Dick Rowland Image ‘Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)’ *Reason Magazine reports (10/02) “The starving millions of Zimbabwe won’t get thousands of tons of US food aid. The African nation’s government doesn’t want any genetically modified corn in the country.” GRIH comment: Here is a great IQ test for Ralph Nader and other Green Party members. “What’s wrong with that?” Choices are “Nothing” or “Everything” or “Something”. *From the same issue as above: “Great Britain essentially decriminalizes pot use and sees a minor national drop in crime. In South London, robberies and muggings are down 50 percent.” GRIH comment: The Ban personal gun ownership lobby IQ test is “What caused the drop?” Choices are “Floride in the water” or “South, as in South London” or “Nothing, just a happenstance” or “None of the above” Global Warming And Other Eco-Myths, edited by Ronald Bailey and published by the Competitive Enterprise Institute explodes several key myths behind the doom and gloom of today’s environmental movement. Hysteria over global warming overpopulation, mass extinctions, coming food shortages, biotechnology, energy shortages, and more are grounded not in reason but in false science and fear of progress. The book asserts that the environmental movement agenda is not so much antipollution as it is antihuman. Bailey authors an introduction called, “The Rise and Eventual Fall of Ideological Environmentalism.” See www.cei.org. ‘Roots (Food for Thought)’ National Elections Bring School Choice Advocates to the Forefront Author: Don Soifer Published: The Heartland Institute 12/01/2002 The school choice community will lose two of its Congressional champions when House of Representatives Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) and Rep. Bob Schaffer (R-Colorado) retire at the end of this session. “The tired arguments against school choice grow less and less relevant every year,” Armey told Congress in July. “Now, in light of the recent Court approval, the time has come for the federal government to step up to the plate and take the lead in ushering the school choice movement into the twenty-first century.” This summer, Armey, along with Senate Education Committee ranking Republican Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire), introduced the District of Columbia Student Opportunity Scholarship bill to bring choice to the nation’s capital. The measure is nearly identical to legislation vetoed by then-President Bill Clinton in 1998. Similarly tireless as a leader for parental choice and meaningful school reform, “Honorable Bob,” as one local newspaper columnist called Schaffer, leaves Congress to honor his pledge to serve only three terms. This year, Schaffer’s scholarship tax credit bill went farther than any such proposal. Nevertheless — despite undergoing major reconstructive surgery and attracting 47 cosponsors and a statement of support from the Bush administration — the measure never made it out of the Ways and Means Committee. Calling the plan “a means to reduce financial barriers to improving educational opportunities for children” in a Sept. 12 statement, the administration had pledged to work with Congress to overcome budgetary obstacles to implementing the plan. Meanwhile, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Michigan) once again earned his reputation as one of the outspoken leaders for parental choice. Hoekstra sponsored a 75 percent tax credit for individuals or corporations contributing to qualified tuition scholarship organizations or to local schools. He believes a tax credit for businesses should be an important priority for the new Congress, and sees it as an important way to bring in new money for schools. Another school choice stalwart, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), introduced not one but three education tax credit bills. First-term Congressman Eric Cantor (R-Virginia) made his refundable $1,000 Education Empowerment Tax Credit the first piece of legislation he introduced as a Member of Congress. Over the course of the session, 67 Members signed on as cosponsors. Cantor plans to reintroduce the bill in 2003. For Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado), also a member of the House Education Committee, the two main education priorities for the next Congress are preventing over-identification of special-education students and promoting parental choice in special education. Other choice leaders returning to the House include Rep. Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) and Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Arizona). The next Congress also features a range of new advocates for school choice and school reform. Some of these mark the return of familiar faces–like new Senator and former Representative Jim Talent (R-Missouri). A former member of the House Education Committee, Talent once proclaimed about school choice at a hearing, “Unless we’re going to bury our heads in the sand, it just seems to me expecting other kinds of reforms to do any good within the time frame these kids need is just not realistic.” An American Federation of Teachers statement pointed out that in his four terms in the House, Talent “voted ‘right’ [on teacher union priorities] in only 2 out of 41 votes.” He replaces a teacher union favorite, Democratic Sen. Jean Carnahan. New Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee) is another familiar face. The former Secretary of Education made charter schools a foundation of his campaign. Two new Representatives with strong parental choice credentials will be Trent Franks (R-Arizona) and Tom Feeney (R-Florida). Franks, a former state representative, strongly supports tuition tax credits, which he says are “easier to pass and easier to uphold” than vouchers. Feeney gained national exposure as Speaker of Florida’s House of Delegates. His commitment to vouchers and choice is longstanding, and during his campaign he reminded voters that he filed the first full-blown voucher bill in the Florida legislature, in 1990. Both Senator Gregg and House Education and the Workforce Chairman John Boehner (R-Ohio) plan to continue using their influential positions to champion school choice. “The drive for equal educational opportunity in America doesn’t end with President Bush’s signing of the No Child Left Behind Act; it begins there,” Boehner said in October. “The momentum behind the parental choice movement has never been stronger.” Don Soifer is executive vice president of the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Virginia. His email address is mailto:mail@lexingtoninstitute.org The above article is quoted from the December issue of School Reform News published by The Heartland Institute www.heartland.org. ‘Upcoming Events’ *School Choice and Special ED: Extending Choice and Opportunities to Children with Disabilities. Start date 2/13/03 Washington D.C. Cato website: *Preserving the American Dream of Mobility and Homeownership. Dates Feb 23-25, 2003 Washington D.C. More info at https://www.ti.org/amdream.html GRIH comment: If you are planning to go to this, please advise Dick Rowland (808) 487-4959 for a discussion of how we might all profit from your experience. ‘Evergreen (Today’s Quote)’ From Forbes 12/9/02. “Tax Cuts? Da! There are two ways of increasing tax compliance. One is to create a more intrusive government by giving the IRS more power to snoop into four affairs. The second is tax reform. Ironically, America can learn much from Russia on this topic. Two years ago Russia decided to junk (its Western style “progressive” income tax) and replace it with a 13 percent flat tax. The results have been spectacular: Inflation-adjusted tax revenues have jumped by nearly 30 percent. If former communists can implement a flat tax, maybe there’s hope for the US Congress. It certainly would mean less tax evasion, as lower tax rates a tax simplification reduce both the incentive to evade and the opportunity to avoid. And while it may not be good news for the thousands of IRS bureaucrats and the legions of well-paid tax lawyers, lobbyists and accountants, it would make life better for the American people.” – Daniel J. Mitchell, Heritage Foundation GRIH comment: Could we have a flat tax for Hawaii, replacing our income tax and perhaps some of our excise tax? ”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.”

RALEIGH, N.C.

RALEIGH, N.C. ? It’s a new year, and as of Thursday morning we now have a new presidential candidate: first-term senator John Edwards of North Carolina. Appearing with his wife and Matt Lauer this morning on NBC’s Today Show, Edwards announced that he was setting up the obligatory exploratory committee and that he would seek to be “a champion for regular people in the Oval Office every day.” Just a regular guy, is Johnny Edwards. This image, of humble beginnings in the rural Carolinas and a young family man here in the capital city of Raleigh, has long been his trademark. Actually, “long” isn’t quite the right word. In 1998, he came out of political nowheresville sporting a button-down, a big smile, a pretty haircut, and a bulging bankroll, and defeated University of North Carolina lobbyist D. G. Martin, the choice of party leaders, for the Democratic nomination for Senate. In the general election, Edwards turned up the regular-guy charm some more, spending a lot of his money on TV ads in which he simply looked into the camera and talked about how regular people live and what they care about. There were virtually no campaign events, no big addresses, no hot-button issues. He talked about a Patient’s Bill of Rights, for example, but neither he nor his opponent, incumbent Republican Sen. Lauch Faircloth, spent much time debating the details. It was about proving that he cared about you and me, that he “got it.” Faircloth, who until he ran for Senate in 1992 was a Democratic powerbroker himself, made the mistake that many Republicans and conservatives appear poised to repeat today: He wrote Johnny Edwards off as a trial lawyer easy to lampoon and demonize. Folks, there’s a reason why so many primetime TV shows and blockbuster movies depict heroic trial lawyers instead of heroic corporate moguls or entrepreneurs (Faircloth is a multimillionaire owner and investor in a variety of business enterprises, including hog farms and processing plants). Americans may resent their lawsuit culture, but they are attracted to its practitioners, especially those attorneys who stand up for us regular people against the big, bad businesses or big, bad governments (Faircloth had also served as a state secretary of commerce and as head of the state’s highway commission). Given the tear-jerking nature of some of his most-celebrated cases, involving maimed children and swindled adults, Edwards’s background as a plaintiff’s attorney is a political asset, not a liability. Edwards was sorely underestimated in 1998, too. I remember hearing from numerous Faircloth operatives about how easy it would be to expose him as a sham, as vapid and glib, as fast-talking Johnny Edwards on the make. One Republican ad showed Edwards’s nose growing like Pinocchio’s as he told his latest whopper. Another ad featured footage from Edwards speaking to a group of fellow lawyers, and counseling them to take a particularly eye-popping piece of evidence and “blow it up” for the jury. The attacks were desperate, and they showed it. Ironically, the situation didn’t merit Faircloth’s desperation. Edwards ended up winning by only a slender 51- to 47-percent margin. Faircloth told me later that he had made a tactical error in emphasizing Edwards’s personal background, which helped rather than hurt the Democrat, instead of more forcefully pushing him on the substantive issues where Faircloth was more in tune with swing voters. That and a very strong post-impeachment turnout among black North Carolinians cost him a close race. Democrats underestimated Edwards, too. Primary opponent D. G. Martin told me later that while he was convinced that Edwards’s bank account and speaking skills poised a major threat, many of Martin’s Democratic supporters had dismissed Edwards as a lightweight and, literally, a Johnny-come-lately. It was just a couple of weeks before the primary election that it began to dawn on statewide Democrats that sentimental favorite D.G. Martin was in danger. I say all this just to encourage a more serious consideration of John Edwards as a presidential contender. At this point, he has about as much experience in electoral office as George W. Bush had in 1999 when he began the early stages of his presidential run. He has already spent much of the past two years, since being Al Gore’s second choice for vice president in 2000, as a frequent traveler to New York, California, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, and other places where key Democratic donors and political activists reside. Like Richard Gephardt and Tom Daschle in Iowa and John Kerry in New Hampshire, Edwards has an early primary state next door (South Carolina, where he was born and spent his early childhood). He’s got personal wealth. And he’s still got the teeth and the hair. Being the only southerner in the Democratic field (I’m not convinced of the seriousness of the reported candidacy of Florida Sen. Bob Graham) will be an advantage, as hackneyed as this sounds. There are legions of Democrats who strongly believe that history and demographics show their party can’t win without a southerner who can cut into the Republicans’ mostly solid south. Many of these are key Democratic donors, political consultants, and commentators with no hint of a drawl themselves. Their case is reasonable. While the deep south is probably lost for a generation, Democrats can plausibly claim to be competitive not just in Florida (which hardly counts as a southern state any more) but in the peripheral south and border states such as North Carolina, Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky, and Arkansas. The general-election voters in play here are far more likely to respond to someone who sounds like them — you known, like regular people — then they are to the likes of Kerry or Joe Lieberman. On the question of Edwards’s ideology, he has so far managed the best of both worlds. He has cultivated an image as a southern moderate that has some reporters lumping him in with the likes of Graham, Lieberman, John Breaux of Louisiana, and Zell Miller of Georgia. Yet in actual voting behavior Edwards is surprisingly orthodox, with a 95 percent rating from Americans for Democratic Action and an 100 percent rating from the government employees’ union. Somehow, with his grin and his telegeneity and his southern charm, Edwards has confounded attempts by his adversaries to paint him as a liberal tool of the special interests. At least Bill Clinton did had some moderate moments in his gubernatorial reign in Arkansas. Both his regional origins and his vague ideology may well boost Edwards outside of the south. Remember that many states now have open primaries in which independent voters can choose either a Democratic or a Republican ballot on primary day. Assuming that Bush is breezing through the GOP race, these voters will grab a Democratic ballot. Many of them may respond well to a youthful, attractive candidate who doesn’t sound stuffy or scary. Here’s some advice for Kerry, Lieberman, and other Democratic aspirants this year: Take John Edwards seriously. Don’t think you can beat him on his personality or his trial-lawyer past. Your party has been fully Clintonized, and many of its activists and voters are now primed to value youth, energy, and charm above anything else. Don’t try to contrast your hard-luck life with his. (Edwards’s son Wade was killed in a traffic accident some years ago, and he and his wife commendably sought to honor him with charitable works around Raleigh.) Do challenge him on the issues, where Edwards does indeed appear shallow and inexperienced. And above all, try to be a “regular guy” yourself. If Johnny Edwards can do it, so can you. ”John Hood is chairman and president of the John Locke Foundation and author of Investor Politics.”

CrimeStoppers and the Honolulu Police Department want the public’s
assistance in identifying the male suspect who robbed the Kapiolani Kaheka Branch of American Savings Bank located at 1600 Kapiolani Boulevard on Friday, Jan. 3, 2003, at 3:40 p.m. The suspect entered the bank and passed a demand note stating that he was armed. He was last seen running on foot mauka on Kaheka Street through the Daiei parking lot.

Anyone with information about this case may call Robbery Detective Taro Nakamura directly at 529-3382 or anonymous calls may be made to CrimeStoppers at 955-8300, *CRIME on your cellular phone. Free cellular calls are provided by AT&T, Nextel Hawaii, Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless Hawaii.

Suspect’s Description

*Caucasian male, 20’s

*5’9″, 150-160 lbs.

*Tan complexion, short dark hair

*Wearing a blue shirt, black pants,

*Black backpack

Honolulu CrimeStoppers Inc., will pay a cash reward of up to $1,000 for information which results in the arrest of a wanted person or the solving of case(s) reported to CrimeStoppers Honolulu Inc. All calls are confidential. Do not approach any suspect. All suspects and wanted fugitives should be considered armed and dangerous. All calls are confidential and anonymous. Persons who participate in the crime, or are victims of the crime are ineligible to receive CrimeStoppers rewards. Be a CrimeStopper and call the hot line at 955-8300 or *Crime on your cellular telephone.

Access the CrimeStoppers Web site at https://www.crimestoppers-honolulu.org or the Student CrimeStoppers Web site at https://www.studentcrimestoppers.org

CrimeStoppers and the Honolulu Police Department want the public’s assistance in identifying the male suspect who robbed the Kapiolani Kaheka Branch of American Savings Bank located at 1600 Kapiolani Boulevard on Friday, Jan. 3, 2003, at 3:40 p.m. The suspect entered the bank and passed a demand note stating that he was armed. He was last seen running on foot mauka on Kaheka Street through the Daiei parking lot. Anyone with information about this case may call Robbery Detective Taro Nakamura directly at 529-3382 or anonymous calls may be made to CrimeStoppers at 955-8300, *CRIME on your cellular phone. Free cellular calls are provided by AT&T, Nextel Hawaii, Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless Hawaii. Suspect’s Description *Caucasian male, 20’s *5’9″, 150-160 lbs. *Tan complexion, short dark hair *Wearing a blue shirt, black pants, *Black backpack Honolulu CrimeStoppers Inc., will pay a cash reward of up to $1,000 for information which results in the arrest of a wanted person or the solving of case(s) reported to CrimeStoppers Honolulu Inc. All calls are confidential. Do not approach any suspect. All suspects and wanted fugitives should be considered armed and dangerous. All calls are confidential and anonymous. Persons who participate in the crime, or are victims of the crime are ineligible to receive CrimeStoppers rewards. Be a CrimeStopper and call the hot line at 955-8300 or *Crime on your cellular telephone. Access the CrimeStoppers Web site at https://www.crimestoppers-honolulu.org or the Student CrimeStoppers Web site at https://www.studentcrimestoppers.org

“Suzanne Gelb Image”

”Silly — Must I Wear Those Junk Clothes?”

Q: Dear Dr. Gelb:

I am 9 years old and I got some roller blades for Christmas. But my mother won’t let me use them on the sidewalk without putting on all this junk that comes with it, on my elbows and knees, and especially the helmet. I hate the helmet, I look silly in it.

Silly

A: Dr. Gelb says . . .

Dear Silly:

I’m not a medical doctor, but it is my understanding that the head and the brain are some of the most sensitive and vulnerable organs of the body. Sometimes the slightest fall can cause major damage to the brain if the head hits in a certain way. I imagine that the discomfort that you are experiencing with your gear will soon subside and then putting on these safety devices will probably feel as natural as stepping into a favorite pair of shoes. So you see, mothers are smart when they love their children enough to care, as your mother obviously does.

”Couch Potato — How Can I Get My Teenager to Cooperate?”

Q: Dear Dr. Gelb:

I have a 14-year-old son. I can’t get him to do anything around the house, he just lies on his bed and watches TV and eats junk food.

Couch Potato’s Mother

A: Dr. Gelb says . . .

Dear Couch Potato’s Mother:

It is unfortunate that you did not begin teaching your son disciplined behavior when he was much younger. But that is water under the bridge, and if you intend to change this boy’s behavior and attitude, then now is the time. I have always maintained that if parents do not teach and command a desired behavior change before children reach about age 15, then short of a correctional institution, which may or may not bring about change, an unruly child is not likely to be receptive or amenable to change.

One approach could be to start today by implementing consequences for your son’s misbehavior. Make a list of the things that you want him to do around the house, type it out and make copies of it. Then make a list of consequences that will be applied if he does not fulfill his responsibilities and do his assigned tasks.

Some courageous parents have really bitten the bullet so-to-speak and had great success with turning around their unruly 13 and 14 year olds, by applying strict, but reasonable consequences from the get-go, informing their teens that these privileges could be earned back if and when the parents are satisfied that the teen has seriously reformed his or her behavior. In this regard, the first thing one mother did was to take the family television out of the house and give it to a charity. Next, she went into her daughter’s closet and removed all of her favorite clothes and shoes, placing them in storage. This parent then informed her daughter that she, the parent, would be choosing what the daughter would be wearing, and that the only food to be eaten would be food which is served at the table. This was a good start. That mother continued to add to her consequence list until her daughter got the message that it was actually more rewarding to cooperate with her parent’s wishes than to rebel against them. In time she earned some of her privileges back, and the consequences became motivators for positive behavior choice.

”’Suzanne J. Gelb, Ph.D., J.D. authors this daily column, Dr. Gelb Says, which answers questions about daily living and behavior issues. Dr. Gelb is a licensed psychologist in private practice in Honolulu. She holds a Ph.D. in Psychology and a Ph.D. in Human Services. Dr. Gelb is also a published author of a book on Overcoming Addictions and a book on Relationships.”’

”’This column is intended for entertainment use only and is not intended for the purpose of psychological diagnosis, treatment or personalized advice. For more about the column’s purpose, see”’ “An Online Intro to Dr. Gelb Says”

”’Email your questions to mailto:DrGelbSays@hawaiireporter.com More information on Dr. Gelb’s services and related resources available at”’ https://www.DrGelbSays.com