{"id":119,"date":"2009-10-22T09:26:34","date_gmt":"2009-10-22T19:26:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/aloha4all.org\/wordpress\/?page_id=119"},"modified":"2009-12-30T15:55:12","modified_gmt":"2009-12-31T01:55:12","slug":"qa","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/aloha4all.org\/wordpress\/qa\/","title":{"rendered":"Q&A"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Akaka bill – H.R. 2314\/S. 1011<\/strong>
\n<\/strong><\/span>Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009<\/strong><\/p>\n

What is the recent history and status of the bill now?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Updated 12\/30\/2009
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

Several versions of the Bill were introduced int the U.S. House in 2009. The HR 2314 version has been advancing through the House, having passed\u00c2\u00a0 at a hearing of the House\u00c2\u00a0 Resources\u00c2\u00a0 Committee on December 15, 2009. At an earlier hearing representatives of the new Obama Justice Department reversed prior Justice Department testimony in opposition to the Bill and actively supported it.<\/p>\n

The Senate companion Bill was drastically revised on December 16, 2009 and passed by voice vote in the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, despite strong objections from Governor Lingle and Attorney General Bennett.\u00c2\u00a0 See the “Akaka Bill News” tab for details on the revised version, which would treat native Hawaiians as an Indian tribe exempt from State oversight.<\/p>\n

In August, 2009, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights repeated its 2006 recommendation that Congress reject the Akaka bill, stating that” The Commission recommends against passage of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act…or any other legislation that would discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American People into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege.”<\/p>\n

June 7, 2006 President George W. Bush’s administration wrote to Senator Bill Frist, “strongly opposing” the Akaka bill and “we must … honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples.”;<\/p>\n

June 8, 2006 The United States Senate rejected cloture on the Akaka bill. This killed the bill for the remainder of the 109th Congress.<\/p>\n

On January 17, 2007, the Akaka bill was re-introduced in the 110th Congress as the\u00c2\u00a0Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007, S. 310<\/em> in the Senate and\u00c2\u00a0H.R. 505<\/em> in the House.<\/p>\n

Legislative background?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The original version of the Akaka bill was introduced in the year 2000 shortly after the Supreme Court, in Rice v. Cayetano, struck down the racial restriction on voting for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Because that decision threatened other laws and programs for the “benefit”\u00c2\u009d of Hawaiians, Senator Akaka with Senator Inouye’s endorsement, proposed candidly to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision by having Congress “recognize”\u00c2\u009d Native Hawaiians as the equivalent of an Indian tribe. (The bill defines “Native Hawaiians” solely by ancestry substantially the same as the ancestral definition the Supreme Court held in Rice to be an impermissible racial classification.)<\/p>\n

All versions of the bill have been based, as S.147 and H.R.309 are, on the dubious proposition that Congress should protect unconstitutional race-based entitlements against court challenges by converting an entire racial group into a make-believe Indian tribe.<\/p>\n

The bill encountered resistance and did not pass in 2000 or subsequently. (It did pass a sparsely attended House in 2000 when Representative Abercrombie included it in a vote on non-controversial items.) Efforts to attach it as a rider to appropriations bills in 2000, 2001 and 2004 were defeated. Hawaii’s political leaders resubmitted the bill to the 110th Congress as S. 310 and H.R. 505.<\/p>\n

What would the Akaka bill do?<\/strong><\/p>\n

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.”<\/p>\n

It would declare that “Native Hawaiians” (defined as anyone with at least one ancestor indigenous to Hawaii) have an inherent right to self-determination and self-governance and would require the U.S. to assist them in creating their own new separate government.<\/p>\n

The bill provides for preparation of a roll of persons, Native Hawaiians only, eligible to participate in the process; election by persons on that roll of an interim governing council and another election by those persons-only to adopt organic governing documents. Thus, the first two elections called for by the bill would be restricted to Native Hawaiians-only, the same racial restriction prohibited by the 15th Amendment and struck down by the Supreme Court in Rice v. Cayetano.<\/p>\n

Upon the election of the first officers, the new government would automatically be recognized by the U.S., without further action of Congress or the Executive branch, as “the representative governing body of the Native Hawaiian people.”\u00c2\u009d<\/p>\n

The 3 governments (US, State and new Native Hawaiian governing entity) would then negotiate an agreement for:<\/p>\n

transfer of lands, natural resources & other assets,
\n<\/span>delegation of governmental power & authority,
\n<\/span>exercise of civil & criminal jurisdiction, and
\n<\/span>“residual responsibilities”\u00c2\u009d of the US & State of Hawaii.<\/p>\n

The 3 governments may, but are not required to, then submit to Congress and to the Hawaii State Governor and legislature amendments to federal and state laws that will enable implementation of the agreements.<\/p>\n

When would the new governing entity come into existence?<\/strong><\/p>\n

It would come into existence only after a series of actions by native Hawaiian representatives as laid out in the Bill. This could take months or years, depending on the extent of opposition within the native Hawaiian community<\/p>\n

What will Hawaii be like if the Akaka bill becomes law?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The State of Hawaii will be diminished. As a result of the negotiations, it will probably lose over 40% of the public lands it owns and the population, territory and natural resources over which it has jurisdiction will be reduced.<\/p>\n

The State of Hawaii will probably lose about $1 billion in cash, suffer a large shrinkage of its tax base and its ability to earn money in the future will be impaired. Its bond ratings will almost certainly be lowered and its cost of borrowing will rise.<\/p>\n

Its law enforcement, homeland security, environmental, health and other services will be less effective and more expensive because of lack of, or restricted, access and jurisdiction over the sovereign territories of the new Hawaiian government.<\/p>\n

It is reasonable to anticipate that the new Hawaiians-only government and its territory will have at least all of the sovereignty, jurisdiction, governing powers and authority of American Indian tribes and reservations.<\/p>\n

Unlike typical contiguous Indian reservations, the “reservation”\u00c2\u009d in Hawaii will likely be a checkerboard of sovereign enclaves on all islands and in neighborhoods, urban and rural, residential, commercial and conservation. (Click on Landmap.)<\/p>\n

While all Indian reservations do not have the characteristics listed below, all of these powers are available to all and in place in various reservations and unless specifically excluded in the legislation, which is not now the case, could be imposed by the new Hawaiian government.<\/p>\n