IMPEACHMENT IS RESPONDING TO UNRESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT

Impeachment is again gracing headlines of this newspaper, but on these
latest occassions, it is closer to home.

Marijuana advocates - or as many prefer to be called, hemp advocates -
organized in East Hawaii have taken the offensive against Mayor Stephen
Yamashiro, and six members of the Hawaii County Council.

The hemp advocates are taking a new tack on an old argument.

Traditionally, these same individuals have testified before the County
Council during budget hearings and raised concerns about marijuana
eradication. While the activity is legal, the hemp advocates claimed the
county funding of the eradication efforts was not. Their argument was
simple, but its effectiveness will be tested in the courts, an appropriate
venue.

Hemp advocates allege the funding is illegal because the county has not, to
their satisfaction, provided necessary program review for the eradication
efforts. They cite the Hawaii County Charter provision that mandates
program review as a requisite for the funding.

The county, predominantly through its elected council, has in the past
maintained that mandated "program review" was fulfilled in the budget
hearing process itself, and for several budget cycles has dismissed the
pro-marijuana advocates with this explanation.

Hemp advocates didn't buy it; they resorted to the due process of
impeachment set forth in the same document that calls for the disputed
review, the Hawaii County Charter.

The petition submitted to the Third Circuit Court also alleges the six
councilmen and mayor, through the unauthorized funding, denied justice,
destroyed domestic tranquility and fostered increased crime and hard drug
use.

We agree helicopter overflights are annoying. However, the copters wouldn't
have to fly if people weren't cultivating marijuana -- which remains illegal
in Hawaii.

It is a stretch, however, to perceive justice denied, or an increase in
crime as a result of these efforts.

That aside, what is important is that elected officials follow faithfully
those rules established to enhance a fair process of governance. Challenges
to the actions of elected officials may be an annoyance to those targeted,
but the challenges will ultimately lead to a clearer definition of what
government may and may not do. Calling upon the third branch of government
to intercede through the impeachment petition is appropriate.

We await a prompt, decisive action from the courts.

We would also raise the question about county program priorities in light of
funding and community needs.

There are federal funds that flow into the county provided that certain
activities are pursued. In the Police Department, two very visible programs
are marijuana eradication and seat belt enforcement.

Is the federal money the impetus behind the continued eradication efforts,
and how exactly is that money being used by the department? A program review
would answer fully these questions.

It is difficult to weigh the impact of the marijuana eradication efforts
against the overall marijuana problem on the island and its associated crime
problems opposed to man hours spent in that pursuit which would otherwise be
spent on other police law enforcement activities. A program review, exactly
what the petitioners seek, would address that issue.

In the context of seat belt enforcement, however, the issue is not so
obscure. Teams of police officers spending hours each week tagging drivers
for no seat belts, which will net federal funds, can be measured against
other traffic enforcement or police activities that might take place
instead.

When conservative estimates place one in four drivers without insurance, the
crime of not using a seat belt seems incomparable.

Program reviews, as well as audits, seldom have a negative impact on the
efficiency of government. They are a good thing and deserve support in and
outside of government.

We don't like the idea of impeachment, however. Neither do we support
marijuana cultivation or use. But we do demand responsive and responsible
government and support whatever measures might be necessary to force an
intractable government into following its rules of governance.