Federal Recognition for Native Hawaiians

U.S. Senator from Hawaii, Akaka (D-HI), (not Inouye (D-HI) from IranContra) has introduced a bill which could be the beginning of federal recognition of native Hawaiians resulting in a "nation within a nation" political and legal status and, presumably, provide legal immunity to the native Hawaiian schools of the Kamehameha Trust from discrimination claims:

"The Native Hawaiian federal recognition bill, also known as the Akaka/Stevens bill or S. 344, [regarding]the future of the Native Hawaiian people. . . .

First, through S.344, Congress finds that Native Hawaiians are the indigenous people of the Hawaiian archipelago. By recognizing Native Hawaiians as the indigenous people of the Hawaiian Islands, the United States recognizes Native Hawaiians as a political entity rather than an entity based on race. According to the Congress, this provides Native Hawaiians a special political and legal relationship with the United States similar to the government-to-government relationship between the federal government and American Indians and Alaska Natives.

The bill articulates that Native Hawaiians have an inherent right of self-determination and have the right to reorganize a Native Hawaiian governing entity. S.344 authorizes the process for the establishment and federal recognition of a Native Hawaiian governing entity for the purpose of continuing a government-to-government relationship.

The federal recognition bill also authorizes a roll for adult Native Hawaiians who wish to participate in the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian government. Native Hawaiians who wish to participate in the roll must be at least18 years old and provide documentation that they are the direct lineal descendants of an indigenous person of the Hawaiian Islands. According to S.344, there are two ways a person can prove lineal descent. A person eligible for the roll must show that they are a direct lineal descendent of (1) an indigenous person who resided in the Hawaiian Islands, on or before Jan. 1, 1893 or (2) an indigenous person who was eligible for programs under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act in 1921.

If the Akaka/Stevens bill is enacted and the Hawaiian people choose to gain federal recognition, nation-within-a-nation, the Native Hawaiian governing entity would then work directly with the federal government and the State of Hawai’i to protect Native Hawaiian lands and programs that affect Native Hawaiians.

While the federal recognition bill authorizes the formation of a Native Hawaiian governing entity, the bill itself does not prescribe the form of government this entity will become. S.344 creates the process for the establishment of the Native Hawaiian governing entity and a process for federal recognition. The Native Hawaiian people may exercise their right to self-determination by selecting another form of government including free association or total independence."

http://www.nativehawaiians.com/questions/SlideQuestions.html#why

[ Edited by: christiki295 on 2004-06-20 23:56 ]

It's about time.
This is excellent news for the pride and heritage of native Hawaiians!

In another thought, it could also mean a possible start for Tiki gambling casinos.(?)

Totally agree! The Hawaiian people deserve this and it is long overdue.

Uh, oh, politics!

However...

On 2004-06-20 23:50, christiki295 wrote:
...resulting in a "nation within a nation" political and legal status and, presumably, provide legal immunity to the native Hawaiian schools of the Kamehameha Trust from discrimination claims:

Kamehameha School has an endowment nearly as big as Harvard's, billions! Why should Kamehameha Prep be allowed to discriminate? White guilt?

"...the United States recognizes Native Hawaiians as a political entity rather than an entity based on race."

**If it's a political group, any of us can join, right?

Or are we giving special race based privileges under another name? **

"...The bill articulates that Native Hawaiians have an inherent right of self-determination..."

Hey, they can vote, eh? Just like me and you. Remember, melting pot, we are all equal in the eyes of the law? Why start giving special privileges to one group of citizens vs. another? They get to vote, use publicly supported schools, municipal infrastructure, etc...AND they get all that other stuff? Good deal!

The federal recognition bill also authorizes a roll for adult Native Hawaiians who wish to participate in the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian government. Native Hawaiians who wish to participate in the roll must be at least18 years old and provide documentation that they are the direct lineal descendants of an indigenous person of the Hawaiian Islands. According to S.344, there are two ways a person can prove lineal descent. A person eligible for the roll must show that they are a direct lineal descendent of (1) an indigenous person who resided in the Hawaiian Islands, on or before Jan. 1, 1893 or (2) an indigenous person who was eligible for programs under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act in 1921.

**Didn't they try something like that in Georgia in the early 1900's. Only white descendants of Civil War vets could reside in certain neighborhoods? I remember bathroom and restaurant systems that tried the same thing.

I have always been against racial discrimination. ANYONE born in Hawaii is a native Hawaiian in my eyes. I have to think that way, it's the way our Constitution 'tries' to ensure equality for its citizens.

Isn't this bill just a way of the government trying to drive these native people to erecting casinos, smoke shops, fireworks stands, and souvenir stores?

I mean, come on, look at how much good these laws have done on the mainland. We're talking NO native culture protection, unless you consider tribal casinos part of indigenous culture. If they want to protect native culture, then living according to native culture and tradition should be required. Can there be native culture driving around in Chryslers? Living with air conditioning? Using modern tax payer supported hospitals?

There is no native culture outside of tourism. I can't think of any "Amish-style" Hawaiians who have forsaken the conveniences of American infrastructure to continue living in the true native fashion. This bill is a sham.**

The Native Hawaiian people may exercise their right to self-determination by selecting another form of government including free association or total independence."

**I think any group of people should be allowed the same opportunity, then. We can have Mormon Country, Whites Only Country, New Africa, Chinatown Country...geez, it's only fair.

Why can't the citizens of this fine country get jobs, vote, hold it together, and still enjoy their specific heritage? Let's just declare evryone a victim of somebody at some point in their family tree and get on with it.

Maybe I should demand some land in England as recompense for having some white ancestors driven away because they were ostracized for their crazy religiosity. Also, I think Norway owes me, I think some other ancestor was discriminated against by a Viking. At some point, these arguments about "native cultures" become specious.

Apologies, but if someone is a citizen, then he or she is the same as me. If some people spent as much time flipping burgers as they did playing victim, then they'd all own a dozen burger stores and get to play victim in their mansions crying about how hard it is to find good help.**

One last question: If whitey stumbled into Hawaii and took things over, how is that different from whoever was there at the time having killed/eradicated the group who was in charge previously? All of human history is kind of about people jostling for an advantage over each other, so why reward the group of oppressors who were busy oppressing just as we took control? Shouldn't there be a fund and form of self government for the people who were conquered and then oppressed by Kamehameha? Maybe he was so good at killing the opposition leaders that we now have no record of who owned the land before him. Just 'cause he was in charge when we arrived doesn't mean there isn't another group we should be looking for to help recover from serial oppression, eh?

Apologies for being so disagreeable. I am against the bill, but mean no personal disrespect to any members.

[ Edited by: Geeky Tiki on 2004-06-21 08:35 ]

I think a big issue would be the amount of blood to qualify as a native Hawaiian. Look at it this way, if someone qualifies at 1/16 Hawaiian blood linage, then the haoles win by legal statute as that person is 15/16th NOT Hawaiian.

I understand Geeky Tiki's argument to a degree, but one must remember, the Hawaiian islands are not a contiguous land mass with the mainland USA; it's freakin' 1,000's of miles away!

Unfortunatly, it's too late. The barn doors open, the cat's out of the bag, nothing will return Hawaii or the Native American lands to the good ol' days.

GeekyTiki, you raise valid points and no offense taken. I hoped this wouldn't be a "wedge" issue - but as tiki is part of Hawaiian history, and Hawaii is a favorite vacation spot for TCers, I thought this issue might be of interest.

I agree, we are nearing political discourse, so this may have to be moved from the main discussion section. Nevertheless:

The United States and its military and business interests played an integral role in the overthrow of the Hawaiian history. http://www.royalty.nu/America/Hawaii.html

President Clevand disapproved, although he didn't do anything about it and subsequently, the United States, via then President Clinton, issued a formal apology.

What to do, if anything, about it now? To me, I don't think we should sweep history under the rug or ignore the elephant in the living room.

Consquently, I think a bill creating a structure whereby the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy should be addressed.

This bill neither provides that federal land should be returned to native Hawaiians, nor provides for reparations. It does, however, create a structure whereby the historical inequity can be analyzed.

I think that this is not only in the best interests of native Hawaiians, but is also in the best interests of the entire United States.

To me, the characterizing institutional discrimination by the government as a harmless part of life which should be ignored is both inappropriate and violates the constitution of this great nation. Therefore, I can not accept such a response:

"Why can't the citizens of this fine country get jobs, vote, hold it together, and still enjoy their specific heritage? Let's just declare evryone a victim of somebody at some point in their family tree and get on with it. "

As the United States participated in the overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy, by threat of force, and as the new government acquired all of the land retained by the monarchy (the Crown lands), I think that such a bill is consistent with the cherished ideas of liberty and justice for all.

[ Edited by: christiki295 on 2004-06-21 17:02 ]

Its all about who gets the land:

The bill is silent, though, on what many believe is the real issue underlying discussions of Hawaiian sovereignty: the 1.8 million acres of so-called ceded lands taken from the kingdom and passed on to the state government.

Those lands are held in trust, and 20 percent of their income flows to native Hawaiians, but many pro-sovereignty activists say they must all be returned to a Hawaiian nation. That is complicated by the fact that among the tracts are military bases around Pearl Harbor, the University of Hawaii campus, and Honolulu International Airport.

In part because the bill does not address the ceded lands, many hard-core sovereignty supporters oppose it.

"The minimum [acceptable] should be a sovereign nation with a land base inviolate," said Jon Osorio, a native Hawaiian who is a professor of Hawaiian studies at the University of Hawaii.
He added that Hawaiians could remain part of the United States and negotiate compensation for things such as military bases.

. . .
Micah Kane, director of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, said leases were now granted only to people whose incomes were below the median.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6297339.htm?1c

In Arakaki vs. Cayetano (II), pla
intiffs are asking that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands be declared unconstitutional and invalid under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America. In addition they are asking that any and all moneys and properties be returned to the State of Hawaii and be used for all residents of the State of Hawaii. Should this lawsuit succeed, the waiting list for Hawaiian Homestead leases would cease to exist, current homesteaders would need to enter into negotiations with the State, and the OHA and DHHL would need to transfer all assets to the state, thereby ceasing to operate its programs which benefit Native Hawaiians.

Although Maui has 31,000 acres set aside as Home Lands, only 225 families actually had settled on homesteads during the program's 80-year history, using less than 150 acres.
Meanwhile, more than 3,000 families, many of whom had been waiting for decades, were still on the waiting list for a Maui homestead. Another 300 families, granted homestead leases 16 years earlier at Waiohuli, high on the slopes of Haleakala, were still waiting to begin building their homes. Continuing disputes between the state and county governments and a developer kept the gates locked and families out. Another 70 families, who had received homestead leases for farming, also 16 years earlier, were even further behind. There were no roads, electricity, or water. Incredibly, the families were told to just keep waiting.
"It was not a good time," says HCA Executive Director Jim Wagele. "Problems with the program were much more visible than any successes. We now realize that the Hawaiians whom the Home Lands were most intended to help, are the ones most likely to be excluded. We were asking native Hawaiians to be financially fit before they can access the program that is supposed to help them. That's a tall order for many native Hawaiian families."

The 300 families at Waiohuli, for example, did not have an effective advocate, especially since the homestead association had dissolved years before. HCA stepped in, helping the families re-establish the organization and training the new officers to interact more effectively with public officials. The revived homestead association proved successful in resolving the issues quickly, and in February 2002, the gates were finally unlocked. "It was a huge event, and the families had made it happen!" exclaimed Wagele.
http://www.ruralisc.org/hca_success.htm

The bill has less than 20 days to make it out of the U.S. Senate. Sen. Inouye (D-HI) attempted to attach it to a bill regarding class-action litigation, but that bill didn't make it.

He may try to attach it to an appropriations bill as he is the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Cmte.

On 2004-06-20 23:50, christiki295 wrote:
U.S. Senator from Hawaii, Akaka (D-HI), (not Inouye (D-HI) from IranContra) has introduced a bill which could be the beginning of federal recognition of native Hawaiians ....

Aloha, Christiki, and mahalos for intiating dialogue on this important issue.

Based on the information I have at this time, and as a kama'aina, I am against the Akaka bill for these reasons:

The Akaka bill makes the Department of the Interior the lead agency responsible for all policies that affect Native Hawaiian resources, rights and lands..

The Department of the Interior has been deemed an "unfit trustee" by a US federal court and its lead officials cited for contempt of court by a federal judge. Over 40 million acres and about $137 billion are missing right now in Indian assets. I do not believe kama'aina wants that to happen to Hawaiian lands and money.

In the last 5 years, officials of the department have destroyed documents, disobeyed court orders, and lied to the court, repeatedly in cases that seek to account for Indian money and land for which the Department of the interior is responsible. For court papers and documentation see http://www.indiantrust.com

The Akaka bill requires the Hawaiian constitution to contain language that gives the officials of the governing entity the authority to permanently settle Hawaiian claims for reparations, reinstated independence, land, damages from the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and all other Hawaiian claims without the approval of Hawaiian voters.

What this means is; so-called leaders of a Native Hawaiian governing entity under the Akaka bill can decide basic issues that affect the kanaka maoli and their 'ohana directly, such as receiving money for damages relating to stolen land and the illegal overthrow. Additonally, kanaka maoli will not be allowed to say a single word about the decisions these new bureaucrats will make for them.

The Akaka bill installs a racial definition of "Hawaiian" where no such definition ever existed in Hawaii outside of U.S. law.

In other words, foreigners will "help" Hawaiians decide who is Hawaiian and who isn't. Would you want strangers to have that power?

The Akaka bill defines Hawaiians living today as the descendants of pre western contact aboriginal native people rather than descendants; subjects of the kingdom of Hawaii, severely damaging Hawaiian's rights to land title in the Hawaiian Islands. Federal law limits the rights of aboriginal people to the right to use and occupy land but not to own it or sell it as aboriginal people . A blanket claims settlement will end even these limited rights as it has for scores of tribes since 1970.

What this means is that Hawaiians will, in effect, be saying to the US federal government, "you were right to come in and overthrow our Queen.You may have all our land that you stole. We don't want it back. You know what's best for Hawaiians more than Hawaiians do. And we give up forever our right to sue the US government if it doesn't keep its word with Hawaiians."

The Akaka bill makes restored Hawaiian independence unlawful. Title 25 of the United States code prohibits Indian Tribes, and federally recognized Alaskans and Hawaiians by extension, from being recognized as independent Nations: 25 USC chapter 3 subchapter I Sec 71: "No Indian nation or tribe within the territory of the United States shall be acknowledged or recognized as an independent nation, tribe, or power. . ."

Stop and think - can you name even one Indian tribe than received US federal recognition and then went on to become independent ? You can not, because it never happened! The reason the US government wants to pass the Akaka bill is to try to stop Hawaiian rights in its tracks!

The Akaka bill creates a permanent political relationship in which Hawaiians are subordinate to the United States forever.
Under the Akaka bill, Hawaiians will have the legal status of wards of the US federal government. Did you know that prisoners currently incarcerated in US federal prisons are also wards of the US federal government? Hawaiians do not see themselves as criminals. Why would Hawaiians want to be lumped in the same legal classification with them? They will be under the Akaka bill!

Finally, the Akaka bill will ensure litigation in courts in the years ahead caused by a poor definition of the rights Hawaiians can expect under US federal law.

If you think lawsuits are coming fast and furious at Hawaiians now, just wait! Hawaiians will be forced to spend enormous amounts of money to defend their so-called "rights" in the Akaka bill if it passes. And guess where those suits will eventually end up? That's right, in the hands of an increasingly anti-Indian, and therefore anti-Hawaiian US Supreme Court.

The Akaka bill does not guarantee that Hawaiian federal entitlements will be protected

When was the last time Hawaiians trusted US bureaucrats to do the right thing for Hawaiians and the US actually did it?

The US federal government is trying to contain Hawaiians just like they did a century ago by saying then, "you'd better accept annexation because it's the best deal you're going to get." They were lying to Hawaiians then and they are lying now!

Did it turn out to be a good deal? Have Hawaiians gotten their nation and lands back? Not on your life.
The Akaka Bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Welcome back, Lanakai.

Your insight has been missed.

On 2004-10-27 02:31, lanikai wrote:
Based on the information I have at this time, and as a kama'aina, I am against the Akaka bill for these reasons:

Sorry to be ignorant but what's a "kama'aina?"

On 2004-10-27 20:03, Kono wrote:

On 2004-10-27 02:31, lanikai wrote:
Based on the information I have at this time, and as a kama'aina, I am against the Akaka bill for these reasons:

Sorry to be ignorant but what's a "kama'aina?"

Long term Hawaii resident that has assimilated local culture.
(there are haoles here and there that have been here a while that still appear as fob haoles. They are not kama'aina.)

On 2004-06-21 00:04, Unga Bunga wrote:
It's about time.
This is excellent news for the pride and heritage of native Hawaiians!

In another thought, it could also mean a possible start for Tiki gambling casinos.(?)

The bill actually contains a provision which statest that provisions which allow American Indians to operate casinos do not apply - so no tiki casinos.

The bill is currently stalled on the Senate floor.