's not it's not encouraging news. And I guess just to add one kind of radical thought here. There may be only so many things that government can do to change that. It may take the really bold candidate to say what the limits are from the government standpoint to to making things better so that cost of living is lower. uh describe what the limits are and then and then and and be real clear about what they can and can't do to affect change, because in fairness to government, there is only so much they can do to keep the cost of living down here.
[00:26:27] Chuck Freedman: And if they said that, maybe we as a community would be less frustrated and perhaps approach things more constructively? That's right, Jerry.
[00:26:34] Jerry Burris: Actually, I remember something that Chuck that your former boss said when we were talking to him about the cost of living and he said, and I thought pretty eloquently, he said, you know, in some ways it does cost more to live here and we have to accept that and just take that as part of the price of living in a place we want to live in. And he outlined several areas where yes, it's more expensive here, but here's the trade-offs. And to some degree, I think candidates, politicians have to say, this is the sympathy side of it. That look, it does cost more, but let's not be disheartened. There's some good stuff going on too and that's part of their He was he was calling it the price of paradise?
[00:27:08] Chuck Freedman: He He was trying to call it that. You get real close to saying it and then not quite. You almost did it though. We've got another caller. George, you're on the air.
[00:27:16] Speaker George: Uh thank you very much for picking up. Um, I just want to say a couple of things about you yeah, the question you asked was who is setting the agenda. And um, I have an um, just want to give this to you. Um, it from what I see, the real leaders in in culture aren't the people that call themselves politicians and so forth. When you look at the at the reality of their thing, the people that come up with radical ideas, the true innovators in the so-called crazies or environmentalists are the people that really are setting the agenda for the general public. They're the people who have the ideas. And usually the general public, maybe the young people first will follow these people and and see what they're doing and they're interested in what they have to say.
[00:27:58] Speaker George: Um, and then behind all this comes the so-called wolves, the people that are following the public, and they say, we are the leaders, we are the politicians, we are the corporate we're the corporate people. There is maybe 10% [unintelligible — audio glitch] total picture. Uh their main interest is power and control. Um, the people that are the general public are interested in their own security, they're interested in what's going to be best for them. And the people who are the real leaders are the ones that are interested in positive change, or they have ideas, they have ideals. And so, um, the thing is kind of backwards right now in my mind. Um Because the agenda is being set from the fringes?
[00:28:36] Speaker George: Yeah, the agenda is always set from the fringes. People who have the thing uh figured out, who have no political agenda, you know, personal political power agenda. They're the ones that really have the freedom to think free thoughts. I think if the politicians and corporate people can look at the fringe and try to see really what's going on, where people are really headed, then the agenda is really obvious. It's been there for years and years. We all know that the environment is in deep trouble. We all know that people are alienated from politics because the politicians don't have any new ideas.
[00:29:12] Chuck Freedman: They're basically interested in their own personal security and their own personal power. Yeah. George, let me let me toss your your question or your comment toward Chuck Friedman because I'm really curious, Chuck. You were on on the governor's team and you've been involved in politics for a long time. To what extent do the candidates realize that that certain things are coming from the fringes as opposed to coming from uh the main body of the community? Is that a a problem?
[00:29:39] Jerry Burris: I don't think it's a a problem for them to understand it. I think most good politicians understand that the the ideas on the on on the fringes today will be in the middle tomorrow, will be in the center of things tomorrow. Uh most smart politicians are aware of that. What they do with it, how they translate that into their own platforms, how they relate that to the world around them is is a bit more of the dance, I think, that Jerry described earlier.
[00:30:03] Chuck Freedman: and what Jim is saying is, you know, why does it take so long to make to to get these good ideas and move them into the middle [unintelligible — audio glitch] a platform or a position. I I will argue with Jim a little bit and say that I think there are some pretty forward thinking politicians that are in Hawaii now and and have been in Hawaii on and off through through our uh, at least uh contemporary history. And they do make their presence known. They're usually not the people who have 13 votes in the Senate or and and uh, how many you need in the house uh 26 26 in the house uh, but [unintelligible — audio glitch] around and uh Well, Chuck, if the folks on the fringes are are the people who are most vocal, and the ones who aren't that vocal are the people that I think George would describe as having the ideas and the ideals, how do the candidates get to that second group that's not quite as vocal?
[00:30:55] Jerry Burris: Or or the other way around. How How do those people get to the candidates they're not willing to take the extra effort. And I think I I think that if you look to the presidential campaign and some of the things people like Dan Boylan would say, and dare I dare I mention his name in his absence. I think uh more exposure is good. I think that the the that that having Bill Clinton and and George Bush and all the others on various media venues uh two years ago was a real was a real plus for the national campaign. It gave people lots of access, they didn't necessarily have to leave their home to get it.
[00:31:28] Jerry Burris: People like them were asking candidates questions that were like questions they would ask and they got to see the dialogue and it meant something to them and I think that more access is good even if you don't have to leave your own home to do it and that's a media question.
[00:31:43] Chuck Freedman: Well, let's toss it to our media fellow, Jerry. What do you think of George's comments?
[00:31:47] Jerry Burris: I think he's right, and I think uh [unintelligible — audio glitch] the media has to play a role is in going to those fringes and those edges and carrying the message back. I mean, no candidate will ever get elected on a platform based on the ideas, no matter how good they are, of the edge and the fringe. They have to appeal to the middle. But what we can do is carry those messages back and try to activate and motivate the middle so that they become important to the great mass, which is, after all, the people who will, those who do vote, who will elect the people. So, it's we're sort of That's the messenger role I keep talking about.
[00:32:18] Chuck Freedman: You're listening to a live Price of Paradise discussion of the political agenda in Hawaii. Who should set that agenda, the politicians, the press, or the people? My guests are Chuck Friedman, a self-described and unrepentant political crony, and Jerry Burris, a fellow who thinks the news media should do more than just report the news. Phone lines are open. The number is 955-8821. Neighbor islanders can call collect. Again, the number is 955-8821. Chuck, earlier, you used the phrase hard choices, and we've been talking about what a few of those might be and and perhaps where uh those would first be articulated. You also used the expression yardsticks. What do you mean by yardsticks? Well, I just feel real strongly that uh we ought to do away with most of the the poetry we're getting in politics and and get and get down to some real pros here.
[00:33:24] Chuck Freedman: And I and I mean p r o s e prose. And uh essentially, I think on the on the big issues that that each candidate um by the media and by the public should be asked to prioritize where they stand on the big issues, give us at least solid examples of actions they take. And then I think perhaps most importantly, the one element that's been left out, the measurements by which we would assess whether they've reached that outcome or not. Because that's what's going to make the difference, that's the yardstick. And that's the part in business, that's how we we look at things. There's a bottom line and you have a way to evaluate whether you're there or not.
[00:34:00] Chuck Freedman: I think too often in political campaigns, we've let the poetry of the campaign sort of cover that and I think that we have to, with all due respect to the slogan makers, uh enough of that. Let let's [unintelligible — audio glitch] slogans we're looking for are are yardstick measurements of the actions that the candidates say they're going to take and how they're going to measure them when we get when they get into office.
[00:34:21] Jerry Burris: Jerry, what do you think of that? I was going to ask Chuck a question or or kind of make this comment that that what you say is true. I mean, I'm with you, but uh uh you've been around candidates enough to know that that there's a a natural aversion to any kind of specifics of the kind of thing you're talking about, because every time you say, I will do this specifically, you've alienated those who don't like that. And every time you say, uh, measure me according to this, you've lost all those who measure you according to that. There is a natural inclination on the part of candidates to use the poetry to try to keep their appeal as broad as possible.
[00:35:15] Jerry Burris: And you know, and and we as voters punish them for being specific because we walk away from those who are specific in ways we don't like.
[00:35:19] Chuck Freedman: So, so if if we have candidates that don't address the hard choices, that don't provide yardsticks, that don't really talk about the issues directly, that's because we've um let them get away with it.
[00:35:32] Jerry Burris: Well, I think Jerry is saying more than we let them get away with it. We trained them. We we have voted and we have approached elections in such a way as to encourage that. Chuck, you've been on the the politician side of all of this. Would would you agree with that?
[00:35:47] Chuck Freedman: Yeah, I would agree that there's been too much image-making, too much emphasis on on what I call the poetry and not enough [unintelligible — audio glitch] the hard choices. I kind of disagree with Jerry in that I think that if if the the public in particular decides to really regulate this campaign, and by regulate, I mean watch real carefully any any media frenzies that get out of control, Jerry, or or any or any um uh candidate uh excesses [unintelligible — audio glitch] poetry and the public says, when
[00:38:00] Jerry Burris: either tunes off and tunes out and doesn't buy it, or expresses clear unhappiness [unintelligible — audio glitch] frenzies and and media frenzies and and political poetry. They can regulate it and they can change it. They have the power to do that if they want to. They can force the candidates and to to take the make the hard choices and they can force the media to cover it. If we if we if what we're asking for is politics as usual, we're going to get coverage as usual, and we're going to get a campaign as usual, and everybody's going to walk away from it feeling, you know, unfulfilled.
[00:38:34] Randall Roth: I want to come back to that and and talk about how that fits with Jerry's earlier comment that the overriding theme right now is this sense of a powerlessness that he's hearing from the community, but first we have a caller, Dale, you're on the air. Can you turn down your radio, Dale?
[00:38:48] Speaker Dale: I don't have my radio on. Okay. In fact, the very thing you're talking about, I was just listening in my car and my my office was uh, one of the things that I think's very important. I think, um, well, I enjoy Jerry's writing a lot. I think generally that the papers have been very, very wimpy in going after the politicians and uh, He's giving me a mean look at that uh, Dale. Well I don't care. He just gave me a look. Or he wouldn't have that job. But I think, um, I know I read an article recently that the papers are going to hold the politicians feet to the fire, and you know, I couldn't quite understand after reading the article exactly what they're going to do, but I certainly think that the newspapers have to both of them, you know, go after some of these politicians and I'm going to give you one example that I thought uh they didn't do a good job on, and I don't think um it it was kind of like to me everybody want to do hands off and that was the scandal with that annoyed last election. I think if we were anywhere on the mainland that uh there would be some paper that would have picked that up because there were, you know, you had a politician herself come out and say that she believed this testimony was true, that she had had many calls from other women, and then all of a sudden, she changed her testimony and you know, no one questioned that. No one questioned anything here.
[00:40:09] Speaker Dale: Um, I think that uh, I don't think that that story was well told. Now, and I'm going to take you to another story. And Dale, let me let me interrupt just for a moment because you've called Mr. Burris here a wimp. I called them media wimp. And I know, and you've given him a a specific example of what you mean by that. Let me get his reaction. Let me just give you two and then I'm going to let you go. You know if you I can I don't have a radio here. So um I'm just going to go and get it tuned in somewhere else. But the other one was that a number of years ago I went to one of the newspapers and I'm not going to tell you Jerry, which one it was and I thought that it was disgraceful the way the newspapers did not handle the redevelopment of Kaka'ako. And I thought there were two things disgraceful and it was the brushing under the the rug of the displacement of the small land owner or store uh merchant, which they kept saying, well, we're going to put them out on the shoreline. Now, that's where we're going to put them. We're going to put them out on this wonderful park area and you know, you can tell me what happened to that. But the big sin in that was that the taxpayers and you know, you need to protect us paid for a goodly part of the infrastructure of the Kaka'ako redevelopment, which is owned by the richest people in Hawaii. Uh, every major estate and trust as well as the newspapers benefited by our tax paper players uh, providing infrastructure. You know, we don't even provide infrastructure for low-cost housing usually. And I think those two stories were, you know, two of them that I really think they wimped out on.
[00:41:45] Jerry Burris: Okay, Jerry. You've gotten a couple specific examples and uh and a criticism. What are your thoughts? If those are the only two we wimped out on, we're doing pretty well. Let me take one at a time. The first one and I'll just do this briefly, and Chuck, you can you can compliment us on our coverage of this if you want to on the uh on the allegations of of against Dan Inouye during the campaign. It's true that that uh we approach that delicately or diffidently, but uh I don't think what you saw here is any different than what you saw around the country where this seemed to be the uh uh the uh theme du jour in the in the campaign. There was Packwood and there were others, and the Washington Post uh has been kind of uh beating its breast and thinking about it. It was in possession of material about Packwood well before the election and didn't feel comfortable about reporting it until the story was completely reported to their satisfaction after the election. Uh, so it's not something that's unique to Hawaii.
[00:42:33] Speaker Dale: But I think his local newspapers did a lot of reporting on it.
[00:42:47] Jerry Burris: Not much. Not much. As a matter of fact, the post did better than than his hometown newspapers, and uh just well, you want to chuck add something on that one. The Washington Post is not does not make it right, but go ahead.
[00:43:00] Chuck Freedman: Chuck, do you have any thoughts on on Dale's criticisms of um the media, the papers? That the that the papers have an obligation certainly not to predict candidates, and they also have an obligation to be fair. The the uh the lines on that are are shifting almost daily and and Dale, I think the one thing that makes it harder and harder nowadays is to figure out what the rules are. Um, stories, information is moving so quickly. Uh, stories get uh twisted and untwisted so quickly that what what rules the papers are going to live by in covering campaign stories, um, I think is a subject into itself. Uh, I'll tell you that I think that the quality of the individual reporters in Hawaii is very good. Uh, I'm not sure about all the decisions the papers and TV make. I I would I have arguments too. In fact, I think everybody that anybody that watches on a regular basis is going to have an argument. I would stand pretty much behind the quality of the individual reporters though. I think we're pretty lucky.
[00:43:57] Jerry Burris: Dale, I've got another caller who's been waiting for about 10 minutes. So I thank you very much for your thoughts. Uh, Richmond, you're on the air.
[00:44:05] Speaker Richmond: Thank you very much. I really appreciate your uh taking my call. Power to the people only through the process of change, which comes through the constitutional convention. When we had statehood, constitutional convention was mandated for every 10 years, so we had one in 59, in 68, we had one in 78, and we didn't have another one after that. Um, why he ching and took over the 78 constitution and ran it their way. Were they the ones that are responsible for us not having state uh a constitutional convention again?
[00:44:45] Jerry Burris: Let's ask Jerry that question. I don't know if I can give you a concrete answer. I think my sense was is [unintelligible — audio glitch] uh 88 when when it was time for another one, everyone still sort of had the vapors from the 78 one. It was uh it was uh incredibly I don't know if you you approve of what they did, but they did a lot of work and a lot of things even in 88 hadn't yet been uh completed uh changes and amendments that were proposed in 78 were still being in the process of being implemented. I think there's a lot of weariness and a lot of feeling that uh too much have been done. It was time to let things be quiet for a while. I'm not a kiss-and-tell kind of guy, but I for the life of me cannot remember the administration taking the negative position about a second constitutional or a subsequent constitutional convention. It was sort of I think it was exhaustion. There was uh I mean 78 they created OHA, they changed uh uh dozens of things, whether you like them or not, and I think in 88 they were still struggling to come to grips with these in terms of legislation and and specific rules.
[00:45:47] Speaker Richmond: Richmond, is that answer your question? No. No. Give it another try. Exhaustion. So somebody somebody ought to have the energy to push it through. Somebody somebody moved that. Who was it?
[00:46:01] Jerry Burris: I honestly, this is Chuck. I I honestly don't remember the administration taking at all a negative position on a constitutional convention.
[00:46:10] Speaker Richmond: Well, there there had to be a vote at one point. Well, at the legislature, I'm trying to remember the process by which the legislature convenes it. It's sort of negative. It's a negative kind of vote that you have to they have to take a proactive vote to uh launch the convention and they didn't do that. It's not like someone voted against it. They just kind of walked away from it. But Richmond, I assume you would say somebody should have been voting for it. Oh, I what I say is that we should have had the convention. Right. And we should have another one in uh in 98. Because that's the only way, the only way the people are going to affect any change. If you're going to change the system, and which is obviously what we have to do, it's only going to be done through a constitutional convention.
[00:46:52] Jerry Burris: And Richmond, the other thing that's sort of exciting about a con-con is [unintelligible — audio glitch] brings a lot of non, well, what we think anyway at the time or are non politicians into the discussion and they then become politicians. Maybe we shouldn't have any more. No, I think that's a plus. Richmond, thanks a lot for your thoughts. We've got a couple of people on the line. I've got a note here that says, and I think this is from Stefan, who called in earlier. Oh, I'm getting some signals here. Let's go to Martha.
[00:47:22] Speaker Martha: Martha, are you there? Yes, this is Martha. All right, Martha. Thank you. What I want to say is Kaka'ako is a domain question and it was bypassed. Hey, you guys, you skipped over something. Let's hope Thank you, Martha. We're going to hold their feet to the fire. Jerry, what about that one?
[00:47:45] Jerry Burris: Dale was on the other line reminding us that Martha was going to call and say we forgot about Kaka'ako. You're right. And I think that that's an enormous story that that in some ways, maybe we have undercovered. Uh, May I interject? Yes. Water is the biggest problem there and um, the development uh for the waterfront won't happen until the Board of Water Supply gives the uh uh permit for water. That's the final thing that upholds that withholds the action, and we should be looking into the water and how they're solving those problems. Couldn't agree with you more, and I couldn't agree that that Well, you you've done an awful lot of work [unintelligible — audio glitch] raising our consciousness about water and uh frustrated sometimes when we don't cover it enough, but it's obviously, it's a huge issue, not just in Kaka'ako. Uh, the Waihole Ditch and who will control that water, whether it will go to central Oahu or back to Winward and on the neighbor islands as the plantation shut down and all this infrastructure has been built to provide water to them, who gets it. Uh is as anyone who follows any sort of development politics around the country, water is is the key element and uh and you're absolutely right. It's a huge story.
[00:48:51] Jerry Burris: And there was on the plus side, not about Kaka'ako, but in the paper Sunday, a real good story I thought about the relationship of water and decision-making in Eva, which is one of what I said was one of the hard choices earlier. Uh, and I'm I'm glad that the advertiser bought that one up early, not late and so we are, you know, the public is more aware of the of the water issues. I don't know why I'm defending the Honolulu advertiser here. It it was music to my ears. I think I think both Dale and Martha at least want a brief reference to to Kaka'ako and I just tell a brief story about that is uh is we may have undercovered it and failed to understand the needs of the small land owners and so forth and we a week or so ago we did a story about some changes in the planning for the Makai side of Kaka'ako out toward the ocean and seeing that the Bishop Estate was no interested in building houses there and and the stuff that was going in around it would benefit them perhaps, and we were visited in full force by our friends from the Kaka'ako Authority who wanted to explain to us how that wasn't true and how they're really caring for the small land owners and the rest of it. So uh in our own crude way, we we tend to bring this stuff to the surface.
[00:49:57] Speaker Martha: Thank you very much for your help. There's one more thing that hasn't been covered and that's desalination. We've never had any really true public information meetings on desalination and yet for the waterfront development, it depends on a desalination plant being built there.
[00:50:12] Jerry Burris: Mr. Friedman is nodding, yes, [unintelligible — audio glitch] right and they've been talking about desalination for for the waterfront for some time and I haven't heard anything about it from a public hearing standpoint or in the news for for quite some time. She's correct. Maybe with Martha's help, we'll hear some candidates talking about that soon. There's one other thing, OTech. Uh, they're working on OTech over on the Big Island which is um a a good idea but there've been no public information meetings on that either. Thank you, Martha. In case you've joined us late, this is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth and my guests are Chuck Freedman, former communications director for Governor Waihee, and Jerry Burris, editorial page editor of the Honolulu Advertiser. The topic is the political agenda in Hawaii and the phone lines are open. To ask a question or make a comment, just dial 955-8821. Neighbor Islanders can call collect the number again 955-8821. Uh Stefan, I believe you called earlier, you're on the line again. What do you have to say?
[00:51:14] Speaker Stefan: Thank you, just some comments very quickly. Uh, what one cannot touch or sense doesn't exist. If that premise is true, then let's take another one. The true judge of all things is that of all the people. And then let's go to a third one. When and where the leadership and the public dream is missing in government, who are the people to follow and then why follow anyone? And then the fourth thing and I'll get off the phone so you can get on to the business at hand, is why don't you suggest to the legislature to charge all the voters $50 who don't vote and give them some encouragement to vote or actually discourage. But if you got the people involved in the voting process, we more likely get in tune with ourselves because we're totally out of touch. And in Australia, if you are not uh going to vote, the government bills you $50. Now that's your right not to vote. But uh they encourage you to vote by fining you $50.
[00:52:15] Jerry Burris: Thank you, Stefan. You know, I'm I'm hearing in what Stefan says a lot of frustration. Um, how common is that, Jerry? It's it's very common. Uh, and it's individualized too. I mean, Martha was was frustrated that there hasn't been enough public attention to some of the water issues and and uh Dale was frustrated that uh perhaps some of the personal lives of the candidates aren't fully explored before people get a chance to vote and and other people are frustrated on other issues, and I think that that uh for good or for ill, we tend to take our frustrations and expect leadership to deal with them. I think Chuck something said that that Chuck you said earlier is that candidates will have should draw a line and be what they can and what they can't do. There are some things, there are some frustrations that the candidates can't do anything more than say, I I hear you, fell. I understand that you're frustrated, but it's not my job to fix it. So I think that's part of the the choice thing that candidates have to make. I think that was your point, too.
[00:53:10] Jerry Burris: We've got another caller Shell, you're on the line.
[00:53:13] Speaker Shell: Hi, Well, I was about to give up. I've got so many notes here, I don't know where to start. Uh, Sorry. I with all due respect, I mean, uh I'm someone who's one paycheck away from the beach. I have a lot of friends that are are in this position. I'm a professional. Uh, I'm struggling. I have I have two homeless friends living with me. They're both professionals, and you guys sound like a bunch of well meaning sitting around discussing theoretical politics. Uh, and I mean that uh uh I'm not trying to insult you, but uh uh I someone said a while ago, uh I guess it was Mr. Burris, talking about hearing from the people in the public. Uh so many I I see issues every day, and I think God, I wish I had the time to write a letter about that. I don't have the time, you know, I'm changing clothes to go to my other job. Uh, uh talking about people not showing up at the voting booth, one of my big concerns is that uh, when people do go to the voting booth, are they educated as to who they're voting? Are they voting for a familiar name? Uh, uh that's certainly part of the media's responsibility, I think, and not just the newspapers. I mean, it takes it takes an educational uh uh process to get that word down to [unintelligible — audio glitch] last little voter that walks in there to make a a decision.
[00:54:29] Jerry Burris: And you don't think they're doing a good job of that now? Uh, I Why don't they stay on the stories? I mean, they these stories break, and the and I'll use one example, the auto insurance reform issue. This has been going on for 3 years. It gets worse and worse and worse. The auto insurance rates go up and up and up. I know that all of those high-quality reporters you were talking about while ago that cover these issues, know a lot more about it than than they take the time or the space to relate in the papers. That's one issue I've been very involved in. And uh, why isn't it resolved? Why haven't you guys stayed on that story? What what's the last auto insurance uh story that was running on either one? Well, let's let's ask Jerry Burris. What's your answer to Shell? Okay, [unintelligible — audio glitch] have a personal, I can personally share that frustration that uh insurance is an enormous issue and difficult to deal with and hard to get your hands around and uh in our defense, I can just say that we have been doing, as we realized that cost of living is important, we've been doing more and more coverage of insurance and trying to uh the homeowners insurance problem, the workers compensation insurance problem, the no-fault that you mentioned, and uh impressing hard on trying to at least get some answers from from the insurance industry and from the regulators as to as to what's right and what's wrong. One of the problems we have is that believe it or not, despite all the bragging we're doing here about our reporters, it's a tough one to crack. I mean, we've have uh insurance commissioners come and go with the state at a rapid rate as they run against the brick wall and get all scarred up and move on. Oh wait a minute. They come and go to well-paying jobs with insurance companies. Well, no no insurance company has offered a job to a reporter so I guess we're doing better than they are. Right. Well, I've got a couple other points here. Go ahead. Uh, I keep the Japanese investment boom, quote unquote. It's now taken that form. Everybody's writing about that period of time, the Japanese investment boom. I just think about the lost opportunities that as as a society, we have missed uh because of the quote Japanese investment boom. I mean, that brought a lot of bad stuff along with all the money and uh I think that we're now dealing with the uh uh the results of that. I mean, the money's gone. And I've got to say one other thing, and it's rather partisan, but the only candidate I've heard that has spoken out uh uh at in a timely and direct manner about any of these things has been Ben Cayetano and I'd like to hear something about that if you go back to what was the first the the
[00:57:00] Speaker Speaker 1: thing of the the budget director, you know, I think that took a lot of nerve for that man to stand up and and call for the resignation of that guy.
[00:57:08] Speaker Speaker 2: Shell, let's let's ask our guests, Chuck and then then Jerry. Um you know, how would you evaluate the campaign so far? The the three gubernatorial or at least the major candidates that we're all aware of, Fassi, Psyche and Kayetano. Uh are they addressing the issues head-on and and if not, is it simply because we're early in the campaign or is there a concern that uh that they're not going to be addressing those issues, Chuck?
[00:57:32] Chuck Freedman: Well, I think it's early. I think there should be concern that they're not going to address the hard choices. I think it's a responsibility of the citizens and the media to provide more access, particularly given the kind of opportunities we have nowadays with cable television, uh and and there's so many different outlets, it's not just the newspaper's job. And when the reporters get around to it, uh, they they should, uh, you know, make sure that we're asking for the priorities that the candidates have, the actions they take, and the yardsticks they measure them by. And you know, Shell, one one other quick point, um, if you're still listening, and that is that that is, um, it's not an excuse, but there's something out there called a news hole. And and it has it's been shrinking, and how much time everybody, every every media outlet has to give to to the story is less and less, not more and more.
[00:58:22] Chuck Freedman: Um, I have a figure here that might startle you. In in 1968, in the presidential campaign, the the average soundbite for presidential candidates on the 6 o'clock news was 42.8 seconds. In 1988, 20 years later, that was Dukakis-Bush campaign, it was 9.8 seconds. So, you know, we're we're fighting a very, very difficult phenomenon here and I think the only way to deal with it effectively is to increase the media opportunities that the individual candidates have, and I count among them cable television, the the government access channel.
[00:58:56] Speaker Speaker 1: Well, that goes back to the prioritization of the editors, doesn't it?
[00:59:00] Chuck Freedman: Yes, it [unintelligible — audio glitch] newspaper business, the television business is business, and and I'm sitting to my left here with Jerry Burris, and uh and I'm saying you know something that if folks out there don't understand it, they need to, that that there are some there are there are bottom lines in the business and uh determinations that uh may may be greater than the than the individual reporter's ability to to squeeze everything he wants into a news hole.
[00:59:24] Speaker Speaker 1: I will send I'm going to send them a little sign, and it says, stay on the story.
[00:59:29] Chuck Freedman: It's the economy stupid.
[00:59:31] Speaker Speaker 1: Yeah, thank you. You send it, send it in and I'll and I'll paste it right above my computer.
[00:59:35] Chuck Freedman: Okay. Shell, thanks a lot.
[00:59:38] Speaker Speaker 2: Uh Chuck, and and I'm here with uh political guru, Chuck Friedman, and newspaperman, Jerry Burris. The topic is the political agenda. We've got just a few minutes left, but the lines are open, 955-8821. Chuck, are you optimistic about the future of Hawaii?
[00:59:55] Chuck Freedman: I'm wondering why the people in the sound room are now bowing to me because I've been called a guru. Am I optimistic about it? Uh no, I I'm not optimistic about it. I'm only optimistic about it if if everybody who's a player in this, which really when you get right down to it [unintelligible — audio glitch] every citizen but also the media and the candidate take additional personal responsibility for um the implications of their own actions. How they campaign, that's the candidate, what they call for in the campaign, that's the voter, how they cover the campaign, that's the media. Indeed, if if we don't do better this time through, we're we're not going to get a satisfying campaign and people will be in perfect position to complain about the results.
[01:00:38] Speaker Speaker 2: So we've got to stop feeling powerless. We need to get in there and do something.
[01:00:42] Chuck Freedman: Yeah, I guess [unintelligible — audio glitch] Clinton's motto was it's the economy stupid, this one ought to be it's us stupid.
[01:00:50] Speaker Speaker 1: It's us stupid. I like that. Jerry, you've got about 30 seconds to give me a summary.
[01:00:54] Jerry Burris: I was trying to think, is it we stupid, or is it us stupid? Well we always weren't looking at the style book. Uh, I'm, maybe I'm a little less pessimistic than than Chuck. I think that, that this very fact that people do feel powerless, they're reaching out and trying to find some way to grab a hold of things. There's a tremendous number of things happening Randy, that thing that you're doing and other groups trying to kind of elevate the citizen's hold on the political process. I think out of this we might see some real kind of a renaissance of people feeling that the politics and government have a way to deal with their own problems.
[01:01:27] Speaker Speaker 2: Thank you. My guests for this special one-hour version of The Price of Paradise radio show have been Jerry Burris, editorial page editor of the Honolulu Advertiser, and Chuck Friedman, vice president of Hawaiian Electric and one-time communications director for Governor Waihee. This program was produced by Suzy Roth with production support from Jill Center and technical assistance from Mark Wagner and um who do we else do we have Scott Kim out there? Uh you've been listening to The Price of Paradise Radio Show. We hope that you've enjoyed this one hour special and that you'll tune in for our regular program each Saturday morning at 9:00 on this station, or Sunday morning at 8:00 on KHPR 88.1 and KKUA 90.7. You've been listening to The Price of Paradise radio show. I'm Randy Roth. Aloha.