• Jones Act shouldn’t be repealed
• Letter was misunderstood
• Bridge okay for Wailua?
Jones Act shouldn’t be repealed
Before WWII two Hawaiian companies were in the shipping business, Matson and Interisland Steam Navigation Company. The flagships of Matson were the passenger liners Lurline and Matsonia. Interisland had the Humuula, which hauled cattle from Kawaihae on the Big Island to Honolulu for slaughter and the Waialeale, which carried passengers and freight. Young Brothers Tug and Barge, a Dillingham company hauled pineapple from Moloka‘i and Lana‘i to Hawaiian Pines (Dole) in Honolulu.
When I came to Hawai‘i in March of 1942 to work at Pearl Harbor, it was aboard the Lurline, which had been taken over by the United States governmet and painted grey. We civilians had cabins. The troops that we carried on that voyage were bunked in the hold. Most of us civilians invited the Marines who were aboard to share our cabins, because sleeping above decks, even if it was on the floor was a lot better than the stuffy below-decks quarters.
The federal government had also taken over the Interisland ships. I know that Senators Inouye and Akaka are aware of this bit of our maritime history. I seriously doubt whether Ed Case knows about this when he advocates repeal of the Jones Act, because the importance of the American Merchant Marine and the American sailors who man these ships, to our national defense and security cannot be measured in the dollars and cents saved by using foreign bottoms and foreign crews.
My wife and I have taken enough cruises on foreign ships to know the sad conditions under which their crews work. It’s true that our merchant mariners are probably the most pampered seamen in the world. They are also the best trained and most competent. The food on our merchant ships is gourmet. The sea cooks treat their shipmates like family. If a sailor standing night watch goes hungry it’s his own fault, because there always a sumptuous night lunch laid out for him to enjoy. This is the rosy side of their life.
A merchant seaman’s job is full of danger. There is the weather, often unpredictable. There is always the danger of physical injury. There are a hundred ways to get hurt, ranging from loose cargo to snapped rigging, fire in a cargo hold to collision; and of course, in wartime, the chance of getting torpedoed by enemy submarines..
During WW11, all merchant seamen’s documents, including my own, were stamped “validated for emergency service.” There was no doubt in anyone’s mind that we were in for the duration. That ended only when my draft number came up in 1944 and I embarked on a new career as a soldier in the U.S. Army. It was a promotion, in a way, because I went from ordinary seaman in the merchant service to Chief Engineer of Army Towing and Patrol Boat, TP 234, with the rank of sergeant.
Letter was misunderstood
I’m sorry that Sharon Aquino (Letters of 7/18/05) didn’t understand my “Tongue in Cheek” letter re: “selling and living on the beach.”
All I’m saying is that the government, instead of providing safe camping areas away from the very valuable beaches, just lets non-tax-paying citizens spoil the areas that help to produce the very jobs that the homeless need. That is “Tourism.”
Those who are homeless by choice, and there are many, should not be allowed to take over the areas that those who work and pay taxes would like to enjoy on holidays.
The government could easily build enclosed areas that would be safe, using tents and military style feeding stations and basic hygiene facilities away from the beaches and near public transportation. It wouldn’t solve all of the problems that the homeless have but it would solve a lot of their problems. It, the military tents, etc., would be a temporary solution while the working homeless are getting back on their feet.
Oh, by the way, my donating my home would only help one homeless family. Like “Habitat for Humanity,” they only take care of one family at a time. How much better it would be if they would build a safe compound with tents, hygiene facilities and food service. That would help many “homeless” who are homeless but don’t want to be, as compared to those who are homeless by choice. And there are those who are homeless by choice. They don’t want any constraints on them and they sure don’t want to follow rules.
My letter was meant to show that the government is not following its own rules, re: building permits nor is it really doing anything to help the homeless, whom I have a lot of compassion for.
- Gordon “Doc” Smith
Kapa‘a
Bridge okay for Wailua?
So our mayor and the head of the department of public works building division are on record as saying (regarding the Wailua cane haul bridge), “Based on what we found, we decided to move forward with the Acrow bridge concept.”—The Garden Island, July 15.
Now, let’s turn the clock back about a year when the public in the Wailua Homesteads was up in arms about the proposed new Olohena bridge being built over a ditch at a cost of $4.8 million. The same Acrow people that this administration has given the green light to build their bridge over the Wailua River were here on Kaua‘i to tell them that they could build the new Olohena bridge for under $1 million AND they could put it in place within one to two days! They had previously installed the Wainiha #2 bridge within 24 hours so their words could be verified. Thus the residents would not have to drive double the distance getting in and out of the homesteads for nearly four months!!
In May of 2005 the council deliberated until 4:30 in the morning about giving the administration a $500,000 money bill which they needed in order to move ahead with their $4.8-million Taj Mahal project. Chair Asing and members Rapozo and Carvalho wisely voted against this money bill but members Yukimura, Tokioka, Kaneshiro, and Furfaro voted for it, thus giving the administration permission to waste millions of dollars of tax money on a project that should have cost far less. And, the mayor did sit in the council chambers till 4:30 a.m. to hear the final vote.
The excuses the administration used for not using Acrow were that Acrow bridges were temporary and not eligible for 80/20 federal matching funds and that they weren’t strong enough and would wash away in heavy rains. And yet we now have two installed on Kaua‘i and this (Wailua) is the biggest one okayed to be built. So why is the public continually presented with these untruths resulting in squandering our tax dollars.
And have no doubts that this white elephant bike path is just another cash cow for someone other than the public who the “powers” have convinced that it is needed. We desperately need councilman Rapozo’s performance audit to look into our government waste.
