“We have met the enemy and he is us.” Shame on us!

We are our own enemies who deny ourselves the hope for a better Hawaii future by continuing to treat elections as popularity contests, or worse, are easily swayed by last-minute, big money-financed negative media blitzes. Are we that lolo? Should we, the people of Hawaii, expect better? Absolutely!

What do we need to do to get the kind of people deserving of our support into public office. Well, sending a campaign contribution to a candidate isn’t it, simply because a politician would rather have you pony up dollars and go away instead of being persistently asked questions about personal motivations and life philosophy. Neither is the legion of distracting sign-holders who would have you believe that you don’t need to know anything about a candidate except the correct spelling of his/her name.

We are to blame because we fail to challenge the candidates to reveal their vision of the “better Hawaii” they speak of, and what they plan to do to get there, if elected. Because of old school values that have conditioned our behavior, and lessons learned from our parents’ generation, we often rely on others to initiate action, and prefer listening and silence to open disagreement and confrontation – because we do not want to create waves. As if to justify our reticence, we say to ourselves that when asked politicians would only give us “canned” responses that don’t reveal anything we don’t already know. We have to break this mold and speak up. If not, we deserve exactly the kind of government that we get. It doesn’t have to be this way!

We and our children deserve leaders who are well-grounded in their values, truthful in meaning what they say, welcoming of the public’s voice, can work with others to deliver benefits that transcend narrow or self-interests, and transparent in their beliefs of what can or cannot be done, and why. Kamaaina, born and bred, all know why we live in Hawaii – kuu home. What makes where a candidate lives a place to be that stirs him/her to seek public office? Who are these people that tell us only in general terms that they share a vision for Hawaii’s future, including a strong and vibrant economy, clean environment, cultural enhancement, better education, and jobs? What do they do in their daytime jobs?

Despite the wisdom of the saying, “fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me,” we continue to shame ourselves every election. We experience very little meaningful discussion about how we ought to move toward a better Hawaii. Hosted “debates” and so called PSAs do little, if any, to reveal what makes a candidate tick. We do ourselves better when we travel and select a printed tourist guide. Why can’t we do the same for our own future? The web can and does provide a broadly accessible means to learn about a candidate’s official party line; but, it does little in revealing the real person who asks for your unconditional support. Auwe! We deserve better.

Is Hawaii’s electorate still holding vigil, awaiting the coming of a political Maui to harness the light of honest and open government and bring about the place we can’t seem to create on our own? Well, it isn’t going to happen. There simply is no magic bullet that will relieve us of our responsibilities for our own future. We need to get off the bus that is going nowhere and elect political candidates that have a vision for our island home and the shared commitment to work “with” us to bring that about. This is what an effective public servant is all about – no cosmetics, no frills, no magic, no sweeping campaign promises. Each and every candidate should articulate his/her vision and the philosophy that will guide his/her thoughts and actions during the legislative process.

Vision is fundamental. At the core, it provides a sense of purpose and characterizes the dream for the future. It is the context for goals, objectives, and policies; the framework for judging good and bad; and the premise for effective and efficient partnerships. Without it, discussion and action cannot move forward, and our elected officials can operate without meaningful public oversight that would hold them accountable for their actions. What a novel idea.

But in the real world we often see thought and practice on different paths. Before our very eyes, or perhaps behind our backs, the legislature subordinated democratic principles to political and administrative whims and wishes in amending the voter law. Although we were taught in our formal academic years that the unrestricted vote was at the foundation of democracy, we let the legislature erode its integrity. This is unconscionable when considering the bleak history of voting – African Americans, women, and in the 1940s Asian Americans. Even today, state legislatures are enacting provisions that only serve to narrow the gates to the poll or limit the freedoms of choice and speech. And what has the use of voting machines contributed? If you said more complications and controversies surrounding fraud, you are right. It is no wonder that citizen trust in government and the legislature is at an all-time low.

Having struggled out of the feudal environment once controlled by the Big 5, one would think that Hawaii would be headstrong in preserving and protecting the democratic principles and rights that predicated that battle. Not so! Apparently, the memories and lessons are forgotten and ignored, and some of our treasured democratic principles and rights are now myths. Auwe!

We, the public, should demand the restoration of the voting law to a democratic form. How? Consider the following:

• Remove the requirement of designating the candidate’s political affiliation on both primary and general election ballots.

There simply is no objective basis for it. It essentially undermines the voter’s civic responsibility to learn for himself/herself who the candidates are and what they stand for to arrive at his/her own choice, and not be unduly influenced to party line voting. The political influences are already abundant via TV ads, sign waving, coffee hours, and other activities.

• Overhaul the primary election ballot system in two ways.

First, trash the requirement of providing all political party ballots to the voter but limits him/her to select and act on a single political party ballot. Where is the nonpartisan wisdom in precluding the independent thinker and voter from supporting the best candidates who may not be in the same political party? If this is not a blatant restriction of choice, what is?

Second, provide another voter option such as the “none of the above” choice. This freedom of choice option delivers a significantly different message than a blank response. Is there any democratic reason for denying the voter this choice?

Although popularity contests will always be a part of the way we elect people to represent our interests, we need to push harder for the abandonment of relying on this approach in favor of a new way of doing things that promotes people with good vision and the commitment to transform it into reality.

The time to act is now. If we don’t, the bus will continue to roll along its fixed route and stop only at prescribed locations. However, if we move now to make a difference in how we choose our future leaders, then we still might find the exit to the Hawaii that we and our children deserve. Some of us aren’t marsupials or wish to just roll over and play possum. We are not our own enemy, and we need to know why candidates wish to represent us. Our inquiring minds want to know.

As a final word, you can forget about that old standard of “wanting to give back.” Whoever said these folks owed anything to anyone? And, just exactly what was the moment or achievement that predicated such a noble gesture?

About the author: Douglas Tom is a recent state government retiree who has a deep interest in initiatives relating to problems, issues, and opportunities dealing with coastal and ocean resources and uses. He has collaborated with other coastal states in helping shape national initiatives and policies and has advised international governments in preparing plans for economic development while protecting and preserving cultural and environmental interests and values. He has also been a longtime advocate for visioning in government public policy.