Tag Archives: Akaka Bill

OHA–Peeling back More Layers

Like many people in the islands, I have (for a long time) only had the vaguest notion of what OHA actually does.  Other than pour huge amounts of money into various projects and promote Native Hawaiian culture.  Those are all well and good as far as they go, but (especially where the huge amounts of money are concerned) one starts to wonder after awhile how they really help the average Native Hawaiian.  Your Kimo on the street, if you will.

No, I don’t have an answer to that.  I’ve looked at hundreds of OHA grants, many of which are in our database and wiki, and learned that (as with so many things in OHA) there are more questions than answers.  We’re working to try to fill in the gaps of knowledge about the OHA grants, but it’s slow work.  (Which is why we could use your help! Hint, hint!)  After all, OHA isn’t shy about deciding what is good for Native Hawaiians in Hawaii, but that’s not the same thing as finding out from the Hawaiians themselves.  Nor are Native Hawaiians some monolithic, homogeneous group that agrees on everything.

Consider the Akaka Bill.  Yes, again.  OHA and others would have you assume that all Native Hawaiians are uniformly in favor of it.  But why should that be?  The concerns about Akaka go beyond race to the future economic and cultural health of Hawaii.  Certainly, there are people of all ethnicities that harbor serious reservations about the push to pass Akaka.  And yet, OHA, speaking for Hawaiians, doesn’t seem aware of the possibility of dissent within that community.  Is this a responsible position for agency with OHA’s scope and influence?  More and more, I wonder how much Native Hawaiians are used as political tools by groups who have a lot more on their mind then just helping out.

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.

A Primer on the Akaka Bill

As you go through the many grants in our database, the obvious question (aside from “How much money????” and “Do any of these really help people?”) that comes to mind is how these programs for Native Hawaiians fit in with the Akaka Bill.  Or it should be.  Unfortunately, the Akaka Bill is one of those things that people tend to react to emotionally even when they don’t know much about it.  The people of Hawaii are generous.  They want to help Native Hawaiians.  They’re told that the Akaka Bill will do so.  But what they’ve only begun to find out is the true implications of the bill . . . that it’s not good for Hawaii. Or Hawaiians, Native or otherwise.

At the American Spectator, Peter Hannaford has a good article on the implications of Akaka—how it creates a race-based government inside the state and a truly unequal situation for the residents of Hawaii.  (He also points out how passage of Akaka plays into the strategy of the sovereignty movement.)  And he makes the important point that Congress cannot create an Indian tribe, which it would be doing by passing the Akaka bill.  After all, the sovereign nation of Hawaii was not composed only of Hawaiians, but of a wide variety of races and ethnicities who had come to the Islands for a variety of reasons.  Hawaii was a melting pot before melting pots were cool.  In that sense, Akaka is a violation of the spirit of the Islands.  (And, as this site demonstrates, helping a group via government action is a tricky thing to accomplish effectively.)