 Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome. We have our all-star lineup here, retired judge Sandra Sims, very unretired attorney and one of the leading women professionals in Hawaii, Louise Ng, research consultant, and Hawaiian studies expert, Radine Keahi Olalo, and Bill Harrison, our lead criminal defense attorney, civil rights, and many other areas of expertise. So, Louise, you came up with something that might help point us in a positive community aligning direction. You want to share that with us? Sure, Chuck, I'd be happy to because it takes my attention away from the national news, which is just makes me despair sometimes about whether we will be able to overcome our divisions, although I hope we will in the next four years. But as I had mentioned the other week, I think maybe where we look to first to try to set a good example and make some progresses in our community. And I shared with you some thoughts that I had heard last week, because the board I'm on, Hawaii State Bar Foundation, we had a reception, and we invited Micah Kane, the head of Hawaii Community Foundation, to say a few words and put what we do in the context of the community. And I was very struck with the three opportunities he listed for creating alignment in our community and maybe one day our nation. And what he said is that, first of all, this is one I really like, we need to focus on the 80% that we agree on and parking lot the 20% that we don't. And work together on the 80% so that we can build trust and get to know each other and build working relationships. And maybe that will ease us into the 20%. The second point he made is that we need to be very intentional about our actions and be transparent and at the same time be comfortable with being uncomfortable and having a greater degree of vulnerability. And I think that's a, and I think the way it was said another time was that we need to realize that not everybody, people may be trying to get to the same end but we have competing ways to do it. And you have to get used to the idea that not everybody is going to think that your way is the noble one, if you think it. So I like that, be uncomfortable, be comfortable with being uncomfortable. And lastly, and something maybe we should have done more on in the past four years is lean on data to take the emotion out of decisions and the conversation. And one of the sources that he pointed out for Hawaii data is that we do have a Hawaii data collective and a website called HawaiiData.org that has a lot of information from which we can look at what, you know, help pinpoint the issues in our community and how to work on them and how to track them. So that's my three cents. Thanks to Micah. Bill, Sandra, Rene. You know that the first comment you made, Louise, about focusing on the 80% where everybody agrees. I think it's a perfect way to start any conversation. And as Chuck knows, being a mediator, you get together and the points you can agree on, you start from that. That's your foundation and you work your way through that and you grow from there. So I think that's a perfect way to start this healing process is that there are some things that we all agree upon. There's a lot of things we don't agree upon, but let's start watering and cultivating the parts that we agree upon. And I think that that would, number one, swatch some of the problems and some of the difficulties we have and continue us in the right direction as growing together and not apart. So how do we convince the resistant people that it's 80, 20, agree, disagree versus 20, 80? You know, I heard Micah on the NPR this morning. He was on the conversation. And he talked about some of those same, some of the same points that he raised at the Bar Foundation. And the portion that I was listening and drawn to was where he talked about leaning on the data and not so much the emotions and talking about the fact that we are so terribly polarized at this point. Hardly anyone is listening to data where people are generally responding to their, to their perceived outrage or anger or you're not thinking like me. There's that response first, as opposed to looking at what really is taking place. I mean, we see that clearly in the whole debate about coronavirus and what to do about that. So much of that is steeped in emotion. And if we can come to a place where, and I'm not totally sure how to get there, but totally come to a place where we can again, begin to focus on understanding data, which is what each of us has always done in our practice and profession is starting from that. We certainly have feelings and emotions, but as a judge, as an attorney, as a mediator, as a research person, you're looking at data first and you're putting that forth first. And that's how you really draw your conclusions. And I'm not, we have to get to a point where this polarization on every single issue can't continue to occur. Because if it does, then you're right, that 2080 is gonna be reversed. But I agree that there is an 80, there is that much we can agree on. And it is important to start there, but I think we have to really in that, emphasize again the getting away, not getting away from emotion, but understanding that decisions and thoughts and practices don't always need to be grounded in that emotion that says, I've got to just pick one side or the other. Is there another question underlying this so, Sandra? And that's that, okay, let's say that as the new administration comes in, they've got a very heavily science, data-weighted set of teams in climate change and education and all of those areas. So let's say that they give the decision makers the data and the decision makers evaluate, decide, and announce their decisions based on that data. Isn't there right now though, in the division, another question that people are just rejecting those decision makers data or no data and therefore rejecting the data because they reject the person they come from. Classic reactive devaluation. Yes. It comes from the other side, it can't be true. I mean, that's exactly where we are and that's unfortunately that's exactly what's happening. I contrast that with a time at which the data and the science were key drivers in our society and key drivers in our political community. If we kind of look at, and hardly anyone's paying attention to it, it feels like, but if we look at what's happening with NASA, there was this time where what NASA was doing in terms of developing space programs and developing science and technology was a focal point. And it was sort of the thing that people aspired toward. I think, again, back to me being old enough to know these, some of these things. But I mean, even in the decision to go to the moon or to work and develop, even in the STEM programs that we're focusing on in many other places now, that focus on education and data is out there, but it's just being pushed down so much. And I think there is the place for that and it is happening, but I feel like the people who are ascribing to it and the people who are most involved in it are not in the forefront anymore. Yeah, and I have a question. I mean, you've got, and again, it's gonna probably go back to me and the young people because STEM programs are getting really, really a lot of attention in some of our schools anyway. And that's sort of been a focus for many of our young folks, but those who are in that place of being heard, which is where those are the people who are being listened to or being heard and whose views are being expressed on this daily basis are those who are debunking it. And that's, I mean, we used to be the nation that ascribed and strived to be, you know, in the forefront of these issues. And it feels like, I'm hesitant to say it's not, but it feels like we're not even trying. See, and that segues right into the question about exactly the generation you identify. So, Radine, as our spokesperson for that generation and those right behind you, is what it's going to take. I mean, what has meaning and value to your generation? What's it gonna take for your generation to take the lead in that more database, more objective, we're behind this, we're going to carry this on into the future. Is there a generational gap that needs to shift? That's a hard question for me to answer. I think I was listening to what you folks were saying in the context of being a researcher. And I think there's been an evolution of how we collect data and how we analyze it. And honestly, I think for me, it boils down to trusting the data more than it does the data itself. And, you know, with social media, we have sound lights and snapshots and, you know, people are questioning the source of the data. And, you know, I think for me, not so much my generation, but even with my nieces who are nine and 11 and they watch the news and they're like, they just shake their head. Like, what is going on? Like, this is absolutely crazy. And for them, I think for them, they just want to know that what they see is what they get. And I think we've moved so far away from that that it's, I think a lot to a large degree, a lot of the division that we see today is because people are not willing to sit down and have a real intelligent conversation. Like you were saying earlier, a lot of it is based on emotion. I've had conversations with people who are definitely not in agreement with me. And I've tried to bring forth data and I've been told, well, you're just, you're just taking the liberal approach to data. So what are you gonna say at that point? So for me, it's always defaulting back to the 80%. I mean, my default is to really listen and figure out where this person is coming from before I even engage in a conversation with them because otherwise it'll end up in a full blown argument. And to some degree, some of those conversations cannot continue because the emotions are too high. And that's fine too. But at least I think for a lot of people in my generation, we're looking at it as, how do we actually reconcile humanity at this point? No, and that's a great question because how do we bring people around? If we look at exactly what you folks are talking about, the data, the data shows us beyond dispute that in 2016, while the elections were mostly done in person and stuff like that, there weren't major problems with them, but nobody paid much attention to whether there were screw ups or things like that. In 2020, because Trump and the GOP signaled from the beginning, we're gonna challenge it. We can't lose unless it's rigged. There's going to be voter fraud. There's going to be mail-in ballot errors. The election people knew exactly where the challenges were gonna come from. And as the head of the intelligence community announced after a complete study of all 50 states, this was the most secure election in US history. That's what the data tells us. And yet we have from polls 60, 70% of people saying, we don't think so. I would like to enter, Jack, I know this is kind of off topic, but just from a logical standpoint, does that mean then that the Democrats won the House and the Senate? It's not logical. I mean, I know, I know, and that's part of the problem. Yeah, exactly. So what do we do with the rest of those? I mean, so you do his, you throw the rest, what does that mean? It doesn't, yeah. But you don't see the Democrats challenging the results in losing 12 House seats. Exactly. And maybe not getting back control of the Senate. There is not a single democratic lawsuit or challenge to any of those. So it's all coming from, and it's one group of people supporting the schoolyard bully. Yeah, it is that, it's again, it's back to that notion of the 20% and the 20% and the emotion driven way of, I don't know, I don't know what the answer is. You know, as I... It's frightening to be honest. It's actually kind of frightening right now. Cause I would have thought that by now, two weeks out, we would just say, okay, that's what's gonna happen. Go on up into the sunset and we'll proceed with the way things are supposed to go. Yeah. The people have spoken, we move forward. Now there's still the lawsuits and I was looking at some of the proceedings that Giuliani has been involved in and I... You would be embarrassing. He would never make it onto law and order. Sam Waterston would eat him up. You know, this conversation really points, I think to me, to two things. And that's faith and trust. Okay, I think it boils down to those two words. And it reminds me of the conversation of a 104-year-old woman talking to a 10-year-old and the 104-year-old woman said, you know, I was around when they showed us pictures on TV of men standing on the moon and turned to the 10-year-old and said, do you believe that? The 10-year-old says, absolutely, it's part of history. And the 104-year-old woman said, were you there? How do you know that this person stepped on the moon? No one that I know was there, okay? They put it on this thing on this box called a television and how can we trust that? And so that whole concept is what we're dealing with now and what has been used by people to create this distrust, okay? And basically that's what we're dealing with now, what we're dealing with this huge distrust in every part and every part of our society. And that's flamed by people who want to continue that distrust to their ends and their means. So the real question is how do we get back to a point where we have faith and we have trust? I think that's what we really have to deal with. Well, let me ask Louise, is there a connection between that faith and trust and the data-based 80-20 realignment, reunification principles you're talking about? Do we just have to adopt it and stick with it and stick with it and eventually over time? Well, you know, not quite on the topic maybe, but I think that maybe one way we can think about what's going on now, which is, to me, it's very upsetting on the national scene is, I mean, part of it is just a huge distraction. It's what they want to do is what Trump has been doing for four years. It distracts us with his hot air stuff. In the meantime, government is working behind the scenes, yet Stephen Miller in there doing his damage to the federal agencies. And I've been reading, Biden has his transition team in place. They are moving forward. And I think maybe part of it is maybe having ultimate faith in the system, yes, and in facts and data, that there are going to be people. If we have people who are systematically moving forward to get transition in place, then maybe we can put up, we can't fix these crazy people creating all of this drama on the national scene, but we just need people behind them getting it done, getting things done. So let me ask this question. Is part of what might be the solution what got Barack Obama elected? Connecting the true grassroots, the community levels, and the strengths there with the leadership. Because that's been broken, that connection has been gone. That's the one, I'm sensing that you and Bill and Radine and Sandra are really talking about is we really need to reconnect the people with the leadership and the faith and the objective data-based understandings in both maybe a big part of the way to do it. How do we get there? I suspect much like Louise, that some of that is already happening, is the people behind the scenes that are still getting things done. I mean, even if you look at what the community foundation is doing and the work that is taking place within our own community, we don't hear everything about it, but if you look at the organizations that are part of that, the organizations that are having to address the needs in a community, those things are taking place. Those things are actually, there are people doing those things. Despite all the noise and distraction, they are still getting those basic kind of things done. I mean, it's kind of an odd example, but kind of take a look at what happened with the food bank situation. It was unfortunate the way it turned out, but at the same time, there was some attention brought, considerable attention brought to the work of the food bank, which has clearly had some benefit in increasing attention to its work, increasing attention to the work of organizations addressing the needs of the homeless and organizations addressing the needs of those with mental illness and organizations and agencies addressing the injustice in our, the addressing issues in our justice system. Those things are still taking place. I mean, you're at the Bar Foundation Dinner, and those are the things that are being done. Lawyers and agencies and commissions are looking at those issues and working to get those things done. So when we talk about where is this faith and trust, it's there. I guess faith you can't see anyway. So, you know, but I look around at the work that's being done in these kind of quiet places and it's happening. And I know, Louise, you're a big part of that. I'm with the Bar Foundation, with the Women's Legal Foundation. I mean, those are the things that you've just been doing. Oh, it's fine. I think that's a great point, Sandra, and the many, they're people doing there, way more than I am, but I think we just need to focus on putting our heads down, get people to put their heads down and work on what we can work on, which is our community. And, you know, sort of raising, well, raising kids, right? So it's showing, you know, raising them by the right example, educating them, making sure they, you know, they know civics and issues, and we're preparing them for leadership so that we won't have this horrible aberration, again, or what we have a lot of critically, critical thinking people who are going to be focused on doing the right thing, doing things right for their community. The more lives we can touch and make better, you know, and then maybe that also helps us make it better on the national scene. I mean, think of all those people, you know, many of the Trump supporters that you've heard who say, oh, well, he made our life better. We'll put up a lot of BS as long as he made our life better. And, you know, that's what we can work on. Make our lives better. What's really brilliant about those insights, Sandra and Louise, is that exactly what you're talking about. It is going to be the youth. It is going to be the next generation. And role models are critical to that. Can any of us remember a point in time when the International Food Bank won the Nobel Peace Prize? When the business leader of the year award was given to the head of the nonprofit who is completely devoted to community support and service? What does that mean for us? Does that help take us in that direction that you folks are talking about? I hope so. Yeah, yeah. Maybe it gives us something to believe in and something being honored. That helps us feel good about ourselves and each other. The first step there is to open that up is the belief in some kind of hope, you know? And the way to get there is listening. I think that's the first step when people believe that you're listening to them. Okay, that gives them hope. And that begins the process. And I think that what happened with the Alaska administration was they did that. Exactly, they capitalized on that. They said, let's walk away. Let's not listen to these politicians anymore. Okay, they're not listening to you. Let's listen to someone who is not a politician to give you that hope. And that's what a lot of these folks did. They said, we have hope now that this individual is not gonna be like the last administration for the last 40 or 50 years. And we're in this position where we're at because of that, all right? So I think that's really an important step is to make people understand that they are being heard. That's first and foremost. And that then triggers the hope and we could start the healing and we could start working together to reach these goals we wanna reach clearly. So I think that's, to me, one of the most important steps. And as we head into our last few minutes, maybe another piece of that important forward step is understanding. We know that a big part of the division is between rural, less populated, less formally educated sectors of the country and city people who are thrown in on each other who have very, very different living conditions, perspectives and sometimes values. But there are common core values. Hey, maybe if we can start to focus on sharing the data and the information to help each of those divided sectors, understand the other better and understand the shared core values and beliefs better. Maybe that's part of it too. So maybe what we're hearing here is that the healing and the reunification are not likely going to be political or even economic or even socioeconomic, but they're going to be faith-based, they're going to be spiritual. They're going to be in people and shared between and among people. In our last minute or two, any last thoughts, Radine, Sandra, Louise, Bill? I think one of the key entities that's gonna have a role in that is also going to be in the arts. I think you gotta see, because that's where more people can kind of come together and talk as you know, whether it's in the music or in the films or in the stories or in the writing, that may be a starting place. I was kind of following some of the things that are taking place with the International Film Festival, with IF. And they're just covering an incredible range of subject areas through all kinds of media. And that is where people can come and talk sometimes. Maybe not the politics, but let's just look at our culture, our civilization, our music, our arts. Where did that come from? Where did those things come from? What do we have in common? What do we share and start from there? So the arts has a big role. That's kind of one of my other things. But yeah. It's a brilliant insight, because the arts are not only a safe place to come and share thoughts and feelings. It's a place of joy and inspiration. It's a safe place, exactly. It not only brings us together, it lifts us up. And on that line of thought, I just throw a plug-in for a hip film. It's on George Jared Helm. It's a short film. And then please go see that. When is, that's in the hip. That's in hip, yes. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah, that's where the joy is. And that's also a really important point, because if you look at what brought us together and what lifted us up in the 60s and 70s, music and the arts were at the heart of that. And that's been missing. And we need to revitalize that and make it part of the heart of our connection with each other. So on that, any last words, folks? Otherwise, we'll see you all in two weeks. Thank you for joining us. Thank you. Thank you. Take good care.