Thursday, April 25, 2024
More
    Home Blog Page 1972

    Yes to Tax Credits for All Emerging Industries in Act 221

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    In the Jan. 26, 2002 issue of The Honolulu Advertiser, (see https://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2003/Jan/26/op/op08a.html) Tareq Hoque, recent chair of the Hawaii Technology Trade Association (HTTA), discussed a progressive local tax incentive known as Act 221. Its purpose is to help emerging industries in Hawaii find investors.

    Hoque at first sounds quite happy about this law, calling it fabulous, and has HTTA take credit for “work[ing] hard with our legislators to get it passed,” but then he spends the rest of his op-ed complaining about it, saying the film industry has exploited the bill.

    So Hoque is glad that Act 221 exists, but is upset that the movie industry also receives this tax credit when filming in Hawaii. He says this is detrimental to our state’s residents, repeating that the credit comes at the considerable expense of Hawaii’s taxpayers. His solution: For the state Department of Taxation to revamp the law so that only tech companies can benefit from the tax credit. I do not think this is a very intelligent strategy, since I worked for three rather high profile high-tech startup companies and 2/3 of them are not around anymore, not to mention the countless high-tech companies in Hawaii I’ve seen go down in recent years. The odds just aren’t very good. We should not be putting all our economic eggs in the tech basket.

    Hoque also takes issue with “Blue Crush,” implying that the producers came in, took their tax credits and left, somehow exploiting the state. Au contraire — “Blue Crush” director John Stockwell liked it here so much that despite all the bad press his picture received in Hawaii, he stayed and brought his current project here as well. If bringing in and retaining outside expertise isn’t a necessary thing in building an industry from scratch, I don’t know what is.

    I am both a longtime member of the technology industry and someone just beginning in the film production business. I am also very concerned about our economy and have been for the past decade or so. Having seen both industries up close and personal, I strongly disagree with Hoque’s very one-sided view. When movie companies receive the tax credit, they don’t really cost private citizens anything. When the film project “The Big Bounce” got a $50 million tax credit, it didn’t steal $50 million from anyone. Its investors got a tax credit as an added incentive to invest in producing a piece of intellectual property — the common bond of all industries covered in Act 221. All emerging industries in Hawaii which 221 is trying to stimulate (biotech, ocean sciences, astronomy, optic sensors, nonfossil fuel energy, software and performing arts products) all produce intellectual property. The big picture and overall goal is a concerted effort to shift towards a knowledge-based economy and intellectual property is its foundation. Perhaps some of the wording in the act needs to change; a more accurate description of a QHTB (Qualified High Tech Business aka a company which qualifies for the tax credits) might be Qualified Targeted Industry Business.

    As many lawmakers point out, like State House Economic Development Committee Chair Rep. Brian Schatz says, Act 221 should in fact be expanded to benefit even more industries. “We want to provide clarity and predictability for investors … so we don’t want to change the law at all,” Schatz says in a Dec. 20, 2002, article in Pacific Business News. Innovation needs to be encouraged in Hawaii as much as possible, and Act 221 does just that.

    What confuses me about Hoque’s commentary is his very obviously contradictory message. On HTTA’s own Web site, they say “with the help of our lawmakers, HTTA created and continues to protect Act 221 …. HTTA’s position is and continues to be no changes to Act 221.” It seems to me that Hoque is quite in favor of big changes to Act 221 — that was the whole point of his article, wasn’t it? Also, in a Dec. 20 article in Pacific Business News, Ann Chung, HTTA’s executive director, says “As far as we understand, nothing is going forward [regarding changes to Act 221]. From our standpoint we would like no changes for Act 221.” If that is the case, I’m wondering why Mr. Hoque bothered to submit his article at all.

    The big picture for Act 221 is the business creation and economic development in Hawaii it encourages, ”’period”’ The benefits from the tax credits aren’t just the returns on successful high-tech companies (and there are few to point to), but a diversified economy. If Hawaii can create burgeoning industries besides that of tourism, more of our best and brightest will be able to stay at home.

    Hawaii’s economy is in the dumps, and we need to act fast to fix it. Whatever industry gets the steroid is fine by me. If a cost-benefit analysis needs to be done regarding some so-called abuses of Act 221, fine — but now is ”’not”’ the time. We cannot make up the rules up as we go along. We should allow the law to work as written until its sunset date in two years, and ”’then”’ look at its long-term effects (after the long term is actually up) and make changes as needed. We need Act 221 for our financial survival, and we need it as it is currently written.

    ”’Stacey Hayashi worked as a software engineer at three Hawaii high-tech startups from 1998 to 2002: Digital Island, WorldPoint, and 4charity.com and was on the founding team of the E-List, a techie/business networking group. She is currently co-owner and co founder of DVD Shop Hawaii and owns and operates several successful e-commerce businesses. She is now trying to find financing for the production of an independent motion picture drama about the Americans of Japanese Ancestry who fought in World War II. She can be reached at:”’ mailto:stacey@442movie.com

    The False Promise of Hydrogen-What the President's Driving At

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    In his State of the Union address, George W. Bush proposed that the federal government spend $1.2 billion on hydrogen fuel-cell research. “With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom, so that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free,” Bush said. “Join me in this important innovation, to make our air significantly cleaner and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of oil.”

    Bush obviously feels significant pressure to appear that he’s doing something about the environment. At some point it might dawn on him that there’s nothing he can say or do that will satisfy the radical environmental lobby and their media lapdogs. Bringing up such issues in high-profile speeches, such as the State of the Union, only provides fodder to his political enemies. Predictably the eco-radicals attacked Bush’s plan for not requiring automakers to put affordable hydrogen cars on the market by a certain model year. They also claim that the plan is just a way to avoid forcing the automobile companies to lower fuel-economy standards.

    It makes even less sense, however, for President Bush to throw a lot of money at a technology that is decades away from commercial viability. The “hydrogen economy” has been promoted for years by environmental activists and alternative-energy gurus like Amory Lovins. But hydrogen is not a source of energy, something which hydrogen advocates either don’t understand or refuse to acknowledge. Since hydrogen does not exist in geological reservoirs it must be extracted from fossil-fuel feedstocks or water. The process of extracting hydrogen uses energy, which means that using hydrogen is less efficient that burning fossil fuels. And if you’re worried about global warming you certainly don’t want to go that route. As a recent energy-technology review in Science magazine pointed out last November, “Per unit of heat generated, more CO2 is produced by making H2 [hydrogen] from fossil fuel than by burning the fossil fuel directly.”

    The other option is to extract hydrogen from water using renewable-energy sources that deal fossil fuels entirely out of the equation. But that is a pipedream. Renewable energy itself is not cost effective, and by the time you use the energy to extract hydrogen from water, transport that hydrogen to where car owners can get to it and then recombine it with oxygen to re-extract the energy the cost becomes astronomical.

    Honda, for example, is leasing five of its FCX fuel-cell vehicles to the city of Los Angeles. It is clearly a PR ploy since the cost to the company for each car is $1.6 million. Honda has also constructed a bank of solar panels in Torrance, California for the purpose of generating “clean” electricity to produce the hydrogen. But it takes a whole week to generate enough power to produce one tank of hydrogen at a cost of $40,000 per tank. Call me crazy, but that’s a long way from affordable transportation.

    Renewable energy has its own significant drawbacks. Wind power, the only renewable energy even close to being competitive, requires enormous subsidies to stay afloat. Subsidies for wind power, which include an array of both federal and state tax breaks and credits, along with accelerated depreciation (five years as opposed to 20 years for other electric generating facilities), are so extensive that their value sometimes exceeds the wind farm’s revenues from selling electricity.

    One of the subsidies, a 1.7-cent-per-kilowatt-hour production tax credit that must be renewed periodically by Congress, throws the industry into a recession every time it lapses. In 1999, for example, the tax credit wasn’t available and only 50 megawatts of wind generation were installed. Congress renewed the tax credit and new generations soared to 1700 MW. In December 2001, the credit lapsed once again and wasn’t renewed until March 2002. That year, only 410 MW of new capacity were installed. An energy source that is so heavily dependent on taxpayer subsidies does not meet President Bush’s stated goal of providing this nation with affordable and reliable energy.

    Moreover, wind farms are incredibly land intensive. Three newly proposed wind farms in West Virginia would occupy 30 to 40 square miles but would produce slightly less electricity than a new 265 MW gas-fired combined-cycle generating plant, which would occupy a few acres. Sallie Baliunas at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, estimates, using very conservative assumptions, that producing enough hydrogen with wind power to replace just one-third of the vehicles on the road today would require 210,000 square miles. In reality, that number would likely be much higher.

    Finally, the history of federal funding of energy-technology research is downright depressing. It is a landscape littered with dozens of multibillion-dollar failures. It is unlikely that this new endeavor will result in anything more than wasted money.

    ”’Paul Georgia is an environmental-policy analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute and managing editor of the global-warming newsletter “Cooler Heads.” He can be reached via email at:”’ mailto:pgeorgia@cei.org

    The False Promise of Hydrogen-What the President’s Driving At

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    In his State of the Union address, George W. Bush proposed that the federal government spend $1.2 billion on hydrogen fuel-cell research. “With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom, so that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free,” Bush said. “Join me in this important innovation, to make our air significantly cleaner and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of oil.”

    Bush obviously feels significant pressure to appear that he’s doing something about the environment. At some point it might dawn on him that there’s nothing he can say or do that will satisfy the radical environmental lobby and their media lapdogs. Bringing up such issues in high-profile speeches, such as the State of the Union, only provides fodder to his political enemies. Predictably the eco-radicals attacked Bush’s plan for not requiring automakers to put affordable hydrogen cars on the market by a certain model year. They also claim that the plan is just a way to avoid forcing the automobile companies to lower fuel-economy standards.

    It makes even less sense, however, for President Bush to throw a lot of money at a technology that is decades away from commercial viability. The “hydrogen economy” has been promoted for years by environmental activists and alternative-energy gurus like Amory Lovins. But hydrogen is not a source of energy, something which hydrogen advocates either don’t understand or refuse to acknowledge. Since hydrogen does not exist in geological reservoirs it must be extracted from fossil-fuel feedstocks or water. The process of extracting hydrogen uses energy, which means that using hydrogen is less efficient that burning fossil fuels. And if you’re worried about global warming you certainly don’t want to go that route. As a recent energy-technology review in Science magazine pointed out last November, “Per unit of heat generated, more CO2 is produced by making H2 [hydrogen] from fossil fuel than by burning the fossil fuel directly.”

    The other option is to extract hydrogen from water using renewable-energy sources that deal fossil fuels entirely out of the equation. But that is a pipedream. Renewable energy itself is not cost effective, and by the time you use the energy to extract hydrogen from water, transport that hydrogen to where car owners can get to it and then recombine it with oxygen to re-extract the energy the cost becomes astronomical.

    Honda, for example, is leasing five of its FCX fuel-cell vehicles to the city of Los Angeles. It is clearly a PR ploy since the cost to the company for each car is $1.6 million. Honda has also constructed a bank of solar panels in Torrance, California for the purpose of generating “clean” electricity to produce the hydrogen. But it takes a whole week to generate enough power to produce one tank of hydrogen at a cost of $40,000 per tank. Call me crazy, but that’s a long way from affordable transportation.

    Renewable energy has its own significant drawbacks. Wind power, the only renewable energy even close to being competitive, requires enormous subsidies to stay afloat. Subsidies for wind power, which include an array of both federal and state tax breaks and credits, along with accelerated depreciation (five years as opposed to 20 years for other electric generating facilities), are so extensive that their value sometimes exceeds the wind farm’s revenues from selling electricity.

    One of the subsidies, a 1.7-cent-per-kilowatt-hour production tax credit that must be renewed periodically by Congress, throws the industry into a recession every time it lapses. In 1999, for example, the tax credit wasn’t available and only 50 megawatts of wind generation were installed. Congress renewed the tax credit and new generations soared to 1700 MW. In December 2001, the credit lapsed once again and wasn’t renewed until March 2002. That year, only 410 MW of new capacity were installed. An energy source that is so heavily dependent on taxpayer subsidies does not meet President Bush’s stated goal of providing this nation with affordable and reliable energy.

    Moreover, wind farms are incredibly land intensive. Three newly proposed wind farms in West Virginia would occupy 30 to 40 square miles but would produce slightly less electricity than a new 265 MW gas-fired combined-cycle generating plant, which would occupy a few acres. Sallie Baliunas at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, estimates, using very conservative assumptions, that producing enough hydrogen with wind power to replace just one-third of the vehicles on the road today would require 210,000 square miles. In reality, that number would likely be much higher.

    Finally, the history of federal funding of energy-technology research is downright depressing. It is a landscape littered with dozens of multibillion-dollar failures. It is unlikely that this new endeavor will result in anything more than wasted money.

    ”’Paul Georgia is an environmental-policy analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute and managing editor of the global-warming newsletter “Cooler Heads.” He can be reached via email at:”’ mailto:pgeorgia@cei.org

    Grassroot Perspective – Feb. 20, 2003-New Jersey Education Association Accuses OpinionJournal of Smear Campaign" Over Brochure Controversy; Partnerships Offer Common-Sense Approach to Financing Long-Term Care"

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    “Dick Rowland Image”

    ”Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)”

    – New Jersey Education Association Accuses OpinionJournal of “Smear Campaign” Over Brochure Controversy. The New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) lashed back at an OpinionJournal story entitled “The Soft Bigotry of the Teachers Union,” calling it “a lie” that was “designed to slander NJEA.” Last Tuesday, OpinionJournal’s Best of the Web Today, a daily electronic newsletter of the Wall Street Journal, discovered a page on NJEA’s web site that featured a brochure called “Getting Involved in Your Child’s School.” Though NJEA has since changed the page, the original page and brochures are still available for viewing (at least for today) on Google’s cache at:

    https://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:EAcPpF8m0JcC:www.njea.org/FamilyCircle/default.asp

    The page offered three versions of the brochure. One was labeled “a parent’s resource,” the second was labeled “Spanish version,” and the third was labeled “African-American version.” Individually, the three brochures merely offer parents tips on volunteering at school, interacting with teachers, and creating am environment at home conducive to learning. The controversy arose when the “parent’s resource” version was compared to the “African-American version.” (The Spanish version was essentially a verbatim translation of the African-American version.)

    Here are a few of the differences:

    *Parent’s resource version — “By working in your school, you will become more familiar with its programs, and you will see why they are vital to your child.” African-American version — “By working in your school, you will see how it works.”

    *Parent’s resource version — “To Whom Will I Be Responsible?” African-American version — “How Will I Work with the Teacher?”

    *Parent’s resource version — “Emphasize academics. Too many families get caught up in athletics and in preparing their children for the world of work, where academics should be their first concern.” African-American version — “Tell your child that studying is important.”

    *Parent’s resource version — “Families should make it their responsibility to teach children basic discipline at home, rather than leave this task to teachers.” African-American version — This tip was omitted.

    Best of the Web Today noted its own preference for the African-American version, because it was shorter and more concise. “But another way of looking at it,” the story read, “is that the New Jersey teachers union seems to think their material has to be dumbed down for the benefit of black parents.”

    EIA asked NJEA for a response. The union replied that “It is a lie that NJEA has ‘dumbed down’ a brochure for anyone at any time. This story is an attack designed to slander NJEA. It is a smear campaign based on one falsehood after another.” The union says the “African-American version” was actually meant as a replacement for the “parent’s resource” version, which it considered too wordy.

    NJEA’s statement also noted that “When we received a call from a reporter, we realized the error on our web page and immediately corrected it.” Asked by EIA to clarify what error it believed it had made, NJEA responded that the African-American version “should never have been labeled that way” and should never have been posted alongside the earlier version. According to NJEA, the page with the three versions sat as it was for over a year without anyone noticing the problem. Separate NJEA spokespersons called the web page “a woeful error” and “a mistake.”

    EIA asked its New Jersey readers for their reaction to the story. Some are NJEA members and some are not. Here are a few of their replies:

    *”Until government (including education) becomes color-blind, none of the rest of us will.”

    *”The height of hypocrisy.. If they truly believed that parental involvement is crucial to a child’s education they ought to allow school choice.”

    *”I am stunned at the patronizing.. The process that yielded the result remains a mystery.”

    *”Pretty insulting.. If I were an African-American member, I would be very upset.”

    Above article is quoted from The Education Intelligence Agency www.eiaonline.com 1/27/2003

    ”Roots (Food for Thought)”

    Partnerships Offer Common-Sense Approach to Financing Long-Term Care

    By Janet Stokes Trautwein

    Published: The Heartland Institute 01/01/2003

    The financing of long-term care is an issue of growing concern for many Americans. The demographic make-up of our population is changing, creating a looming crisis in providing — and, most importantly, financing — long-term care services.

    Medicaid is now the primary payer of long-term care services and as a result, state and federal governments bear a tremendous financial burden for these services. Aging baby boomers will exacerbate this problem. Elderly individuals often believe, mistakenly, that Medicare pays for long-term care costs.

    Long-term care costs consume about two-thirds of a typical state’s Medicaid budget. With states running deficits, Medicaid cannot continue to support these outlays. It is critical something be done now to encourage people to plan privately for their long-term care needs, just as they do for their other retirement needs.

    Partnerships an Answer

    Long-term care partnerships offer consumers an alternative to “spending down” their entire life savings by forming a partnership between Medicaid and long-term care insurers. These partnership programs provide access to affordable private long-term care insurance for individuals of moderate income who may not have been able to afford private coverage in the past.

    Consumers who purchase these partnership policies receive a predetermined level of benefit for long-term care services through a private insurer. If the benefits under the private plan are exhausted and the individual still requires services, Medicaid will be available, but without the requirement to spend down all assets, as is usually required to meet Medicaid eligibility criteria. Under most partnership programs, the individual is permitted to retain assets equal to the amount of benefits purchased under the policy, and Medicaid becomes the payer only after the long-term care partnership benefits are exhausted.

    For the first time, there are long-term care partnership bills pending in both chambers of Congress. S. 2199, introduced by Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho), and the companion bill H.R. 1941, sponsored by Representative John Peterson (R-Pennsylvania), take the very important step of allowing long-term care partnership programs to be offered on a favorable basis in all states, bringing affordable access to private long-term care insurance to millions of Americans.

    States Lead the Way

    Four states — California, Connecticut, Indiana, and New York — currently offer long-term care partnership programs. They have proven effective in providing affordable coverage for consumers who otherwise might have been dependent on Medicaid for long-term care services. Sales of long-term care partnership policies have risen dramatically in states where they are allowed, meaning more individuals will utilize partnership benefits rather than turning to their state’s Medicaid program for assistance with long-term care needs.

    Unfortunately, the Tax Act of 1993 (known as the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) contains a provision that prevents additional states from launching long-term care insurance partnership programs on a favorable basis. At least 19 other states have passed resolutions or actual legislation that would enact state partnership programs if the current impediment in federal law is removed. Passage of S. 2199/H.R. 1941 would allow these and other state partnership programs to move forward.

    A wide range of partnership policies is available, some offering coverage for a single year and others for a lifetime, and they contain many of the same features as non-partnership policies. They offer average Americans some affordable financial protection for their home and life savings if they are in need of future long-term care services.

    Long-term care services are becoming increasingly expensive for individuals and state governments. Long-term care partnership programs are an important part of the solution. They not only provide a strong foundation for retirement planning, but also allow more Americans to have greater control over their futures.

    Janet Stokes Trautwein is vice president of government affairs for the National Association of Health Underwriters.

    Above article is quoted from The Heartland Institute www.heartland.org Health Care News January 2003

    ”Evergreen (Today’s Quote)”

    “[Some people] have a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to lower the powerful to their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom. I believe that it is easier to establish an absolute and despotic government amongst a people in which the conditions of society are equal, than amongst any other; and I think that, if such a government were once established amongst such a people, it would not only oppress men, but would eventually strip each of them of several of the highest qualities of humanity. Despotism, therefore, appears to me peculiarly to be dreaded in democratic times. — Alexis de Tocqueville Democracy in America [1835]

    ii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”’
    ”’See Web site”’ https://www.grassrootinstitute.org ”’for further information. Join its efforts at “Nurturing the rights and responsibilities of the individual in a civil society. …” or email or call Grassroot of Hawaii Institute President Richard O. Rowland at mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”’

    Grassroot Perspective – Feb. 20, 2003-New Jersey Education Association Accuses OpinionJournal of Smear Campaign” Over Brochure Controversy; Partnerships Offer Common-Sense Approach to Financing Long-Term Care”

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    “Dick Rowland Image”

    ”Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)”

    – New Jersey Education Association Accuses OpinionJournal of “Smear Campaign” Over Brochure Controversy. The New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) lashed back at an OpinionJournal story entitled “The Soft Bigotry of the Teachers Union,” calling it “a lie” that was “designed to slander NJEA.” Last Tuesday, OpinionJournal’s Best of the Web Today, a daily electronic newsletter of the Wall Street Journal, discovered a page on NJEA’s web site that featured a brochure called “Getting Involved in Your Child’s School.” Though NJEA has since changed the page, the original page and brochures are still available for viewing (at least for today) on Google’s cache at:

    https://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:EAcPpF8m0JcC:www.njea.org/FamilyCircle/default.asp

    The page offered three versions of the brochure. One was labeled “a parent’s resource,” the second was labeled “Spanish version,” and the third was labeled “African-American version.” Individually, the three brochures merely offer parents tips on volunteering at school, interacting with teachers, and creating am environment at home conducive to learning. The controversy arose when the “parent’s resource” version was compared to the “African-American version.” (The Spanish version was essentially a verbatim translation of the African-American version.)

    Here are a few of the differences:

    *Parent’s resource version — “By working in your school, you will become more familiar with its programs, and you will see why they are vital to your child.” African-American version — “By working in your school, you will see how it works.”

    *Parent’s resource version — “To Whom Will I Be Responsible?” African-American version — “How Will I Work with the Teacher?”

    *Parent’s resource version — “Emphasize academics. Too many families get caught up in athletics and in preparing their children for the world of work, where academics should be their first concern.” African-American version — “Tell your child that studying is important.”

    *Parent’s resource version — “Families should make it their responsibility to teach children basic discipline at home, rather than leave this task to teachers.” African-American version — This tip was omitted.

    Best of the Web Today noted its own preference for the African-American version, because it was shorter and more concise. “But another way of looking at it,” the story read, “is that the New Jersey teachers union seems to think their material has to be dumbed down for the benefit of black parents.”

    EIA asked NJEA for a response. The union replied that “It is a lie that NJEA has ‘dumbed down’ a brochure for anyone at any time. This story is an attack designed to slander NJEA. It is a smear campaign based on one falsehood after another.” The union says the “African-American version” was actually meant as a replacement for the “parent’s resource” version, which it considered too wordy.

    NJEA’s statement also noted that “When we received a call from a reporter, we realized the error on our web page and immediately corrected it.” Asked by EIA to clarify what error it believed it had made, NJEA responded that the African-American version “should never have been labeled that way” and should never have been posted alongside the earlier version. According to NJEA, the page with the three versions sat as it was for over a year without anyone noticing the problem. Separate NJEA spokespersons called the web page “a woeful error” and “a mistake.”

    EIA asked its New Jersey readers for their reaction to the story. Some are NJEA members and some are not. Here are a few of their replies:

    *”Until government (including education) becomes color-blind, none of the rest of us will.”

    *”The height of hypocrisy.. If they truly believed that parental involvement is crucial to a child’s education they ought to allow school choice.”

    *”I am stunned at the patronizing.. The process that yielded the result remains a mystery.”

    *”Pretty insulting.. If I were an African-American member, I would be very upset.”

    Above article is quoted from The Education Intelligence Agency www.eiaonline.com 1/27/2003

    ”Roots (Food for Thought)”

    Partnerships Offer Common-Sense Approach to Financing Long-Term Care

    By Janet Stokes Trautwein

    Published: The Heartland Institute 01/01/2003

    The financing of long-term care is an issue of growing concern for many Americans. The demographic make-up of our population is changing, creating a looming crisis in providing — and, most importantly, financing — long-term care services.

    Medicaid is now the primary payer of long-term care services and as a result, state and federal governments bear a tremendous financial burden for these services. Aging baby boomers will exacerbate this problem. Elderly individuals often believe, mistakenly, that Medicare pays for long-term care costs.

    Long-term care costs consume about two-thirds of a typical state’s Medicaid budget. With states running deficits, Medicaid cannot continue to support these outlays. It is critical something be done now to encourage people to plan privately for their long-term care needs, just as they do for their other retirement needs.

    Partnerships an Answer

    Long-term care partnerships offer consumers an alternative to “spending down” their entire life savings by forming a partnership between Medicaid and long-term care insurers. These partnership programs provide access to affordable private long-term care insurance for individuals of moderate income who may not have been able to afford private coverage in the past.

    Consumers who purchase these partnership policies receive a predetermined level of benefit for long-term care services through a private insurer. If the benefits under the private plan are exhausted and the individual still requires services, Medicaid will be available, but without the requirement to spend down all assets, as is usually required to meet Medicaid eligibility criteria. Under most partnership programs, the individual is permitted to retain assets equal to the amount of benefits purchased under the policy, and Medicaid becomes the payer only after the long-term care partnership benefits are exhausted.

    For the first time, there are long-term care partnership bills pending in both chambers of Congress. S. 2199, introduced by Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho), and the companion bill H.R. 1941, sponsored by Representative John Peterson (R-Pennsylvania), take the very important step of allowing long-term care partnership programs to be offered on a favorable basis in all states, bringing affordable access to private long-term care insurance to millions of Americans.

    States Lead the Way

    Four states — California, Connecticut, Indiana, and New York — currently offer long-term care partnership programs. They have proven effective in providing affordable coverage for consumers who otherwise might have been dependent on Medicaid for long-term care services. Sales of long-term care partnership policies have risen dramatically in states where they are allowed, meaning more individuals will utilize partnership benefits rather than turning to their state’s Medicaid program for assistance with long-term care needs.

    Unfortunately, the Tax Act of 1993 (known as the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) contains a provision that prevents additional states from launching long-term care insurance partnership programs on a favorable basis. At least 19 other states have passed resolutions or actual legislation that would enact state partnership programs if the current impediment in federal law is removed. Passage of S. 2199/H.R. 1941 would allow these and other state partnership programs to move forward.

    A wide range of partnership policies is available, some offering coverage for a single year and others for a lifetime, and they contain many of the same features as non-partnership policies. They offer average Americans some affordable financial protection for their home and life savings if they are in need of future long-term care services.

    Long-term care services are becoming increasingly expensive for individuals and state governments. Long-term care partnership programs are an important part of the solution. They not only provide a strong foundation for retirement planning, but also allow more Americans to have greater control over their futures.

    Janet Stokes Trautwein is vice president of government affairs for the National Association of Health Underwriters.

    Above article is quoted from The Heartland Institute www.heartland.org Health Care News January 2003

    ”Evergreen (Today’s Quote)”

    “[Some people] have a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to lower the powerful to their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom. I believe that it is easier to establish an absolute and despotic government amongst a people in which the conditions of society are equal, than amongst any other; and I think that, if such a government were once established amongst such a people, it would not only oppress men, but would eventually strip each of them of several of the highest qualities of humanity. Despotism, therefore, appears to me peculiarly to be dreaded in democratic times. — Alexis de Tocqueville Democracy in America [1835]

    ii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”’
    ”’See Web site”’ https://www.grassrootinstitute.org ”’for further information. Join its efforts at “Nurturing the rights and responsibilities of the individual in a civil society. …” or email or call Grassroot of Hawaii Institute President Richard O. Rowland at mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com or (808) 487-4959.”’

    From Believing in an Inner Child to Reaching One's Goals

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    “Suzanne Gelb Image”

    Dear Readers:

    Answers to the questions in today’s column can be supplemented with excerpts from my book “Welcome Home. A Book About Overcoming Addictions” (p. 85 for Answer 1; p. 86 for Answer 2). For more information visit my Web site at https://www.DrGelbSays.com

    ”Inner Child – What Does it Mean?”

    Dear Dr. Gelb:

    This idea of the inner child floats around a lot. I hear about it on Oprah and Dr. Phil and there are books about it. I can’t for the life of me picture an inner child, even though I love children and I am a mom. To me, I was once a child and now I am an adult. Can you shed some light on this?

    Tender Years

    A: Dr. Gelb says . . .

    Dear Tender:

    It is no secret that many adults experienced unfairness, emotional pain and frustration while growing up. And along with that, they developed fears, guilt and shame that persist into adulthood. This is often called one’s frame of reference and it helps us relate to others and to make decisions. The inner child concept that people talk about can be understood as the child that we once were — in many instances, scared, gullible, and frustrated.

    ”Visualizations – Do They Work?”

    Dear Dr. Gelb:

    My friend has cancer and is using visualizations for healing. I am not sick, but my friend encourages me to use visualizations to reach my goals. I want to share my friend’s life with him as much as I can, but I don’t know much about visualizations. Should I take his advice?

    Friend

    A: Dr. Gelb says . . .

    Dear Friend:

    Many people find it difficult to visualize or form some type of mental image in their mind. An effective alternative can be to use the imagination. It is not hard to imagine being somewhere and doing something. It is not hard to then imagine someone else being there as well. This type of mental behavior is closely related to visualization.

    Visualization tends to be most effective when one is relaxed. Some disciplines, such as yoga, teach states of relaxation that can facilitate visualization. So, instead of using the word visualize, I like the idea of relaxing and then imagining that those things one wants to happen are actually occurring.

    Continued practice and repetition of this type of imagining can produce positive results in a variety of areas. I found visualization to be useful when I was studying for the bar exam. I visualized myself reading the question, and that as I was doing this my mind recognized the answer immediately, and then I visualized myself writing down the answer. I passed the exam on the first try.

    ”’Suzanne J. Gelb, Ph.D., J.D. authors this daily column, Dr. Gelb Says, which answers questions about daily living and behavior issues. Dr. Gelb is a licensed psychologist in private practice in Honolulu. She holds a Ph.D. in Psychology and a Ph.D. in Human Services. Dr. Gelb is also a published author of a book on Overcoming Addictions and a book on Relationships.”’

    ”’This column is intended for entertainment use only and is not intended for the purpose of psychological diagnosis, treatment or personalized advice. For more about the column’s purpose, see”’ “An Online Intro to Dr. Gelb Says”

    ”’Email your questions to mailto:DrGelbSays@hawaiireporter.com More information on Dr. Gelb’s services and related resources available at”’ https://www.DrGelbSays.com

    From Believing in an Inner Child to Reaching One’s Goals

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    “Suzanne Gelb Image”

    Dear Readers:

    Answers to the questions in today’s column can be supplemented with excerpts from my book “Welcome Home. A Book About Overcoming Addictions” (p. 85 for Answer 1; p. 86 for Answer 2). For more information visit my Web site at https://www.DrGelbSays.com

    ”Inner Child – What Does it Mean?”

    Dear Dr. Gelb:

    This idea of the inner child floats around a lot. I hear about it on Oprah and Dr. Phil and there are books about it. I can’t for the life of me picture an inner child, even though I love children and I am a mom. To me, I was once a child and now I am an adult. Can you shed some light on this?

    Tender Years

    A: Dr. Gelb says . . .

    Dear Tender:

    It is no secret that many adults experienced unfairness, emotional pain and frustration while growing up. And along with that, they developed fears, guilt and shame that persist into adulthood. This is often called one’s frame of reference and it helps us relate to others and to make decisions. The inner child concept that people talk about can be understood as the child that we once were — in many instances, scared, gullible, and frustrated.

    ”Visualizations – Do They Work?”

    Dear Dr. Gelb:

    My friend has cancer and is using visualizations for healing. I am not sick, but my friend encourages me to use visualizations to reach my goals. I want to share my friend’s life with him as much as I can, but I don’t know much about visualizations. Should I take his advice?

    Friend

    A: Dr. Gelb says . . .

    Dear Friend:

    Many people find it difficult to visualize or form some type of mental image in their mind. An effective alternative can be to use the imagination. It is not hard to imagine being somewhere and doing something. It is not hard to then imagine someone else being there as well. This type of mental behavior is closely related to visualization.

    Visualization tends to be most effective when one is relaxed. Some disciplines, such as yoga, teach states of relaxation that can facilitate visualization. So, instead of using the word visualize, I like the idea of relaxing and then imagining that those things one wants to happen are actually occurring.

    Continued practice and repetition of this type of imagining can produce positive results in a variety of areas. I found visualization to be useful when I was studying for the bar exam. I visualized myself reading the question, and that as I was doing this my mind recognized the answer immediately, and then I visualized myself writing down the answer. I passed the exam on the first try.

    ”’Suzanne J. Gelb, Ph.D., J.D. authors this daily column, Dr. Gelb Says, which answers questions about daily living and behavior issues. Dr. Gelb is a licensed psychologist in private practice in Honolulu. She holds a Ph.D. in Psychology and a Ph.D. in Human Services. Dr. Gelb is also a published author of a book on Overcoming Addictions and a book on Relationships.”’

    ”’This column is intended for entertainment use only and is not intended for the purpose of psychological diagnosis, treatment or personalized advice. For more about the column’s purpose, see”’ “An Online Intro to Dr. Gelb Says”

    ”’Email your questions to mailto:DrGelbSays@hawaiireporter.com More information on Dr. Gelb’s services and related resources available at”’ https://www.DrGelbSays.com

    Legislative Hearing Notices – Feb. 20, 2003

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    The following hearing notices, which are subject to change, were sorted and taken from the Hawaii State Capitol Web site. Please check that site for updates and/or changes to the schedule at

    “Hawaii State Legislature Sidebar”

    Go there and click on the Hearing Date to view the Hearing Notice.

    Hearings notices for both House and Senate measures in all committees:

    Hearing

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 9:00 AM GM103 Submitting for consideration and confirmation to the Board of Directors, Housing and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii, Gubernatorial Nominees STEPHANIE AVEIRO, for a term to expire 06-30-07; TAIAOPO TUIMALEALIIFANO (Tenants) and FRANK JUNG (Hawai’i), for terms to expire 06-30-06; CHARLES STED (Honolulu), for a term to expire 06-30-05; TRAVIS THOMPSON (Maui) and CHARLES KING (Kauai), for terms to expire 06-30-04. CPH

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB378 RELATING TO ACCRETED LANDS. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB552 SD1 RELATING TO LANDOWNERS’ LIABILITY. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB633 PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE HAWAII CONSTITUTION TO PREVENT CONDEMNATION OF TRUST LANDS. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1041 RELATING TO LIABILITY. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1242 RELATING TO FAIR ACCESS FOR STATE GOVERNMENT. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1415 RELATING TO PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS WITHIN THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1418 SD1 RELATING TO PUBLIC LAND LIABILITY. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1418 SD1 RELATING TO PUBLIC LAND LIABILITY. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1449 RELATING TO PUBLIC MEETINGS. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1594 RELATING TO THE COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. JHW

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB6 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR COACHES’ STIPENDS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB16 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB17 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB39 SD1 RELATING TO PARKS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB41 RELATING TO PUBLIC CONTRACTS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB58 RELATING TO SCHOOL REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB60 RELATING TO SCHOOL ASSESSMENT LIAISONS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB75 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB248 SD2 RELATING TO THE CONVENTION CENTER. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB319 SD1 RELATING TO COUNTIES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB337 SD1 RELATING TO THE MANAGEMENT OF SCHOOL FACILITIES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB339 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB342 RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL PURPOSE REVENUE BONDS FOR HANAHAUOLI SCHOOL. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB343 RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL PURPOSE REVENUE BONDS FOR CHAMINADE UNIVERSITY. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB353 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB377 RELATING TO TAXATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB395 SD1 RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL PURPOSE REVENUE BONDS FOR HO’ALA SCHOOL. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB397 RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL PURPOSE REVENUE BONDS FOR MID-PACIFIC INSTITUTE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB489 RELATING TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB490 RELATING TO RENEWABLE ENERGY. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB492 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN STATE FACILITIES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB498 SD1 RELATING TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB505 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE EMERGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL WORKFORCE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB560 SD1 RELATING TO SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB574 RELATING TO CAPTIVE INSURANCE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB596 SD1 RELATING TO ENERGY CONSERVATION TAX CREDIT. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB637 RELATING TO MISSING CHILDREN. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB666 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB832 SD1 RELATING TO THE HAWAII STATE PUBLIC LIBRARY SYSTEM. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB848 RELATING TO THE ISLAND OF KAHOOLAWE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB857 SD1 RELATING TO ALIEN INVASIVE SPECIES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB864 SD1 RELATING TO CHILD WELFARE SERVICES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB870 SD1 RELATING TO HOMELESS SERVICES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB883 SD1 RELATING TO ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB884 MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR MEDICAID PROGRAMS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB913 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE LOSS MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB919 SD1 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR BIOREMEDIATION RESEARCH. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB956 SD1 RELATING TO PRESUMPTIVE MEDICAID ELIGIBILITY FOR PREGNANT WOMEN. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB959 RELATING TO CHILD ABUSE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB961 RELATING TO GOOD BEGINNINGS ALLIANCE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB964 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR TREATMENT SERVICES FOR CHILD VICTIMS OF INTRAFAMILIAL SEXUAL ABUSE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB974 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE PRESCHOOL OPEN DOORS PROGRAM. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB995 SD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1055 SD1 RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1072 SD1 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR ISPED CLERK TYPISTS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1087 SD1 RELATING TO CONDOMINIUMS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1183 RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL PURPOSE REVENUE BONDS FOR ST. PATRICK SCHOOL. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1210 RELATING TO THE HAWAII TOURISM AUTHORITY. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1253 SD1 RELATING TO ECONOMIC DATA. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1283 RELATING TO THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF HAWAII. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1286 RELATING TO THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF HAWAII. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1315 RELATING TO INSURANCE FRAUD. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1316 RELATING TO DENTAL INSURANCE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1322 RELATING TO TAXATION OF PREMIUMS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1351 RELATING TO BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR ADULT SERVICES PROGRAMS. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1352 SD1 RELATING TO HOME AND COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1353 MAKING AN EMERGENCY APPROPRIATION FOR MEDICAID. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1354 SD1 RELATING TO HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1381 SD1 RELATING TO THE HAWAII STATE PUBLIC LIBRARY SYSTEM. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1411 SD1 RELATING TO THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIAL FUND. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1421 SD1 RELATING TO EARNED INCOME DEDUCTION FOR PUBLIC HOUSING RENT CALCULATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1461 RELATING TO TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATIONS TAX. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1517 SD1 RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1533 SD1 RELATING TO TAXATION. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1580 RELATING TO ADVOCACY FOR HUMAN SERVICES. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1584 SD1 RELATING TO CHILD CARE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1593 RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE. WAM

    2/20/03 9:00 AM SB1629 RELATING TO THE GENERAL EXCISE TAX. WAM

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 10:00 AM SB29 RELATING TO SPECIAL WASTES RECYCLING. ENE

    2/20/03 10:00 AM SB1505 RELATING TO INVASIVE SPECIES. ENE

    2/20/03 10:00 AM SB1505 RELATING TO INVASIVE SPECIES. ENE

    2/20/03 10:00 AM SB1611 RELATING TO THE DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINER PROGRAM. ENE

    2/20/03 10:00 AM SB1681 RELATING TO VEHICULAR EMISSIONS. ENE

    2/20/03 10:00 AM HB130 RELATING TO PENSION AND RETIREMENT SYSTEMS. FIN

    2/20/03 10:00 AM HB317 HD2 RELATING TO THE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM. FIN

    2/20/03 10:00 AM HB553 HD1 RELATING TO THE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM. FIN

    2/20/03 10:00 AM HB986 HD1 RELATING TO DEATH BENEFITS OF SURVIVING CHILDREN OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. FIN

    2/20/03 10:00 AM HB1157 RELATING TO THE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM. FIN

    2/20/03 10:00 AM HB1159 RELATING TO THE EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM. FIN

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 10:45 AM HB50 HD1 RELATING TO THE HAWAII PUBLIC EMPLOYEES HEALTH FUND. FIN

    2/20/03 10:45 AM HB606 HD1 RELATING TO COMMUNITY SERVICES. FIN

    2/20/03 10:45 AM HB968 RELATING TO UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. FIN

    2/20/03 10:45 AM HB1373 RELATING TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. FIN

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB196 RELATING TO A GEOTHERMAL-TO-HYDROGEN TAX CREDIT. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB288 HD1 RELATING TO ENERGY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB473 HD1 RELATING TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB737 HD2 RELATING TO CLEAN WATER. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB744 HD1 RELATING TO FUEL. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB1029 RELATING TO PERMIT APPROVALS. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB1127 HD1 RELATING TO ENERGY RESOURCES. FIN

    2/20/03 11:30 AM HB1405 HD1 RELATING TO BIOFUEL. FIN

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 12:30 PM HB83 HD1 RELATING TO A LAND EXCHANGE BETWEEN THE STATE OF HAWAII AND THE ALOHA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA. FIN

    2/20/03 12:30 PM HB179 HD1 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND IN NORTH KONA. FIN

    2/20/03 12:30 PM HB426 RELATING TO PUBLIC LANDS. FIN

    2/20/03 12:30 PM HB1053 RELATING TO CONSERVATION. FIN

    2/20/03 12:30 PM HB1613 HD1 RELATING TO NORTH KOHALA. FIN

    2/20/03 12:30 PM HB1627 RELATING TO NEW MOTOR VEHICLES. FIN

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 1:15 PM SB1043 RELATING TO HAWAII’S BALANCE OF TRADE. ECD

    2/20/03 1:15 PM SB1284 RELATING TO THE SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT. ECD

    2/20/03 1:15 PM SB126 RELATING TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. ECD/TMG

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 1:30 PM HB32 HD2 RELATING TO EDUCATION. FIN

    2/20/03 1:30 PM HB281 RELATING TO STATE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE. FIN

    2/20/03 1:30 PM HB289 HD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. FIN

    2/20/03 1:30 PM HB292 HD1 RELATING TO THE SCHOOL PRIORITY FUND. FIN

    2/20/03 1:30 PM HB712 RELATING TO THE STATE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT SPECIAL FUND. FIN

    2/20/03 1:30 PM HB1176 HD1 RELATING TO EDUCATION. FIN

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB43 HD1 RELATING TO INSURANCE FRAUD. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB285 HD1 RELATING TO ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB373 HD1 RELATING TO POLITICAL SPEECH. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB385 HD1 RELATING TO THE PREVENTION OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB548 HD2 RELATING TO ANATOMICAL GIFTS. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB865 HD1 RELATING TO CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB1182 HD1 RELATING TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES. JUD

    2/20/03 2:00 PM HB1198 HD1 RELATING TO CHILD LABOR. JUD

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB85 RELATING TO ACCRETED LANDS. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB192 HD1 RELATING TO ACCRETED LANDS. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB193 RELATING TO LANDOWNERS’ LIABILITY. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB524 RELATING TO LANDOWNERS’ LIABILITY. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB526 HD1 RELATING TO HOME OCCUPATIONS WITHIN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB529 RELATING TO CAVE PROTECTION. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB581 RELATING TO SHARK FEEDING. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB1214 HD1 RELATING TO PUBLIC LAND LIABILITY. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB1261 HD1 RELATING TO PUBLIC SAFETY. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB1285 RELATING TO HISTORIC SITES. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HB1286 RELATING TO NATIVE HAWAIIAN HISTORIC SITES. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HCR26 REQUESTING THE SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO REVIEW THE FITNESS OF CONGRESSMAN HOWARD COBLE TO CONTINUE AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY. JUD

    2/20/03 2:15 PM HR30 REQUESTING THE SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO REVIEW THE FITNESS OF CONGRESSMAN HOWARD COBLE TO CONTINUE AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY. JUD

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 2:30 PM HB75 HD1 RELATING TO CONDOMINIUMS. FIN

    2/20/03 2:30 PM HB320 HD2 RELATING TO RISK MANAGEMENT. FIN

    2/20/03 2:30 PM HB418 HD1 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII. FIN

    2/20/03 2:30 PM HB1163 RELATING TO DENTAL INSURANCE. FIN

    2/20/03 2:30 PM HB1495 HD1 RELATING TO CREMATION. FIN

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SB1061 RELATING TO ADULT RESIDENTIAL CARE HOMES. HMS/HTH

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SB993 RELATING TO SMOKING. HTH

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SB1356 RELATING TO REGISTRATION OF VITAL STATISTICS. HTH

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SB1364 RELATING TO PSYCHIATRIC FACILITIES. HTH

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SB1516 RELATING TO DENTAL HEALTH. HTH

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SB861 RELATING TO ADULT RESIDENTIAL CARE HOMES. HTH/HMS

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SCR8 EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR A WOMEN’S HEALTH PLATFORM THAT RECOGNIZES SERIOUS INEQUITIES IN THE HEALTH PREVENTION AND TREATMENT OF WOMEN, AND CALLS FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THESE INEQUITIES TO IMPROVE THE HEALTH STATUS OF WOMEN IN HAWAII. HTH/HMS

    2/20/03 2:45 PM SCR13 REQUESTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A STATEWIDE INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE TO DEVELOP A PLAN FOR COORDINATION AND EXPANSION OF SERVICES PROVIDED THROUGH HEALTHY START TO YOUNG CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES. HTH/HMS

    ”Date Time Bill Number Measure Title Committee”

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB53 RELATING TO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION’S MARITIME RELATED USES. FIN

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB58 RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLES. FIN

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB579 HD1 RELATING TO BOATING. FIN

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB1075 HD1 RELATING TO IMPLEMENTATION OF A FIXED RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM. FIN

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB1230 RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION. FIN

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB1247 MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONTRAFLOW LANE ON FARRINGTON HIGHWAY ALONG THE WAIANAE COAST FROM MOHIHI STREET TO PILIOKAHI AVENUE. FIN

    2/20/03 3:30 PM HB1572 HD2 RELATING TO PARKING FOR DISABLED PERSONS. FIN

    ”’To reach legislators, see:”’ “Representatives at a Glance” and “Senators at a Glance”

    The Costs of Drug Testing is Too High for Hawaii's Public Schools-In My Opinion

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    “Laura Brown Image”

    Senate President Robert Bunda, D-North Shore, suggested in his opening day speech that children in Hawaii’s public schools should be tested for illegal drug use while at school. This was part of his strategy to help curb the high drug usage by Hawaii’s population.

    Gov. Linda Lingle, in her State of the State address, said she agreed with Bunda that the possibility of drug testing students at school could help bring down drug usage and addiction in Hawaii. Hawaii currently ranks first in ice usage, according to Hawaii’s U.S. Attorney Ed Kubo. Though details of the plan were not yet developed, Lingle said at a press conference following her State of the State, that parents could opt out their children making the program voluntary.

    However, many people in Hawaii do not believe there should be drug testing in Hawaii’s public schools, voluntary or otherwise. And there is some logic behind their concern, especially considering how other programs nationally have failed.

    There is a good reason why only 3 percent of school districts nationally drug test students: the costs far outweigh the benefits.

    Nevertheless, a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing schools to drug test interscholastic athletes set off a drug company marketing frenzy in an attempt to capture a share of the potential education market.

    In a June 22, 2002, press release, Worldwide Medical Corp. President and CEO Daniel G. McGuire stated that the court decision would “accelerate the company’s focus towards the education marketplace.” Employee drug testing already is a $1 billion dollar per year market in the United States.

    As an enticement to schools, some drug companies are offering free drug testing paraphernalia for the first year of a school’s program.

    Sports Safe Testing Service Inc., Ohio, estimates the total cost of voluntary drug testing of 5 students per year at $7,500. Schools in Dublin, Ohio, spent $70,000 the first year and netted 20 students who tested positive for some kind of banned substance. The school board then decided it would be more beneficial to hire a full-time drug and alcohol counselor.

    More costly is mandatory testing of athletes, since it is usually done on the whole team at the beginning of each season, followed by weekly random testing of 10 percent of in-season athletes. A school with 700 athletes can expect to pay annually between $54,000 and $88,000. Hair testing can cost up to $200 per sample. However, these costs are based on actual laboratory costs only.

    ”A Certified Lab is Required”

    First, a community must identify which drugs are causing the problems in their schools. For example, if a community suffers from ice or Ecstasy use, they must find a lab that specifically screens for those drugs.

    Many labs advertise the ability to do urine drug testing, but not all labs are certified by the government. The only way to increase the odds of obtaining accurate results is to use a government certified lab, which means it must have a minimum of 10 years experience in toxicology testing and chain-of-custody procedures. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) labs use a Substance Abuse Panel to screen for amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine, marijuana, codeine, methadone and phencyclidine.

    A Medical Review Officer (MRO) must be used to review results and make final certification. A MRO is a licensed MD trained and certified in drug testing by the Medical Review Officer Certified Council (MROCC). The closest SAMHSA certified lab to Hawaii is in San Diego.

    ”Window of Detectability”’

    Most drugs have a small window of detectability before the metabolites are absorbed by the body. In other words, schools will not be able to determine weekend drinking. LSD metabolites are so small, they are unlikely to be detected at all.

    Masking techniques and products are widely available. While radioimmunoassy (RIA) may be used for preliminary screening, Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy (GC-MS) provides a “molecular fingerprint” of the drug. This is the only acceptable industry standard for drug-screen confirmations.

    ”False Positives can Lead to Litigation”

    Although the MRO shares liability with the school for test results, the risk of obtaining a false positive is high.

    There are more than 100 prescription drugs that can cause a positive result.

    Ibuprofen can result in a false positive for marijuana. Second hand tobacco or marijuana smoke can be detected, as well as any medication containing codeine.

    Students who take Ritalin, Dexedrine or other prescription medications for learning disabilities may be misidentified as substance abusers.

    Litigation costs then would undoubtedly far exceed routine lab costs.

    ”Drug Testing Hurts Morale”

    The message drug testing sends from adults to students is they cannot be trusted.

    Research shows that participation in extra-curricular activities greatly decreases the likelihood of drug, alcohol or tobacco use.

    The negative consequence of drug testing may be decreased participation in extra-curricular activities by students who most need positive redirection and reinforcement.

    School personnel must also act as monitors in the collection process. This disrupts the school environment and destroys privacy. Strict refrigeration requirements may result in urine samples being stored in staff refrigerators along side their lunches.

    It would only be a matter of time before the unions precluded their members from participation in this process and extra staff would have to be hired to carry out the program in each school.

    Lack of certified labs, costs of testing and monitoring, probability of litigation and the shifting of teacher responsibility from academics to policing all add up to a price too great for Hawaii’s school system to bear.

    ”’Laura Brown is a researcher and the education writer for Hawaii Reporter. She can be reached via email at:”’ mailto:Laurabrown@hawaii.rr.com

    The Costs of Drug Testing is Too High for Hawaii’s Public Schools-In My Opinion

    Hawaii Reporter
    -
    0

    “Laura Brown Image”

    Senate President Robert Bunda, D-North Shore, suggested in his opening day speech that children in Hawaii’s public schools should be tested for illegal drug use while at school. This was part of his strategy to help curb the high drug usage by Hawaii’s population.

    Gov. Linda Lingle, in her State of the State address, said she agreed with Bunda that the possibility of drug testing students at school could help bring down drug usage and addiction in Hawaii. Hawaii currently ranks first in ice usage, according to Hawaii’s U.S. Attorney Ed Kubo. Though details of the plan were not yet developed, Lingle said at a press conference following her State of the State, that parents could opt out their children making the program voluntary.

    However, many people in Hawaii do not believe there should be drug testing in Hawaii’s public schools, voluntary or otherwise. And there is some logic behind their concern, especially considering how other programs nationally have failed.

    There is a good reason why only 3 percent of school districts nationally drug test students: the costs far outweigh the benefits.

    Nevertheless, a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing schools to drug test interscholastic athletes set off a drug company marketing frenzy in an attempt to capture a share of the potential education market.

    In a June 22, 2002, press release, Worldwide Medical Corp. President and CEO Daniel G. McGuire stated that the court decision would “accelerate the company’s focus towards the education marketplace.” Employee drug testing already is a $1 billion dollar per year market in the United States.

    As an enticement to schools, some drug companies are offering free drug testing paraphernalia for the first year of a school’s program.

    Sports Safe Testing Service Inc., Ohio, estimates the total cost of voluntary drug testing of 5 students per year at $7,500. Schools in Dublin, Ohio, spent $70,000 the first year and netted 20 students who tested positive for some kind of banned substance. The school board then decided it would be more beneficial to hire a full-time drug and alcohol counselor.

    More costly is mandatory testing of athletes, since it is usually done on the whole team at the beginning of each season, followed by weekly random testing of 10 percent of in-season athletes. A school with 700 athletes can expect to pay annually between $54,000 and $88,000. Hair testing can cost up to $200 per sample. However, these costs are based on actual laboratory costs only.

    ”A Certified Lab is Required”

    First, a community must identify which drugs are causing the problems in their schools. For example, if a community suffers from ice or Ecstasy use, they must find a lab that specifically screens for those drugs.

    Many labs advertise the ability to do urine drug testing, but not all labs are certified by the government. The only way to increase the odds of obtaining accurate results is to use a government certified lab, which means it must have a minimum of 10 years experience in toxicology testing and chain-of-custody procedures. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) labs use a Substance Abuse Panel to screen for amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine, marijuana, codeine, methadone and phencyclidine.

    A Medical Review Officer (MRO) must be used to review results and make final certification. A MRO is a licensed MD trained and certified in drug testing by the Medical Review Officer Certified Council (MROCC). The closest SAMHSA certified lab to Hawaii is in San Diego.

    ”Window of Detectability”’

    Most drugs have a small window of detectability before the metabolites are absorbed by the body. In other words, schools will not be able to determine weekend drinking. LSD metabolites are so small, they are unlikely to be detected at all.

    Masking techniques and products are widely available. While radioimmunoassy (RIA) may be used for preliminary screening, Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy (GC-MS) provides a “molecular fingerprint” of the drug. This is the only acceptable industry standard for drug-screen confirmations.

    ”False Positives can Lead to Litigation”

    Although the MRO shares liability with the school for test results, the risk of obtaining a false positive is high.

    There are more than 100 prescription drugs that can cause a positive result.

    Ibuprofen can result in a false positive for marijuana. Second hand tobacco or marijuana smoke can be detected, as well as any medication containing codeine.

    Students who take Ritalin, Dexedrine or other prescription medications for learning disabilities may be misidentified as substance abusers.

    Litigation costs then would undoubtedly far exceed routine lab costs.

    ”Drug Testing Hurts Morale”

    The message drug testing sends from adults to students is they cannot be trusted.

    Research shows that participation in extra-curricular activities greatly decreases the likelihood of drug, alcohol or tobacco use.

    The negative consequence of drug testing may be decreased participation in extra-curricular activities by students who most need positive redirection and reinforcement.

    School personnel must also act as monitors in the collection process. This disrupts the school environment and destroys privacy. Strict refrigeration requirements may result in urine samples being stored in staff refrigerators along side their lunches.

    It would only be a matter of time before the unions precluded their members from participation in this process and extra staff would have to be hired to carry out the program in each school.

    Lack of certified labs, costs of testing and monitoring, probability of litigation and the shifting of teacher responsibility from academics to policing all add up to a price too great for Hawaii’s school system to bear.

    ”’Laura Brown is a researcher and the education writer for Hawaii Reporter. She can be reached via email at:”’ mailto:Laurabrown@hawaii.rr.com

    1...1,9711,9721,973...2,029Page 1,972 of 2,029

    Recent

    Most Commented

    Popular

    Contact us