If train or no train comes down to deciding whether or not we elect former Gov. Ben Cayetano as mayor of Honolulu, we should have more than one debate on the issue.

So far, Honolulu has viewed two debates, including one live televised meeting.

We need a lot more discussion just on rail. Just like the presidential debates limit topics to education, foreign policy or domestic issues, Honolulu needs to hear more from the three candidates. Right now we only know Mayor Peter Carlisle wants to build rail now; former acting Mayor Kirk Caldwell wants rail with unspecified changes; and Cayetano wants buses, not trains.

They should have at least an hour to just bat around the issue of transit in Honolulu.

As became clear from the television debate on Hawaii News Now, co-sponsored by this newspaper, what we are going to do to ease our traffic crisis is a target moving a lot faster than H-1 on a Friday afternoon.

Cayetano has developed a clear case for not advancing the current plan. He says it is too big, too costly and already out of date.

Still lacking, though, is a clear alternative. During last week’s debate, Cayetano relied on the adopted, and then spurned, Honolulu plan for a bus rapid transit system. The compelling reason for Cayetano is that a $10 million consultant study found that the much cheaper bus system would accomplish exactly the same results as the heavy rail system now under construction.

"We propose things like better traffic synchronization, more express buses and then we’ll get to our second phase — the bus rapid transit system on dedicated lanes," he said during the debate.

If a little cross-examination is good for the soul, Cayetano will be all the better for it, if his opponents sharpen their examination of the former governor. We all need him to explain when and how he would start a bus system, where it would go, what it would look like and how much it would cost.

We also need some specifics from Caldwell, who right now may actually be coming up with another rail plan. Last week he dropped two new plans.

First was his Goldilocks plan, which essentially said: "Let’s revisit this whole thing and see if we can come up with a plan that’s not too big, not too small; one that is just right."

"I am asking that a review be done with community input to see where more appropriate design can be implemented, and more cost savings may be possible," Caldwell said in a news release before the debate.

"We can and we must find common ground to address legitimate concerns from our community to make rail more acceptable for more people throughout our island."

Then during the debate, Cayetano noted that Caldwell had also mentioned that perhaps the train should go to Manoa and the University of Hawaii, something that the original planners had already ruled out as too costly.

Carlisle is apparently adopting a version of the Popeye philosophy of "I yam what I yam, and that’s all what I yam," as he explained in the debate that rail is moving and that is a sure thing.

As Carlisle said earlier: "My values have not changed. And my enthusiasm to do rail transit the right way has not changed."

What has changed is that now either in the August primary or the November general election, the public will finally be able to bring the long debate about rail to a conclusion.

—————

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