September 1992 Home   Newsletters

October 1992

November-December 1992

President's Message (Arlene Ellis)
Testimony before the Planning Commission 9/2/92 (Arlene Ellis)
League Recommendations on Proposed Charter Amendments
Statement on Policy and the Environment - 1 (Astrid Monson)
Statement on Policy and the Environment - 2 (Jean Aoki)
Statement on Policy and the Environment - 3 (Arlene Ellis)
Testimony on Bill 122, Excise Tax Surcharge (Arlene Ellis)
Testimony on Bill 122, Excise Tax Surcharge - 2 (Astrid Monson)
Rail Opponents Challenged to Find Alternatives (Astrid Monson)
Letters to the Editor - 1 (Arlene Ellis)
Letters to the Editor - 2 (Muriel R. Roberts)
Letters to the Editor - 3 (Katherine Kocel (P.K.A. Loew) & Susan MacKinnon)
Letters to the Editor - 4 (Barbara Farwell)

Letters to the Editor - 1

The Honolulu Advertiser

Andrew Loo's letter of July 21 attacks the League of Women Voters' credibility because we oppose the City administration's rail transit proposal. He thinks we should be "impartial." He claims our position is based on a recent poll showing the 71% of the respondents oppose rail.

The League is nonpartisan as to political parties and candidates but decidedly not impartial on issues. Our members decide what issues they want to study, a committee is appointed to get the facts and analyze them, the pros and cons are reported back to the members at large, and then they decide on our position. After we have a position, we act -we testify before legislative bodies, we go on radio and TV, we write letters to the Editor, we lobby, sometimes we even demonstrate and - yes - march!

Our position opposing the rail transit proposal was taken in May 1990, after years of research and discussion among our members of the project's costs and benefits. It represented the overwhelming consensus of our member's opinions.

The poll Mr. Loo refers to was published two years later, in April 1992. Only 22% of the respondents favored the city's plan for a $1.7 billion rail system.

Based on the City's own figures, the rail system will do little or nothing to reduce traffic congestion, or eliminate air pollution, or increase transit ridership. Its costs will be crushing, its benefits minimal. There are lots of things we need more. We urge those who agree with us to let their City Council representatives know their views, before it is too late.

Arlene Kim Ellis

September 1992 Home   Newsletters November-December 1992