Higher power pushed away Lane
The Friday article on Hurricane Lane said, “It’s unclear exactly why leeward areas appear to have been spared” from the rain and wind of the hurricane and went on to speculate about the wind patterns.
However, can I offer a different explanation? Kailua-Kona is home to a Christian university where people pray. I used to be there myself, and when I heard of the damage predicted for Hawaii, I prayed even here on the mainland that Kailua-Kona would be spared from both wind and rain and that God would turn the hurricane out to sea. And that is what happened.
As they used to say at the school, “Let them give glory to the Lord, and proclaim His praise in the islands!”
Chuck Jonas
Tempe, Ariz.
Returned wallet made the day
A big mahalo to the person who found my wallet in the Target parking lot Saturday and turned it in. You cannot imagine my relief in finding it.
Thank you for your honesty and decency, and for showing the aloha spirit that makes us so happy to live here. It’s nice to know that that still exists.
Paul Dobinson
Holualoa
Let’s answer those
statehood ‘what ifs’
Dennis Gregory’s piece Thursday about “what ifs” raised an interesting question, but included some misleading data regarding the 1959 statehood vote and didn’t really answer the question.
With respect to his numbers on the statehood vote, let me provide some corrections. Dennis’ number for the islands’ population was taken from the 1960 census – exactly. At the fairly rapid growth rate of Hawaii population, there would have been somewhat fewer residents in 1959. Also, he ignored the fact that only persons age 21 or older could vote. Looking at the 1960 census, it appears that about 282,700 of the 632,773 persons reported in the census were under age 21 (assuming about one-fifth of those age 20-24 were age 20). That would leave about 350,000 residents age 21 and older.
Also, only citizens may vote – not clear from my quick review of the census data how many non-citizen immigrants there were in Hawaii then, but there would have been some. Finally, only registered voters could vote. Looking at the Office of Elections data, there were only 183,118 registered voters in the 1959 general election, and 171,383 voted (93.6 percent). Dennis said “only 132,773 voted for statehood.” So “only” 72.5 percent of those who voted, voted for statehood. Should we assume that all those people who didn’t register to vote were opposed to statehood?
So, “what if?” What would Hawaii look like today if there had been no overthrow and no statehood? If the U.S. government had not gotten involved? Would there be a Japanese flag flying if the U.S. had stayed out the war in the Pacific?
Looking at the various parts of Polynesia might give a better perspective of “what if.” Tonga managed to remain independent. Samoa had significant colonization by Britain and Germany; Tahiti by the French; New Zealand by the Brits. Would Hawaiians be better off today if Hawaii hadn’t been colonized at all? Or had been dominated by Britain or France? Or Japan? Or even Russia (which had a presence on Kauai for a time)?
I believe the best way to answer this question is by asking: Where do Polynesians today (or for the last several decades) move for opportunity? To Tonga? Samoa? Tahiti? New Zealand? I don’t think so. So far as I can tell, they mostly come to Hawaii and a few mainland states. How many native Hawaiians have chosen to leave for other areas of Polynesia for a better life? Not very many to my knowledge.
Perhaps some Hawaiian activists believe that if there had been no overthrow, Hawaii today would look just the same, except that the Hawaiians would all be wealthy landowners, collecting rents from the rest of us. I doubt it.
Bill Hastings
Kamuela
