Galen Fox Image Aloha Kakahiaka. It’s a beautiful morning. Isn’t it a beautiful day in Hawaii nei? Some of you, like me, remember when Hawaii was a territory. You remember when we were second class citizens, left out of the promise America offered residents of the 48 states. Then one bright morning, the door opened, and the nation welcomed us in. Hawaii became a state. What a beautiful day. Hawaii was then an exciting place filled with hope. The last territorial Legislature glowed from the creative sparks produced by rubbing new ideas against old. Republicans and Democrats were all involved, a Republican governor, a Democratic Legislature, together generating change that enlarged Hawaii’s role in the nation, and embraced our entire population. Now, today, such a beautiful day has come again. We have a new governor. The windows have been thrown open. The fresh breeze of change is blowing through our collective home. Once again, after an absence of 40 years, no matter what your party, Hawaii has a place for you. Fifty-one representatives feel the joy that comes from being part of solutions that involve Republicans, Democrats, and all Hawaii standing together. The solutions we crave are those that help people find jobs. All of us want more jobs for Hawaii’s people. It’s the lack of jobs that is forcing families apart, and sending our friends to the mainland. Most transplanted ex-Hawaii residents would rather be home, if they could make a decent living here. We need jobs. All of us want not just jobs, but better paying jobs for Hawaii’s people. The “price of paradise” is a real problem here. Hawaii’s cost of living is 22 percent above the national average; only the Bay Area is more expensive. Yet our wages are barely above the national average. We have an income gap that makes it hard to live here. To have better paying jobs, we need to take Hawaii into the knowledge-based economy. For that, Hawaii’s people need a good public education system. Reforming public education has to be one of this Legislature’s top priorities. To seize our future, we must improve public education now — we need action, not studies. The road ahead remains difficult. But we know that real change comes from Republicans and Democrats, business, labor, and government, working side-by-side to get the job done. History has led us to this remarkable January 2003 morning. At the dawn of the territorial era, 100 years ago, James Dole brought the pineapple industry here. It was the last time Hawaii, on its own, generated a major new industry. Pearl Harbor, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam gave us the defense industry, a boon to our economy that owed little to our own initiative. And so it was with tourism, which grew Hawaii through statehood’s first three decades. Tourism thrived because of outside forces — the jet plane, the jumbo jet, mainlanders discovering the neighbor islands, and finally Japanese tourism and investment. It all came so easily. We were freed from the discipline of having to work together to make our own future. Since the Japanese bubble burst in 1990, we have been searching for a new path to prosperity. After 1990, tourism stopped growing. After 1990, Hawaii family income dropped 15 percent in relation to the rest of the country, from 21 percent higher to only 6 percent higher. After 1990, while state government employment jumped 15 percent and our population grew by 9 percent, private sector job growth stopped-increasing by just 3 percent. After 1990, Hawaii’s poverty rate rose faster than that of any other state, and a higher share of Hawaii’s population left for other states than did the population of any other state. Now we stand at the beginning of a new day. We are filled with hope. We know that no outside force or event is going to bless us the way Pacific wars and the jet plane helped us earlier. We know we are going to have to do it ourselves. And we will work hard to shape our own destiny. We will find the common ground that unites us, and for the benefit of Hawaii’s people, we will embrace change. Let’s do it, let’s do it together. Mahalo.
Remarks by House Majority Leader-Opening of Hawaii’s 22nd Legislature
Scott Saiki Image Mr. Speaker, A tsunami of words Will roll over our ears during the next few months. I believe it is clear that we need to listen better and learn more to effectively lead this state. So allow me to start off with one thought: We get it. The members of this House walked hundreds of miles during the past year, listening to the concerns of their neighbors, community leaders and the people in their districts. Again and again they heard a similar message. Voters want accountability in government and in their schools, and they want [results]. We get it. The people of Hawaii want clean government — fair, honest and above board. With this last election, Hawaii stands at a crossroads. And it is worth considering just how we got here. Because right now, before we choose a path on which to travel, we should make an honest assessment of where we are. Many people think the Democrats have gotten too comfortable. That we have been in power for too long. So they voted for change, and some of the people who voted for that change were Democrats too. But I would like to emphasize one point. During the past four decades, we have led the path to fundamental change in Hawaii. We have transformed our state from a plantation-based economy to a forty billion dollar economy that rests upon technology, business, finance, tourism and agriculture, and employs over 570,000 people. We have developed a public education system that now serves over 183,000 students. We have protected and continue to safeguard our air, water, and land for future generations. In making this change, we strove to advance economic and social equality for all. This year, they must return to these roots. I’m not going to deliver a laundry list of proposals today. Instead, this year, we’re going to do a few things and do them well. And what we propose, we will achieve. This House will introduce a fundamental change in campaign financing, freed from the influence of special friends with large checkbooks. We will ban government contractors from giving contributions to any candidate for public office, whether at the executive or legislative level. We will introduce a new system to expedite school repair and maintenance and to put control of contracts into the hands of local schools where it belongs. We must provide a safe and comfortable learning environment so that our children will thrive. We will launch a Community School Board Initiative to give parents, teachers, students and community leaders a greater voice in how their schools are run. But this House will also insist that major school reforms be tested and designed for full accountability. We know from experience that just because an idea sounds good, does not mean it is good. Many of our communities are plagued by an epidemic of ice. It breaks up families, causes crime, and strips young people of their future. This is not a new problem for Hawaii, but it’s getting worse. Drug dealers must face swift and effective punishment. But for drug abusers, rehabilitation must play a greater role. We must focus on prevention because prisons and tough laws alone will not eliminate the ice problem. We will establish community based rehabilitation centers and targeted law-enforcement teams to stop ice. One hundred and ten years ago this week, Queen Liliuokalani was overthrown and Hawaiian home rule ended. Hawaiians have waited too long for this wrong to be righted. This House supports the rights of the native Hawaiian people and just as it did two years ago, will urge Congress to support legislation to achieve Hawaiian self-governance. We ask the governor to join us in encouraging Congress to take action now. The Hawaiian people are taking charge of their own destiny. And this is what we all want — to be in charge of our own destinies. Just think about how this has helped make Hawaii great — ordinary people from all walks of life can make their mark here. Mr. Speaker, this morning you have shared with us your vision for government that is accountable and gets results. We can do better, and we will do better. For all of us, the way to begin that journey is to stand at the crossroads and take a step on the right path, the path lined with our Democratic principles of fairness, equality, tolerance and opportunity. When there is change at the top, people expect a new beginning. But we cannot build our future with a mere slogan. Our new beginning has a human face and it is already here in this chamber. I would like to introduce the newest House Democrats and ask them to please stand: Representative Kirk Caldwell, Representative Cindy Evans, Representative Sol Kahoohalahala, Representative Jon Karamatsu, Representative Romy Mindo, Representative Scott Nishimoto, Representative Maile Shimabukuro, Representative Alex Sonson, Representative Tulsi Tamayo, Representative Glen Wakai, Representative Tommy Waters. This is the new generation of Hawaii’s leaders. And Mr. Speaker, they get it too. Thank you.
Grassroot Perspective – Jan. 16, 2003-Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families; Balance Sheet; Mackinac – Looks at Michigan's Unemployment Situation
“Dick Rowland Image”
”Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)”
– Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families
As President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 phase in over the next few years, the tax relief many middle- and upper-income families were anticipating will be offset by the alternative minimum tax. That is the warning contained in a new study from the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center.
The alternative minimum tax (AMT) was originally designed to assure that wealthier Americans with many deductions did not escape paying taxes of some sort, and as recently as three years ago fewer than one million Americans were subject to it. But if nothing is changed, by 2010 about 36 million taxpayers will face its complex provisions.
*When the Bush cuts become fully effective, 85 percent of taxpayers with two or more children will be forced off the regular income tax and onto the AMT system.
*It will largely affect families with incomes of $75,000 to $500,000.
*Under AMT, many deductions are denied — including those for children, the taxpayers themselves, and for state and local taxes.
*Married couples are 25 to 30 times more likely to be subjected to it than single people — which tax experts call “a nasty marriage penalty.”
The study concludes that almost any remedy to the problem will cost the Treasury hundreds of billions of dollars or require raising taxes elsewhere to compensate for the losses.
Although the White House is reportedly aware of the problem, no action is expected anytime soon.
Source: David Cay Johnston, “Study Says Middle Class to Lose Much of
Bush Tax Cut’s Benefits,” New York Times, Sept. 19, 2002; Leonard E. Burman, William G. Gale, Jeffrey Rohaly and Benjamin Harris, “The Individual AMT: Problems and Potential Solutions,” Sept. 18, 2002, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
More details see www.ncpa.org Daily Policy
Digest 9/19/02
– Balance Sheet
Clark County, Nevada, has decided not to outlaw lap dances at local strip clubs. Local officials started with a rule that dancers could get no closer than six feet to their fans. But they reversed their position after hearing that such sedate offerings would drive business to nearby lap-dance-friendly Las Vegas.
GRIH Comment: Let’s see, how to apply competition in Hawaii: Why not allow outlying communities to incorporate and reduce counties to
counties? Or, allow private enterprises to operate door to door transit
service with same subsidy as government transportation receives? Wow! You could expect some real charge.
”Roots (Food for Thought)”
Like the rest of the country, Michigan is working its way out of what
turned out to be a relatively mild recession, with unemployment still
rather high. For thousands of Michigan families, the recession won’t
end until new jobs open up — and job creation usually doesn’t pick up until the very end of a recession.
Fortunately there is something Congress can do to speed the process.
The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) requires employers to pay a tax of 0.8 percent on the first $7,000 earned by their employees. This tax does not fund unemployment insurance — the actual funds that go to the unemployed are collected through a separate state tax. Funds collected under FUTA are returned to the states to cover the costs of administering their unemployment insurance systems.
At least that’s what’s supposed to happen. As it turns out, the federal
government is keeping most of this FUTA revenue. Researcher William B. Connerly, Ph.D., of the American Institute for Full Employment in Klamath Falls, Ore., recently discovered that only 47 percent of FUTA taxes actually go to running state unemployment insurance programs. The rest stays in Washington, where it has the effect of making the budget surplus look larger than it actually is.
Michigan fares better than most states on this deal, but of the $246.6
million Michigan employers pay in FUTA taxes annually, only $134.9
million — a little more than half-comes back to Michigan’s unemployment insurance system.
The Bush administration has proposed a hefty funding cut for FUTA, from 0.8 percent down to 0.2 percent. In effect, this would leave the states to cover the costs of their own unemployment insurance systems, while the remaining FUTA funding would cover functions such as loaning money to states that exhaust their unemployment funds, or providing money for 13-week benefit extensions in states with high unemployment.
The FUTA tax cut would save Michigan employers over $184 million
annually. Even if the state government were to hike unemployment taxes to make up its administrative costs, employers would still come out ahead, to the tune of around $50 million annually (the $184 million saved minus the $134.9 million it costs to run Michigan’s system).
What would be even better would be to eliminate FUTA altogether. The reason: Making the states come up with the funds to run their own unemployment insurance systems is likely to make those systems more efficient.
A basic tenet of sound public policy is that nobody spends someone
else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. And the Michigan
Unemployment Agency (MUA) is a perfect example. In 2001, the MUA paid out more than $1.6 billion. If past years are any guide, more than 10 percent of the funds paid out were not properly payable under Michigan’s unemployment law. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 10.35 percent of the monies paid out of the state’s unemployment insurance funds in 2000 were overpayments. Because states like Michigan administer their unemployment insurance with federal FUTA tax money, there is no pressure to use the money efficiently.
Making the state Legislature responsible for funding the Michigan
Unemployment Agency would mean that the agency and its budget would be under the control of elected officials from Michigan, rather than being monitored from afar by one-size-fits-all-minded bureaucrats in Washington. State lawmakers are more in touch with the unemployment situation in Michigan, and are more responsive to the needs of job seekers and employers. This would translate into closer scrutiny and more flexibility in how the fund is administered.
As things now stand, Michigan’s unemployment insurance program is being run in a way that wastes taxpayer dollars. Being laundered through a large federal bureaucracy weakens accountability and provides little incentive for efficiency or innovation in the handling of state unemployment insurance funds.
While it is a relatively small item in Michigan’s budget, the FUTA tax
is aimed at the heart of Michigan employment. It is levied directly on
employers and goes up every time new workers are hired.
Now is a perfect time for Congress to cut the cost of hiring new workers. Lowering or abolishing the FUTA tax would be a good way to start.
(Paul Kersey is labor research associate with the Mackinac Center for
Public Policy. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby
granted, provided the author and his affiliation are cited.)
Above article see https://www.mackinac.org
”Evergreen (Today’s Quotes)”
*More enforcement? Nobody knows what’s in the code. Who can make heads or tails of this: “Line 20b(1). – You must complete this line if there is a gain on Form 4797, line 3; a loss on Form 4797, line 12; a loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). Enter on this line and on Schedule A (Form 1040), line 22, the smaller of the loss on Form 4797, line 12; or the loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). To figure which loss is smaller, treat both losses as positive numbers.”
We should junk the code and start over. Replace it with a simple,
single-rate system that has generous exemptions for individuals.
– Steve Forbes on IRS Tax Code 12/9/02
*Completely disrupt the Republicans by saying “yes” to a flat tax. Can you imagine? In one stroke this would tar the Republicans as lap dogs for special interests. The Dems have always said that about Republicans — but never to much effect. This time the charge would stick to the Republicans like poo-poo on Vibram. It would take a generation to wipe it off. A flat tax is fully within the Jeffersonian principles of the Democratic Party. It is moral (a flat-rated tithe is referred to in the Bible’s Leviticus) and populist. Everybody would pay the same rate! No billionaire would get to play the system with pricey legal help. – Rich Karlgaard, Forbes 12/9/02 “Advice to Democrats”
”’See Web site”’ https://www.grassrootinstitute.org ”’for further information. Join its efforts at “Nurturing the rights and responsibilities of the individual in a civil society. …” or email or call Grassroot of Hawaii Institute President Richard O. Rowland at mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”’
Grassroot Perspective – Jan. 16, 2003-Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families; Balance Sheet; Mackinac – Looks at Michigan’s Unemployment Situation
“Dick Rowland Image”
”Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)”
– Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families
As President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 phase in over the next few years, the tax relief many middle- and upper-income families were anticipating will be offset by the alternative minimum tax. That is the warning contained in a new study from the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center.
The alternative minimum tax (AMT) was originally designed to assure that wealthier Americans with many deductions did not escape paying taxes of some sort, and as recently as three years ago fewer than one million Americans were subject to it. But if nothing is changed, by 2010 about 36 million taxpayers will face its complex provisions.
*When the Bush cuts become fully effective, 85 percent of taxpayers with two or more children will be forced off the regular income tax and onto the AMT system.
*It will largely affect families with incomes of $75,000 to $500,000.
*Under AMT, many deductions are denied — including those for children, the taxpayers themselves, and for state and local taxes.
*Married couples are 25 to 30 times more likely to be subjected to it than single people — which tax experts call “a nasty marriage penalty.”
The study concludes that almost any remedy to the problem will cost the Treasury hundreds of billions of dollars or require raising taxes elsewhere to compensate for the losses.
Although the White House is reportedly aware of the problem, no action is expected anytime soon.
Source: David Cay Johnston, “Study Says Middle Class to Lose Much of
Bush Tax Cut’s Benefits,” New York Times, Sept. 19, 2002; Leonard E. Burman, William G. Gale, Jeffrey Rohaly and Benjamin Harris, “The Individual AMT: Problems and Potential Solutions,” Sept. 18, 2002, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
More details see www.ncpa.org Daily Policy
Digest 9/19/02
– Balance Sheet
Clark County, Nevada, has decided not to outlaw lap dances at local strip clubs. Local officials started with a rule that dancers could get no closer than six feet to their fans. But they reversed their position after hearing that such sedate offerings would drive business to nearby lap-dance-friendly Las Vegas.
GRIH Comment: Let’s see, how to apply competition in Hawaii: Why not allow outlying communities to incorporate and reduce counties to
counties? Or, allow private enterprises to operate door to door transit
service with same subsidy as government transportation receives? Wow! You could expect some real charge.
”Roots (Food for Thought)”
Like the rest of the country, Michigan is working its way out of what
turned out to be a relatively mild recession, with unemployment still
rather high. For thousands of Michigan families, the recession won’t
end until new jobs open up — and job creation usually doesn’t pick up until the very end of a recession.
Fortunately there is something Congress can do to speed the process.
The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) requires employers to pay a tax of 0.8 percent on the first $7,000 earned by their employees. This tax does not fund unemployment insurance — the actual funds that go to the unemployed are collected through a separate state tax. Funds collected under FUTA are returned to the states to cover the costs of administering their unemployment insurance systems.
At least that’s what’s supposed to happen. As it turns out, the federal
government is keeping most of this FUTA revenue. Researcher William B. Connerly, Ph.D., of the American Institute for Full Employment in Klamath Falls, Ore., recently discovered that only 47 percent of FUTA taxes actually go to running state unemployment insurance programs. The rest stays in Washington, where it has the effect of making the budget surplus look larger than it actually is.
Michigan fares better than most states on this deal, but of the $246.6
million Michigan employers pay in FUTA taxes annually, only $134.9
million — a little more than half-comes back to Michigan’s unemployment insurance system.
The Bush administration has proposed a hefty funding cut for FUTA, from 0.8 percent down to 0.2 percent. In effect, this would leave the states to cover the costs of their own unemployment insurance systems, while the remaining FUTA funding would cover functions such as loaning money to states that exhaust their unemployment funds, or providing money for 13-week benefit extensions in states with high unemployment.
The FUTA tax cut would save Michigan employers over $184 million
annually. Even if the state government were to hike unemployment taxes to make up its administrative costs, employers would still come out ahead, to the tune of around $50 million annually (the $184 million saved minus the $134.9 million it costs to run Michigan’s system).
What would be even better would be to eliminate FUTA altogether. The reason: Making the states come up with the funds to run their own unemployment insurance systems is likely to make those systems more efficient.
A basic tenet of sound public policy is that nobody spends someone
else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. And the Michigan
Unemployment Agency (MUA) is a perfect example. In 2001, the MUA paid out more than $1.6 billion. If past years are any guide, more than 10 percent of the funds paid out were not properly payable under Michigan’s unemployment law. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 10.35 percent of the monies paid out of the state’s unemployment insurance funds in 2000 were overpayments. Because states like Michigan administer their unemployment insurance with federal FUTA tax money, there is no pressure to use the money efficiently.
Making the state Legislature responsible for funding the Michigan
Unemployment Agency would mean that the agency and its budget would be under the control of elected officials from Michigan, rather than being monitored from afar by one-size-fits-all-minded bureaucrats in Washington. State lawmakers are more in touch with the unemployment situation in Michigan, and are more responsive to the needs of job seekers and employers. This would translate into closer scrutiny and more flexibility in how the fund is administered.
As things now stand, Michigan’s unemployment insurance program is being run in a way that wastes taxpayer dollars. Being laundered through a large federal bureaucracy weakens accountability and provides little incentive for efficiency or innovation in the handling of state unemployment insurance funds.
While it is a relatively small item in Michigan’s budget, the FUTA tax
is aimed at the heart of Michigan employment. It is levied directly on
employers and goes up every time new workers are hired.
Now is a perfect time for Congress to cut the cost of hiring new workers. Lowering or abolishing the FUTA tax would be a good way to start.
(Paul Kersey is labor research associate with the Mackinac Center for
Public Policy. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby
granted, provided the author and his affiliation are cited.)
Above article see https://www.mackinac.org
”Evergreen (Today’s Quotes)”
*More enforcement? Nobody knows what’s in the code. Who can make heads or tails of this: “Line 20b(1). – You must complete this line if there is a gain on Form 4797, line 3; a loss on Form 4797, line 12; a loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). Enter on this line and on Schedule A (Form 1040), line 22, the smaller of the loss on Form 4797, line 12; or the loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). To figure which loss is smaller, treat both losses as positive numbers.”
We should junk the code and start over. Replace it with a simple,
single-rate system that has generous exemptions for individuals.
– Steve Forbes on IRS Tax Code 12/9/02
*Completely disrupt the Republicans by saying “yes” to a flat tax. Can you imagine? In one stroke this would tar the Republicans as lap dogs for special interests. The Dems have always said that about Republicans — but never to much effect. This time the charge would stick to the Republicans like poo-poo on Vibram. It would take a generation to wipe it off. A flat tax is fully within the Jeffersonian principles of the Democratic Party. It is moral (a flat-rated tithe is referred to in the Bible’s Leviticus) and populist. Everybody would pay the same rate! No billionaire would get to play the system with pricey legal help. – Rich Karlgaard, Forbes 12/9/02 “Advice to Democrats”
”’See Web site”’ https://www.grassrootinstitute.org ”’for further information. Join its efforts at “Nurturing the rights and responsibilities of the individual in a civil society. …” or email or call Grassroot of Hawaii Institute President Richard O. Rowland at mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”’
Politically Wrong-The Neglected Truth Behind Taiwan
Recently, a Globalization Index released by A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Magazine ranked 62 countries in the areas of economics, personal contact, technology and political integration. In each of the first three categories, Taiwan ranked consistently well — 29th for economics, 30th for personal contact, and 17th for technology. However, for the category regarding political integration, the Globalization Index ranked Taiwan an unfair 62nd, resulting in an overall ranking of 34th. The truth behind the political integration ranking needs to be unveiled.
Situated at the Asia-Pacific crossroads with limited land and natural resources, Taiwan has been recognized for its successful economic development, democratization and globalization. It has also received well-known appellations throughout the world, such as being one of the four “Asian Dragons” and the “Taiwan Experience.” Through the hard work of its 23 million proud and diligent people, Taiwan is now an outstanding example of economy and democracy: it has the 16th largest economy and is the 14th largest trading nation in the world. Brown University ranks Taiwan’s e-government as the best in the world and the World Economic Forum ranks Taiwan 3rd in global competitiveness. In terms of democracy, Condoleeza Rice, the U.S. National Security Advisor, praised Taiwan during a lecture at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research in New York last October as one of many countries that “show that freedom manifests itself differently around the globe and that liberties can find an honored place amidst ancient traditions.” These examples attest to the fact that when given the chance, Taiwan has the ability to develop its economic, technological and democratic potential despite the many obstacles it faces.
Nevertheless, the international political environment, especially the political pressures from China, continues to suffocate Taiwan. According to the magazine, the political variables of the Globalization Index are determined by a country’s membership in international organizations, participation in U.N. Security Council missions and diplomatic relations with other countries. However, due to China’s ruthless and merciless political blockade, Taiwan remains the only country in the world excluded from the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Therefore, Taiwan cannot develop formal diplomatic ties with other countries, let alone participate in U.N. Security Council missions. Moreover, Taiwan does not have the equal political opportunities afforded the other 61 countries in the Globalization Index, and such unfair criteria explain why Taiwan ranks last in the Globalization Index’s political integration category.
The exceptional situation of Taiwan’s exclusion from the U.N. and other international organizations is not only contrary to the universality principle of the U.N., but also creates a critical gap in the global network that is crucial for the fight against terrorism and against AIDS, two issues that are so important today. Despite these political challenges, however, Taiwan still shows its eagerness and willingness to participate in the international community. For example, after years of hard work, Taiwan is now a member of World Trade Organization and is ready to further connect itself to the global trading system. Also, following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Taiwan provided $20 million (U.S.) in financial and humanitarian assistance to the victims and their families. Taiwan has also pledged its support to the United Stated in its fight to combat international terrorism by announcing Taiwan’s cooperation, under Resolution 1373 of the U.N. Security Council, to combat terrorism. What’s more, in the event that military action against terrorism becomes necessary, Taiwan has pledged that it will afford the U.S. and its allies clear passage through Taiwan airspace. Taiwan also has joined the global fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria by donating $1 million to the United Nations Foundation last December. These are only a few examples of Taiwan’s unrelenting efforts to carry out its full duties as a member of this global village. That is also why U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledges Taiwan as a “success story,” noting that Taiwan has a resilient economy, a vibrant democracy and is a generous contributor to the international community.
The Globalization Index figures for Taiwan released by A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Magazine provide important statistical information for governments and academicians around the world to recognize Taiwan’s success in the globalization of its economy, personal contact and technology. Moreover, it is also high time for all members of this global village to realize the fact that Taiwan has continued to be treated unfairly in the international political arena, made especially evident by its isolation from the U.N. and other international organizations. In a world of accelerating interdependence, no country should be left out. Taiwan needs the World, and the World needs Taiwan.
”’Raymond Wang, Consul General, Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, can be reached by phone at 808-595-6374, by Fax at 808-595-6542 or by mail at 2746 Pali Highway, Honolulu, HI 96816.”’
Grassroot Perspective – Jan. 16, 2003-Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families; Balance Sheet; Mackinac – Looks at Michigan's Unemployment Situation
Dick Rowland Image ‘Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)’ – Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families As President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 phase in over the next few years, the tax relief many middle- and upper-income families were anticipating will be offset by the alternative minimum tax. That is the warning contained in a new study from the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. The alternative minimum tax (AMT) was originally designed to assure that wealthier Americans with many deductions did not escape paying taxes of some sort, and as recently as three years ago fewer than one million Americans were subject to it. But if nothing is changed, by 2010 about 36 million taxpayers will face its complex provisions. *When the Bush cuts become fully effective, 85 percent of taxpayers with two or more children will be forced off the regular income tax and onto the AMT system. *It will largely affect families with incomes of $75,000 to $500,000. *Under AMT, many deductions are denied — including those for children, the taxpayers themselves, and for state and local taxes. *Married couples are 25 to 30 times more likely to be subjected to it than single people — which tax experts call “a nasty marriage penalty.” The study concludes that almost any remedy to the problem will cost the Treasury hundreds of billions of dollars or require raising taxes elsewhere to compensate for the losses. Although the White House is reportedly aware of the problem, no action is expected anytime soon. Source: David Cay Johnston, “Study Says Middle Class to Lose Much of Bush Tax Cut’s Benefits,” New York Times, Sept. 19, 2002; Leonard E. Burman, William G. Gale, Jeffrey Rohaly and Benjamin Harris, “The Individual AMT: Problems and Potential Solutions,” Sept. 18, 2002, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. More details see www.ncpa.org Daily Policy Digest 9/19/02 – Balance Sheet Clark County, Nevada, has decided not to outlaw lap dances at local strip clubs. Local officials started with a rule that dancers could get no closer than six feet to their fans. But they reversed their position after hearing that such sedate offerings would drive business to nearby lap-dance-friendly Las Vegas. GRIH Comment: Let’s see, how to apply competition in Hawaii: Why not allow outlying communities to incorporate and reduce counties to counties? Or, allow private enterprises to operate door to door transit service with same subsidy as government transportation receives? Wow! You could expect some real charge. ‘Roots (Food for Thought)’ Like the rest of the country, Michigan is working its way out of what turned out to be a relatively mild recession, with unemployment still rather high. For thousands of Michigan families, the recession won’t end until new jobs open up — and job creation usually doesn’t pick up until the very end of a recession. Fortunately there is something Congress can do to speed the process. The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) requires employers to pay a tax of 0.8 percent on the first $7,000 earned by their employees. This tax does not fund unemployment insurance — the actual funds that go to the unemployed are collected through a separate state tax. Funds collected under FUTA are returned to the states to cover the costs of administering their unemployment insurance systems. At least that’s what’s supposed to happen. As it turns out, the federal government is keeping most of this FUTA revenue. Researcher William B. Connerly, Ph.D., of the American Institute for Full Employment in Klamath Falls, Ore., recently discovered that only 47 percent of FUTA taxes actually go to running state unemployment insurance programs. The rest stays in Washington, where it has the effect of making the budget surplus look larger than it actually is. Michigan fares better than most states on this deal, but of the $246.6 million Michigan employers pay in FUTA taxes annually, only $134.9 million — a little more than half-comes back to Michigan’s unemployment insurance system. The Bush administration has proposed a hefty funding cut for FUTA, from 0.8 percent down to 0.2 percent. In effect, this would leave the states to cover the costs of their own unemployment insurance systems, while the remaining FUTA funding would cover functions such as loaning money to states that exhaust their unemployment funds, or providing money for 13-week benefit extensions in states with high unemployment. The FUTA tax cut would save Michigan employers over $184 million annually. Even if the state government were to hike unemployment taxes to make up its administrative costs, employers would still come out ahead, to the tune of around $50 million annually (the $184 million saved minus the $134.9 million it costs to run Michigan’s system). What would be even better would be to eliminate FUTA altogether. The reason: Making the states come up with the funds to run their own unemployment insurance systems is likely to make those systems more efficient. A basic tenet of sound public policy is that nobody spends someone else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. And the Michigan Unemployment Agency (MUA) is a perfect example. In 2001, the MUA paid out more than $1.6 billion. If past years are any guide, more than 10 percent of the funds paid out were not properly payable under Michigan’s unemployment law. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 10.35 percent of the monies paid out of the state’s unemployment insurance funds in 2000 were overpayments. Because states like Michigan administer their unemployment insurance with federal FUTA tax money, there is no pressure to use the money efficiently. Making the state Legislature responsible for funding the Michigan Unemployment Agency would mean that the agency and its budget would be under the control of elected officials from Michigan, rather than being monitored from afar by one-size-fits-all-minded bureaucrats in Washington. State lawmakers are more in touch with the unemployment situation in Michigan, and are more responsive to the needs of job seekers and employers. This would translate into closer scrutiny and more flexibility in how the fund is administered. As things now stand, Michigan’s unemployment insurance program is being run in a way that wastes taxpayer dollars. Being laundered through a large federal bureaucracy weakens accountability and provides little incentive for efficiency or innovation in the handling of state unemployment insurance funds. While it is a relatively small item in Michigan’s budget, the FUTA tax is aimed at the heart of Michigan employment. It is levied directly on employers and goes up every time new workers are hired. Now is a perfect time for Congress to cut the cost of hiring new workers. Lowering or abolishing the FUTA tax would be a good way to start. (Paul Kersey is labor research associate with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the author and his affiliation are cited.) Above article see https://www.mackinac.org ‘Evergreen (Today’s Quotes)’ *More enforcement? Nobody knows what’s in the code. Who can make heads or tails of this: “Line 20b(1). – You must complete this line if there is a gain on Form 4797, line 3; a loss on Form 4797, line 12; a loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). Enter on this line and on Schedule A (Form 1040), line 22, the smaller of the loss on Form 4797, line 12; or the loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). To figure which loss is smaller, treat both losses as positive numbers.” We should junk the code and start over. Replace it with a simple, single-rate system that has generous exemptions for individuals. – Steve Forbes on IRS Tax Code 12/9/02 *Completely disrupt the Republicans by saying “yes” to a flat tax. Can you imagine? In one stroke this would tar the Republicans as lap dogs for special interests. The Dems have always said that about Republicans — but never to much effect. This time the charge would stick to the Republicans like poo-poo on Vibram. It would take a generation to wipe it off. A flat tax is fully within the Jeffe
rsonian principles of the Democratic Party. It is moral (a flat-rated tithe is referred to in the Bible’s Leviticus) and populist. Everybody would pay the same rate! No billionaire would get to play the system with pricey legal help. – Rich Karlgaard, Forbes 12/9/02 “Advice to Democrats” ”See Web site” https://www.grassrootinstitute.org ”for further information. Join its efforts at “Nurturing the rights and responsibilities of the individual in a civil society. …” or email or call Grassroot of Hawaii Institute President Richard O. Rowland at mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”
Grassroot Perspective – Jan. 16, 2003-Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families; Balance Sheet; Mackinac – Looks at Michigan’s Unemployment Situation
Dick Rowland Image ‘Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)’ – Alternative Minimum Tax Will Cancel Bush Cuts for Many Families As President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 phase in over the next few years, the tax relief many middle- and upper-income families were anticipating will be offset by the alternative minimum tax. That is the warning contained in a new study from the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. The alternative minimum tax (AMT) was originally designed to assure that wealthier Americans with many deductions did not escape paying taxes of some sort, and as recently as three years ago fewer than one million Americans were subject to it. But if nothing is changed, by 2010 about 36 million taxpayers will face its complex provisions. *When the Bush cuts become fully effective, 85 percent of taxpayers with two or more children will be forced off the regular income tax and onto the AMT system. *It will largely affect families with incomes of $75,000 to $500,000. *Under AMT, many deductions are denied — including those for children, the taxpayers themselves, and for state and local taxes. *Married couples are 25 to 30 times more likely to be subjected to it than single people — which tax experts call “a nasty marriage penalty.” The study concludes that almost any remedy to the problem will cost the Treasury hundreds of billions of dollars or require raising taxes elsewhere to compensate for the losses. Although the White House is reportedly aware of the problem, no action is expected anytime soon. Source: David Cay Johnston, “Study Says Middle Class to Lose Much of Bush Tax Cut’s Benefits,” New York Times, Sept. 19, 2002; Leonard E. Burman, William G. Gale, Jeffrey Rohaly and Benjamin Harris, “The Individual AMT: Problems and Potential Solutions,” Sept. 18, 2002, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. More details see www.ncpa.org Daily Policy Digest 9/19/02 – Balance Sheet Clark County, Nevada, has decided not to outlaw lap dances at local strip clubs. Local officials started with a rule that dancers could get no closer than six feet to their fans. But they reversed their position after hearing that such sedate offerings would drive business to nearby lap-dance-friendly Las Vegas. GRIH Comment: Let’s see, how to apply competition in Hawaii: Why not allow outlying communities to incorporate and reduce counties to counties? Or, allow private enterprises to operate door to door transit service with same subsidy as government transportation receives? Wow! You could expect some real charge. ‘Roots (Food for Thought)’ Like the rest of the country, Michigan is working its way out of what turned out to be a relatively mild recession, with unemployment still rather high. For thousands of Michigan families, the recession won’t end until new jobs open up — and job creation usually doesn’t pick up until the very end of a recession. Fortunately there is something Congress can do to speed the process. The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) requires employers to pay a tax of 0.8 percent on the first $7,000 earned by their employees. This tax does not fund unemployment insurance — the actual funds that go to the unemployed are collected through a separate state tax. Funds collected under FUTA are returned to the states to cover the costs of administering their unemployment insurance systems. At least that’s what’s supposed to happen. As it turns out, the federal government is keeping most of this FUTA revenue. Researcher William B. Connerly, Ph.D., of the American Institute for Full Employment in Klamath Falls, Ore., recently discovered that only 47 percent of FUTA taxes actually go to running state unemployment insurance programs. The rest stays in Washington, where it has the effect of making the budget surplus look larger than it actually is. Michigan fares better than most states on this deal, but of the $246.6 million Michigan employers pay in FUTA taxes annually, only $134.9 million — a little more than half-comes back to Michigan’s unemployment insurance system. The Bush administration has proposed a hefty funding cut for FUTA, from 0.8 percent down to 0.2 percent. In effect, this would leave the states to cover the costs of their own unemployment insurance systems, while the remaining FUTA funding would cover functions such as loaning money to states that exhaust their unemployment funds, or providing money for 13-week benefit extensions in states with high unemployment. The FUTA tax cut would save Michigan employers over $184 million annually. Even if the state government were to hike unemployment taxes to make up its administrative costs, employers would still come out ahead, to the tune of around $50 million annually (the $184 million saved minus the $134.9 million it costs to run Michigan’s system). What would be even better would be to eliminate FUTA altogether. The reason: Making the states come up with the funds to run their own unemployment insurance systems is likely to make those systems more efficient. A basic tenet of sound public policy is that nobody spends someone else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. And the Michigan Unemployment Agency (MUA) is a perfect example. In 2001, the MUA paid out more than $1.6 billion. If past years are any guide, more than 10 percent of the funds paid out were not properly payable under Michigan’s unemployment law. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 10.35 percent of the monies paid out of the state’s unemployment insurance funds in 2000 were overpayments. Because states like Michigan administer their unemployment insurance with federal FUTA tax money, there is no pressure to use the money efficiently. Making the state Legislature responsible for funding the Michigan Unemployment Agency would mean that the agency and its budget would be under the control of elected officials from Michigan, rather than being monitored from afar by one-size-fits-all-minded bureaucrats in Washington. State lawmakers are more in touch with the unemployment situation in Michigan, and are more responsive to the needs of job seekers and employers. This would translate into closer scrutiny and more flexibility in how the fund is administered. As things now stand, Michigan’s unemployment insurance program is being run in a way that wastes taxpayer dollars. Being laundered through a large federal bureaucracy weakens accountability and provides little incentive for efficiency or innovation in the handling of state unemployment insurance funds. While it is a relatively small item in Michigan’s budget, the FUTA tax is aimed at the heart of Michigan employment. It is levied directly on employers and goes up every time new workers are hired. Now is a perfect time for Congress to cut the cost of hiring new workers. Lowering or abolishing the FUTA tax would be a good way to start. (Paul Kersey is labor research associate with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the author and his affiliation are cited.) Above article see https://www.mackinac.org ‘Evergreen (Today’s Quotes)’ *More enforcement? Nobody knows what’s in the code. Who can make heads or tails of this: “Line 20b(1). – You must complete this line if there is a gain on Form 4797, line 3; a loss on Form 4797, line 12; a loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). Enter on this line and on Schedule A (Form 1040), line 22, the smaller of the loss on Form 4797, line 12; or the loss on Form 4684, line 35, column (b)(ii). To figure which loss is smaller, treat both losses as positive numbers.” We should junk the code and start over. Replace it with a simple, single-rate system that has generous exemptions for individuals. – Steve Forbes on IRS Tax Code 12/9/02 *Completely disrupt the Republicans by saying “yes” to a flat tax. Can you imagine? In one stroke this would tar the Republicans as lap dogs for special interests. The Dems have always said that about Republicans — but never to much effect. This time the charge would stick to the Republicans like poo-poo on Vibram. It would take a generation to wipe it off. A flat tax is fully within the Jeffersonian principles of the Democratic Party. It is moral (a flat-rated tithe is referred to in the Bible’s Leviticus) and populist. Everybody would pay the same rate! No billionaire would get to play the system with pricey legal help. – Rich Karlgaard, Forbes 12/9/02 “Advice to Democrats” ”See Web site” https://www.grassrootinstitute.org ”for further information. Join its efforts at “Nurturing the rights and responsibilities of the individual in a civil society. …” or email or call Grassroot of Hawaii Institute President Richard O. Rowland at mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”
Politically Wrong-The Neglected Truth Behind Taiwan?s Political Index Ranking
Recently, a Globalization Index released by A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Magazine ranked 62 countries in the areas of economics, personal contact, technology and political integration. In each of the first three categories, Taiwan ranked consistently well — 29th for economics, 30th for personal contact, and 17th for technology. However, for the category regarding political integration, the Globalization Index ranked Taiwan an unfair 62nd, resulting in an overall ranking of 34th. The truth behind the political integration ranking needs to be unveiled. Situated at the Asia-Pacific crossroads with limited land and natural resources, Taiwan has been recognized for its successful economic development, democratization and globalization. It has also received well-known appellations throughout the world, such as being one of the four “Asian Dragons” and the “Taiwan Experience.” Through the hard work of its 23 million proud and diligent people, Taiwan is now an outstanding example of economy and democracy: it has the 16th largest economy and is the 14th largest trading nation in the world. Brown University ranks Taiwan’s e-government as the best in the world and the World Economic Forum ranks Taiwan 3rd in global competitiveness. In terms of democracy, Condoleeza Rice, the U.S. National Security Advisor, praised Taiwan during a lecture at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research in New York last October as one of many countries that “show that freedom manifests itself differently around the globe and that liberties can find an honored place amidst ancient traditions.” These examples attest to the fact that when given the chance, Taiwan has the ability to develop its economic, technological and democratic potential despite the many obstacles it faces. Nevertheless, the international political environment, especially the political pressures from China, continues to suffocate Taiwan. According to the magazine, the political variables of the Globalization Index are determined by a country’s membership in international organizations, participation in U.N. Security Council missions and diplomatic relations with other countries. However, due to China’s ruthless and merciless political blockade, Taiwan remains the only country in the world excluded from the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Therefore, Taiwan cannot develop formal diplomatic ties with other countries, let alone participate in U.N. Security Council missions. Moreover, Taiwan does not have the equal political opportunities afforded the other 61 countries in the Globalization Index, and such unfair criteria explain why Taiwan ranks last in the Globalization Index’s political integration category. The exceptional situation of Taiwan’s exclusion from the U.N. and other international organizations is not only contrary to the universality principle of the U.N., but also creates a critical gap in the global network that is crucial for the fight against terrorism and against AIDS, two issues that are so important today. Despite these political challenges, however, Taiwan still shows its eagerness and willingness to participate in the international community. For example, after years of hard work, Taiwan is now a member of World Trade Organization and is ready to further connect itself to the global trading system. Also, following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Taiwan provided $20 million (U.S.) in financial and humanitarian assistance to the victims and their families. Taiwan has also pledged its support to the United Stated in its fight to combat international terrorism by announcing Taiwan’s cooperation, under Resolution 1373 of the U.N. Security Council, to combat terrorism. What’s more, in the event that military action against terrorism becomes necessary, Taiwan has pledged that it will afford the U.S. and its allies clear passage through Taiwan airspace. Taiwan also has joined the global fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria by donating $1 million to the United Nations Foundation last December. These are only a few examples of Taiwan’s unrelenting efforts to carry out its full duties as a member of this global village. That is also why U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledges Taiwan as a “success story,” noting that Taiwan has a resilient economy, a vibrant democracy and is a generous contributor to the international community. The Globalization Index figures for Taiwan released by A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Magazine provide important statistical information for governments and academicians around the world to recognize Taiwan’s success in the globalization of its economy, personal contact and technology. Moreover, it is also high time for all members of this global village to realize the fact that Taiwan has continued to be treated unfairly in the international political arena, made especially evident by its isolation from the U.N. and other international organizations. In a world of accelerating interdependence, no country should be left out. Taiwan needs the World, and the World needs Taiwan. ”Raymond Wang, Consul General, Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, can be reached by phone at 808-595-6374, by Fax at 808-595-6542 or by mail at 2746 Pali Highway, Honolulu, HI 96816.”
Excessive Baggage?
Haoli Makahiki Hou. It’s never too late for that. Let’s all hope that 2003 will be a happy and prosperous one.
With amazement I have followed the recent articles about our #1 revenue producer, tourism. To me it appears that the “Old Boy’s Club Left Over” is suddenly working its brains off but is coming up empty and therefore is panicking.
The Hawaii Visitor and Convention Bureau is sounding off old bytes on Lilo & Stitch, claiming “happily” that the first year for $1.7 million was a success. Does that mean more children have visited Hawaii? Have they brought with them their parents? At the same time the Hawaii Tourism Authority is complaining that the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism is not providing sufficient data to implement effective marketing strategies. And HTA’s Frank Haas is sounding off that new marketing strategies will focus on higher spending markets. Then HTA’s chief thinker, Rex Johnson, sounds off and is complaining that the HVCB is not spending its provided $33 million wisely. Huh?
Although there is not sufficient data, which in fact is missing because of missing results from the HTA, the L&S claim is made by the HTA but HTA is failing to specify its findings. Johnson’s sidekick Haas suddenly is focusing on additional markets after having failed for 10 months to implement necessary strategies on Europe and other markets that had been neglected for years. It appears the HTA and HVCB is meandering with the flow of markets that would have visited Hawaii anyway.
Finally DBEDT will receive its long overdue facelift and will become what we expect of it. “King” Seji Naya writing children’s books about Business & Tourism is now in the past. I applaud Gov. Linda Lingle on her choice for new DBEDT director, Ted Liu. It will not be an easy task so please let’s all be patient. The new administration has to overcome 40 years of mostly mismanagement. And after 40 years we finally have a governor who understands business and aloha. Let’s all roll up our sleeves and provide as much assistance as possible to make us all successful again, as a team effort.
I am still waiting to see what marketing strategies the HTA wants to implement to accomplish its goals. The HTA budget stands but it only states what is needed, not how to make things happen. So my suggestion is to close HTA. With the new DBEDT and a cabinet level position of Director for Tourism, we will be a lot more cost effective. No more Lilo & “Stitches.”
The money set free can support other programs.
We have offered our expertise, advise and twice our ideas were taken by the HTA but wasted. No one within the HTA appears to have proper professional qualifications to justify their positions. It is time to focus on markets that have been largely neglected because no one understands their specific mentalities or their languages.
At the same time the HVCB should be carefully scrutinized to value its effectiveness. A bidding process should begin to find a qualified agency that can best market our beautiful state. No more it is whom you know and not what you know.
”’Dieter Thate is owner of Dieter’s Tours and Kimapa Hawaii since 1993. He can be reached by e-mail at:”’ mailto:mail@kimapa.com ”’Visit his Web site at:”’ https://www.kimapa.com
Excessive Baggage?
Haoli Makahiki Hou. It’s never too late for that. Let’s all hope that 2003 will be a happy and prosperous one. With amazement I have followed the recent articles about our #1 revenue producer, tourism. To me it appears that the “Old Boy’s Club Left Over” is suddenly working its brains off but is coming up empty and therefore is panicking. The Hawaii Visitor and Convention Bureau is sounding off old bytes on Lilo & Stitch, claiming “happily” that the first year for $1.7 million was a success. Does that mean more children have visited Hawaii? Have they brought with them their parents? At the same time the Hawaii Tourism Authority is complaining that the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism is not providing sufficient data to implement effective marketing strategies. And HTA’s Frank Haas is sounding off that new marketing strategies will focus on higher spending markets. Then HTA’s chief thinker, Rex Johnson, sounds off and is complaining that the HVCB is not spending its provided $33 million wisely. Huh? Although there is not sufficient data, which in fact is missing because of missing results from the HTA, the L&S claim is made by the HTA but HTA is failing to specify its findings. Johnson’s sidekick Haas suddenly is focusing on additional markets after having failed for 10 months to implement necessary strategies on Europe and other markets that had been neglected for years. It appears the HTA and HVCB is meandering with the flow of markets that would have visited Hawaii anyway. Finally DBEDT will receive its long overdue facelift and will become what we expect of it. “King” Seji Naya writing children’s books about Business & Tourism is now in the past. I applaud Gov. Linda Lingle on her choice for new DBEDT director, Ted Liu. It will not be an easy task so please let’s all be patient. The new administration has to overcome 40 years of mostly mismanagement. And after 40 years we finally have a governor who understands business and aloha. Let’s all roll up our sleeves and provide as much assistance as possible to make us all successful again, as a team effort. I am still waiting to see what marketing strategies the HTA wants to implement to accomplish its goals. The HTA budget stands but it only states what is needed, not how to make things happen. So my suggestion is to close HTA. With the new DBEDT and a cabinet level position of Director for Tourism, we will be a lot more cost effective. No more Lilo & “Stitches.” The money set free can support other programs. We have offered our expertise, advise and twice our ideas were taken by the HTA but wasted. No one within the HTA appears to have proper professional qualifications to justify their positions. It is time to focus on markets that have been largely neglected because no one understands their specific mentalities or their languages. At the same time the HVCB should be carefully scrutinized to value its effectiveness. A bidding process should begin to find a qualified agency that can best market our beautiful state. No more it is whom you know and not what you know. ”Dieter Thate is owner of Dieter’s Tours and Kimapa Hawaii since 1993. He can be reached by e-mail at:” mailto:mail@kimapa.com ”Visit his Web site at:” https://www.kimapa.com