Should tourists be able to buy medical cannabis in Hawaii?

If they have a valid card and proper identification, why not? After all, tourists can’t bring their cannabis with them; transporting the drug across state lines violates federal law. Surely our visitors should have access to needed medication. And wouldn’t more customers give a boost to this homegrown industry?

Well, maybe. Right now, only certified local residents can legally use cannabis. And the state’s rules governing medical cannabis are strict and may differ from other states’ requirements. Would out-of-state patients be required to have a debilitating medical condition recognized by Hawaii? Would the state provide legal protection for out-of-state users? And is there enough medical marijuana to go around? Hawaii’s dispensaries already seem to have a hard time keeping up with demand; it would be harsh if tourists sucked up all the supply, leaving locals with nothing.

The state Department of Health raised those issues, among others, in its opposition to the reciprocity provision in House Bill 2729, now making its way through the Legislature.

It’s hoped that once the market matures in Hawaii, reciprocity will become a simple matter. In the short run, however, there are hard questions that should be answered first.

Maybe next year for Chinatown

Tuesday’s abrupt cancellation of the Chinatown Merchants Association’s annual “Night in Chinatown” festival and parade — which would have been today — was as surprising as it was disappointing. In celebration of Chinese New Year, 15,000 to 20,000 residents and tourists have converged each year over some 20 years at the Chinatown street fair for entertainment, lion dancing and bustling vendor booths selling food and souvenirs.

A litany of reasons were given as factors for the cancellation: Only 15 vendors registered, compared with the usual 35-40, somewhat due to a $150 increase for booth space and other costs; lackluster monetary donations from Chinatown merchants; loss of grants from the city and the Hawaii Tourism Authority. Even traffic bulb-outs were blamed, for hurting area merchants’ bottom line due to fewer parking stalls.

Still, some help did increase, such as $60,000 in in-kind support from police, $15,000 more than last year. So it’s puzzling what made this year so much more challenging than previous ones — and why organizers hadn’t sounded alarms before the 11th-hour cancellation.

The mayor was right in calling the parade/festival an important “signature event” that “needs to continue” next year. Post-mortem talks must occur, to re-enlist robust city, tourism and merchant support, financial and otherwise; as well as to improve organizing logistics, such as earlier deadlines and benchmark checklists.

As for celebrating the Year of the Dog (it begins Feb. 16), folks can still enjoy festivities today, minus the parade: The Chinese Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii’s event at the Chinatown Cultural Plaza runs from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., with over 30 vendors and food booths, entertainment and lion dances. Gung hee fat choy, all.

States stick up for net neutrality

When the Federal Communications Commission unwisely voted to repeal Obama-era net neutrality rules, internet service providers (ISPs) had reason to celebrate. No longer would they be prohibited from introducing paid prioritization of content — speeding up, slowing down or blocking internet transmissions based on payment.

But winning is one thing; holding the territory is another. Hawaii and 21 other states, as well as the District of Columbia, are fighting back. They have sued to force the FCC to restore net neutrality, arguing in a court petition that the repeal was “arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion” within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as a violation of federal law and the Constitution.

And on Monday, Gov. David Ige signed Executive Order 18-02, making Hawaii the fourth state to require internet service providers to adhere to net neutrality rules as a condition for doing business with the state. Other states are exploring ways to require ISPs to treat all internet content the same, although the new federal rule preempts such state action.

Still, ISPs now have to worry about each state making up its own rules.

It would be better if ISPs acknowledge and accept what most of us already know intuitively: The internet needs to be open and free to adapt to the needs of those who depend on it — that is, all of us — and not just to the needs of the ISP and its shareholders.