Category Archives: Akaka Bill

Certified Hawaiian

When you’re Hapa, you get used to people playing, “guess the ethnicity” with you.  Especially on the mainland.  (In Hawaii, the game is generally much shorter.  In part because one of your cousins will inevitably walk by and put an end to things.)  I actually don’t mind it though.  I’ve always liked the way that our racial/ethnic mix gives us a broad feeling of connection on the Islands.   Like we’re all in this together.  After all, even if you may not be Portuguese/Japanese/Filipino/Samoan/Hawaiian/Chinese/Haole/Etc., it’s a pretty fair guarantee that you’re at least related to someone who is.

And this leads us to one of the things that so puzzles me about how the Akaka Bill is supposed to work–namely, how do you even go about defining who counts as “Hawaiian Enough” to be part of a Native Hawaiian government.  After all, we’re talking about a culture that includes the concept of hanai adoption.  That’s about as far from a “one-drop rule” as it’s possible to get, culturally speaking.

But, of course, since we’re talking about laws and stuff here, there has to be a way to legally define who gets to play in a Akaka government.  But would you believe that, as the Bill currently lies, a significant number of those who would consider themselves Hawaiian wouldn’t count as such for the purposes of the Akaka Bill?  In fact, one analysis found that more than 73% of those who defined themselves as Hawaiian for the purposes of the census would now be counted as such for the purposes of the Akaka Bill.  Here’s why:

Under the conditions set forth in S1011, Section 3(12), for an Hawaiian to become a “Qualified Native Hawaiian Constituent” all five of the following conditions must be met:

  • (A) Must be direct lineal descendant of indigenous people living in Hawaii on or before January 1, 1893 or of a person eligible in 1921 for Hawaiian Homelands.
  • (B) Wishes to participate in the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian governing entity
  • (C) is 18 years of age or older;
  • (D) is a citizen of the United States; and
  • (E) maintains a significant cultural, social, or civic connection to the Native Hawaiian community, as evidenced by satisfying 2 or more of 10 criteria

Of the five, Parts (B) and (E) are the most likely to exclude Hawaiians from becoming “Qualified” to participate in the Tribe.  Part (B) most likely means excluding all persons who do not sign up for Kau Inoa.  The December, 2009 Kau Inoa Newsblog proudly announces: “Those who register in Kau Inoa will help shape the Hawaiian nation to come….We are happy to share that at the end of November 2009, 108,118 people were registered in the Kau Inoa Native Hawaiian Registry….”

The 2000 US Census counted over 401,000 Hawaiians in the US.  A 2004 estimate by the US Census Bureau counted 279,651 Hawaiians in Hawaii, down from 283,430 in 2000.  The out-migration of Hawaiians is a direct result of the lack of economic opportunity created by OHA-funded shake-down artists and their environmentalist allies.  The Kau Inoa number is less than 27% of all Native Hawaiians, but it gets worse.

Rule (E) excludes many of the roughly 122,000 Hawaiians living outside of Hawaii.  Exceptions are made for for college students, military personnel, federal employees (such as Congressional staffers) and their dependents,  Hawaiian Homelands beneficiaries, their children and grandchildren.

By making “Native Hawaiian Membership Organization” into the following two separate rules, an activist or other OHA operative who has been a member of two Native Hawaiian Membership Organizations thereby meets the “two of ten” qualification in Part (E):

  • (viii) Has been a member since September 30, 2009, of at least 1 Native Hawaiian Membership Organization.
  • (ix) Has been a member since September 30, 2009, of at least 2 Native Hawaiian Membership Organizations.

The bill does not contain a list of such organizations, leaving the door open to all sorts of games as some organizations are accepted and others are not.

I don’t know about you, but I find the notion of having to “prove” your Hawaiian-ness by virtue of what clubs or activities you belong to be . . . mind boggling.  Especially when you consider that the Akaka Bill includes a loophole for those who might not have Hawaiian blood, but are “regarded as Hawaiian” by the Native Hawaiian community (whatever that may mean).  By that logic, a haole with the right connections can be part of the Native Hawaiian government while a 100% local, ethnically Hawaiian guy who likes to keep to himself might not.  Seriously.  Only politicians and huge sums of money can combine to create something so ludicrous.  Don’t tell me that’s what most people are thinking of when they say that Native Hawaiians deserve some kind of recognition.

Can You Hear Me Now?

Hawaii’s illustrious Senators, Inouye and Akaka, have called for public hearings on the vitally important matter of whether the postal service should reduce delivery to five days a week.

Clearly, they have their fingers on the pulse of those issues that are deeply concerning to Hawaiians.  With economic woes galore and simmering tensions over different social and cultural issues, it’s high time someone came along and finally confronted the issue of 5-day-a-week mail delivery.  Someone get those Senators their Profiles in Courage awards!

After all, what else could they possibly want to hold public hearings about?  It’s not like either of them has sponsored legislation that will completely change the political, economic, and cultural face of the Islands and upend the way that minority and indigenous groups are defined.

Ahem.

When it gets right down to it, it’s ludicrous (considering exactly how significant the Akaka Bill is to Hawaii) that neither of our Senators have called for public hearings on its impact.  Or even just to learn about how we regular folk feel about it and answer the (obvious) questions it raises.  What are they afraid of?  Do they just not want discussion and open debate on the merits of Akaka?  Kinda makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

Casinos–Now With a Different Kind of “Stimulus”

Today, I have a guest article for you from Elaine William of CERA (Citizens Equal Rights Alliance).  Many of those who are acquainted with the problems of tribal law, federal policy regarding tribes and reservations, and the financial issues that abound there are watching Hawaii carefully to see how those same factors will come into play if the Akaka Bill passes. If you’re concerned about Akaka, these are issues that you cannot afford to overlook.  (And for those who are interested in the complex problems that arise out of the conflict between civil liberties and tribal government, you’ll want to check out their website at www.citizensalliance.org.)

Indian Casinos:

The New Industry That Is…Too Big To Fail!”

By Elaine Willman, Board Member

Citizens Equal Rights Alliance

Imagine a major Indian casino, the Mohegan Sun in Connecticut, reporting that its slot revenues reported to the state in April have “stabilized,” slipping only 1 percent. The same casino reported $1.3 billion (with a “B”) in gross revenue for 2009. However, the economy is still dark, customers have less disposable income to slough into the tax-exempt slots, and the casino is facing a $15 million lawsuit for a head-on wreck caused by a drunken customer.

So every member of Connecticut’s congressional officials (except for one on travel) wants to ensure that the Mohegan Sun does not fail; that its “job creation” is always protected. These fool elected officials have promoted and now awarded Stimulus funding of $54 MILLION dollars) in the form of a guaranteed loan from USDA to this mega-wealthy tribe.

And if they default? No problem. Tribes have sovereign immunity. Taxpayers whose taxes are already annually subsidizing this and 565 other Indian tribes in 35 states for all basic needs—housing, health, law enforcement, roads, environment, scholarships, language, cultural preservation—Yes, you and I, our children and grandchildren, will just continually pay off the casino debts in perpetuity across the country.

Taxpayers get to: 1) annually fund all basic needs of tribal governments: 2) cover all tribal uncollectible debt due to “sovereign immunity;” and 3) keep throwing dollars into tax-exempt tribal slot machines across the country so our local economics get sufficiently and systematically drained of tax revenues and small businesses. To make this work, taxpayers must faithfully commit to frequenting tax-exempt tribal government businesses. But now it doesn’t matter if you choose not.  They’re too big to fail; the federal agencies will step in and bill you for their losses, anyway.

There are 245 other tribes in the lower 48 states entitled to the same perks as the Mohegan Sun. Fortunately, the 228 tribes in Alaska who receive the basic-needs funding, at least don’t have casinos yet. Alaskan tribes are non-profit corporations without jurisdictional authority or gaming so they focus almost entirely on their culture. What a concept!

First a few facts:  565 federally recognized (tax-exempt) tribes are located in 35 hosts states, of which 246 tribes are gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988.  Every host state to numerous tribal tax-exempt and tax-eroding tribal governments and reservations are coincidentally the states experiencing the largest state budget deficits.

The impossibility is calculating the annual cost of this race-based socialist system spreading across the country. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke reports $94 million in Stimulus Funding for the tribes in Washington State alone. We’re hearing 4 billion annually just for tribal health care; many more billions for housing, law enforcement, etc. And these dollars do not include the “Tribal Priority Allocations” doled out annually by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. There are 29 federal agencies – each with a separate budget for funding the 565 tribes. And worse, state governments that have no “trust relationship” with Indian tribes  (such as Washington, Oregon, Montana and others) have set up separate state budgets to supplement federal dollars going out to tribes. Strike Two for taxpayers.  All of these federal and state dollars are serving less than 1 million enrolled tribal members of our 300+ million American population.

Who can blame the Native Hawaiians for wanting in on this lucrative industry, forever chaining down American citizens to the galley oars of a feudal federal Indian policy system? Pray that the Akaka Bill (Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act) fails again in Congress this year, or these numbers will considerably worsen.

Since the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 federal Indian policy has been a 76-year private conversation between federal agencies, elected officials and tribal leaders, with the whopping bills deducted from your federal and state tax contributions annually. We simply can no longer afford to sustain and grow this socialist erosion spreading across 35 and perhaps 36 (Hawaii) states.

One of our astute Supreme Court Justices assessed our predicament accurately when he noted the following, over fifteen years ago:

“Individuals who have been wronged by unlawful racial discrimination should be made whole; but under our Constitution there can be no such thing as either a creditor or a debtor race. That concept is alien to the Constitution’s focus upon the individual. …To pursue the concept of racial entitlement – even for the most admirable and benign of purposes – is to reinforce and preserve for future mischief the way of thinking that produced race slavery, race privilege and race hatred. In the eyes of government, we are just one race here. It is American.” Justice Antonin Scalia, Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta, 534 U.S. 103 (1995)

Here is the problem:  Over 35 years ago, in 1975 Congress passed the Indian Self-Determination and Education (IDEA) Act to promote economic self-sufficiency for tribal governments. Apparently this was not working well enough, so 22 years ago, Congress added the economic steroid of a tax-free gaming monopoly for Indian tribes when it passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 1988.

In March of this year, George Skibine, an Assistant Secretary at the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was a keynote speaker at the 2010 Citizens Equal Rights Alliance (CERA) conference in Washington, D.C. Mr. Skibine was asked: “Has the Department of Interior (DOI) or Bureau of Indian Affairs ever developed criteria or measuring systems by which a tribal government might be deemed economically self-sufficient, and no longer in need of federal funds?” The answer was no. Not in 35 years so far. Not even with a gaming monopoly. The follow-up question: Does the DOI/BIA have any interest in establishing such economic indicators so that federal subsidies could be redirected to either write down our national deficit, or redirected to the poorest tribes? The answer was no again. Why should they? The behemoth BIA bureaucracy grows as the number and needs of tribes grow.

Also at the CERA Conference Mr. Skibine was asked if the BIA or federal government could ascertain the total annual federal funds expended for tribal governments? His response: “We tried to do that once, but were unable to.”  Astounding! No one knows the annual bottomless pit of taxpayer dollars supporting tribal governments.

So there you have it. We are enslaved forever by our Congressmen to a burgeoning number of private tax-exempt governments that we are forced to fund unknown annual billions in perpetuity. And now we must assume the responsibility for all failed tribal government debts. This is on top of the disastrous oil spill, the failing housing and banking industry, and government takeover of health care.

What can you do?  Try any or all these suggestions:

  1. Howl at every talking head on radio and television.
  2. Get firm commitments from incumbents or candidates to put a “sunset” or end game in place for this tax-enslavement.
  3. Get federal legislation that prohibits gaming tribes from receiving stimulus funds of any sort.
  4. Get legislation in place that ends any further “federal recognition” of wannabe tribes.
  5. Educate everyone you know by circulating this article, and getting it web-posted everywhere you can.

We are stuck with the horrendous oil spill disaster. We are stuck with the present administration throwing more huge tax dollars out to tribes. We are stuck with the government takeover of multiple industries in this country under the present administration.

We are not stuck with our elected officials. We can get responsible commitments from federal and state elected officials, or get them out office, beginning in November 2010. We are not helpless.

And we best get busy. Tribal governments claim to plan for seven generations. That is a long time for Americans to be subservient custodians of our fellow U.S. citizens.  Menominee Tribal leader, Ada Deer once said, “We use the system to beat the system.”  It is time to end the abuse of the “system.”

Elaine Willman, MPA, is the author of Going to Pieces…the dismantling of the United States of America. Ms. Willman is past Chair and current Board member of Citizens Equal Rights Alliance, an organization focused on the equal rights of tribal members who have no protections under the 14th Amendment, and serve at the mercy of private tax-exempt governments annually subsidized without inquiry or consent of American taxpayers.

Contact Elaine Willman:  toppin@aol.com

For the Future Subjects of the Kingdom of Maui

Right.  So . . . the problem with totally out-there politicians is that no one takes them seriously.  Which means that no one really thinks about the damage they can do or the implications of their more extreme proposals.

Consider Gladys Baisa, currently a councilwoman from Maui.  According to her website, there’s not much that separates Gladys from your average, excruciatingly dull local politician.  She likes old people, hot pink gingham, the environment, and children, and is willing to show up at the groundbreaking of a new tennis court and endure the tedium of a County Council meeting.  (For those who have never been, it’s a lot like a PTA meeting, only less sexy and without the possibility of baked goods.)

Oh, and one other thing: she has proposed a “draft ordinance acknowledging the reinstatement of the Hawaiian Kingdom nation.”

Yep, Gladys feels that the governing body that is primarily responsible for pressing issues like, “What should we name the new park?” is equipped to handle the transfer of political power and land to a newly established sovereign Hawaiian kingdom.  Alrighty then.

I’ll spare you the painful details of how this is going to be accomplished, as not everyone enjoys a trip to Delusionville.  (Why yes, she does name a Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Reinstated Kingdom of Hawaii.  What do you think this is?  Amateur hour?)

Of course, the real problem here is how easy Gladys is to dismiss.  (P.S. She’s running for reelection right now, and as far as I can Google, not in any particular danger of being unseated as yet.)  Of course, Maui isn’t going to vote to reinstate the Kingdom of Hawaii.  But for those who are inclined to dismiss the problems inherent in Akaka, let this be a bit of a warning to you.  The divisions and disagreements over the crown lands and the future of Hawaii aren’t going to go away with the passage of the Akaka Bill.  In fact, it’s more likely to open even bigger divisions and political questions.  And there is the scary possibility that one day, Gladys’ proposal won’t seem so “out-there.”

By the way, if you’re thinking of letting Gladys know what you think about her various political stances, you can email her here.

What Kamehameha hath joined together, let not Akaka rip asunder

June 11 was Kamehameha Day.

Kamehameha’s greatest accomplishment 200 years ago was to unify all the Hawaiian islands under a single government.  But now once again the Akaka bill in Congress threatens to rip us apart along racial lines.

The Kingdom founded by Kamehameha was multiracial in all aspects.  John Young (Englishman) was so important to the founding of the Kingdom that his tomb is in Mauna Ala (the Royal Mausoleum).  It is the only tomb built to resemble a heiau, and is guarded by a pair of pulo’ulo’u (sacred taboo sticks).  His are the oldest bones in Mauna Ala.  Yet the Akaka bill would deny John Young membership in the Akaka tribe.

The first sentence of Hawaii’s first Constitution (1840) — the kokokahi sentence — was written on advice of American missionary William Richards.  In modern English it says: “God has made of one blood all races of people to dwell upon this Earth in unity and blessedness.”

The Akaka bill would do exactly the opposite of the one-blood concept.  It rips us apart for no reason other than race, establishes a binary opposition of “us vs. them,” divides Hawaiian children from non-Hawaiian parents, spawns jealousies between members of the Akaka tribe and their cousins who are excluded.  This is not aloha.

The Kingdom of Hawaii was founded by people of different races working together on the battlefield and in the government.  That cooperation continued throughout the Kingdom’s history.  Every person born in the Kingdom, regardless of race, was thereby a subject of the Kingdom with all the same rights as ethnic Hawaiians.  Many Asian and Caucasian immigrants became naturalized with full rights.  From 1850 to 1893, sometimes 1/4 to 1/3 of the Legislature were Caucasians appointed by the King to the House of Nobles or elected to the House of Representatives (and later elected to the Nobles after a Constitutional change).

Supporters of the Akaka bill say we opponents are holding it against them that Hawaiians were so welcoming and inclusive.  But no.  The point is that non-natives were full partners in the Kingdom and cannot now be discarded.  There never would have been a unified Hawaii without British weapons and expertise.  No written language or Christianity without the missionaries.  No prosperity without massive investment of capital and managerial skill by American businessmen, plus sweat equity from Asian laborers.  In 1893 only 40% of Hawaii’s people had even one drop of native blood.

There has never been a unified government for all the Hawaiian islands that included only ethnic Hawaiians, either among the leaders or among the people.  The Akaka bill purports to “reorganize” what never existed.

Ministers presiding over weddings say: “What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” This year let’s say: What Kamehameha hath joined together, let not Akaka rip asunder.  ‘A’ohe hope e ho’i mai ai.  Imua.

You Don’t Have to be Psychic

Though that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t help.

Guessing about the future is the essence of politics.  You guess that your policies will help, others prognosticate their miserable failure, and you both stake your political fortunes on the outcome.  It may seem like a game, but the stakes are higher than anyone realizes.  This is, after all, a version of roulette that stakes our economic, social, and cultural health on who’s right and who’s wrong.

With all that said, as any poker player could tell you–well, any successful poker player that is–there are ways to limit how much of a risk you’re actually taking.  You can look at history, trends, and so on and make an educated guess about the potential pitfalls ahead.  And that’s why we in Hawaii should be interested in the situation of other federally recognized tribes.   After all, if the Akaka Bill is passed, we will have a new Native Hawaiian government and a lot of changes.  So a look at American Indian Tribes, the government, and the law is probably a good idea.

And that’s what you’ll find with the first two installments of our new series on possible unintended consequences of Akaka.  The first looks at the possible impact of the bill on children and families in light of the Indian Child Welfare Act, a federal law meant to give recognized tribes a say in the custody of children that could have profound consequences if applied in Hawaii.  And the second considers the problem of casino gaming–while Akaka’s supporters claim that this issue has been put to rest, there are plenty of reasons to feel less than sanguine about it.

Of course, these are just questions and possibilities . . . factors to consider, not ironclad prognostication.  But shouldn’t someone be raising these questions before we find ourselves trying to wade through the unintended consequences of another political gamble?

Akaka by OHA

So, if you’ve been living in a cave on Mars, with your fingers in your ears, going, “La, la, la, la, la” over and over again, you’ll probably be glad to hear that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has launched an “informational” page to help people truly understand the implications of the Akaka Bill.  Of course, if you’re even slightly conscious and an inhabitant of Hawaii, you probably already have  grasp of the basics.  But I’m sure OHA’s effort will be deeply appreciated by those who just woke from a coma or those who don’t care to have their news tainted by elements of impartiality.

Of course, there’s not much new to find there–they’ve basically taken the “There, there . . . no need to worry, it won’t change anything except the very foundations of the state,” approach.  It was interesting to see that they skipped right past the fact that a roll of names of eligible Hawaiians to participate in the formation of the of the new Native Hawaiian government would be determined and published . . . without really questioning how that determination would be reached.  This was especially fascinating in light of OHA’s assurance that the Akaka Bill is not race-based.  Technically speaking, that would be proper, as the Kingdom of Hawaii was not a racial entity, but a regular old sovereign government with borders, citizens of many races, and so on.  But that’s not exactly the history of Native Hawaiian programs in the last several decades, which (understandably) tend to focus on actual Native Hawaiian lineage.

The claim that the Akaka Bill is not race-based does bring up an interesting paradox, however. Pretend for a moment that it really was going to reflect the history of the Hawaiian nation and include anyone who can trace their heritage to citizens of the Kingdom–including Native Hawaiians, Chinese, whites, and so on.  It certainly would be a most accurate representations of Hawaiian citizens at the time of annexation.  But would there be much support for an Akaka Bill that wasn’t at it’s heart, race-based?  Somehow, I doubt it.

A Feeling of Recognition

Interesting things are happening in Hawaii politics when it comes to support for the Akaka Bill.

Actively opposing it still takes a measure of political courage.  (Which, believe it or not, is not necessarily an oxymoron.)  But slowly, enough concerns have been raised about its effect on the Islands that some of those aspirants to office that aren’t completely beholden to the Akaka supporters are searching for some other language to express their reservations.  Consider it the political equivalent of backing quietly away from a terrible potluck dinner, saying, “No, I’m pretty full.  I think maybe I’ll just have this roll.”  (This might not be the best analogy, in that I’ve never been to a bad potluck dinner in Hawaii.  You all are luckier than you know.  Maybe everyone should have to do a year-long mission to the Mainland so that they can learn about the horrors of the mysterious gooey casserole and wet, salty, mushy rice.)

The result is a move towards ambiguity.  Look for statements that support, “some form of recognition for Native Hawaiians,” and yet stop short of endorsing Akaka.  Putting aside for the moment, all of the debate about how comparable the situation of Native Hawaiians is to that of Native Americans, there is (at heart) a genuine and admirable impulse here:  No one wants to underrate the contribution of Native Hawaiians or the importance of Hawaiian culture.  And when combined with the difficult socio-economic situation of many Native Hawaiians, there is a clear desire to assist that community–heck, this entire website calculates the millions and millions of dollars spent on all of these motivations.  But warm feelings do not make necessarily make good law.  In fact, all of this vague charity comes perilously close to that “soft bigotry of low expectations” thing.  I’m starting to wonder whether all of these well-intentioned feelings aren’t more destructive to the future of Native Hawaiians than anything else.  Stopping short of creating a separate governmental system, but still wanting to give “something” to Native Hawaiians . . . isn’t that pretty close to where we are now, only without making it official with Presidential signatures and much patting-ourselves-on-the-back?  (Then again, if I was Hawaiian, I’d be happy to just get a check for my share of the millions in federal, state, OHA, and Bishop Estate money spent to help me.  Because I’m starting think that I could do a lot more to help myself than any of those groups.)

How Big is Bigger and Who Stands to Gain?

The CEO of OHA, Clyde Namuo, makes remarks in the Honolulu Advertiser of 4/15/10 addressing David Shapiro’s regular column of 4/12/10 opining that Shapiro made some “good observations” but “overlooks the bigger issue of why federal recognition makes sense for Native Hawaiians and for all in Hawaii, in the first place”. He follows that with mostly platitudes, but specifically mentions land, rights and resources “owed” a new Akaka Tribe.

Shapiro, on the other hand, discusses the secret, closed door method used in DC to make the latest changes before they were sprung on then Representative Abercrombie, the Governor, and virtually everyone else, just before the House vote. His observations then turn even darker. Here are some quotes:

“ The Akaka bill would change life in Hawaii in profound ways and confer enormous power on a relative few, but there has been little clear explaination….” Senators Inouye and Akaka “are basicly saying ‘Trust Us’ which many are unwilling to accept on a matter with such enormous impact on local life and so much opportunity for political mischief”

Here are my questions for readers:

Which person outlines the bigger issue?

Which of these two stands to gain power, money, etc if the Akaka bill becomes law?

The best course of action at this time is to stop all consideration and action at this time in the US Senate until extensive educational hearings are held in Hawaii so our people can evaluate and judge what the federal government is planning to do to us or for us and what we think of it. For those of you who like that idea, call an elected official and propose such.

Akaka Bill Report–Senate Version

The Senate Indian Affairs Committee has now released its report on the Akaka Bill–the Senate version anyway, which (like just about every other piece of legislation coming from the Senate) is the more radical version.

Of course, if you’ve paid any attention to the arguments advanced in favor of the bill, you won’t need me to rehash them here.  With little to recommend it from a historical or constitutional standpoint, supporters of the bill inevitably fall back on the same old distortions of history and emotional appeals.  (For those who still think that the Apology Resolution wasn’t an advance move to forward this agenda and establish a biased view of Hawaiian history, you may now take a moment to admit your mistake.)

Needless to say, the bill shows no awareness of the concerns raised by Gov. Lingle or the people of Hawaii who are becoming aware of the innate problems of the Akaka Bill and fear that it will forever change our Islands for the worse.

There are, however, a few Senators who spoke to the considerable Constitutional concerns raised by the bill.  Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) concludes that the bill attempts to act outside of the powers of Congress, which is only permitted to recognize tribes, not create them based on race.  Senator McCain echoed those concerns, saying, “at its core, this bill embraces the dangerous concept of conferring special privileges on one racial group over  others.  This is unacceptable to me, and it is unacceptable, I am sure, to most other citizens of this Nation who agree that we must continue our struggle to become and remain one people–all equal, all Americans.”

It’s clear that there are Republicans in the Senate prepared to oppose this bill.  Now, we just need to help their colleagues understand why this bill is a bad idea.

For the full committee report, click here.