Introducing Akaka Talka
A new blog concerning the Akaka Bill and the ramifications of its passage for Hawaii.
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
A new blog concerning the Akaka Bill and the ramifications of its passage for Hawaii.
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Anonymous said,
November 14, 2005 @ 12:49 pm
Great idea! Let’s hear what the PEOPLE of Hawaii have to say about this issue. Why can’t the voters of Hawaii decide whether or not to pursue recognition?
Anonymous said,
November 22, 2005 @ 4:57 pm
Better yet if it only concerns a group of people why not let those people vote on it?
HWB said,
November 28, 2005 @ 9:35 pm
The Akaka bill, S.147/H.R. 309: Odd ball legislation that should be sent to the trash bin.
The Akaka bill would reject the first of America’s self-evident truths: that all men are created equal. It would effectively create a new privileged class in America: anyone with an indigenous ancestor. Upon enactment, the bill would find that the U.S. has a special trust , political and legal responsibility to American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians that “arises out of their status as aboriginal, indigenous, native people of the United States.” Sec. 2, Findings (3) and (22)(D).
It would declare that “Native Hawaiians” (defined by Sec. 3(8) as anyone with at least one ancestor indigenous to Hawaii) have an inherent right to self-determination and self-governance Sec. 4(a)(4) and would require the U.S. to assist them in creating their own new separate sovereign government. (Secs. 5, 6 & 7.)
Census 2000 counted over 400,000 people in the U.S. who identified
themselves as at least part Native Hawaiian. About 40%, or 160,000 of them, reside in mainland states. The Akaka bill would allow those 160,000 non-Hawaii residents to participate in the creation of a new government in Hawaii, but exclude about 1 million Hawaii residents from the process simply because they lack the favored ancestry.
Although Senator Akaka and Governor Linda Lingle say the Akaka bill would just give Native Hawaiians “parity”, the same recognition already given to Native Americans and Alaska Natives, that is untrue. The bill would give Native Hawaiians political power and privilege far superior to all other citizens, including Native Americans and Alaska Natives.
Ancestry alone is not sufficient for recognition of an Indian tribe. A
pre-existing, long-standing political entity, functioning in a separate community, is needed. Without an existing tribe or polity there is nothing to be recognized. Congress cannot create tribes. It can only recognize those historic tribes that still exist and function. Native Hawaiians do not meet those mandatory requirements. There has never been in Hawaii, even during the years of the Kingdom, a “tribe” or polity of any kind for Native Hawaiians, separate from the government of the rest of the citizens of Hawaii.
“God hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on the earth in unity,” Thus began the first Constitution of Hawaii in 1840.
Under the laws of the Kingdom all persons naturalized or born in Hawaii had the same rights as Native Hawaiians.
Nor does their history remotely resemble Indians’. The U.S. has treated Native Hawaiians as equals from the beginning. As contrasted with rhetoric, the facts of history show the relationship with the U.S. has been a success story for Native Hawaiians.
Here’s a suggestion I just sent to a friend of Senator Chaffee:
Please ask Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chaffee to imagine the consequences of allowing indigenous ancestry alone to justify creation of new governments in America.
Some 60 tribes from all parts of the country were relocated to Oklahoma in the 1800’s. With the precedent set by the Akaka bill, descendants of each of those tribes would arguably be entitled to create their own new government in the states where they originated.
There must be thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people alive today with an ancestor who was a Narragansett or member of another tribe indigenous to Rhode Island. Ask Senator Chaffee to imagine Rhode Island going on the chopping block, to be subdivided into multiple sovereign governments, without the consent of the people of Rhode Island.
Based on the Akaka bill’s precedent of granting “recognition” merely based on having at least one Indigenous ancestor, a radical proliferation of Indian tribes and Indian casinos could be triggered in many other states.
As to Governor Lingle’s belief that the Akaka bill will restore the rights
of the native Hawaiian people to the place that they were before the adverse decisions rendered in Rice v. Cayetano and Arakaki v. State of Hawaii, I have 2 responses:
1. Even if the Akaka bill is enacted, it would not change the outcome of those cases or of the pending Arakaki v. Lingle which challenges the validity of the OHA and DHHL/HHC laws. Both of them are agencies of the State of Hawaii. The Akaka bill cannot and does not even purport to convert those state agencies into an Indian tribe.
2. Our Governor took an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. Causing the United States to abandon its highest principles (for example, that all men are created equal) and encouraging the State of Hawaii to self-destruct will not help Linda Lingle’s political future or that of the Republican party nationally. Many long-time Republicans in Hawaii now believe she should be voted out of office because of her shameless pandering to one racial group and breach of her no-new-tax pledge.
Anonymous said,
November 29, 2005 @ 10:55 am
“Aboriginal Hawaiians do not have political status as a group in the international realm based on being indigenous. Hawaiian nationals do have political status as a group internationally based on the fact that their country was recognized.
Aboriginal Hawaiians do not have the right to political independence as an Indigenous people. They do have the right to political independence as a part of the larger group that is Hawaiian nationals.
Aboriginal Hawaiians have substantially greater rights as Hawaiian nationals than they do as indigenous Hawaiians, and it is a much more solid foundation to stand on, and in fact it is what distinguishes them from most other indigenous peoples. It is the recognition gained by Kamehameha III that is the legacy you can stand on, and it has nothing to do with being indigenous.”
–S.C.