Jones Act harms Hawaii economy

Michael Hansen’s commentary was excellent ("Natural gas is cheap, but Jones Act rules it out for Hawaii," Star-Advertiser, Island Voices, April 29). It points out again that archaic laws associated with the Jones Act are greatly driving up the cost of living and doing business in Hawaii.

Hawaiian Electric Co.’s major source for generating electricity is burning very expensive, environmentally harmful imported oil. For this, we currently pay nearly three times the cost for electricity as the national average.The Jones Act precludes us from having an economically viable option for bringing in less expensive and environmentally more benign natural gas — the fuel of choice for mainland utilities.

The Jones Act protecting domestic shipping made sense when written in 1920 but has become increasingly harmful to Hawaii’s economic vitality in the 21st century.It benefits a very selective few at a great cost for the majority.

It is time for repeal.

Jerry Wilhelmy
Waialae Iki

Excuses are not the way to justice

I can fully understand where Leonard Pitts is coming from ("Racial injustice still with us despite 20 years to ponder," Star-Advertiser, April 30).

However, it is very concerning that although he does not "lionize" the resulting rioting, killings, beatings, looting and burnings that followed the jury trial acquittal of Los Angeles police officers in the Rodney King beating, he rationalizes and excuses it.

His reasoning is that the violence after the Rodney King trial was the result of pent-up frustrations from past injustices.

He also strongly hints that there will — or maybe even should — be the same reaction if George Zimmerman is found not guilty in the death of Trayvon Martin ("‘No justice, no peace’ is a certainty").

When we take the path of creating our own bubbles of reality, when we go backand selectively use past injustices to rationalize our present actions,then there is no solution to conflicts and no end to violence, be it domestic, neighborhood or world wars.

Les Goto
Kaneohe

Obamacare about burden sharing

A letter claiming that the Affordable Care Act is a government money grab is not accurate ("Health care plan is going to cost us," Star-Advertiser, Letters, April 28).

Ever since Congress in 1986 passed the law requiring hospitals to treat people who come to them with health problems — even if they can’t pay —hospitals treat everyone and pass the costs on to the insurance companies, who then passthem on to the rest of us in higher premiums.

The new law has a range of options for people to use (based on the amount of insurance they can afford) in buying health insurance that would enable more people tobe covered.It is not a government-paid plan, but rather a way to avoid our having to subsidize very expensive emergency room health care for thepreviously uninsured.

There are all sorts of political polemics out there in this campaign year about "Obamacare," but very few of them are based on actually studying the Act.

David Chappell
Kaneohe

Plastic bag ban won’t cost much

Alot of discussion has been going on about the banning of plastic shopping bags on Oahu. The supposedly high cost of changing from plastic to paper is often cited. Some grocery store representatives have been quoted as saying their costs might go up by as much as $30,000 a year if they have to go to paper bags.

Well, I just did a little research and found that paper bags costabouta nickelper bag. So, let’s say you buy $100 worth of groceries and it takes three bags to hold it. That means you’re paying15 cents extra, as compared to using plastic.

That is an insignificant increase in the cost of your groceries, and when you consider that most stores offer coupons and specials far in excess of 15 cents every day, the stores themselves can easily absorb the minor difference.

The point is that the banning of plastic bags should be argued on the actual merits of such a ban, not on any superfluous and minuscule cost increase.

Roger Garrett
Kapahulu

Social Security payments owed

There is no doubt that runaway government spending must be curtailed.

What is troubling is that in the public discourse, "entitlements" that are earned are lumped together with "entitlements" that are unearned.

"The world owes me a living" type of giveaways deserve to be cut. There are private charities galore to help people who need it.

But cutting benefits that have been earned is another story.

Although some government pension benefits might deserve to be reduced, as they have sometimes been in the private sector, benefits that have been earned, like medical care for injured veterans or Social Security programs that were paid for, should not be punished because government has, in the past, chosen to give money to unwed mothers or drug addicts.

People who paid into Social Security their whole lives should not be punished because government spent the money instead of setting up investment trusts.

Roy "Sky" Wyttenbach II
Waikiki

Fishermen should protect resource

With the Pacific Ocean surrounding the islands, it’s a given that people fish. However, what many recreational fisherman disregard is that there are size and quantity restrictions.

On nearly every outing, I notice fishermen taking home fish that either don’t meet the size requirement or exceed the quantity limit. Not only do they frustrate other fisherman (not to mention future generations), but they also strain the ecosystems of our oceans. Without juveniles maturing into adults, we lose many members of older generations of fish as well as fish to feed predators such as sharks.

If we continue to disrupt this delicate balance, we will diminish the grandeur of our oceans, have fewer fish, pay more at restaurants and the supermarket, and give tourists one less reason to visit.

Where’s the aloha? It is crucial that islanders stop overfishing. Fish sustain our survival, so why do we continue to decimate their populations?

Justin Chock
Aiea High School, Grade 11