| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Home Front: Politix | |||
| Hawaii native bill roils U.S. Senate | |||
| 2005-05-31 | |||
Hawaiian politicians are urging passage of a bill that would allow a separate government for ethnic Hawaiians. Sponsored by Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, D-Hawaii, with support from Gov. Linda Lingle and other Republicans in the islands, the measure would designate ethnic Hawaiians, thought to account for about 20 percent of the state's population, as an "indigenous people," the Washington Times reported Monday. "All my bill does is clarify the political and legal relationship between native Hawaiians and the United States, thereby establishing parity in the federal policies towards American Indians, Alaska natives and native Hawaiians," Akaka said.
Related Article, EFL: Hawaiian registry has 18,000 on its list Bradford Lum is Irish, Dutch, German and Chinese, but it's the three-eighths Hawaiian blood running through his veins that matters most. That's why Lum and his elderly mother, Lily, entered their names with the Native Hawaiian Registration Program, a database of people with documented proof of their Hawaiian bloodlines. Many Hawaiians believe a catalog of all living Hawaiians, estimated at 400,000 worldwide, is the key to founding a nation, or at least gaining federal recognition, for Hawaii's native people. "We need to be a nation within a nation," Lum said, "but we're not even recognized as an indigenous people right now." Others who entered their names in the registry, including John Kaukali, 67, do not believe a Hawaiian nation or government is a practical goal. "I really don't think so," said Kaukali, who is half Hawaiian. "You cannot have a nation within a nation." Kaukali doubts the registry, dubbed Kau Inoa, or "place your name," will do anything to help Hawaiians in his lifetime. He signed up hoping his grandchildren will benefit from any social services the government offers to Hawaiians if they manage to gain the same federal status as other indigenous groups in the United States. (cough)casinos(cough) The Native Hawaiian Recognition Act, also called the Akaka Bill, after its sponsor, Democratic Sen. Daniel Akaka, would formally recognize native Hawaiians as an indigenous people in the same way the U.S. government recognizes American Indians and Alaska natives.
So far, the Kau Inoa project has registered only 18,000 since starting sign-ups in January 2004, according to Hawaii Maoli, the group funded by the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs to gather and store the information. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, a state agency, is funding the ads and the sign-up effort, but Administrator Clyde Namuo said the registry is free of state or federal influence because the information is stored in an independent repository. Almost half of the people with Hawaiian blood live on the U.S. mainland, clustered mainly in West Coast cities, according to the U.S. Census, which included the Hawaiian designation for first time in 2000. But even those living far from Hawaii are encouraged to sign up. Hawaiians, however, have divergent views on what such a nation or government would be. Many scoff at federal recognition and say the Hawaiian nation is already legitimate. Others support a Hawaiian government based in the state of Hawaii and sanctioned by the United States. Some demand full sovereignty and the reinstatement of a monarchy. The most radical endorse a separate nation-state that would partner with the United States only on certain issues, such as defense or trade.
| |||
| Posted by:Steve |
| #18 None of these bozos should be recognized as "indiginous peoples" with any rights different from any other American. They are plain old citizens (POC) and they should get off the dole. I'm sorry they lost the war and I'm sorry they survived. They can assimilate or watch the war go into retuns, makes me no never mind. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-05-31 21:23 |
| #17 The suggestion to give them Kauai is not a good one. Anyone who hasn't had the pleasure of walking on Hanalei beach in the moonlight is missing out on one of the most beautiful things a person can do. |
| Posted by: Penguin 2005-05-31 21:08 |
| #16 Now that I think of it, the last excerpt (about what sort of government would take the place of statehood) made me think ... Are we talking MeCHA types here? |
| Posted by: Edward Yee 2005-05-31 20:39 |
| #15 Ironically, I agree with Kamehameha III, who *wanted* to destroy their repulsive religion and much of their culture; but the people themselves should be preserved as a unique ethnic group. Huh? What's this all about, Anonymoose? *has not studied Hawaiian separatism* But seriously, what the f*ck is this?? They "need a nation within a nation"??? I don't even support the concept of Indian nations as separate nations! One country, fifty states, people! Almost half of the people with Hawaiian blood live on the U.S. mainland, clustered mainly in West Coast cities, according to the U.S. Census, which included the Hawaiian designation for first time in 2000. THERE we go ... Others support a Hawaiian government based in the state of Hawaii and sanctioned by the United States. Some demand full sovereignty and the reinstatement of a monarchy. The most radical endorse a separate nation-state that would partner with the United States only on certain issues, such as defense or trade. I wonder what else they're going to want ... |
| Posted by: Edward Yee 2005-05-31 20:35 |
| #14 Best outa three DB? And we get the other DBs ordinance. |
| Posted by: Bobby Lee 2005-05-31 18:02 |
| #13 rj - I guess they weren't paying attention in history class. Joining up as a state is a forever deal. (See Civil War, The...1861-1865) |
| Posted by: Desert Blondie 2005-05-31 17:36 |
| #12 This crap used to boil up almost every year in the Hawaiian State House. Yes lets give the Hawaiians native status and carve out a reservation for them. Let's put it on Kahoolawi and let them run their own affairs and we'll even throw in a hundred milion or so a year to make them comfy. In return they will use the Trask sisters as a human sacrafices to Valcano on the Big island. Man I can't stand that mouthy BITCHES. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-05-31 17:21 |
| #11 Most of the Indeginious Hawaiians want to have all of the benefits of being part of the US while running their own nation. As if the US tourists would still pour into Hawaii if it weren't a state. I imagine there are folks in the US Virgin Islands quietly rooting for the Indigenious Hawaiians to have their way. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-05-31 16:23 |
| #10 Here's my take on Niihau and other human wildlife preserves, in case anyone's interested. It has some information on how that good ol' native culture is preserved on Niihau. |
| Posted by: Angie Schultz 2005-05-31 15:10 |
| #9 I'll admit they should be given tribal status on the same grounds that we have an endangered species act. Unless there is some provision for a reservation (I suggest on Kawai'i) for them, in just a couple more generations, they will be effectively extinct as a people. Ironically, I agree with Kamehameha III, who *wanted* to destroy their repulsive religion and much of their culture; but the people themselves should be preserved as a unique ethnic group. A reservation would give them a group identity away from the cities, encourage intramarriage, and address their special social problems as a tribe. The cost of this would be fairly small, as a huge amount of Kawai'i is uninhabited federal park, difficult to access, yet with arable land, fresh water, considerable coastline, and other amenities. From that launching point, they could reassert some sacred site recognition on the other islands, assert cultural and linguistic rights, self-manage far more then they currently can, and a bunch of other things. To include casinos, I would imagine. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-05-31 15:06 |
| #8 Hmmmmmmmmm... did somebody say Hawaiian Indigeneous Peoples? What's U of H pay? |
| Posted by: W. Churchill: Injun Professor 2005-05-31 15:05 |
| #7 Wasn't the vote 96% in favor or statehood? They could have stayed a territory. Can we vote them off the island and offer the star to Alberta? |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2005-05-31 15:03 |
| #6 Nah, some white family named Robinson owns it. They're not Hawaiian by blood, but they try to maintain Hawaiian traditional culture on the island. Of course, none of these Hawaiian nationalists want to actually move to Niihau and live like the bruddas do. More info here. |
| Posted by: Desert Blondie 2005-05-31 15:00 |
| #5 The Hawaiian royal family, I believe, still owns the smallest island (Nihau?) |
| Posted by: mojo 2005-05-31 14:11 |
| #4 native hawaiins dont have a reservation,ergo no area of sovereignty, no casinos, and certainly no independence. IIRC there are some endowments, started with govt funds way back when hawaii was annexed, that are supposed to give money to native hawaiians only, and somebody sued for discrimination. Presumably calling them a nation would enable the money to go only to those with Native Hawaiin ancestry. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2005-05-31 13:56 |
| #3 Hawaiians are "indigenous peoples"? Damn, there goes my plan to get the local high school mascot changed to the "Fightin' Fat Guys in Grass Skirts" |
| Posted by: BH 2005-05-31 13:49 |
| #2 Okay! "Indigenous peoples"! How much is this gonna cost? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2005-05-31 13:19 |
| #1 Nope, Steve, what the "reinstituted Hawaiian Gov't", the local sucessionist movement, wants is not a casino; they want the land back. They also think the Akaka bill is a cheap buy-off compared to what they want. |
| Posted by: Thong Phomotch2218 2005-05-31 13:16 |