Akaka bill yeas and nays for the cloture motion vote of June 8, 2006 (56 yea, 41 nay, 3 not voting)

Original source was

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00165#position

SEE ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS AT THE BOTTOM -- WHY THE 56 YES VOTES ON CLOTURE WOULD PROBABLY DWINDLE TO LESS THAN 50 IF THERE WERE A VOTE ON THE BILL ITSELF.

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Comment by Ken Conklin:

The cloture vote on the Hawaiian Government Reorganization bill was 56-41 in favor of cloture. Therefore cloture failed, because 60 votes were required to make it pass.

Although the Hawai'i delegation is trying toput a positive spin on the result by saying that a majority of the Senate favors the Akaka bill, that might not be correct. Several Senators who voted for cloture might have voted against the bill after allowing it do come to the floor. We know that is definitely true about two Senators: John McCain and Jon Kyl.

Remember that Senator Kyl voted yes for cloture only because of an agreement he made two years ago; but he absolutely would have voted no on the bill itself, and was fully prepared to offer several devastating amendments if it had come to the floor. Senator McCain, on the floor of the Senate immediately before the cloture vote, made a point of saying that he was voting yes on cloture because of a deal made previously, but would vote no on the bill. See the contents of his floor speech below.

It's also very interesting that Senator Lindsey Graham chose not to show up for the vote. He did vote earlier that same day on a different topic. Senator Graham's wife worked closely with Hawai'i Governor Linda Lingle during her campaign for Governor. Rumors are that Senator Graham told people opposing the Akaka bill that he signed on as a cosponsor and would vote for the bill because his wife demanded it, even though the Senator himself most likely does not like the concept. Thus, his absence from the vote could be viewed as an abstention because of conflict between his personal values vs. loyalty to his wife. Let's hope the Senator wears a helmet when he goes home.

Some of the other Republican Senators who voted yes really have no excuse -- they are the same ones who often seem to lean sharply to the left, such as Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Gordon Smith, and Norm Coleman.

No Democrat voted against cloture. There are rumors that a handful of Democrats would have voted no on the bill after voting yes on cloture; but no Democrat has made any public statement to that effect. God help us if the elections this November go the wrong way.

There is a ray of hope that some who like the Akaka bill might see the light and change their minds. Senator Hatch was a co-sponsor of the Akaka bill in the 108th Congress (2003-2004), at a time when he was also Chair of the Judiciary Committee. But this time around he did not sign up as a cosponsor; and when it came time for the cloture vote, he voted against even allowing the bill to come to the floor. He has grown in his understanding of the bill, and so there's hope that others might do the same. Who knows -- maybe someday there will even be a Democrat who gets it right!

The essay below was taken from pp. S5636-S5637 of the Congressional Record for Thursday June 8, 2006 which can be found at http://tinyurl.com/k299m The contents were then copied into the form of an article published June 9.

------------

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?75d24e41-590f-4631-b705-0006c5a27acb

Hawaii Reporter, June 9, 2006

Despite a 'Yes' Vote on Cloture, I am Unequivocally Opposed to the Akaka Bill My Vote in Support for Cloture Fulfills an Agreement I Made, But I Would Not Vote for the Akaka Bill's Passage Because It Divides the Nation By Race

By U.S. Sen. John McCain

Today we will vote on the motion to proceed to S . 147 , the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2005. This legislation was passed by the Indian Affairs Committee on March 9, 2005. The bill is similar to a bill reported by the Committee during the 108th Congress that was not brought before the full Senate.

S . 147 was developed to provide Native Hawaiians with a mechanism for self-governance and self-determination, which the bill's sponsors believe would protect from legal challenges a variety of programs and services currently in place for the benefit of Native Hawaiians. To achieve this goal, the bill would establish a process that would permit Native Hawaiians to organize a sovereign entity that would have a legal relationship with the United States similar to that which exists today between the United States and federally recognized Indian tribes.

I recognize that this legislation has been offered in response to many legitimate concerns expressed by the members of the Hawaii delegation and the State's Governor. The leaders of the State of Hawaii are attempting to ensure that a longstanding agreement between the Federal Government and Hawaii will not be jeopardized by litigants determined to undermine certain aspects of that agreement relating to Native Hawaiians. That does not change the fact that I have serious doubts about the wisdom of this legislation.

The sponsors reached an agreement in the 108th Congress that they would be afforded an opportunity to bring the bill to the Senate floor during this Congress.

To fulfill that agreement, in my capacity as the chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, I have worked to ensure that the legislation would be reported by the committee.

I will also support the motion to proceed to the bill's consideration because of the agreement that was reached in the last Congress.

I would like the record to reflect clearly, though, that I am unequivocally opposed to this bill and that I will not support its passage should cloture be invoked.

Again, I do know how important this legislation is to the Senators from Hawaii and certainly to the very capable Governor of the 50th State. I am very much aware that one of the purposes of this legislation is to insulate current Native Hawaiian programs from constitutional attack in the courts, and I am sympathetic to that purpose. I commit to the Senators and the Governor that I remain willing to work with them to address the fundamental legal concerns facing their State. I also recognize the efforts made by Senator Akaka to address some of the criticisms that have been leveled at this legislation. However, I still have a number of significant concerns with this measure.

Foremost among these concerns is that, if enacted, S . 147 would result in the formation of a sovereign government for Native Hawaiian people. I am sure that the sponsors have good intentions, but I cannot turn away from the fact that this bill would lead to the creation of a new nation based exclusively -- not primarily, not in part, but exclusively -- on race. In fact, any person with even a drop of Hawaiian blood would qualify to vote on the establishment of this new, legislatively created entity that would then negotiate with the Federal Government of the United States and the State of Hawaii on potentially unlimited topics.

As the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights stated in its recent report recommending against passage of S . 147, this bill would discriminate on the basis of race and '''further subdivide [Page: S5637] GPO's PDF the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege.'''

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.

U.S. Sen. John McCain is a Republican representing the state of Arizona.

==================

Send comments or questions to:
Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

You may now

GO BACK TO THE AKAKA BILL HISTORY FOR ALL OF JUNE, 2006

or

READ MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE HAWAIIAN GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION BILL IN THE 109th CONGRESS (January 2005 through December 2006)

or

SEE MORE GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE HAWAIIAN RECOGNITION BILL (HAWAIIAN GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION BILL)

or

GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE

(c) Copyright 2006 Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. All rights reserved