Dela Cruz allowed to raise debatable ideas, isn’t he?

In our nation’s quest to form a more perfect union, was there ever thought given to just making people be quiet?

What if the problem we face is not that the issues are too complex, the solutions too costly or the options too limited?

What if the real problem is that we talk too much about our problems?

Apparently this may be some of the thinking from sections of the state Democratic Party wanting to sanction Wahiawa Democratic state Sen. Donovan Dela Cruz.

The issue is a complaint filed by Lynn Sager, chairwoman of the party’s environmental caucus, who says that Dela Cruz introduced a bill that is "in direct opposition to our party platform."

The measure, Senate Bill 2927, was one of the big controversies of the recently concluded legislative session.

In one form, it would have exempted development around bus transit stations and planned rail stations from city planning. Critics feared it would do away with zoning and impact fees and scrapped public participation in the planning process.

Sager asked for a full inquiry by the Oahu County Committee into Dela Cruz’s "status as a Democrat in good standing with the party."

The party’s constitution says: "A member of the Democratic Party of Hawai‘i may be expelled, censured or reprimanded for … failure to abide by the constitution of the Democratic Party of Hawaii and/or platform of the party."

It then goes into a long process for how the party is to sort things out. Happily for Dela Cruz, there is no mention of an auto-da-fe, as practiced by the Spanish Inquisition.

The section calling for specific consequences to violations of a party platform, which is written to be general and nonspecific, easily lends itself to witch hunts and thought crimes.

In his letter back to the party asking that the charges be dropped, Dela Cruz argued his bill should be an answer to "the smart growth puzzle to promote development away from our open space and agricultural lands and towards our urban core."

"Many states and counties have offered incentives far more generous than those stated in SB 2927 and have created walkable communities for the residents, reduced automobile usage, prevented urban sprawl and controlled growth" Dela Cruz said.

A former member of the Honolulu City Council, Dela Cruz, has been pushing for increased development during his two years in the state Senate. He was the guiding force behind the new law creating the Public Land Development Corp., which had been criticized for speeding the development of public lands.

Dela Cruz, however, said he is worried that Hawaii is quickly losing investment to other states, that needed changes are not being made. He reasons that smart growth is better than dilapidated buildings; opportunity for new recreation areas is better than weed-choked, unsafe parks; and planned construction of urban high-rises is better than more sprawling suburbs and strip malls.

The issue is debatable. Obviously there was enough opposition to kill Dela Cruz’s transit development bill during this legislative session, and the Public Land Development Corp. so far hasn’t really done much of anything.

Also Hawaii has a sketchy track record, vowing to be for smart, planned development, and then opening up a flood of exemptions that would make a Macau developer jealous.

Dela Cruz and the Democrats can probably take care of themselves, but what is dangerous is not realizing that the Legislature is one of the ways we talk.

Issues come up, pressure groups push, and business interests battle with consumer and environmental groups. The constant struggle within the Legislature is one of the ways we as a group figure out what we want.

The good may not always win and the tyranny of the majority may be just that.

But there should not be punishment for asking, "Can we talk?"

———

Richard Borreca writes on politics on Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays. Reach him at rborreca@staradvertiser.com.