Lingle’s web blast yesterday, timed just before the arbitration hearing with HGEA and on the eve of the Labor Day weekend, reminded me of that old lawyer joke.
If you’ve got the law on your side, pound on the law.
If you’ve got the facts on your side, pound on the facts.
If neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound the table.
And Lingle did a fine job of pounding the table.
Unfortunately, Lingle’s administration is nowhere near as good at actually working with others to create a workable solution as it is in locking the governor away from the pesky media to make a one-way web appearance.
When so many others who have roles in this process are saying that Lingle doesn’t know the meaning of “collaboration” or “compromise”, I’m confident that there is a problem there.
It may be that as a lame duck, she has decided that her political future is not in Hawaii and, therefore, is willing to risk our well-being to create this image of the tough conservative politician willing to walk the “no new taxes” gangplank. It’s for consumption by the GOP base on the mainland. She’s simply not as worried about the local impact.
Then there’s the issue of the media’s handling of this “no questions allowed” appearance. A reader’s comment overnight said it better than I could:
The Advertiser provided the governor with an exclusive platform for a politically charged monologue, then posted a verbatim transcript that had obviously been prepared beforehand, included no analysis or response from any union representatives or others, and provided no indication that it ever even sought any. It’s been six hours so far. They did this despite the governor’s prior stated refusal to take any questions on the content of her announcement or provide specific details. That’s not even close to responsible journalism. Or even journalism at all. Not by a long shot.
Make no mistake, this was no fireside chat or scheduled state of the state speech covering a variety of topics and issues of general interest. The timing and subject matter make it very clear that this was a direct shot across the bow and a public threat on the eve of a crucial arbitration hearing.It’s as if the Advertiser was so enamored of the technological ABILITY to post a live video broadcast by the governor and a prepared transcript that its managers never stopped to consider whether that’s something they SHOULD do as a credible news organization.
And for purposes of this observation, I’m not even commenting on whether the governor’s position or that of the unions deserves public support.
The point is this: the Advertiser today took a dangerous step across an important line between objectively covering government as a news organization and becoming a willing vehicle of government and a specific government leader’s strong-arm tactics. Such willful acquiescence to Orwellian manipulation is truly sickening, especially when it’s courtesy of people who claim to be journalists.
So it goes. Enjoy your Labor Day extended weekend.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Advertiser under current management is like a loaded machine gun in the hands of an uneducated, hyperactive child. The rank and file are akin to younger siblings beaten into submission. Meanwhile, the oblivious corporate parents are on the mainland gambling with the rent money and ignoring calls from the neighbors.
I should say that I enjoyed this comment but don’t agree with it. I now turn to the Advertiser first in the morning because I find the Star-Bulletin’s new light-weight news recipe rewards less often and rarely goes in depth. Advertiser writers have a better chance of getting the space to report a story fully. But we do subscribe to both newspapers and plan to continue to do so.
Lingle may be tired, tone-deaf of both, but she may also be correct. According to a pro-state-employee blurb from California, Hawaii has the highest per capita number of state employees (approx. 6%%) in the nation, over three times the average (approx. 2%). Even putting small/large state issues aside, 3 times the national average seems a bit steep, yeah?
At times our state government and Hawaii’s unions (is a difference?) seem prone to step over the line when it comes to grabbing the wealth of those who create it. When that wealth gets stretched, some think the remedy is to seek and even bigger cut of the pie. Do it too much and the net total wealth starts disappearing. Are we near or at that point yet? I don’t know, but one can’t find the optimal point except post hoc. And post hoc is way, way too late.
Food for thought, perhaps….
Meow,
M.Rethman
See these data at: http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:3ebLhXTC1MEJ:www.csba.org/EducationIssues/EducationIssues/~/media/Files/EducationIssues/SchoolsInvestment/0609_FewerStateEmployeesPerCapita_FINAL.ashx+per+capita,+state+employees,+Hawaii&hl=en&gl=us
PS. The Advertiser and Star Bulletin are both good for using underneath the cat boxes.
There’s always a problem with these number. For example, in most states, elementary and secondary education is operated and funded by the counties, while in Hawaii the education system has been centralized at the state level. Fully half of all Hawaii state employees are accounted for by school employees. No wonder Hawaii looks out of line. It’s an artifact of this significant organizational difference.
More problems with the numbers: In no other state are the counties (and populace) completely separated by water, which requires versions of state offices and staff in each one.
As I conceded in my first post, every state has its differences and Dave and Ian pointed out two important differences between Hawaii and elsewhere. But hang in there with me for a moment: If we subtract Ian’s half, we get 6% down to 3%. Subtract another quarter of a percent for the island/small state aspects and we’re still roughly 40% above the average per capita percentages. Okay, I’ll give you another quarter percent — just to make it robust — and we’re down to a full 25% above average. Worth considering when it comes to millions of dollars that we don’t have.
Let’s look at some more important differences that account for Hawaii’s relatively high number of state employees. How about corrections? Most mainland jurisdictions use county jails to hold those charged/convicted of misdemeanors. In Hawaii, apart from short-term holding cells at police stations, it’s all part of the state prison system. How about airports? Los Angeles Airport? City of Los Angeles. Denver? Owned by the city. Chicago? Ditto, I believe. In Hawaii? All part of the state Department of Transportation. Harbors? Same thing. We forget how Hawaii’s plantation past left us with a very centralized system.
Thank you Ian for picking apart what on its surface seems like a easy-to-latch onto anti-worker rallying cry.
In addition to these functional and organizational differences, there are certain unique requirements for Hawaii, such as strict agricultural monitoring to protect the relatively sheltered environment/ecosystem (which will be decimated by Lingle’s cuts). We need proportionately more staffing here than in a contiguous state that is not a closed environment.
Re: “We need proportionately more staffing here than in a contiguous state that is not a closed environment.”
Yes, no doubt this is true. But what proportion?
6% of Hawaii’s approx. 1.2 million+ population is 72,000+ people. If half are in education (and what’s the administration to teacher ratios here?), that leaves 36K+. The national average per capita would be less than 24K. We need approx. 12K+ more state employees in our state because of its unique geography, etc.? Maybe not. Government (not just our state’s but any version) can be like a stain in the rug. It’s easily made bigger but hard to make smaller.
BTW, there is a difference between an “anti-worker” rallying cry and a cry for an efficient and effective government. And it’s clear, at least on Oahu, that not much its resources are going into fixing our ridiculously crummy but freeze-melt-cycle -free roads and highways. Why? Is Hawaii state government not big enough? Or could it signal a feather-bedded racket?
These are important questions that have nothing to do with workers, per se, but have everything to do with good government.