Some might say that Blake Oshiro has moved up in the world, in that he’s now on the Capitol’s fifth floor, having left the fourth-floor office he used as a member of the state House six months ago.
As deputy chief of staff to Gov. Neil Abercrombie, he has crossed over a threshold into a different kind of government work, trying to advance an administrative agenda on multiple fronts. But a centerpiece in the wall decor of that office is a framed copy of Act 1, 2011, the civil unions bill he championed while he was still on the legislative side of the curtain.
The 42-year-old attorney got into electoral politics to press for what he called progressive changes in environmental and civil-rights policy more broadly, not only gay-rights issues. Getting civil unions passed was a triumph not because it fulfilled a personal quest — he is in a 15-year, same-sex relationship, though he and his partner have no immediate plans for a legal union. Having the right to do so, however, was a goal worth fighting for, Oshiro said.
Oshiro’s diversions include his four French bulldogs and his daily gym workouts. But his workday focus this year was smoothing the path for several Abercrombie initiatives, including a bill to begin the work of establishing regulations for an undersea cable connecting island electric grids, and another to enact a land settlement between the state and the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs.
The former lawmaker didn’t mind working behind the scenes, asserting that being the center of attention is never his first choice.
"I like to be different," he acknowledged, "but if I’m thrown in a room of strangers, unless I’m there for work, I tend not to be out front."
People sometimes confused him with state Rep. Marcus Oshiro, and he generally didn’t mind that.
"He was finance chair, which meant he had all the money," he said with a laugh. "So they’d be nice to me. I’d be like, ‘Fine!’"
Oshiro said he got his share of emotionally charged response from the whole civil unions battle. But he still believes the legislative process, not a referendum or court ruling, is the best way to make this kind of societal change.
Representative democracy, he said, "is effective, because if a person doesn’t represent your values, your mechanism is to get them out of office."
QUESTION: What were the top-priority bills you got through this session?
ANSWER: Definitely the OHA settlement bill was something that had been a longstanding dispute that we’re very pleased we were able to resolve, and now we can all move forward together, especially in Kakaako, and seeing the important development of that area.
The second one I would point to is the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, a critical measure. … I think bringing the prisoners home was sort of the catalyst that started the discussion. But when we really looked at what the initiative will do, … we’ll be able to reallocate resources in a much smarter way, so that we can ensure that there is supervision and oversight for those offenders that most need it. …
So I think those, at least, two measures to me stick out as major transformation initiatives.
The other one that was really important to the governor was the undersea island cable, because we believe that it’s critical for us to move forward on renewable energy sustainability, and the overall need of our state to be connected together. We were supportive because it didn’t necessarily say that it’s about Big Wind, or Lanai, or Molokai. That’s never been the focus for us.
Q: You mean it matters less what the energy source is than that major island grids be connected?
A: Yeah, because most of the highest and most need is on Oahu, but we don’t have the availability of the resources. Whereas places like on the Big Island with geothermal, or on Maui they actually even have the potential for generating excess wind (power). So those to us are the first two places we’d first start looking at, to start connecting up to.
We realize it’s probably politically sensitive to go to Molokai and Lanai right now, so we’ll kind of wait and see how that shakes out.
Q: Isn’t there a sense that some of the neighbor islands don’t like the idea of being tapped for Oahu?
A: I think we need that bigger and larger discussion to realize how interdependent we all are and need to be, as one state. Currently Oahu is the island that generates the most amount of revenue, based off of tourism and business. …
Q: How do you see your role in the administration?
A: I think my role is to really help the governor navigate through some of the political landscape. …
Q: Not only legislative?
A: Not only legislative, but just understanding the nuances of the current political landscape, the new personalities, the new dynamics that have arisen. … Things when (the governor) was in the Legislature were probably different, and so advising him on how to best achieve his goals through what is the current landscape is probably the main thing that I’m doing.
In addition to that, I’m helping oversee some of the departments with their implementation of the policies, and helping them understand how to get their priorities achieved — budgetarily, legislatively, as well as administratively.
Q: What tactics needed changing, based on your observation of the administration’s first legislative session?
A: I would say that probably the two things that come forefront to my mind are increased communication and increased presence. I think making sure that whenever we were moving in a certain direction that we made it clear to the Legislature what we were thinking, giving them as much advance notice as we could before any significant developments occurred.
Q: For example?
A: The one that comes to my mind, again, is the OHA settlement. It took a lot of work to get a bill through unamended, because that is a very rare feat — especially a bill like that. So we met with (key legislators) early on, before the session, explaining what it was, working back and forth between the House and the Senate. …
Q: Did the move to lift the residential-development ban (at the Kakaako waterfront) cause a problem?
A: It did, it did. … Because we saw the potential for that issue to unravel the entire package, we had to work very carefully to navigate our way through to make sure that it didn’t attach itself to the bill, and get amended. We ended up having (the residential restriction) as a separate bill … telling the House that we’re generally supportive of the idea, but that’s not what we’re prioritizing. Our priority is the bill as introduced. …
Q: It was Sen. Clayton Hee who wanted the provision allowing residential development on the OHA parcels, right? What was your message to him?
A: We had to work with him because he had a key role in the referral (of the bill) and the process. But we also had to try to emphasize to him that our priority was the bill as introduced. … We felt once we got that out of the way, then we could focus on the rest of the package.
And so ultimately we passed about 11 of the 14 initiatives the governor had talked about in the State of the State. And so we’re very pleased with that overall average.
Q: What were the three that didn’t make it?
A: Teacher evaluation is one that failed, but we’re still going to be moving forward with the Board of Education. Another one had to do with moving out telecommunications from the PUC (Public Utilities Commission) over to the DCCA (Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs). … And the third one was the recapitalization of the hurricane and rainy-day funds.
Q: Any major takeaways from this session? Lessons learned?
A: I’ve always known this, from my 11 years in the Legislature, but I never had to experience it, per se: It’s so much easier to kill a bill that you don’t like than to pass a bill that you do like.
The law of averages is there’s about 2,000 bills that get introduced every year. At the end of the day, only about 250 to 300 make it out. …
At most, I’ve advocated for maybe one bill, or maybe a couple that were my pet bills. But this time around, having to help really monitor and guide a hundred-something bills that the departments and administration want, every single one that died, we go, “Oh, there goes another one.”
Q: Transitioning to one national issue: What was your reaction to the president’s statement of support for same-sex marriage?
A: I was very pleased to see that the president’s viewpoint has evolved to the point that he’s now supportive of the issue. … I was a little surprised that it came out prior to the election. Politically, I would have probably advised him to wait.
But personally, I’m very glad to see he has come out in support, because I do think generally my sense is any time a leader on the state level — on the federal level, on the local level — talks about a controversial issue, I think it is a good thing for public discourse. Because then people start examining their own views, they start talking about it themselves; because otherwise I think we are so busy in our day-to-day lives, things like that are not something that we think about all the time.
Q: Did it ever feel awkward making the transition in your roles as legislator to one advancing a particular agenda?
A: No … more that I sort of miss some of the personal interaction I would have with some of my colleagues. … I’m not necessarily involved in the day-to-day or inside meetings, knowing the intimate and intricate goings-on. … But I was down there almost every day, working with them in a different capacity, trying to get the governor’s bills and the administration package through. …
One thing I miss: I’m not representing a community, not being the voice for somebody. I have to look at the big picture …
Q: But you might seek office again sometime, right?
A: Who knows what the next chapter brings?
