Elevating Politics
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1995-06-18
Guests: Mary George (retired Republican state legislator); Jerry Burris (editor, The Honolulu Advertiser); Tom Okamura (Democratic state legislator)
Duration: 1:09:17

[00:00:03] Randall Roth: Good morning. This is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise radio show. We're broadcast live each Sunday morning from 8 to 9 on KHPR 88.1 FM, and KKUA 90.7 FM. And then rebroadcast each Sunday evening from 8 to 9 on KIFO 1380 AM. This radio show is entirely the product of volunteers, whose immediate goal is to generate lively and informed dialogue about the challenges that are confronting the people of Hawaii.
[00:00:33] Randall Roth: We believe such public conversation is absolutely essential if we as a community hope to meet those challenges. Our topic today is a question. How can we elevate politics in Hawaii? It's the kind of question that can provoke a wide variety of responses, a Rorschach test of sorts, that should generate an interesting conversation. Joining me in the studio are Mary George, Tom Okamura, and Jerry Burris.
[00:00:58] Randall Roth: Mary recently retired from a distinguished career in public service, most recently as a member of the Hawaii State Senate. She's been named Citizen of the Year, Woman of the Year, Legislator of the Year, and received a host of other honors and awards. Good morning, Mary.
[00:01:13] Mary George: Happy Father's Day, Randy.
[00:01:14] Randall Roth: Well, thank you. And we'll make you radio person of the year this morning. That That's my call. Tom Okamura has been a member of the State House of Representatives for 15 years. During that time, he's held many important posts, including majority whip, majority floor leader, and majority leader. A lot of majorities there. You're not a Democrat by any chance, are you?
[00:01:34] Randall Roth: He's also a vice president with Hawaiian Trust Company. Good morning, Tom.
[00:01:37] Tom Okamura: Good morning, Randy.
[00:01:38] Randall Roth: Jerry Burris is the editorial page editor of the Honolulu Advertiser and a real smart guy. Whenever I'm trying to figure out the way things really work in Hawaii, I call Jerry. Good morning, Jerry.
[00:01:49] Jerry Burris: Good morning. And I say, well, call someone else because I don't know.
[00:01:53] Randall Roth: All right. Well, our question is, how do we elevate politics in Hawaii? And I guess that suggests that the person asking the question already has some notions about where we are. Mary, do you have any thoughts on on the question itself?
[00:02:09] Mary George: I think the fact that we have to ask the question may, uh, uh, may indicate what we have to do to turn it around. If there's a general perception that, uh, politics is a pretty, uh, pretty low life profession, we're not going to get very good caliber people running for office.
[00:02:27] Randall Roth: Well, let's ask this guy that I said is so smart. Jerry Burris, is there is there that public perception that, uh, it needs elevating, that it's pretty low right now?
[00:02:36] Jerry Burris: I I think there is. You know, I can speak with authority since newspaper reporters are probably the only ones lower on the scale of public approval.
[00:02:43] Randall Roth: Well, well, lawyers are down there too.
[00:02:46] Jerry Burris: But, uh, I think there is. And and I've always had the feeling that not all of that is a result of of negative situations because, uh, to some degree, people disengage from politics when they sort of think that things are going okay. They don't have any big cause or big, uh, big concern that they need taken care of by politics. When you tend to see people get plugged into politics is when they're they're vitally concerned with something and they're convinced that government or politics can solve it.
[00:03:11] Jerry Burris: So so to some degree, and I don't mean it's all peaches and cream, but to some degree, if people's lives are sort of in control and, uh, and things are going along okay, they they disengage from politics, and then they become alienated, I think a little bit.
[00:03:23] Randall Roth: Are are people disengaged right now, generally speaking? And again, focusing on Hawaii?
[00:03:28] Jerry Burris: I think I think they are. I mean, we do some, we've been trying to do a lot of polling and and public kind of surveying of what people are thinking about for for our coverage in the newspaper. And one of the things we get very strongly is this, uh, powerlessness, you know, I don't know how to do anything, control the things that affect my life. Which think, which you would think would lead them back to politics and back to government, but it doesn't seem to.
[00:03:51] Randall Roth: Yeah, there does seem to be an inconsistency there. Okay, Tom, any thoughts on this? How do we elevate politics in Hawaii?
[00:03:57] Tom Okamura: I think we have to continue, uh, providing public access to the public, giving them more information, involving them in the dialogue, and actually being active participants in the process. I don't feel, in many ways I feel that we're going to a positive change, uh, because of legislation which we've passed in the recent times, including the Uniform Information Practices Act, which makes almost all state documents, government documents now are public. And that's why people know what's happening. That's why the media can report, you know, on some of these controversial, um, insider deals or whatever it is.
[00:04:34] Tom Okamura: And and so people resent that. But I think we're going to the transition, so now people know we can't do those kinds of things. In the past, nobody knew, including legislators.
[00:04:43] Randall Roth: So when we see an example of wrongdoing, instead of saying, oh, government is corrupt, we should say, wow, isn't it neat that we can actually see that, that it's being uncovered?
[00:04:52] Jerry Burris: That's true. That's true. And and like this past session, we, you know, improved our ethics laws and our campaign spending laws, etc., so that, you know, we can we can handle these kinds of problems in a more, uh, judicial manner.
[00:05:06] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, Mary, I've had you on the show a number of times in the last couple of months. I think you know, you're you're one of my favorite guests on this show.
[00:05:13] Mary George: That's you. It's not Mother's Day, Andy. It's it's Father's Day.
[00:05:16] Randall Roth: I'm building you up because I know you're going to give us the the right answer right now.
[00:05:20] Mary George: No, no, no, no. I'm going to going to remind people that 'twas ever this, 'twas ever this, you know, longevity has its advantages, particularly considering the alternative. But one of the things that I remember vividly is that my springboard into politics was, um, um, Mrs. Clean. I was going to clean up ethics and government was the big thing that got me elected to the City Council. And that God forbid, was over a quarter of a century ago.
[00:05:46] Mary George: And going back further than that, who was it who said this wonderful thing about um, there are two things you shouldn't watch being made, sausages and laws. Public information may not be the answer.
[00:05:58] Randall Roth: Well, maybe to see it being made is is going to do some damage?
[00:06:03] Mary George: I, uh, I often think that, or I often thought that when I was a member. I cannot comment on the last session, but, um, there were times when, um, um, serving in politics was something of an embarrassment. When you didn't want to say what you did for a living, you know.
[00:06:18] Jerry Burris: But what you're saying is a lot of times the process is kind of ugly, or horrifying sometimes. But I I tend to kind of agree with Tom to the degree that that it's better for people to see it, even the bad parts and then they can sort it out and decide.
[00:06:32] Mary George: I just meant that it isn't going to cure it. It isn't going to cure it, and I don't even think it's an important ingredient.
[00:06:39] Jerry Burris: It it's an important ingredient. Of course, you know, I'm I love this information flow stuff because that's what we sell newspapers on. But, uh, I think it's an ingredient in to the degree that if people people can make informed decisions about how things are. And I think that those who are practicing government, practicing politics, if they know that people understand and and are watching what they're doing, they're going to going to do a better job.
[00:07:00] Jerry Burris: It's like anything else, you know, the more accountability you have, the it won't cure it, I know, I agree with you there, but.
[00:07:04] Mary George: You given me a perfect lead in here, and that is that, uh, one of the, uh, to me, it's almost a tragedy is the dominance of the one party system, one party in this state. Because the surest, um, um, safeguard against, uh, misdeeds in politics are the hopefuls waiting in the wings from the other party. serving much as the media does, as the watchdog, you know.
[00:07:32] Randall Roth: But is is that somebody's fault, and if so, who's? Tom?
[00:07:36] Tom Okamura: I think that the one-party domination, if anything, you certainly can't blame the Democrats. Democrats, their job is to get as many of their members elected. They've done a great job. The the problem was when we went through a change in multi-member to single-member districts, and the Republican party were the greatest advocates for that. It backfired on them. And I personally would like to see us go back to a multi-member district. I have a bill in this year that would would would, um, change the Constitution and to have the reapportionment commission, um, change our system from a a single member to a multi-member district.
[00:08:12] Tom Okamura: I think it would bring in a lot more competition. It would also, I believe, make legislators a lot more accountable and see the big picture versus be kind of a tunnel vision thinking.
[00:08:23] Jerry Burris: Well, you're singing my song. I just No, I I just 100% agree with that. I think that I don't think it was as I remember it was the courts that actually imposed the single-member, not the the Republicans, but The Republicans were the greatest advocates though and supporters of it.
[00:08:37] Mary George: There was some. Some. The party in general, uh, not. I was violently opposed, for example, but I wasn't a member of the commission.
[00:08:45] Jerry Burris: And for this kind of reason, I guess, because it's just when you have multi-member, you can have a guy whose career is devoted to district politics or you know the issues at home. You can have another guy who's kind of a little bit off in the world and wants to think the big thoughts and they can get in there because there's I mean guy in generic sense Mary, of course, Father's Day joke. There's But you can have a combination of people in the district and we even have a Republican and it Manoa used to consistently send a Republican and a Democrat, conservative and liberal. And it was great for Manoa and it was great for the legislature.
[00:09:14] Randall Roth: You know, something else that that Mary brought up and and I use the word fault and fault such a negative word, but we can hardly quote fault the Democratic party for doing the best they can to get as many of of their folks elected as as possible. Um, what has to change in order for there to be a strong second party? Does it have to be changed within the Republican Party? Change within the the public or or the media or Mary, what's it going to take to have a two-party system or three or four party system?
[00:09:45] Mary George: Better, better candidates inevitably and um, the um, the spiral that's caused by um um, the public's perception that it's a lousy profession, um, causes uh, um, a dearth of good candidates to come in. You know, you don't want to get into the scene. How would, how would you change that spiral? I wish I knew. I wish I knew. Obviously we can't subsidize cand good candidates to run.
[00:10:13] Mary George: That's um, Well, now when you say we can't, the public can't. Um, can employers or There's got to be some way to break this spiral and I think that's that's an interesting word that that you used. Jerry Burris, do you have any thoughts on how to do it?
[00:10:29] Jerry Burris: One one small problem, I think, is that there's a reason that the Republicans have trouble growing back is this, this, this pattern of careerism, and I don't mean everyone, but there are people now going into politics with the idea that this would be a fun career to be a legislator or something, from the beginning thinking of this, not going in because of some outside issue. But because they want to be in politics. I think it's the vast majority, isn't it? Well, I don't know, but it's it's a good goodly number of them. And [unintelligible — audio glitch] you're when that is your motivation, when that's your thinking, you will go in as a Democrat, no matter how you feel politically, because you think Democrats are the majority, Democrats almost always win these district races, so I'll be a Democrat, no matter what I think.
[00:11:07] Jerry Burris: If you're motivated by some sort of issue or principle or something, you might you might not choose to do that, but if your eye is on your career, you're going to go with the main chance.
[00:11:18] Randall Roth: Well, does our Democrat have any thoughts about that, Tom?
[00:11:20] Tom Okamura: Yeah, I know, publicly right now, you know, it seems like I think all institutions are looked down upon, even the religious institution, uh. But, you know, it it's I for one still view, um, the the elective office as a noble profession. And on the other evening on Dialogue, there were, um, some new generation young legislators, including, uh, Representative Quentin Kawanana Kowa from the Republicans, and, uh, Scott Saiki, Eric Hamakawa, and Marcus Oshiro from the, um, Democrats. And all of them, I, I've come to know personally during this past session, and they indicated on that program that they believe it is a noble profession.
[00:11:57] Tom Okamura: And they ran and got in with the intention of, you know, bringing about positive change for Hawaii. So I'm really hopeful, and I'm positive that people still are getting into the profession for the right reasons.
[00:12:10] Randall Roth: Okay, Mary?
[00:12:11] Mary George: Jerry was starting to sing my song, although I think we disagree.
[00:12:16] Randall Roth: Was he out of tune just a bit?
[00:12:21] Mary George: No, he used the word career, career politicians, and I think that's the thing that, um, if I could make one change in the system, that's the one I'd like to change. I would like to return, to revert to the time of the citizen politician when he went to Washington or to the state capitol or the county or whatever, for um, um, a year or two, a term or two, and then went back home and ran the store. I think we had, um, I think the perception of the citizen politician would do a great deal. And, of course, that leads me up to term limits.
[00:12:55] Randall Roth: Term limits. Term limits. Okay. What is that? This is the issue of the world.
[00:13:00] Mary George: The the, um, dominance of one party is, um, uh, protected and fostered by a strong continuing majority. And if you cut short the terms, you're going to prevent this, um, uh, sticking like a limpet to an office to your power.
[00:13:20] Randall Roth: Well, Tom, you've been, uh, in the legislature 15 years. Um, what do you think of term limits?
[00:13:25] Tom Okamura: I'm against it. For one thing, if we did have term limits, it wouldn't affect me because I'm not going to I don't plan to be there much longer. I'm against it because I think it takes the will of the public away. That that every election is a term limit. Two years for representatives, four years for senators. You have to get reelected and the public makes that choice. Senator George is a good example. When she first ran for the Senate, she said that she would stay no longer than two terms.
[00:13:50] Mary George: No, I did not. I'm sorry, I never said that.
[00:13:54] Randall Roth: Well, that was big a very public thing that that No, no, I introduced legislation in 74, 75 for term limits, but I didn't say I'd resign.
[00:14:06] Mary George: Okay, that's fine. If everybody does it, okay, but why should I uh, you know, why should I quit or leave everybody else in?
[00:14:14] Randall Roth: Okay, so you put in legislation for for the Senate for I believe two terms. There was a limit for two terms. But and you know, for the benefit of the Republicans, as well as all of the people of Hawaii, fortunately, Senator George continued to run, and she has always been respected as a great legislator, and people are very thankful for that.
[00:14:34] Tom Okamura: And, and that's what term limits will do, take away. And I think we really need a balance of of fresh new faces, fresh new ideas, as well as veteran legislators who understand the process, understand the issues, because otherwise you're going to have the bureaucrats, you're going to have the executive, you're going to have uh uh staff. Okay, having that un great power.
[00:14:57] Randall Roth: Well, we've we've got a standoff here. We've got somebody on each side. Jerry Burris, you you get to, uh, to be the swing vote on this one.
[00:15:03] Jerry Burris: This is this is great, because I'm so mugwump on this. It's I got a coin here. Should I flip it or It's interesting, uh, we did an editorial not too long ago where we endorsed term limits, um, sort of reluctantly, uh, and it was that what that reflected was a fair amount of division within our editorial board, where because the arguments that Tom made and the arguments that Mary made are persuasive in and of themselves on both sides. We ended up endorsing term limits uh for two reasons. One is the effect of money, and that incumbents tend to accumulate money that keeps them in even beyond their their usefulness, and that's the problem. Uh, now the cure for that obviously could be to do something about the money, but that hasn't seemed to work so far. So there is a money issue.
[00:15:47] Jerry Burris: The second issue was, going back to the theme of of powerlessness, and as many flaws as term limits have, and they do have a lot of flaws, almost everything you said, Tom, I agree with. Uh, if they were there, there's a feeling that people would have a sense of I know I'm going to have a voice because this guy or this person can't be in there forever. They're going to be gone, and I'll have a chance to vote for someone else, someone fresh. Now, that's sort of a condemnation of the voters who are so disillusioned that they need to have this artificial cure, but it may increase some public control, or some sense of public control over over politics and the system was working for them.
[00:16:23] Jerry Burris: So we ended up reluctantly saying let's give this a try, although I can't disagree with any of the arguments against it.
[00:16:29] Randall Roth: Matteo will come will come back to this a little bit later in the show. Tom also wants to say something here, but I need to uh remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise radio show. Our topic today is a question. How can we elevate politics in Hawaii? Our guests in the studio are Mary George, a retired Republican legislator, Tom Okamura, who is a Democrat legislator, and Jerry Burris, the Advertiser's editorial page editor. If you'd like to ask a question or make a brief comment, all you've got to do is call us at 955-8821, and neighbor Islanders are always invited to call collect.
[00:17:00] Randall Roth: Our number again is 955-8821. We have a caller from the Big Island, David. Good morning, David.
[00:17:07] Speaker 2: Hey, good morning, Randy. Um, several months ago, you put your finger right on one of the problems. We were talking about, uh, no-fault auto insurance and the Senate had passed it, but the House, no, the House, the the Senate had passed it, the House hadn't yet. And you said, well, surely the House one passed it, and even if they do, the governor will never sign it because, after all, he's a lawyer himself.
[00:17:29] Speaker 2: And I thought that was kind of interesting, because [unintelligible — audio glitch] governor should be looking out for the welfare of the people, not for his own special interest group.
[00:17:36] Randall Roth: Well, I I don't think I said that. Maybe one of our guests, uh, said that. But what what's your point?
[00:17:42] Speaker 2: Well, my point is that the legislators are very often looking out for their own special interest group rather than the the welfare of the people.
[00:17:49] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, let's get a response to that, Tom.
[00:17:53] Tom Okamura: The no-fault bill, uh, Well, let's take [unintelligible — audio glitch] more general point that legislators are watching out for special interests as opposed to everybody's best interest. I I would disagree with that. I think that all legislators, you know, when that are there, their intention is to serve the public interest. And I believe that, you know, every member is very sincere with that. The problem becomes, I think that again the access to people, the access to information, etc., um, that that you know, you have public interest groups, special interest groups who who have the resources, the time, the manpower, the the information that perhaps they can unduly um, influence legislators and that's where the problem comes in.
[00:18:38] Tom Okamura: And and because of the short nature of the legislature also sometimes we don't have all the information perhaps to make the most um the the critical decisions in the best interests, um. But but I believe that most members are very sincerely there to serve the interest of the public.
[00:18:56] Randall Roth: Yeah. Jerry, do you have the impression that special interest
[00:19:00] Speaker 9: have more of an influence over the legislature, not because anyone in the legislature is bad or anything like that, but because of time and money and focus and all that sort of thing. Do special interests have more influence than what in a perfect world they would?
[00:19:16] Speaker 11: Yeah, I think so. And and by special interests, I mean two categories. One is the professional special interests. I mean, the insurance lobby is more effective at the legislature than just some some Joe Blow out there who decides he's concerned about insurance.
[00:19:30] Speaker 9: And trial lawyers on the other side.
[00:19:31] Speaker 11: And trial lawyers on the other side, and the other and the other special interests that are that are having uh I think an undue influence [unintelligible — audio glitch] single issue groups that can arise up or around an issue and tend to overpower the legislature. And not to not to sound like a broken record, but when you have single-member districts and small districts and the and if there's an issue in that district where a special interest group, you know, they're just concerned about a development typically, they can sway the whole process.
[00:19:59] Speaker 11: And uh that so those two combinations of things obviously have more effect, I think, Tom, than than just the average citizen.
[00:20:05] Speaker 9: Yeah.
[00:20:06] Speaker 12: Um, Mary, do you have any thoughts on that?
[00:20:08] Speaker 13: Yeah, I do. I don't uh I don't really share Jerry's uh perception on this. I think that it's the mix of special interests that a good legislator will listen to them all. And whether it's the uh the giant AARP, for example, uh with with the geezer uh uh concerns or the trial lawyers, whoever it is, when you get the mix, what you're doing is getting the articulation of uh of what the public feels. And a good legislator will be will be able to evaluate them.
[00:20:43] Speaker 11: So legislators would would depend upon strong lobbyists and hope that they would be on both sides of all important issues.
[00:20:51] Speaker 13: Absolutely, and where they where there's a blank, they'll seek it out. But it um it's almost, it's virtually impossible for a legislator to personally research everything.
[00:21:01] Speaker 11: Well, you you guys are stronger minded than I am because I have seen some of these people down there both citizens, special interest groups [unintelligible — audio glitch] lobbying groups who do such a powerful job that I'd have hard time uh Not being convinced by them.
[00:21:14] Speaker 12: Okay. Okay. David, thank you for your call.
[00:21:17] Speaker 11: Can I make one comment?
[00:21:18] Speaker 12: Real quick one.
[00:21:19] Speaker 11: I have to disagree with Mary because the special interest groups by and large, all have big money behind them. And items like the environment that doesn't have a lot of money behind them, are get shortchanged by the special interest groups.
[00:21:32] Speaker 12: Okay. Thank you, David. We have a caller from Waipahu, Anita. Good morning, Anita.
[00:21:38] Speaker 14: Good morning. Uh I have a a question uh for uh Senator George. I still think of her that way. Um for whom I have a lot of respect, but I also have to say that when the anyone, Republicans or Democrats, talks about term limits and then says, but I'm not willing to put my uh actions behind this. And we saw this in the federal uh legislative debate, in which people said, oh yes, term limits are great, and they should be like for 12 years starting tomorrow and I've already served for 35.
[00:22:19] Speaker 14: And I think the question is how do sitting legislators communicate to people in a way that um is believable about this? Because to be honest, a wide circle of friends, regardless of political affiliation, when this debate is going on and people say, oh, I'm not going to step back. Uh I believe in this, but somebody has to force me. It comes off as a a real joke.
[00:22:49] Speaker 12: Well, let's see what Mary has to say about it.
[00:22:51] Speaker 13: Well, it's very uh seems to me perfectly obvious that if only um a selected few abide by term limits, um it's it's not going to work. It's got to be everybody or it isn't going to work at all. I don't know, does anybody remember Fred Rohlfing who believed in uh the resign to run rule, and when, I guess it was when he was running for the state for the uh Congress.
[00:23:15] Speaker 11: That's right, yeah.
[00:23:16] Speaker 13: Uh he um he resigned because he believed in uh that you should resign from one office before you run for the next one. Went over like a cement cloud. Nobody paid any attention, and he just lost the seat that um he could otherwise have continued.
[00:23:30] Speaker 11: It was it was one day of good for you, Fred, and then who's Fred Rohlfing from then on.
[00:23:34] Speaker 13: Absolutely. And the same thing is true with term limits. I I pushed for it that um majority of my colleagues did not uh agree with me, so it didn't pass. But I would like to uh remind uh uh people that I think it's almost 70% of the uh electorate in this country, and a goodly I don't know what the percentage is, but maybe you do, Jerry, of the people in the state of Hawaii believe in term limits.
[00:24:01] Speaker 11: It's, yeah, our polling shows it's it's a strong large percentage. Uh but you know that the irony is is they believe in term limits, but if you ask them, how about in your district, are you satisfied with your particular senator? And say, well, ours is pretty good, you know, I wouldn't mind keeping him or her in, but generally, I'm for term limits. So that's the schizophrenia that uh gets in the way.
[00:24:19] Speaker 11: But is is that is that necessarily bad? In other words, even if if a particular legislator is a good person, the fact that they would cease to serve after a period of time, doesn't necessarily mean that the idea of term limits is is a bad one. In other words, you're going to have mixed results. Some good, some bad. And if they're more good than bad, then perhaps term limits um are worthy of a of a try.
[00:24:42] Speaker 13: You have to hold I I hold the thought. Nobody is irreplaceable. Everybody said very nice things about me when I retired last when I I resigned. I wasn't I wasn't defeated. I resigned. Okay. Anyway, people said very nice things about oh, you leave big shoes to fill. Well, the size of my feet may have something to do with that. But uh um gee, you know, there new people come up and new people may have fresh ideas. They may listen better, they may not be so set in cement, they may not be indebted to the people with the big checkbooks.
[00:25:16] Speaker 11: Well, let's let's shift the the focus of this just a little bit. We've talked a lot about term limits. You mentioned checkbooks, and somebody earlier commented on on campaign financing. Uh I'm really curious, you know, who gives, why do they give, when do they give, etc. I'm under the impression that um well, we had three um so-called major candidates for governor this last time. By major, they they received more than a a tiny percentage of of the votes, and each one raised, I think, something like three or four million dollars.
[00:25:49] Speaker 11: I'm under the impression that there are a lot of folks out there who were giving to all of them, presumably because they didn't want to have the next governor, whichever the three was going to be, mad at them. That doesn't strike me as the right reason to be contributing. Jerry, as a editorial page editor, is my perception off?
[00:26:09] Speaker 11: They they did it purely for the love of the democratic process.
[00:26:14] Speaker 13: And if you believe that, Is it that way every place or is there something unique to Hawaii that causes people to give out of what I guess would be called self-preservation.
[00:26:25] Speaker 11: The institutional givers tend to give to anyone they see is legitimate candidate. Anyone that might win because they don't want that person to be an enemy. Or they Maybe that's too maybe that's too strong to put it. It's not that there's going to be some immediate vindictive lightning bolt that will come down, but I think it's uh it's it's this game where if he's doing it, I better do it because I don't want to be seen as not participating the way my competitor is participating. So everyone tends to build up this house of cards it gets bigger and bigger.
[00:26:56] Speaker 11: Uh I don't know where the restraint needs to begin, but
[00:27:00] Speaker 12: Yeah. Tom.
[00:27:01] Speaker 15: The real answer, I think in the long term, if you want to really empower the people and and have good legislation is to have public financing of campaigns. And when and how that comes about, I'm not certain. Um even for myself and I know for other legislators, we made it a policy as individuals not to hold any uh fundraising activities during the session.
[00:27:26] Speaker 15: I also um don't collect more than $250 from any individual or PAC or corporation, but that's a choice that I make and and I hope fully others wouldn't follow through.
[00:27:36] Speaker 11: Yeah, and you're the exception rather than the rule.
[00:27:38] Speaker 15: Yeah, but it starts that way, I think, you know, with a few people doing that, but eventually, I think if you want to get get away from all the politics, you've got to have public financing.
[00:27:49] Speaker 12: Mary George?
[00:27:50] Speaker 13: I don't know, I I look with uh with considerable envy on the British system. They have because I suppose they don't have the uh the constitutional tether that we have. They've been able to um hold their campaigning down and for for example, as I remember for 48 hours or something like that before an election, nothing. There's no radio, no television, no no press, and it's a short campaign period and uh and peanuts for money.
[00:28:21] Speaker 11: Yeah, that that'd really be, you know, [unintelligible — audio glitch] can remember going through I covered a campaign for governor that ran under a spending limit law before it was declared unconstitutional in '74. And it worked just fine. We had a terrific campaign and everyone held the I think it was $360,000 or something the candidates were allowed to spend, and it seems to me there's plenty of advertising, plenty of traveling around, plenty of rallies, and uh and it worked fine.
[00:28:46] Speaker 11: And it's it's just a shame, I can understand the constitutional reasons why you can't have that kind of limit, but it worked fine. So there's nothing magic about spending three or four or $5 million that accomplishes anything that spends
[00:28:57] Speaker 13: Unless the other guy does.
[00:28:59] Speaker 11: Unless the other guy does, but I mean in this past campaign if, and obviously prices have gone up, but that campaign could have been run for $800,000 or a million dollars each if each had spent that much. With advertising, with computers and everything else, I well, you were on the inside Mary, so you know, but you didn't need to spend
[00:29:15] Speaker 13: In 70 in 74?
[00:29:16] Speaker 11: No, no, no. On the most recent.
[00:29:18] Speaker 13: 90 94.
[00:29:20] Speaker 11: 94. The Pat Saiki campaign. I mean a lot of that was an arms race spending, not a true need kind of spending, I believe. Okay. You're listening to the Price of Paradise radio show. I'm Randy Roth, our guests today are Mary George, a retired Republican legislator, Tom Okamura, who is a democratic legislator, and Jerry Burris who is the Honolulu Advertiser editorial page editor. We're trying to answer the question, how can we elevate politics in Hawaii? And if you would like to get in on our conversation, just call us at 955-8821.
[00:34:35] Speaker 11: legislators right now that are really quite upset. Uh the media in general, the newspapers in particular, probably Mr. Burris uh from time to time. Professional school doing that. I I think there is the sense that uh uh politicians aren't treated fairly, that the media likes to put the spotlight on any misstep and completely ignore anything that's done well or done ethically or whatever.
[00:35:02] Speaker 11: What do you think?
[00:35:04] Speaker 16: Part of that I think has is because newspapers, the media, they they print or they advertise what sells and a lot of us over the years have begun to think that the media has become more like the tabloid or getting into that direction unfortunately. In the past and and don't get me wrong, Jerry, Jerry is Take your arm off. He has been an outstanding reporter. But the in the past there was a lot more in depth kind of reporting and you don't find that as much anymore.
[00:35:34] Speaker 16: And so one of the things that that we did, and you know, we're all human beings and everyone's accountable, and and the media, we did have a bill this year um you know, the mutual publishing plan agreement which Congress allowed for the the State of Hawaii the exception to the antitrust laws. Only the Hawaii Dailies have that special privilege and that was done 33 years ago because both of the papers were losing money and there was a fear that both papers would go out of business.
[00:36:05] Speaker 16: Now 33 years has passed and all we're saying is um let's look at that again and let's see if in fact it's still needed or or perhaps we can foster more competition in this.
[00:36:19] Speaker 11: Tom, I I tend to be naive, but it seems really obvious to me that the legislature did that to send a message to to the press. It it doesn't seem to me like they really want to know how much money's being made. They just want to um let the press know that they're not real happy with what's appearing in the newspaper. Am I just playing wrong? No.
[00:36:41] Speaker 16: I'm seriously. We're we're saying just as you know, the the public and and various groups in the community are asking [unintelligible — audio glitch] the government for accountability, well, accountability, and keep out, keeping our hands off of um monopolies etcetera etcetera. Open up the process. We're saying, hey, why don't why why aren't we doing that with those newspapers?
[00:37:03] Speaker 11: What's good for the goose is good for the gander. All right, Jerry Burris the gauntlet has been thrown.
[00:37:08] Speaker 16: One correction. When you said only the two Hawaii dailies, you mean in Hawaii. I mean, there's 60 or 70 of these kind of operations around the country where two newspapers uh get some exemption from uh anti-trust laws to operate in joint. And what what I want to avoid is is getting into a detailed discussion of the joint operating agreement.
[00:37:27] Speaker 11: But if we can talk in terms of of how the politicians are viewing the media and to what extent the media is a part of this concern that the politics is is so low and needs to be elevated so much, Jerry?
[00:37:41] Speaker 16: Okay, I'll try to make this real brief. One is that uh is I agree with you, I think there is less coverage of the legislature and I think there's some disappointment over that.
[00:37:49] Speaker 10: Uh what, I don't know if it's less in-depth coverage. I think the stories that we do are probably as as depthful and as thoughtful as as they ever were, but there isn't the mass of coverage.
[00:38:00] Speaker 9: and I think people miss that. A lawmaker could also console himself with, well, there was a negative story. It was on page one, but they also did six or seven other stories about events that were going on. So, on balance, there's a pretty good mix. As a result of a myriad of things, you know, shrinking news hole and and everything else, we've shifted our coverage away from the legislature a little bit. I think that's happened.
[00:38:22] Speaker 9: I think this this legislation asking to look at the books, uh I have to think it's it's maybe not in your mind, but in a lot of minds, it's it's more a coverage issue than it is a financial issue because if you if you attended any of the hearings, I'm sure you did, the hearings focused on coverage. They didn't talk about finances. I mean, the people from the paper would go over to testify about this bill to open their books and they'd be spending the evening answering questions about why we messed up this story or got the story wrong or something, and it was all on coverage. And I think coverage is a is a legitimate thing for people to be concerned about. I don't think this bill has anything to do with coverage except in people's minds.
[00:39:04] Speaker 11: Okay. Well, Mary, want you give us your thoughts and then we've got some callers.
[00:39:07] Mary George: Yeah, I want to comment a little bit. My perception, Jerry, is that this is uh um under a national law and that the state has basically nothing to do with the capability of the two newspapers have a joint operating agreement. And the fact that the state intruded into this and wants to generate information which they say they're going to send back to Washington, and Washington doesn't want it. You know, they have no they have no need for it. It to me, I think Randy's evaluation, naive or not, um has uh um more than a grain of truth in it.
[00:39:45] Jerry Burris: But but putting away, you know, all the gifts and butts of a political thing, is it a fair thing to do? 33 years ago this was granted. Now, things may have changed.
[00:39:57] Speaker 9: By Congress, or not by the legislature.
[00:39:59] Jerry Burris: Regardless, regardless now. What I'm saying is
[00:40:03] Speaker 9: What do you mean, regardless?
[00:40:05] Jerry Burris: Uh what I'm saying is, perhaps it's time to re-evaluate that that policy and to maybe maybe it's
[00:40:10] Mary George: Yeah, but
[00:40:13] Jerry Burris: But maybe it's preventing competition from coming into Hawaii.
[00:40:17] Speaker 9: Well, and and I hate to to say this, but but one piece of what they're doing that makes some sense to me is that if the news hole is shrinking, as Jerry you've you've just said, and if the newspapers are making a ton of money, as folks in the legislature seem to assume, I guess we in the public might say, why is that news hole shrinking? But that's another subject.
[00:40:37] Jerry Burris: That's curiosity.
[00:40:38] Speaker 9: That's that's how we're making all that money.
[00:40:40] Speaker 11: Okay. Uh, we've got some folks on the line. Let's go to Nancy in Honolulu. Good morning, Nancy.
[00:40:45] Speaker 8: Oh, getting back to campaign reform.
[00:40:47] Speaker 11: All right.
[00:40:48] Speaker 8: Yeah, I I would like to just make a couple of comments and raise one other issue. I think that uh having term limits would go a long way toward preventing the buildup of big monies in, you know, as contributing to particular candidates to keep men there forever and ever. The second thing is that public financing would create more career politicians because they wouldn't have to hustle very much to get a start and stay in there. And the third thing is, I think that uh we should find some way to ban or or severely restrain paid lobbying. It doesn't make any we used to have a much purer government before we allowed such tremendous lobbying to go on.
[00:41:29] Speaker 8: Citizen lobbying is one thing. If they didn't have paid people, they really have to care about something to get in there and try to do things. But with big staff, there's no sense of having lobbyists and then having a whole bunch of research staff that the public pays for. They can learn about the issues by using their staff and not allowing lobbyists to be in there at all.
[00:41:49] Speaker 9: Mary, you you've made three extremely good points. I've got five more people stacked on the line and I'm going to keep moving because I know the folks in the studio have talked about at least two of those three points. But we can come back to Mary's third point in just a bit. We uh we need to hear first from Graham on the Big Island. Good morning, Graham.
[00:42:08] Speaker 5: Good morning. Uh I'd like to ask the panel if they think that might the political process be improved by a change to proportional voting system.
[00:42:19] Speaker 9: Okay. Real quick response to Graham, proportional voting system, Mary?
[00:42:23] Mary George: I don't know what he means by that. How how that would apply constitutionally in this state, I don't know.
[00:42:30] Speaker 9: Um, is that the line idea?
[00:42:34] Jerry Burris: Jerry, go ahead and tell us. I mean, the only one I heard about is that that you you have proportional voting so that certain blocks of of voters identified, however you identify them, get a proportion of the seats in a in a legislature or council.
[00:42:49] Mary George: Like Republicans.
[00:42:50] Jerry Burris: Like Republicans. Is that what we're talking about, Graham?
[00:42:53] Speaker 5: Uh yes, it's the Australian and British system whereby uh small parties can get one or two members in.
[00:43:00] Speaker 9: Okay. Uh Tom, you're a member of the dominant party in Hawaii. What do you think of that?
[00:43:05] Tom Okamura: I think with something, you know, I I certainly would be open to looking at. I don't know enough about it at this point to take a clear position.
[00:43:11] Speaker 9: Graham, I think we we need to do a little homework before uh the folks in the studio can can say much more than that. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Ed and Makiki, good morning, Ed.
[00:43:21] Speaker 3: Thank you, Randy, for your usual great program. My general comments, since I was born and brought up in the islands here, is the sociology or sociological history where much of the Asiatic uh cultures you might say are obedience oriented. You obey your boss. I think that helps to to preserve this uh continuation of the same people in office for for a long, long time. That's about it.
[00:43:48] Speaker 9: Okay, we we appreciate your call. Uh Tom, maybe you uh have a thought on that?
[00:43:54] Tom Okamura: I think things have changed dramatically from the plantation days. You know, the the Asians are very well-educated, they're they're um very active in the community, etc. They may not be as uh vociferous as other groups, perhaps but.
[00:44:09] Jerry Burris: Just just as independent as everybody else.
[00:44:12] Tom Okamura: In fact, uh a lot of the one of the things we worry about is that a lot of the young for instance, Japanese-Americans are beginning to turn Republican. To marry this, though.
[00:44:23] Jerry Burris: Boy, things are changing, huh, Mary?
[00:44:25] Mary George: Yeah.
[00:44:26] Speaker 9: Uh, let's go to Carol in Manoa. Good morning, Carol.
[00:44:29] Speaker 1: Good Good morning. Um, on the topic of elevating politics, it seemed to me there was a chorus, a loud chorus for reform prior to the election on the so-called high three system, and it went nowhere this session. What can we do to keep this issue alive?
[00:44:43] Speaker 9: Well, that that's a favorite topic of mine, and I guess as uh in preparing to get the thoughts of our guests, I need to let listeners know just what we're talking about in
[00:44:51] Mary George: Yes, I'll hang up because you you can run with that, I'm sure.
[00:44:54] Speaker 9: Okay. Thank you, Carol. Um, it's it's unfortunately, it's it's complicated, but in a nutshell, the way pensions are calculated in Hawaii, and the way legislators are treated as employees of the government, combine in such a way as to um dramatically increase a legislator's pension if they go from the legislature into another government job. Especially if it's a high paying government job, but just being a full-time job tends to make it higher paying. And among other things, there is a concern that legislators are going to count out to the governor, they're going to do what the governor wants so that they can get a high paying appointment, a so-called high three, which can just dramatically increase their pension. Now, that's an oversimplification, but uh a lot of people think that this is a mechanism that number one, hurts the checks and balances in our government, and number two, it gives legislators a way of making a lot more money over a lifetime than what the public realizes they're making.
[00:46:04] Tom Okamura: Tom, any thoughts on it? I I can understand, you know, the the public's uh concern about this. The my only concern about the high three is that, you know, I don't believe that legislators or public officials should be discriminated as any other employee. You know, in any employee, whether in private sector or public sector, you know, as the years go on, they try to move into higher positions with higher pay, so that by the time they retire, [unintelligible — audio glitch] get a decent salary or or decent retirement at least.
[00:46:37] Speaker 9: But but there's discrimination now in the sense that they're the formula for calculating their pension has what's called an accrual rate that's dramatically higher than the accrual rate of of almost every other state employee. So if there's a problem with legislators being treated differently, it's because the system currently gives them this dramatic advantage.
[00:47:00] Jerry Burris: You're talking about the um 3 and a half percent the uh annually for as opposed to other officials.
[00:47:07] Speaker 9: For example, my accrual rate is 1 and a quarter percent. If I were in the legislature, it would be three and a half percent. And there are ways of of changing the law so that that three and a half percent could continue and affect if if we want that, but it would be based upon the compensation paid legislators, and if they move from the legislature to another position, then you would start using the one and a half or whatever have you to apply, the one and a quarter to apply to the higher compensation outside the legislature.
[00:47:36] Jerry Burris: versus the overall high three.
[00:47:39] Speaker 9: Right. But see the high three right now for for other employees is taken usually on their last three three years. Now, if the three and a half percent thing is what's what's um upsetting people, you know, maybe we should look at that. There is a bill that that's in the legislature now, and maybe we know we can have a hearing to discuss that. But [unintelligible — audio glitch] think we should be real careful that just because there are so many negative perceptions and feelings towards public officials now that we overreact and we we literally take every benefit away from our potential legislators that, you know, competent good people are no longer going to run.
[00:48:21] Speaker 9: And we could end up with with people running for office who are the wealthy or the retirees.
[00:48:27] Jerry Burris: Yeah, I think you're raising a really good uh important different uh point, but but just to you know, finish my thoughts on the on the high three, um it seems to me that uh you know, you've got a public out here that perceives this as a problem.
[00:48:45] Speaker 9: and people in the legislature who just kill it without conversation, who who kill it without there being some sort of public dialogue so that everyone can understand it better. Mary?
[00:48:54] Mary George: I just wanted to comment that um as you know, Tom, the high three rewards go to Democrats. They're they're plums for people in power.
[00:49:04] Jerry Burris: It's also gone to Republicans uh Mary.
[00:49:07] Mary George: Name several. They're I think maybe one or two, but in general, when you look at at the names that were brought up
[00:49:15] Speaker 9: Kinau Kamalii?
[00:49:16] Mary George: Kinau uh left the party.
[00:49:19] Speaker 9: Uh John Maderis? Buddy Swaras?
[00:49:25] Mary George: There's been a number of those.
[00:49:27] Jerry Burris: I think [unintelligible — audio glitch] think we're we're not past fingers on one hand. Yeah, your your point is right. That [unintelligible — audio glitch] generally Democrats who end up getting work in democratic administration.
[00:49:36] Speaker 9: We'll give we'll give Tom the last point since I've given him a hard time. Go ahead, Tom.
[00:49:39] Tom Okamura: If the person is very qualified, competent, and hardworking, I see nothing wrong with that. They should not be discriminated. Unfortunately, there have been a few cases in the past where that has not been the case. And and but that's what stands out and that's where the abuse takes place, and we should cut that out. That people who are appointed should definitely be qualified.
[00:50:02] Mary George: I I agree, no discrimination, but let's let's cut out the discrimination that's already there then.
[00:50:08] Speaker 9: Don't deny them the job, just don't give them a $300,000 increase in terms of the present value benefit of their of their pension. Um, you're listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth, the guests in the studio are Mary George, Tom Okamura, and Jerry Burris. We're trying to answer the question, how do we elevate politics in Hawaii?
[00:50:28] Mary George: Can I throw
[00:50:29] Speaker 9: Go ahead, Mary.
[00:50:30] Mary George: I just want to something just occurred to me that we've left out of this equation. It's what we do to each other. Uh we're we're friendly uh um antagonists here around the table perhaps. But one of the things that happens in elections, I think maybe a contributor. Uh, for example, um um if you throw mud, some of it's going to stick to everybody and it's going to stick to the profession. That's that's fairly obvious. But it's also um sort of by in in direction. It doesn't have to be mud throwing. If um if my uh enthusiastic adherents choose to call me Mrs. Clean, doesn't that mean that there's a Mr. Dirty out there someplace? And if somebody says my my gang are the good guys, doesn't that imply that the bad guys are out there? It seems to me in large measure, antagonistic politicians are at to
[00:51:22] Speaker 9: Polarizing. Everybody. Yeah, degrade degrade the profession by in this way. So maybe we got to clean up our own acts.
[00:51:30] Jerry Burris: That's a real good point and and they've seen this phenomenon the last four, six, eight years as negative campaigning has become a better tool that people find that it works, but what they're doing is polluting the public mind. Uh, you know, every time you say [unintelligible — audio glitch] a person running for office is somehow not worthy or or is is wrong or bad or just out for evil purposes, you're creating this climate that you're talking about, and uh they they've done polling on this and public surveying, and they've asked people now, why is it that you think the politicians are all a bunch of crooks?
[00:52:01] Jerry Burris: And they say, well, because that's what they say about each other. You know, and it and it creates this terrible uh negative atmosphere.
[00:52:07] Speaker 9: In this morning's advertiser, there's kind of a a pro con piece by David Broder and and George Will, and one of them commented that uh you know, on on school lunches are are some issue. The the Democrats are saying let's increase it 5.2%. The Republicans are saying let's increase it 4.7%. They're both saying let's increase it and it's it's a fairly close percentage. And yet you've got the one side saying, you know, these other people are evil because they're taking food out of people's mouths, and the other side are saying these people are spending us broke, etc. and and it's polarizing folks to where it's hard to have a good conversation and really focus on the issues.
[00:52:45] Jerry Burris: I agree. Totally, yeah. I agree and I think that you know, the problem as Mary and uh Jerry said is that we've got to stop the judging. You know, whether whether I'm pro or con on on a given issue, it's not right or wrong. We have to learn to respect one another's viewpoints, and almost all legislation ends up as some sort of compromise. But the more we we throw um throw things at darts at each other and say that you're wrong because you don't agree with me, then that's what perpetuates the negativity.
[00:53:14] Speaker 9: Well, and I think part of what Mary's saying, you're not just wrong, you're evil because you must have bad intentions if you're not in agreement with me. Okay. Uh we want to remind people that uh they can ask a question or make a brief comment by calling us at 955-8821. We have a caller from YK Key, Steve, good morning.
[00:53:33] Speaker 17: Good morning.
[00:53:34] Speaker 9: What can we do for you today?
[00:53:36] Speaker 17: Well, I'd like to start off by saying that I am a Democrat, but that if the Republican party were made up of a bunch of Mary Georges, I think they might even get close to a majority.
[00:53:45] Speaker 9: Hey, you want to join
[00:53:46] Speaker 17: fan. Over the years.
[00:53:48] Speaker 9: I'm the Steve, I'm the head of this fan club, so you can you can sign up down here. Go ahead, Steve.
[00:53:53] Speaker 17: Uh uh here's my comment, or my question, or a little of both. Uh this is about money and money's influence in local politics. Um, isn't the Orson Swindle phenomenon an example of the infusion of a large amount of money uh on top of a candidate who really had no background in Hawaii politics who a lot of us see as a parachute artist. And um, who in fact was uh, who's now a Republican, but uh thought he was head of uh Ross Perot's organization for a while.
[00:54:26] Speaker 9: Didn't he have far less money than Neal Abercrombie? His opponent?
[00:54:29] Speaker 17: I think he, I think he got an infusion from uh from the uh Republican National Committee and I think that they're going to probably be targeting him with a lot more money than uh in in the near future.
[00:54:42] Jerry Burris: Let's get the main point is that I think that he he's [unintelligible — audio glitch] comes to access mockingly uh out of a fairly well financed organization, not somebody with any background of local politics. Not essentially a parachute artist, which is one of the problems the Republicans have had before. Well, Well, we're remembering people like Dillingham and uh and Crosby and some of their other stellar uh last-minute inventions. We're we're getting we're getting a little far afield. Go ahead and leave the phone and listen to the comment.
[00:55:11] Speaker 9: Okay, a little far afield. Mary, uh, I'm sure you got a response.
[00:55:15] Mary George: Oh, no, I I'll I'll give him a party card and he can run. We there there are no barriers to joining the party, running as a Republican and the only difference of opinion I'd have with that caller is basically, I don't think Orson had a lot of money. I don't think uh um I I don't think he has any money now. I hope he runs next year.
[00:55:37] Mary George: I think his he's gotten his feet wet and if he wasn't uh local enough last time, uh nothing like a good political campaign to make a local out of you.
[00:55:48] Speaker 9: Jerry, what what did you get out of Steve's comments?
[00:55:50] Jerry Burris: I well, the idea that there's forces outside Hawaii uh creating these sort of Manchurian candidates that I I think he did get some money, Orson Swindle from the National Republicans, but but Neil Abercrombie got some from the Democrats. I don't think that was a Is that a problem? I don't think so. I think that uh I think the proof of it is is that outside interest may find themselves fascinated with a candidate in Hawaii, but that candidate is not going to survive unless he or she has some good strong legs here. It doesn't mean you have to be born here. I mean Neal wasn't either, so.
[00:56:22] Speaker 9: Yeah, yeah. Um, what about this thing and [unintelligible — audio glitch] I was involved in called Pop 94, popping in an acronym for Price of Paradise, where we were trying to get a lot of folks from the community involved in figuring out what the good questions are, uh asking the candidates for governor those questions in a way that that we hoped would would get thoughtful responses, and then encouraging as much media attention um to those responses as we possibly could get. Um, you know, I'm not going to take it personally or anything like that, and and Jerry, I know you had something to do with it because the advertiser had a tie-in with uh Pop 94. You
[00:57:00] Speaker 9: you know graciously gave us an awful lot of of attention, which we thought was appropriate and we appreciate it. Any thoughts from in the studio from anyone? Jerry, I don't mean to exclude you from the conversation about either that or or things like that where where the public is trying to be more a part of the process.
[00:57:21] Tom Okamura: Tom, I think it was one of the most positive things that have happened politically in years and I congratulate you for that. I think the more we can involve the public, and the media also should be applauded because I think the coverage of the the past election was was outstanding and I think the people were exposed more and more to the various candidates and so they hopefully gave them the opportunity to make more intelligent choices.
[00:57:48] Speaker 9: Okay. Mary?
[00:57:49] Mary George: I still I have kind of mixed feelings about it. It um um there was an artificial creation of um an equality of issues that all these things are important and that we really ought to know all about all of these things before we can cast an intelligent vote. Um I I'm not sure. I think maybe it it overcomplicated what basically should be um um a fairly simple straightforward decision.
[00:58:22] Speaker 9: Mhm. Mhm. Jerry?
[00:58:23] Jerry Burris: [unintelligible — audio glitch] halfway agree with Mary on this is that it it got a little bit off compass. Too many things went on, but uh it's it's sort of like, you know, the old thing about turning an ocean liner around in the middle of the ocean. I think that what happened, if we assume that politics is off course, that this this started to correct course, maybe 10%, maybe 20%, and that things like this as they become clarified and evolved and maybe a little bit more focused are really going to make a difference.
[00:58:51] Jerry Burris: I mean, the whole idea was is that is that campaigns have become creatures of the professionals and that people's feelings and and needs and desires and, you know, real burning questions weren't being addressed. And there was an attempt made to find out what those questions are and an attempt to get them addressed. Kind of awkward, kind of sloppy, nothing worked perfectly. Uh, you know, we had candidates dropping out of the process halfway through, but I think there was some correction, and I think that's the important thing.
[00:59:18] Jerry Burris: I like, like Tom said, I think that certainly pushed it back in the way we want it to go a little bit.
[00:59:24] Speaker 9: Mhm. Yeah, I was a little disappointed that we didn't, for example, that both papers weren't covering it in in the in the same way, but the other newspaper, the Star Bulletin, did something similar, um in a variety of ways, Power 94. And so, I don't know. To me, it it was a tiny step, Mary, but it showed that that folks in the community are are trying to to somehow turn it around [unintelligible — audio glitch] somehow or another, we as a community have some responsibility too to make things work.
[00:59:58] Mary George: I think it provides uh uh provided, and hopefully we'll continue to provide, a useful um um balance against the uh uh the professional who uh who has the clever media approach that that sometimes frighten me, the uh the tendency to uh paint somebody in a warm and fuzzy way as um as an attractive candidate without paying any particular attention to um to basics.
[01:00:29] Speaker 9: where some advertising expert is somehow going to package a candidate uh Yeah. Okay. We have several callers on the line. First Frank from Makiki. Good morning, Frank.
[01:00:39] Speaker 4: Morning. I'm wondering now if we can think of the legislators as the supply side and the voters as the demand side, and I'm thinking about the younger generation. I understand that pop uh that a Price of Paradise copies were distributed to the high schools and that they were used as text. I would love to know what that uh if if there's any the indication of how the young people had responded.
[01:01:09] Speaker 9: Yeah, we we did survey uh the schools and we got some some very good and positive responses. And in fact, we're going to be doing a show sometime in the next month or two. Not directly on that, but we're going to have some recent graduates of high school, of of Hawaii high schools in here to talk about the so-called brain drain. And one of the things I intend to talk to them about was what their impression of the issues covered by the Price of Paradise books were when when they were introduced to those uh in the classroom.
[01:01:38] Speaker 9: So Frank, I appreciate your call.
[01:01:40] Speaker 4: the younger generation is where it's going to come from. Yeah, thank you, Frank. Bye bye. Thank you. We have a call from Maui, Jay. Good morning, Jay.
[01:01:48] Speaker 6: Morning, Randy, and I always enjoy your show. I'll try to be brief. Um, first, the political politics means to me means expressions and activities. And the if uh politics is use so broad, sometimes very confusing. Now, the question I ask, I don't expect a definitive answer immediately. Can you really elevate political expressions and activities?
[01:02:18] Speaker 6: Of course question can say yes, but can you really attain it?
[01:02:22] Speaker 9: Let's let's ask the people in the studio. Can we really do it?
[01:02:26] Speaker 6: Randy could I Go ahead. a few more things, because I know you have lots of people waiting on the line. The issue here is the legitimacy. The legitimate privacy on one side, legitimate public information on the other. Now, this is the issue involving the political activities and expressions.
[01:02:47] Speaker 6: Thirdly, I have great hope if there's any elevation will come, will have to come from the public media.
[01:02:55] Speaker 9: Okay. Because they, including you, Randy, you you folks have this responsibility to inform the public, accurate, but not headline-seeking, inaccurate. Light not heat, right? And and do not come back to question again. Jay, we're we're down to just the last couple of minutes. And one one of the important things you've said is that we need to kind of take stock of whether we're optimistic or pessimistic.
[01:03:27] Speaker 9: Where are we in terms of of Mary, do you think we're actually going to improve things? And why are you either optimistic or pessimistic about that?
[01:03:38] Mary George: I'm I'm optimistic. I wouldn't be a a politician if I didn't have a certain basic trust in the fundamental good judgment of the voters.
[01:03:48] Speaker 9: I think Tom agrees with me. You're a professional talk show guest now, Mary. It's you're out of politics. But you're optimistic. Yes.
[01:03:56] Jerry Burris: Jerry Burris? Oh, I am too. I think that uh, you know, we, as people are saying that the newspapers tend to be critical and look for the negative and the editorial school more than they praise. But uh, if you look at the great overall flow of things, there's a lot of good people out there. And what they have to do is, is keep, keep in mind that it's, that they're working for people. They're not working for themselves.
[01:04:16] Jerry Burris: And and I think you're going to see some good people come along.
[01:04:19] Speaker 9: And you're talking about the politicians, and in the folks in the community, what what about them? I mean, they just sit back and watch?
[01:04:26] Jerry Burris: No, no. They'll get involved. And I think one of the things, the big the the big issue is, is that there has to be something that motivates people, that that drives them. And these things will come up from time to time, and if there's good people in place, they'll they'll respond to them.
[01:04:40] Speaker 9: What's driving it? Leaders, the media, or something else?
[01:04:44] Jerry Burris: Right now, it's it's the media and the professional leaders. And I think that, but people will come in when they feel there's a need.
[01:04:51] Speaker 9: Okay. Tom Okamura?
[01:04:52] Tom Okamura: I too am very optimistic and I like to add that, you know, especially under the leadership of speaker Suki, we have opened up the legislative process immensely with with quorum requirements, public voting [unintelligible — audio glitch] issues, uh, you know, public access program, permanent public access room, all of these things has encouraged the public to participate, and we have to continue doing that. We have to create a partnership, true partnership with the public.
[01:05:23] Speaker 9: Just as long as those don't become bells and whistles in substitute for real direct communication back with the constituents. In other words, that's to be almost a cultural change in addition to changing the rules. Yeah. Okay. Well, I want to thank uh my guests, Mary George, Tom Okamura, and Jerry Burris.
[01:05:39] Speaker 9: The Price of Paradise producer is Susie Roth, the director of operations for Hawaii Public Radio is Jeff Ilardi. Our assistant producers are Cassie Roth, Aliya Yap, and Walter Roth. If you'd like to hear the show in its entirety, it'll be replayed tonight at 8 o'clock on KIFO 1380 AM. Next week, we're going to be talking about the New Zealand experience and asking whether or not there's some lessons to be learned.
[01:06:05] Speaker 9: Our guest will be David McClain, a distinguished professor from the College of Business at the University of Hawaii, and Murray Boden, a corporate executive with a New Zealand company. You've been listening to the Price of Paradise Radio show.
[01:06:15] Speaker 7: You've been listening to Price of Paradise Radio Show.
[01:06:15] [music outro 182 s]