Tag Archives: Akaka

Akaka Bill

Can You Hear Me Now?

3 Comments

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?

Akaka Bill, Sovereignty

For the Future Subjects of the Kingdom of Maui

Leave a comment

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.

Akaka Bill

What Kamehameha hath joined together, let not Akaka rip asunder

1 Comment

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.

Akaka Bill

You Don’t Have to be Psychic

Leave a comment

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 Bill, OHA

Akaka by OHA

Leave a comment

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.

Akaka Bill

A Feeling of Recognition

Leave a comment

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.)

Uncategorized

OHA–Peeling back More Layers

1 Comment

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.

Akaka Bill

How Big is Bigger and Who Stands to Gain?

1 Comment

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

Akaka Bill Report–Senate Version

Leave a comment

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.