The state and county governments seem intent on perpetuating their own functions and job security through continued taxes, excessive fees and fines. They prefer to collect and then distribute aid versus just giving people a break.

If our leaders really wanted to help the people of Hawaii survive the COVID-19 pandemic, they would suspend taxes on all groceries, take-out or dine-in food sources. Suspend the taxes on all medical visits, procedures and drugs. Suspend the bottle deposit and the tax on gasoline. Lower vehicle registration fees and suspend vehicle inspections. Eliminate taxes on used vehicles and give a break on property taxes to those affected by job loss related to COVID-19.

People should not be taxed to eat, take necessary medicines, drive to the store or work and stay in their homes. For many non-government employees throughout Hawaii, but especially in the tourism sector, it is a struggle to just get by.

Brian Zinn

Hawaii Kai

Suspend unneeded capital projects

The COVID-19 crisis and the internet have substantially changed the way we live, work, shop and educate. Many of our daily activities can and are being accomplished at home. This means commuting traffic for work, school and shopping has been significantly reduced.

Because of these changes, city and state officials should re-evaluate the need for current and planned capital expenditure projects — specifically, rail transit and Aloha Stadium.

Does a rail system to Ala Moana and a new stadium redevelopment really make much sense? Reduced traffic removes a valid reason for the rail. The shopping-mall concept is obsolete. Having a new shopping mall near Pearlridge center is not logical. Certainly, that money could better be spent on our antiquated infrastructure.

It is inconceivable that folks from Kapolei will be shopping at Ala Moana since they have their own affordable big-box stories in West Oahu and are finding it economical and convenient to shop there, and, for that matter, to shop on the internet.

Funding of both these projects with more taxes on the people of Oahu would force more families to leave Hawaii.

Robert B. Schieve

Haleiwa

Tourists should take more COVID-19 tests

The upcoming resumption of travel to Hawaii is predicated upon a traveler completing and submitting a negative COVID-19 test within 72 hours of arrival.

However, proof of a negative test within 72 hours of travel is of limited usefulness. COVID-19 tests are often negative if a traveler has just been infected. The individual might have caught the virus before or after being tested, and reach peak contagiousness after arrival to Hawaii.

More robust testing and monitoring is necessary. Some countries require that tourists be closely monitored, and repeat COVID-19 testing during their stay. With the current plan, we risk another outbreak.

John Misailidis

Manoa

A positive benefit from quarantine

Many of us who have fished all our lives should take note of the return of good fishing in the town areas of Honolulu. These shoreline areas were made barren decades ago because of tourist development and uncontrolled shoreline use.

What we are witnessing today is a stark reminder that the fish, and good fishing, can return, but it is we who must make the necessary and important commitments to start being responsible stewards of the shoreline and reefs.

I grew up in the late 1950s in the Waikiki/Ala Moana area and remember what good fishing was like. What we are seeing now is a reminder that Hawaii’s ocean resources can replenish themselves. We just need to give them a chance. It would be a nice gift to leave for our grandkids and the next generation.

Jeff Konn

Moiliili

Punish fishermen who broke the law

I sure hope those fishermen caught fishing illegally get the maximum punishment possible (“Seven men caught illegally spearfishing in Waikiki Conservation District,” Star-Advertiser, Sept. 22). Want to bet on that?

Charles Carter

Waikiki

Majority decides on SCOTUS nominee

Although I don’t favor the likely outcome, it seems clear to me that President Donald Trump is acting responsibly to quickly nominate a candidate to fill the Supreme Court vacancy. The Senate is preparing to execute its constitutional duty to review the nominee.

This rankles many who cite hypocrisy due to the Senate majority’s public stance four years ago when refusing to hold hearings on then-President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. One can objectively argue that today the Senate is doing what it is supposed to be doing. Four years ago, one can argue, the Senate majority was derelict (but not unlawful) in its duties. The Constitution provides no timelines for these events.

The majority gets to set the agenda. So if you don’t like what the current majority is doing, share your views with your (and other) representatives in Congress and vote your conscience in November.

Arnold Warshawsky

Kailua

EXPRESS YOURSELF

>> Contact: 529-4831 (phone), 529-4750 (fax), letters@staradvertiser.com, staradvertiser.com/editorial/submit-letter