The financial pinch is not only affecting the state, but the counties as well where benign neglect over the years has put county officials in a bind similar to the one with which their state counterparts are now dealing — too much spending and not enough revenues.

While the reasons for this dilemma differ from county to county, all counties are faced with the same challenge of not having enough resources to fund all the programs on their plate. Ah, but that’s the problem, too many programs to spend on and not enough money. Same problem the state faces.

Unfortunately, county councils usually decide how much they want to spend first, then the painful part comes later when they have to raise the property tax to accommodate that spending. Thus, the disconnect between meeting wants and asking taxpayers to pay for those wants occurs each year.

The various constituents of the “wants” march down to city hall or the county building demanding their favorite program or service not be cut or if it is cut it will mean the end of the world.

So the county acquiesces to each demand not wanting to offend any constituency and at the end of the day they realize, they have one heck of a whopping amount of funds that need to be appropriated.

Herein lies the problem, because county officials want to be a friend of all and an enemy of none, they lack the ability to say no to a project.

However, by not having the ability to say no to any one program constituent, they are jeopardizing their relationship with the person who has to foot the bill, the taxpayer.

And in many cases those who ask for full funding of programs are the very same taxpayers who decry increases in the real property tax rate.

So what can elected officials do?

It seems that elected officials need to equate the cost of appropriating the funds for a program and service and what that funding will mean as far as an increase in the real property tax rate.

Of course, there are certainly legitimate functions for which the real property tax is the justifiable means of financing. These programs or services are those which are considered core functions of the county. These services make up the mission statement of the county.

What are core functions? They are public safety, police and fire protection, health and sanitation. In local lingo, it is “make sure no one breaks in my house, make sure my house no burn down, my toilet flushes and pick up my garbage.” Everything beyond that is pure frosting on the cake. These are the functions that should be funded out of the real property tax and not be an afterthought after the property tax is used for something else.

This is the case in the City & County of Honolulu where the administration is suggesting cutting back on garbage pick up and charging a monthly fee if a family wants more than once-a-week garbage collection.

All these years the people of Honolulu have enjoyed twice a week garbage collection paid from property tax collections. Now the administration wants to charge $8 a month for those who want the second weekly pick up.

The irony is that the same administration has berated the Council for proposing to cut the city’s office of economic development’s popular “brunch on the beach” programs.

The administration argues that it is important for the city to promote Honolulu as a place to do business so that jobs can be created. The problem with that is that the state is already doing that, promoting Hawaii as a place to do business.

Is this a duplication of services or is this a duplication of services? And are real property taxpayers being asked to pay for this promotion program out of property taxes that used to pay for twice-a-week garbage pick up?

If the city administration of Honolulu wanted to make Honolulu a more attractive place to do business, they could do it without spending a dime. In fact, they just might have to spend less as one of the major criticisms is that it takes so long to get approvals for projects that it even prompted one state legislator to try and pass a bill to override all of the city approval requirements so a new medical center could be built in central Oahu.

So what’s the point? County officials need to go back and examine what are the core functions that have been mandated of the county. They should fund those programs out of their real property tax, and if there is any money left over, perhaps consideration can be given to some of the frosting programs.

Local officials need to learn how to say no to spending that is not a core function of county government if they don’t want to raise real property taxes.

”’Lowell L. Kalapa is the president of the Tax Foundation of Hawaii, a private, non-profit educational organization. For more information, please call 536-4587 or log on to”’ https://www.tfhawaii.org

WASHINGTON, April 26 (UPI) — President George W. Bush said Saturday that the U.S. economy is not meeting its full potential as the U.S. Congress is set to reconvene in two days and debate the size of his embattled tax cut proposal.

“We know our economy can grow faster and create new jobs at a faster rate. We also know that the right policies in Washington can unleash the great strengths of this economy, and create the conditions for growth and prosperity,” Bush said during his weekly radio address to the nation.

Bush’s comment’s come at the end of a week where he has tried to salvage the size of his coveted 10-year, $550 billion tax cut package. Lawmakers in the U.S. Senate vowed two weeks ago to hold the amount of the proposal to no more than $350 billion.

“On Monday, members of Congress return from recess, and they will face some important decisions on the future of our economy. I have proposed a series of specific measures to create jobs by removing obstacles to economic growth,” Bush said.

The economy has some strengths, he said. “Lower interest rates have helped more Americans buy their own homes. Gas and other energy prices are coming down, and consumers are getting the savings immediately. Inflation is low, and America’s families are seeing their incomes on the rise,” Bush said.

At the same time, consumer confidence has lagged. Unemployment remained at 5.8 percent in February, up from 5.7 percent in January. The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index declined sharply to 62.5 points in March, down 2.3 points from 64.8 in February. Some 3.5 million Americans are drawing unemployment benefits and total unemployment is 8 million.

“We experienced the shock of a terrorist attack; we have endured a recession; we had to deal with some major corporate scandals; we faced the uncertainty of war; and we have seen a slowdown in the global economy, which weakens demand for American goods and services,” Bush said. Bush traveled this week to Ohio, a state important for his tax cut proposal and his eventual re-election campaign. The state holds 21 electoral votes and is home to Sen. George. V. Voinovich, the Republican who worked with Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, to broker the deal with the Senate leadership to hold down the size of the president’s proposal.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, promised the Republican moderates the tax-cut bill would include half of the $726 billion Bush had asked Congress to provide as a stimulus for the still-sagging U.S. economy. In return, moderates pledged to support the $2.2 trillion federal budget plan.

In the tight partisan split of the Senate, 51 Republicans to 48 Democrats and an Independent who often votes with the Democrats, Snowe and Voinovich are strong enough to stop Bush in the Senate. The House has already adopted a tax reduction plan favorable to Bush. Voinovich told a reporter in Ohio that Bush did not try to lobby him on the tax vote while he was there and added that “He knows where I’m at … We’re very, very good friends.”

The senator said there had been “too much focus on the stimulus package.” Voinovich said he supported the package but not for that big a tax cut. He said that if offsets could be found, lawmakers could do more than $350 billion.

Democrats also say they are not buying Bush’s tax plan. Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, said in a response to Bush’s radio address that the American people are not buying the administration’s massive tax cut, saying: “They are wrapping it in fancy paper and calling it a ‘stimulus package,’ or an ‘economic plan.'”

“They can dress up this tax cut any way they want and it’s still just that — a tax cut for the wealthiest one percent of Americans that does nothing to create jobs and will only sink our nation further into debt.

“A tax cut of this size, directed to the privileged few, will not help our struggling economy – no matter what it is called,” Jones said.

Bush’s plan calls for accelerating the 2001 tax rate reductions and making them retroactive to Jan. 1, 2003. It reduces the so-called marriage penalty in 2003 rather than 2008 and raises the child tax credit from $600 to $1,000 this year instead of in 2010.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Bush’s proposals would reduce revenues by $35 billion and increase outlays by $4 billion. Between 2004 and 2013, analysts anticipate the proposals would reduce revenues by $1.5 trillion and increase outlays by $96 billion.

The president’s proposals would add $621 billion to mandatory spending between 2004 and 2013, the CBO estimates, with Medicare and Medicaid, the federal-state health-care plan for low-income individuals, accounting for 75 percent of that increase.

Congress returns from a two-week recess on Monday. The conference committee will then begin the markup on the tax bill during which lawmakers will hammer out a final number for the president’s signature. The White House said Tuesday that it was important that a majority be found in the Senate and the House to give final passage to the plan as it emerges from the House Ways and Means and the Senate Finance committees.

“The jobs and growth plan I have proposed is fair; it is responsible; it is urgent. And Congress should pass it in full,” Bush said Saturday.

Copyright 2003 by United Press International. All rights reserved.

TAIPEI, Taiwan, April 27 (UPI) — Taiwan Sunday said it would bar visitors from China, Hong Kong, Canada and Singapore to prevent the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome, amid other regional efforts to halt the spread of the flu-like virus that has killed more than 300 people worldwide.

“Fighting the epidemic is like fighting a war,” said Taiwan premier Yu Shyi-kun. “We face an invisible enemy.”

He said Taiwan would no longer issue resident visas to those from China, Hong Kong, Singapore and Canada. The ban includes those with multiple-entry visas. In addition, Taiwanese residents returning from the locations will be quarantined for 10 days.

Taiwan Sunday announced its first death from the virus. A 56-year-old man in Taipei died from the disease. Last week, a SARS outbreak in a Taipei hospital pushed up the number of probable cases from 33 to 55; the number of suspected cases increased from 50 to 72.

The government of Hong Kong, whose residents are affected by the travel ban, criticized the move. In a statement, the government called Taiwan’s move uncalled for and said it was not in the interest of commerce, tourism and other exchanges between Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Twelve more people died from SARS in Hong Kong, bringing the local death toll to 133. The total number of those infected in Hong Kong now stands at 1,543, and there are 24 suspected cases.

But, a Hong Kong health official noted that there had been a slight downturn in the number of SARS cases on the territory.

Margaret Chan, director of health, said Sunday’s 16 new cases was one less than the 17 reported Saturday. Over the last week some 20-30 new cases were reported daily. She warned against complacency, however.

In mainland China, which along with Hong Kong has been the worst hit by the mysterious flu-like virus, another nine deaths were reported, taking the nationwide toll to 131; there are 161 new cases. The Health Ministry said eight of the deaths along with 126 cases were in Beijing.

There are 2,914 cases on the mainland and 1,921 suspected infections. Guangdong province, where the outbreak of the epidemic has been traced, saw three new cases, but no new deaths.

In a bid to stem the flow of the disease, the Chinese government ordered all entertainment venues closed. The order extends to movie theatres and Internet cafes.

The virus, for which there is no known cure, also claimed its 20th victim in Toronto Sunday. Canada has the highest number of SARS cases after Asia.

The head of the World Health Organization, Gro Harlem Brundtland, defended her agency’s efforts to battle the spread of the disease that has affected 20 countries. She defended measures such as advising against travel to Toronto.

“We are doing what is prudent and necessary … before (the disease) becomes global and constant,” she told the British Broadcasting Corp. “If this outbreak reaches poor, undeveloped parts of Africa, we are in trouble.”

In Singapore, the Ministry of Health announced Sunday that as of Tuesday all public hospitals will implement a no-visitor rule for their patients. Of the 198 SARS cases reported so far in the island-state, about 38 percent of them were visitors to hospitals.

The rule will not apply for departments or hospitals treating children or providing obstetric care, where the 1 visitor per patient per day policy will continue.

The policy is flexible, however. Individual hospitals can make case-by-case decisions. The rule will be reviewed at the end of May.

Singapore’s SARS death toll has now reached 21 with an additional death pending further investigation. A total of 131 SARS patients have now been discharged from hospital, while another 47 remain, including 17 in intensive care. There are another 199 probable cases and 111 suspect cases. A total of 2,836 have been placed under home quarantine orders.

In Malaysia, some 280 people, including staff, at a mental hospital for women in Kuching were placed under a 10-day quarantine due to SARS. The move came after what Health Deputy Director-General Datuk Dr Ismail Merican called three “pending (verification) SARS cases.”

In other SARS-related developments Sunday:

*South Korea said it was examining 12 new suspected SARS cases, including a Japanese man.

*The Korea Federation of Small and Medium Businesses said it will continue to suspend the entry of industrial trainees from China and Vietnam because of SARS. The temporary ban may hurt 165 small and medium-sized firms, it said.

*Professor Ron Penny, head of a SARS clinical task force in New South Wales, Australia, said people were adding to the SARS paranoia by wearing face masks. He said people should not exaggerate the problem before the disease hits Australia.

*Taipei’s city government urged its taxi drivers to wear surgical masks as a precaution against SARS. The Taipei City Traffic Department said taxi drivers should open their windows to allow ventilation and said it will provide bleach at taxi stands to help disinfect vehicles.

*In the Indian city of Kolkota, formerly Calcutta, a passenger who arrived on a Bangladesh Biman airlines flight with fever was isolated on suspicion of suffering from SARS. He had visited Hong Kong two weeks ago. The national airline, Air-India, suspended 15 more pilots for refusing to fly to SARS-affected destination. Twenty-seven pilots have been suspended so far for refusing to fly unless they are assured the flight crew has not visited a SARS-hit area in the past 10 days

”’With reporting by Sonia Kolesnikov in Singapore.”’

Copyright 2003 by United Press International. All rights reserved.

“Dick Rowland Image”

”Shoots (News, Views and Quotes)”

– Consumers at the Center

Reuters’ Karen Pallarito reported on the recent annual meeting of the
Washington Business Group on Health (WBGH) by writing, “Consumers are
at the center of the latest equation for taming runaway healthcare
costs..” She says most workers are still sheltered from the
cost of their care “paying only nominal copayments for the services they
receive.” She quotes WBGH president Helen Darling as saying, “What
workers pay is still relatively small. and what the employers are paying
is very, very high,” roughly $10,000 to $13,000 for an employee with
family coverage. Ms. Darling adds, “This is an unsustainable business
model, which is why you see small employers dropping health benefits.” Ms. Darling urged employers to switch from a copayment model to coinsurance to “expose employees to the real cost of benefits.”
SOURCE:
https://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2003/03/13/business/links/20030313e
con001.html

– Modern Healthcare Looks at Consumerism

“Modern Healthcare” includes a major article on consumer driven health
plans in its March 10 issue. Written by Laura Benko, the story is a
pretty comprehensive look at everything going on out there. She starts
with an anecdote about a Kentucky company, Logan Aluminum, that experienced a 23.7 percent increase in insurance costs in 2001, followed by another 8.5 percent in 2002. The company signed up with Aetna’s consumer driven program for its 1,000 workers. The company puts up a $400 HRA to cover part of the $1,000 deductible. The article says Logan is just part of a “fast-growing number of employers” who are exploring this approach. It cites Towers Perrin as saying 44 percent of large employers are now considering the approach, up from 13 percent last year.

The story goes on to describe the various approaches being tried out in
the market, with emphasis on HRA plans but also mentioning MSAs, FSAs,
Blue plans with tiered payment systems, and the Vivius and MyHealthBank
models which “allow employees to select benefits a la carte from an
online menu of coverage arrangements, and to balance deductibles,
premiums, and copayments to suit their personal needs.” The article
notes that physicians are largely supportive of the approach but
hospitals are not, fearing they will be stuck with bad debts. It mentions the results so far, especially from Humana which saw costs go up 4.9 percent when it expected increases of 19.2 percent, and Destiny whose 500 accounts are seeing increases of 12 percent while the rest of the area is getting 20 percent to 30 percent rate hikes. Destiny president Ken Linde says if you count the account funds that are rolling over, the real rate of increase is more like 7 percent.
SOURCE: https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article.cms?articleId=28785

”Roots (Food for Thought)”

– Three Ways to Make President Bush’s Tax Plan Even Better

By Lawrence H. Whitman

Executive Memorandum #856

President Bush has advanced two sound tax principles: (1) Government
should tax income only once; accordingly, policymakers should end double
taxation of dividends. (2) Because future tax rate reductions will not
help today’s economy as much as tax cuts now, provisions of the 2001 tax
cut scheduled for the future (particularly income-tax rate reductions)
should occur immediately. These two commonsense principles and resulting
policies would bolster the economy, lower unemployment, increase wages,
and boost the stock market. To improve the President’s proposal and
unleash an even stronger economy, Congress should apply these principles
to additional areas through the following policies.

End IRA income limits and age restrictions

The government prevents some people from investing in retirement
accounts (deductible IRAs and Roth IRAs) on the basis of how much income
they make. These limits are confusing, inconsistent, and economically
damaging. For example, single people making more than $50,000 may not
deduct traditional IRAs, and those making more than $110,000 may not use
Roth IRAs. These restrictions discourage use of retirement accounts and,
thus, depress investment, increase unemployment, and harm the economy.
Policymakers should allow everyone, regardless of income, to use
retirement accounts.

Current policy also forces people older than 70 to withdraw money from
(and pay taxes on) traditional retirement accounts such as non-Roth IRAs
and 401(k)s. This policy is unfair and harmful: It punishes seniors who
work and discourages others from doing so. Moreover, the government
should not tell seniors when to withdraw their own retirement money.
Ending this discriminatory age requirement would enhance freedom, help
seniors, and remove one government barrier to working, thus triggering a
stronger economy.

Some critics of the President’s proposal to eliminate the double
taxation of dividends mistakenly argue that it would not help
individuals using only retirement accounts. In fact, the policy would
increase general stock prices, benefiting all investors. Given their
desire to help retirement account investors, these critics should
support eliminating income limits and age restrictions for retirement
accounts. The change would benefit retirement account investors and
seniors and increase the use of retirement accounts, prompting more
investment and thereby spurring the economy.

Repeal President Clinton’s 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits
Before 1993, the government taxed only 50 percent of Social Security
benefits. The rationale for this policy was that workers already paid
income taxes on the 6.2 percent of their wages that went to Social
Security through payroll taxes (employers pay the rest) and that the
government should not tax this money again when people receive it as
Social Security benefits. However, in 1993 President Clinton signed a
law that abandoned this principle. The law stipulated that, while the
government would still tax 50 percent of Social Security benefits of
seniors earning between $25,000 and $34,000 ($32,000-$44,000 for married
couples), it would tax 85 percent of benefits of seniors earning over
$34,000 ($44,000 for married couples).

This policy double taxes Social Security benefits and punishes seniors
who work, discouraging many from doing so. Policymakers should repeal
this unfair double tax on Social Security benefits. This reform would
remove a layer of taxation, help senior citizens, lower one more
government obstacle to working, and improve the economy.

Make the entire 2001 tax cut effective immediately

Many of the tax reductions passed in 2001 will not take effect for
years. This situation postpones the benefits of lower rates and causes
economic inefficiency today. For example, under current law, the death
tax will decline until eliminated in 2010. Until then, the government
will impose high tax rates — over 40 percent — on the assets of the
deceased. Moreover, unless policymakers act, in 2011 the death tax will
return to higher rates. This situation demonstrates the need to make the
entire 2001 tax cut permanent. (See Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No.
1614, “Make the Tax Cuts Permanent and Fully Effective Now.”)

The delay in ending the death tax makes planning for it difficult and
forces small-business owners, farmers, and others to divert money from
constructive activities — expanding and hiring — into expensive planning
to deal with onerous taxes. Ending the death tax immediately would
liberate vast resources, helping workers, potential workers, and the
economy. It is immoral to tax people when they die, and it is wrong to
delay rectifying that injustice.

The 2001 tax legislation also increases the amount people may invest
annually in retirement accounts. For IRAs, the limit will increase from
$2,000 to $5,000. For 401(k)s and similar employer-sponsored accounts,
the limit will rise from $10,000 to $15,000. However, these increases
will not fully take effect until 2006 and 2008, respectively. The
government should not punish investment, and it is wrong to delay
correcting this problem. Immediately increasing the allowable limits in
retirement accounts would spur investment, strengthen the stock market,
help the economy, decrease unemployment, and increase wages.

The Federal Budget

Those who cite budget deficit concerns as a way to criticize the
President’s proposal and other pro-growth policies confuse cause and
effect. The budget does not drive the economy; the economy drives the
budget. The proper goal for policymakers should be a strong economy, not
greater government tax revenue. Indeed, a robust economy is the best way
to increase tax revenue. Moreover, policymakers should restrain runaway
government spending, because sound budget policy entails controlling
federal spending and enacting pro-growth tax rate reductions that
unleash a vibrant economy.

Furthermore, despite claims made by opponents of tax cuts, no credible
evidence supports the theory that government deficits noticeably
increase interest rates. Japan has large budget deficits and interest
rates near zero, and long-term interest rates in the United States have
fallen while the federal budget has gone from surpluses to deficits.
Allegations that deficits substantially increase interest rates are
clearly wrong.

Conclusion

President Bush has advanced two sensible principles: End double taxation
and accelerate future tax-rate reductions to go into effect today.
Congress should further the President’s plan by ending income limits and
age restrictions on retirement accounts, repealing the tax increase on
Social Security benefits, and making immediately effective the entire
2001 tax cut. The President has taken steps in the right direction. Now
Congress can make a very good plan even better.

-Lawrence H. Whitman was formerly the Director of the Thomas A. Roe
Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

Above article is quoted from the Heritage Foundation, Executive
Memorandum No. 856 February 3, 2003 https://www.heritage.org

”Evergreen (Today’s Quote)”

“The tragedy of America’s civil rights movement is that it has
substituted today’s government-backed racial favoritism in the
allocation of resources for yesterday’s legal and extra-legal
favoritism. In doing so, civil rights leaders fail to realize that
government allocation of resources produces the kind of conflict that
does not arise with market allocation of resources. Part of the reason
is that any government allocation of resources, including racial
preferential treatment, is a zero-sum game.” — Walter E. Williams

”’Edited by Richard O. Rowland, president of Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. He can be reached at (808) 487-4959 or by email at:”’ mailto:grassroot@hawaii.rr.com ”’For more information, see its Web site at:”’ https://www.grassrootinstitute.org/

“Suzanne Gelb Image”

”Waiting – Is Patience the Answer?”

Dear Dr. Gelb:

Last week my cell phone broke and when I went to have it repaired, the repair person was socializing with a customer even though he knew I was waiting. The service is on a walk in basis, so I did not have an appointment, but I was so annoyed that the technician could have serviced me, but socialized for a while, even though he did end up fixing my phone in a professional manner. Still I have a need to ask, what’s happened to customer service?

Annoyed

Dear Annoyed:

The belief that people should jump to one’s every whim can prompt impatience. People have their own agendas and priorities and it is not uncommon to feel angered when the expectation is that someone should be at our beck and call when we enter their place of business, and not waste our time by socializing with someone else.

It appears to me that the technician has good business skills because he focuses on having satisfied customers who walk away feeling that they are welcome and they are not just a number or an object to satisfy his financial gain. To me that reflects good manners and good business policies.

”Advice – When to Give it?”

Dear Dr. Gelb:

I am not a psychologist or anything, but often people tell me their problems and I usually have some advice or a book to recommend or something helpful to offer. I know it is not always good to give unsolicited advice. When advice is welcome, and when it is obnoxious because it is uncalled for?

Helpful

Dear Helpful:

It appears that you answered your own question. In my opinion it is rude to offer advice to a friend, solicited or unsolicited. Friends can be helpful for moral support, lending a listening ear and offering empathy as emotions are expressed. That is emotional support. If there are needs beyond that, then consulting with a properly trained service provider would likely be a sensible next step.

”’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