-
CHAPTER THREE At the Heart of a Revolution
- University of Hawai'i Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
CHAPTER THREE At the Heart of a Revolution THE EXHILARATION FOLLOWING our political victory at the polls soon abated as the realities of governing became clear. As a newly elected member of the Board of Supervisors, I quickly realized that I was only one vote out of seven. The many changes we as veterans had envisioned could not occur simply by my saying, “I’m going to do this!” To effectively spearhead change, I needed the skills of a negotiator. I had to sit down with the rest of the supervisors and persuade them to take a certain course of action. The three Democrats on the board in 1952 were Noble Kauhane, Mitsuyuki Kido, and myself. The four Republicans were Sam Apoliana, Milton Beamer, Nicholas Teves, and Johnny Asing. Although a majority, the Republicans could not organize the board. There were two Republicans who were willing to work with the Democrats. There was one Republican maverick and another Republican who was by then old and more interested in fixing potholes in the roads for his constituents than organizing the board. With the support of the two Republicans open to working with us, the control of the board was largely put in the hands of the Democrats. In those days, the Board of Supervisors worked well with the Democratic mayor Johnny Wilson, who set a conciliatory tone to government at City Hall. When Neal Blaisdell later became mayor in 1954, I led the board in its stonewalling efforts against him because I was not certain how he would align himself in the Kalihi Tunnel 61 litigation. During the construction of the tunnel, a major structural disaster resulted in the deaths of several construction workers, with the city exposed to millions of dollars in damages. The contractor refused to assume liability for the accident , shifting blame to the city and county. Blaisdell was the newly elected Republican mayor and seemed to have a working relationship with the contractor. Doubtful of his intentions , I used my position with the majority on the board to block many of the mayor’s actions and appointments. However , as soon as Blaisdell was able to convince us that he had the interests of the city first, we started working together. Eventually we became good friends. We learned to trust him, and the mayor and the board worked well together during the rest of Blaisdell’s tenure. Indeed, during my years with the board, I learned that an effective political policymaker is someone with a clear goal or objective who is willing to work diligently behind the scenes, building consensus to achieve those ends. In my view, the politician who plays to the media for his or her own political interests at the expense of others is ultimately ineffective with peers. I always tried to work with the majority of the board. I would not make personal political hay by discrediting the others. In controversial cases with political risks, I learned to take the heat and lead in the decision-making. If at all possible , it was more effective to work in the background and let somebody else receive credit in order to build political consensus and exert leadership. Since symbolic titles were also of little interest to me, I gladly exchanged a title for support to govern effectively. Another limitation on my ability to effect political change was the limited scope and jurisdiction of city and county government . The territorial legislature had the power to enact laws and appropriate funds affecting the entire territory, including the county governments. The Democratic majority’s priorities in the 1950s were to push for reform in tax laws and to expand educational opportunities. The democratically controlled legislature after 1954 began to enact critical laws to effectively change policy in the areas of tax reform, education, 62 AN UNLIKELY REVOLUTIONARY [54.175.5.131] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 13:00 GMT) labor laws, and business. The county government did not have this legislative power. The board dealt mostly with issues such as roads, sewers, and zoning. At each legislative session, the counties went hat in hand to seek help from the legislature. However, there was one advantage. We governed all year, not just during a sixty-day legislative session. Also, the county government affected the lives of the people more directly than the legislature by virtue of its dealing with problems of police, parks, water, roads, sewers, and land development. We were closer to the daily lives of the people within...