Rumble in the U.S. House: History of the Akaka bill H.R.505, from October 18, 2007 through October 31, 2007. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PASSES AKAKA BILL H.R. 505 BY VOTE OF 261-153. President Bush formal statement opposing and threatening veto. House Republican Study Committee statement opposing. Full text of floor debate from Congressional Record; and yeas and nays from House Clerk on 4 roll-call votes. Followup news reports and commentary.

The history of the Akaka bill during the entire 110th Congress, January 2007 through December 2008, is divided into subpages covering several time-periods. The index of topics for the entire 110th Congress, with links to the subpages, can be found at
https://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/AkakaHist110thCong.html

This is a subpage covering the history for the period from October 18 through October 31, 2007.

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

INDEX OF ITEMS FROM OCTOBER 18, 2007 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2007. (FULL TEXT OF EACH ITEM FOLLOWS THE INDEX, IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER).

** ON THURSDAY OCTOBER 18, 2007 THE U.S. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES SENT TO THE FULL HOUSE ITS REPORT ON THE AKAKA BILL H.R.505. IN ADDITION, THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD INCLUDED AN ENTRY ANNOUNCING THAT THE AKAKA BILL WILL COME TO THE HOUSE FLOOR FOR ACTION ON WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY, OCTOBER 24 OR 25.

** ON FRIDAY OCTOBER 19 THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN WHIP REPORT FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK INDICATED THAT THE AKAKA BILL WILL COME UP IN THE MIDDLE OF A GROUP OF NON-CONTROVERSIAL BILLS UNDER SUSPENSION OF THE RULES SOMETIME WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY. Placing the Akaka bill on the calendar of non-controversial bills under suspension of the rules is the same stealth tactic that was successful in getting the bill passed in the House in September 2000, and resulted in the House Judiciary Committee taking action against the bill in 2001 to prevent that from happening again, and also in 2005.

October 20: An op-ed in the Wall Street Journal says "The costs to U.S. society of the aberration of a sovereign Indian "nation" within our borders are neither justified nor sustainable." in the context of discussing the inability of injured individuals to sue an Indian tribe due to sovereign immunity.

Sunday October 21: Article by H. William Burgess: "Akaka Bill Set for a Vote in the U.S. House This Week"

***** MONDAY OCTOBER 22: PRESIDENT BUSH ISSUES NEW FORMAL STATEMENT STRONGLY OPPOSING AKAKA BILL INCLUDING THREAT TO VETO IT IF IT REACHES HIS DESK. STATEMENT ON OFFICIAL STATIONERY AS SENT TO HOUSE RULES COMMITTEE. NEWS REPORTS TRY TO SPIN IT -- International Herald Tribune, Alaska TV station, Honolulu Advertiser, all relying on Associated Press.

October 23: (1) National Review online, Roger Clegg article "House To Vote Tomorrow on Akaka Bill"; (2) Washington Times "Native Hawaiians' status set for vote" lengthy article describes the bill in the way OHA likes to characterize it and says bill likely to pass the House but perhaps not with the 2/3 vote needed to override a veto; (3) Honolulu Advertiser reports Akaka bill will come to the House floor on Wednesday for debate and perhaps a vote; (4) Honolulu Advertiser editorial says "If the bill does come to the House floor tomorrow, as scheduled, Hawai'i delegates need to make the case for the bill as forcefully as possible. The object will be to secure bipartisan support for the measure, in part to counter the White House statement. ... If the bill does emerge intact from the Senate, where it faces far longer odds, it's essential that the president sees it has broad support in both houses; he may then be less likely to bother with a veto, which would be tough to override."; (5) Honolulu Star-Bulletin republished Associated Press story published yesterday in Advertiser breaking news; (6) Grassroot Institute President Richard Rowland quotes OHA newspaper ad for Akaka bill and asks questions about what it says.; (7) James Growney (Native Hawaiian) opposes Akaka bill and calls for an environmental impact statement on it comparable to the one being demanded for the Superferry.

October 24 early morning: (1) House Republican Study Committee strongly opposes Akaka bill -- official statement available as 10-page pdf on colorful letterhead stationery and also as simple text; (2) Peter Kirsanow, member of U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in National Review online "Multicultural Racism -- The insidiousness of Hawaiian separatism"; (3) National Review editorial opposes Akaka bill; (4) The American Chronicle Eagle Forum opposes Akaka bill

** SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE U.S. HOUSE FLOOR DEBATE ON WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 24 (Rules committee sets procedural rules for debating and amending the Akaka bill; summary of proposed amendment)

** OCTOBER 24: U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FLOOR DEBATE -- -- Akaka bill passes 261-153 after failed attempt to amend it and/or send it back to the Resources committee. TRANSCRIPT OF FLOOR DEBATE TAKEN FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Also, a summary includes breaking news reports, and the record of the YEAS and NAYS on each of four roll call votes.

** October 24: News reports and commentaries after the House passed the Akaka bill. (1) Men's News Daily "Racial Division, Hawaiian Style" "Members of the Project 21 black leadership network say the legislation directly conflicts with the spirit of inclusion and equality that civil rights activists fought so hard to create. It is contemptibly dishonest, not to mention completely disingenuous, for the very politicians who are best known for decrying racial division to eagerly push legislation to institutionalize race as the guiding principle for a body of government within our United States"; (2) Time Magazine "Native Hawaiians should regain some of the self-governance powers lost when the islands' queen was overthrown more than a century ago, the House decided Wednesday."; (3) NASDAQ News "House Votes To Give Native Hawaiians Self-Governance Powers"; (4) KITV 4 television news; (5) Grassroot Institute of Hawaii President Richard Rowland notes that those pushing the Akaka bill refuse to describe its consequences and will never be held accountable for them.

October 25: (1) Honolulu Advertiser reports House passage of Akaka bill, some local reaction, and a timeline of the bill from 2000 to 2007; (2) Honolulu Star-Bulletin reports passage of the bill and comment from 4 members of local civil rights committee who favor the bill; (3) Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial says opposition to Akaka bill by Republicans, and especially President Bush, makes it advisable to wait until the next President is elected, and in the meantime continue to attach racial entitlements to noncontroversial bills (as has been done for many years); (4) Barb Lindsay, national Director of One Nation United, article "Coming Together to Avoid Coming Apart" to call attention "that there are living descendants of indigenous people now residing in every state. They will surely take notice and demand their own self-governing "tribal" governments, too."; (5) Retired Arizona sheriff explains "Why The Akaka Bill Stinks"; (6) Knoxville (TN) Metro Pulse newspaper columnist writes "One Nation...Indivisible -- Scrap the Hawaiian Nation idea"

October 26: (1) Honolulu Star-Bulletin cartoonist "Corky" shows President Bush riding a huge elephant whose foot is raised ready to stomp the Akaka bill while Bush says "Ahh, the Akaka bill, come in ... closer ... closer ..."; (2) Indian Country Today columnist says historical differences between "Native Hawaiians" and the Indian tribes are no more substantial than differences among the tribes themselves, and also discusses Rep. Flake's proposed amendment to require compliance with the 14th Amendment

October 27: Mike Graham, citizen of the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation, article in American Chronicle, calls on "President Bush Reinstate Native Hawaiian Government Now", arguing that America owes it to Native Hawaiians.

Sunday October 28: The Molokai Times reports passage of Akaka bill with emphasis on House floor speech by Mazie Hirono, Member of Congress representing this island.

October 29: (1) Investors Business Daily -- strong editorial entitled "Hawaii Oh-oh" ruefully notes House passage of Akaka bill and repeats important points against it; (2) Haunani Apoliona, OHA chair, writes 700 word commentary in Honolulu Advertiser praising House passage of Akaka bill and saying "Hawaii needs federal recognition law now."

October 30: Kansas City newspaper republishes part of Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial from October 25.

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

FULL TEXT OF EACH ITEM FROM OCTOBER 18, 2007 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2007; IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?r110:@OR+(+@1(H.R.+505)++@1(H.+R.+505) ++)

Then click on item #3

3 . LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM -- (House of Representatives - October 18, 2007) [Page: H11754]

(Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

Mr. BLUNT. I yield to my good friend, the gentleman from South Carolina, for the purpose of inquiring about next week's schedule.

Mr. CLYBURN. I thank my friend for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning-hour business and 2 p.m. for legislative business, with votes rolled until 6:30 p.m. We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. A list of those bills will be announced by the close of business tomorrow.

On Tuesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for morning-hour business and 10 a.m. for legislative business. On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative business. We expect to consider H.R. 1483, the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Act; H.R. 1011, Virginia Ridge and Valley Act; H.R. 505 , Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act; H.R. 3685, Employment Nondiscrimination Act; and H.R. 3867, Small Business Contracting Act. On Friday, there will be no votes in the House.

** At the same URL, click on # 10:

10 . Daily Digest - Thursday, October 18, 2007

** Halfway down

House of Representatives

Reports filed:

H.R. 505 , to express the policy of the United States regarding the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians and to provide a process for the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian governing entity (H. Rept. 110-389)

Also see

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.00505:

Latest Major Action: 10/18/2007 Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 243.
House Reports: 110-389

Clicking on House Reports 110-389 yields:

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr389)

Table of Contents

Beginning
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
COMMITTEE ACTION
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
EARMARK STATEMENT
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

** Clicking on "Printer Friendly Display" yields the full report issued October 18, 2007. Note that although this report is only 14 pages long, it incorporates, by reference only, several very lengthy reports submitted in previous years, which are available through the "thomas" (Library of Congress) website. The new 14-page House Report 110-389 can be found in formatted simple text at
http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr389&dbname=110&
also available as a pdf at
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f:hr389.110.pdf

The pdf version has also been stored on this website, at:

https://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/AkakaHouseReport110-389.pdf

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

** ON FRIDAY OCTOBER 19 THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN WHIP REPORT FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK INDICATED THAT THE AKAKA BILL WILL COME UP IN THE MIDDLE OF A GROUP OF NON-CONTROVERSIAL BILLS UNDER SUSPENSION OF THE RULES SOMETIME WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY. Republican whip reports can be found during the 110th Congress (2007-2008) on Representative Roy Blunt's website at
http://republicanwhip.house.gov/

Note that the Akaka bill is expected to be placed on the "suspension calendar." That means it will be included among a group of non-controversial bills to be approved by voice vote under suspension of normal rules during the dinner hour when very few Representatives are present. This is the same stealth strategy used successfully in September 2000 -- the only time the Akaka bill has passed either the House or Senate. However, the strategy can be overcome if enough Representatives who oppose the bill show up on the House floor to make objection to using the suspension calendar to pass a bill that is very controversial indeed.

To see what happened in September 2000, including Representative Abercrombie's comments afterward, go to
http://tinyurl.com/7yclb

Abercrombie's abuse of the suspension calendar in 2000 caused Representative James Sensenbrenner, then Chair of the Judiciary Committee, to write a letter to Speaker Dennis Hastert in 2001 demanding the Akaka bill be referred to the Judiciary Committee for hearings on its unconstitutionality, and that in the meantime the bill be barred from the suspension calendar -- see the Sensenbrenner letter at
http://tinyurl.com/49p55

In July 2005 the Judiciary Committee indeed did take the very unusual step of holding a hearing on the Akaka bill pre-emptively, in its Subcommittee on the Constitution, even though the bill had been officially referred to the Resources Committee which has jurisdiction on Indian legislation. Some of the testimony, and comments by the subcommittee chairman, can be seen at
http://tinyurl.com/c3kg9

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

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119284045860265621.html
Wall Street Journal, October 20, 2007, Page A9

Tribal 'Nations' Within U.S. Aren't Justified

Your front-page article "Plaintiffs Suing U.S. Tribes Can't Get Their Day in Court1" (Oct. 12) provides yet another reason to reconsider the privileged legal status of so-called Native Americans. Our school-taught, collective guilt over the demise of those who presided over North America 500 years ago has left us reluctant to broach the subject, but broach it we must. The costs to U.S. society of the aberration of a sovereign Indian "nation" within our borders are neither justified nor sustainable.

The sad fact is that American Indians were displaced by the successive pressures of the colonization, settlement and economic exploitation of North America. They lost a series of battles against soldiers and disease, and ultimately against the onslaught of a more advanced civilization.

It is absurd to act as if the Indians didn't lose those battles and that war; to carve out an imaginary sovereign state belonging to them, the borders of which are continually shifting to the detriment of U.S. citizens; to include Indians as beneficiaries of U.S. social programs while exempting them from the obligations of their taxpaying neighbors; to allow their legal claims in U.S. courts while precluding claims against them; and to pretend they exercise a superior sort of stewardship over land or nature such that they can be made exempt from environmental regulation.

However unpopular it may be, we need to repeal the recognition of Indians and their Tribal Governments as a land within our land. The survivors of the lost Indian civilization can and should be made citizens, with the same rights and responsibilities as the rest of us. Their cultural heritage can be maintained just as well without tax- and regulation-exempt casinos and a free ride in matters of national security, economic infrastructure, social welfare and civil jurisprudence. Their well-being, and their right to cultural and ethnic self-determination and self-expression, don't require our paternalistic treatment of them as children whose rights we hold in trust.

The harsh treatment of indigenous Americans by their conquerors, though typical of the time, was in hindsight incorrect and regrettable. But the subsequent sequestering of their tribes, first geographically and then politically as a sovereign "nation," was also incorrect and regrettable. It was a compounding of errors, rather than a cure, and of the two errors only one can be undone.

Andreas Danckers
Libertyville, Ill.

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?3eeb44c7-b98b-4908-9352-dc8af9759a05
Hawaii Reporter, October 21, 2007

Akaka Bill Set for a Vote in the U.S. House This Week

By H. William Burgess

Republican Whip Blunt announced late last week that the "Akaka bill", H.R. 505 Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007, is scheduled for consideration by the House with several other bills, this coming Wednesday and Thursday, October 24 and 25 starting at 10 a.m.

The bill will also apparently be heard by the House Rules Committee on Monday, October 22 at 5 p.m.

Peter Kirsanow, Commissioner, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, published a lengthy commentary opposing the Akaka bill in National Review on January 18, 2007, entitled "Disunited States; Multiculturalism Run Amok." First sentence: "The worst piece of legislation ever analyzed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has been brought back from the dead and may be enacted in the next few weeks."

See it here: http://tinyurl.com/28ku7e

What's wrong with the Akaka bill?

It would have the United States go into the most integrated state and reverse course. It would sanction the permanent division of Hawaii and its people, based solely on their ancestry. I'm not making this up. Under the Akaka bill, the U.S. would sponsor the permanent segregation of American citizens in Hawaii by their racial ancestry. How would the Akaka bill do that?

It would sponsor creation of a new separate, sovereign government of, by and for Native Hawaiians. Once the new government is created, the U.S. would be deemed to have recognized it as the "representative governing body of the Native Hawaiian people." The bill then calls for negotiations, unlimited in duration and scope, for the breakup and giveaway of some, probably much, perhaps eventually even all, of the land, natural resources, money, reefs, territorial waters, governmental power and authority and civil and criminal jurisdiction of the State of Hawaii. By requiring U.S. recognition of sovereignty based merely on indigenous ancestry, the Akaka bill would be a precedent for the Aztlan movement to "liberate" the Southwestern part of the United States and similar separatist movements in other states. It would radically change existing Indian law and make the legal status of real Indian tribes incompatible with the Constitution's equal protection clause. In short, it would be the beginning of the breakup, not only of the State of Hawaii but of the United States itself. For an index of major articles opposing the Akaka bill, see Ken Conklin's web site here:
http://tinyurl.com/5eflp

For a chronological list of articles and links on Hawaiian Sovereignty by Walt and Arla Harvey, see
http://www.coastalhawaii.com/Akaka_Bill.htm

H. William Burgess is a Hawaii attorney and a member of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission's Hawaii committee. Reach him at
hwburgess@hawaii.rr.com

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

The House Rules Committee met on Monday October 22 to consider what procedural rule should be applied to the Akaka bill, H.R.505, expected to come to the House floor in the next couple of days. The Republican whip report last Friday indicated this bill would probably be placed on the "suspension calendar" of non-controversial bills to be passed on voice vote under suspension of the rules at the dinner hour with only a few Representatives present on the floor -- the same stealth tactic used successfully in September 2000.

The President sent his statement to the Rules Committee. Perhaps one of his reasons for doing that might have been to make sure the committee knows this is a highly controversial bill which should not be placed on the suspension calendar. The statement can be seen on official letterhead bearing the seal of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, and was released through the Office of Management and Budget.

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

See the official letterhead statement in pdf format at

https://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/AkakaPresidentStatemntHse102207.pdf

Following is the statement in simple text. Several news reports are copied below it, so readers can see how the official statement is (or is not) reported. The Honolulu Advertiser "breaking news" report is interesting for the way it slants the reporting of the statement.

--------

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
October 22, 2007
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
[sent to the House Rules Committee]
[regarding]

H.R. 505 – Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 (Rep. Abercrombie (D) Hawaii and 7 cosponsors)

The Administration strongly opposes passage of H.R. 505. As the U.S. Civil Rights Commission recently noted, this legislation "would discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege." The President has eschewed such divisive legislation as a matter of policy, noting that "we must . . . honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples." This bill would reverse this great American tradition and divide the governing institutions of this country by race. If H.R. 505 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.

H.R. 505 would grant broad governmental powers to a racially-defined group of "Native Hawaiians" to include all living descendents of the original, Polynesian inhabitants of what is now modern-day Hawaii. Members of this class need not have any geographic, political, or cultural connection to Hawaii, much less to some discrete Native Hawaiian community. Proponents of the bill seek to analogize Native Hawaiians to members of existing Indian tribes. As one Federal court recently explained, however, "the history of the indigenous Hawaiians...is fundamentally different from that of indigenous groups and federally-recognized Indian Tribes in the continental United States."

Closely related to those policy concerns, H.R. 505 raises significant constitutional concerns that arise anytime legislation seeks to separate American citizens into race-related classifications rather than according to their own merits and essential qualities. In the particular context of Native Hawaiians, the Supreme Court has invalidated state legislation containing similar race-based qualifications for participation in Native Hawaiian governing entities and programs. Given the substantial historical and cultural differences between Native Hawaiians as a group and members of federally recognized Indian tribes, the Administration believes that tribal recognition is inappropriate and unwise for Native Hawaiians and would raise serious constitutional concerns. The Administration strongly opposes any bill that would formally divide sovereign United States power along suspect lines of race and ethnicity.

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

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/22/america/NA-GEN-US-Hawaiian-Recognition.php
International Herald Tribune (Americas edition)
October 22, 2007

Bush administration 'strongly opposes' Hawaiian recognition bill

The Associated Press

HONOLULU: The Bush administration "strongly opposes" a House of Representatives bill that would grant federal recognition to Native Hawaiians, calling the measure discriminatory and divisive.

The White House Office of Management and Budget on Monday said the measure supported by nearly every elected Hawaii official would reverse the American melting pot, divide governing institutions and raise constitutional concerns by separating Americans into race-related classifications.

"The administration strongly opposes any bill that would formally divide sovereign United States power along suspect lines of race and ethnicity," the White House said in a statement.

The bill, to be heard on the House floor Wednesday, is identical to the Senate's so-called Akaka bill, named after its sponsoring Hawaii Sen. Daniel Akaka.

The bill, which has failed in several previous attempts to get it through Congress, is designed to secure for Native Hawaiians the same self-governance rights held by American Indians and Alaska Natives. It provides a broad framework for creating a Hawaiian government responsible for managing about 2 million acres (810,000 hectares) of former Hawaiian lands and $15 million (€10.6 million) per year in ceded land revenue.

If passed and eventually presented to President George W. Bush, his senior advisers would recommend a veto, the White House said.

"The president has eschewed such divisive legislation as a matter of policy, noting that 'we must ... honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples,'" the statement said.

The White House cited a recommendation by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which urged that Congress reject the bill because it would discriminate on the basis of race and "further subdivide the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege."

The House version was introduced by Rep. Neil Abercrombie, a Democrat, and co-sponsored by five other representatives: Democrats Raul Grijalva, of Arizona, Hawaii's Mazie Hirono and Virginia's James Moran, along with Republicans Tom Cole of Oklahoma and Donald Young of Alaska. Delegates Madeleine Bordallo, a Democrat representing Guam, and Eni Faleomavaega, a Democrat representing American Samoa, are also signed on as co-sponsor.

Abercrombie and Hirono, in a joint statement, stressed that the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act does not create a program or entitlement, require an appropriation, nor turn over assets of the U.S. government. It also does not give anyone title to anything they do not already own, the Hawaii Democrats said.

They said it simply provides a method for Hawaii to divest itself of requirements for administering land and dollar assets to a native entity, which will take full responsibility. The House members said Native Hawaiians would be able to decide for themselves the organization of the government entity to represent their interests in a relationship with the U.S. government.

"The relationship parallels that of Native Americans tribes and Alaskan Natives," they said.

The White House argued Native Hawaiians cannot be compared with other indigenous peoples, given the "substantial historical and cultural differences."

"The administration believes that tribal recognition is inappropriate and unwise for Native Hawaiians and would raise serious constitutional concerns," the White House said.

Last year, the measure was held up in the Senate on a procedural vote amid concerns from Republicans that it could lead to race-based privileges in a state known for its diversity. The Bush administration also questioned some provisions of the bill, despite strong support from Hawaii's Republican governor, Linda Lingle.

There are about 400,000 people of Native Hawaiian ancestry nationwide, and 260,000 of them live in Hawaii. No one would be required to join a Hawaiian government if the Akaka bill is approved.

___

On the Net:

HR 505: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?billh110-505

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

** version on TV news in Alaska:

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=7249828
KTUU TV News, Anchorage, Alaska
Associated Press - October 22, 2007 8:14 PM ET

HONOLULU (AP) - The Bush administration says it "strongly opposes" a House bill to grant federal recognition to Native Hawaiians.

The White House Office of Management and Budget says the measure, identical to the so-called Akaka bill in the Senate, is discriminatory and divisive.

The White House says President Bush believes the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made one nation out of many peoples, must be honored.

A release says if the bill were presented to Bush, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill.

The House bill was introduced by Hawaii's Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie and co-sponsored by five other representatives.

The bill is designed to secure for Native Hawaiians the same self-governance rights held by American Indians and Alaska Natives.

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

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Oct/22/br/br5039824716.html
Honolulu Advertiser, Breaking News Posted at 3:36 p.m., Monday, October 22, 2007

White House opposes Hawaiian-recognition bill

By JAYMES SONG
Associated Press

HONOLULU — The Bush administration "strongly opposes" a House bill to grant federal recognition to Native Hawaiians, calling the measure discriminatory and divisive.

The White House Office of Management and Budget on Monday said the measure supported by nearly every elected Hawai'i official, Democrat and Republican, would reverse the American melting pot, divide governing institutions and raise constitutional concerns by separating Americans into race-related classifications.

"The administration strongly opposes any bill that would formally divide sovereign United States power along suspect lines of race and ethnicity," the White House said in a statement.

The bill, to be heard on the House floor Wednesday, is identical to the Senate's so-called Akaka bill, named after its sponsoring Hawai'i Sen. Daniel Akaka. If passed and eventually presented to Bush, his senior advisers would recommend a veto, the White House said.

The bill, which has failed in several previous attempts to get it through Congress, is designed to secure for Native Hawaiians the same self-governance rights held by American Indians and Alaska Natives. It provides a broad framework for creating a Hawaiian government responsible for managing about 2 million acres of former Hawaiian lands and $15 million per year in ceded land revenue.

The House version was introduced by Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai'i, and co-sponsored by five other representatives: Democrats Raul Grijalva, of Arizona, Hawai'i's Mazie Hirono and Virginia's James Moran, along with Republicans Tom Cole of Oklahoma and Donald Young of Alaska. Delegates Madeleine Bordallo, D-Guam, and Eni Faleomavaega, D-American Samoa, are also signed on as co-sponsor.

They said it simply provides a method for Hawai'i to divest itself of requirements for administering land and dollar assets to a native entity, which will take full responsibility. The House members said Native Hawaiians would be able to decide for themselves the organization of the government entity to represent their interests in a relationship with the U.S. government.

"The relationship parallels that of Native Americans tribes and Alaskan Natives," they said.

The White House argued Native Hawaiians cannot be compared with other indigenous peoples, given the "substantial historical and cultural differences."

"The administration believes that tribal recognition is inappropriate and unwise for Native Hawaiians and would raise serious constitutional concerns," the White House said.

There are about 400,000 people of Native Hawaiian ancestry nationwide, and 260,000 of them live in Hawai'i. No one would be required to join a Hawaiian government if the Akaka bill is approved.

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

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OGFhNmNlODlhYThkYzkyMDVkMzcyOWI5MWQ3MmNmMGE=
National Review online, Tuesday, October 23, 2007

House To Vote Tomorrow on Akaka Bill [Roger Clegg]

The Washington Times reports today that the House is expected to vote tomorrow on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, also known as the Akaka bill (after its Senate sponsor). As NR readers will recall—the bill has been decried here by the editors, Ramesh, Peter Kirsanow, yours truly, and others—it would create a new "Indian tribe" made up of anyone with a drop of Native Hawaiian blood. The idea is to end-run a Supreme Court decision that said—quite rightly—that preferences for Native Hawaiians are ethnic preferences and therefore presumptively unconstitutional; now, presto!, they will no longer be an ethnic group but an Indian tribe, and discrimination in their favor will be perfectly fine.

The bill is unconstitutional, and it is also ugly, divisive, and balkanizing—for Hawaii, of course, but for the whole country as well, particularly in light of the precedent it sets. The Bush administration issued a statement strongly opposing the bill yesterday. Anyone who votes for it will have a lot to answer for.

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

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071023/NATION/110230030/1002
The Washington Times, October 23, 2007

Native Hawaiians' status set for vote

By Sean Lengell - The House is expected to vote tomorrow on a measure to grant indigenous Hawaiians the ability to form a sovereign government similar to those operated by many American Indians.

The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, sponsored by Rep. Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii Democrat, is similar to bills proposed for several years by the Hawaiian congressional delegation. Last year, the measure died in the Senate on a 56-41 procedural vote, four shy of the 60 needed to allow a floor debate.

This year's bill is expected to pass the House, although whether the bill will be approved by a "veto-proof" two-thirds majority is uncertain.

Although the U.S. government traditionally has treated indigenous Hawaiians in a manner parallel to American Indians and indigenous Alaskans, the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination has not been formally extended to native Hawaiians. The bill itself doesn't extend federal recognition but rather authorizes the process for federal recognition.

The bill also would prohibit the establishment of casinos and other forms of gaming.

Critics of the measure say the bill violates the U.S. Constitution by creating a race-based government, an accusation denied by supporters.

"There has been a lot of mischaracterizations of this bill," said David Helfert, a spokesman for Mr. Abercrombie. "It's not a giveaway, it doesn't create a program that costs money, and it's not racially based. It simply has to do with indigenous peoples of a former sovereign nation."

An identical bill sponsored by Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, Hawaii Democrat, has passed the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, although it's uncertain whether it will receive a floor vote this year.

"There's a lot going on right now with the appropriations bills, so it's up to [Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid] to get it to the floor," said Jon Yoshimura, a spokesman for Mr. Akaka. "We're sort of waiting in a queue right now."

Exactly who would be considered "native Hawaiian" under the measure is uncertain, as the bill calls for the establishment of a group to determine eligibility.

Members of the largest national American Indian organization, the National Congress of American Indians, and the largest organization representing the indigenous Alaskans, the Alaska Federation of Natives, support the measure.

National organizations such as the American Bar Association, Japanese American Citizens League and the National Indian Education Association also have passed resolutions in support of federal recognition for Hawaii's indigenous people.

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071023/NEWS21/710230365/1171/NEWS21
Honolulu Advertiser, Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Hawaii Sen. Akaka's bill faces House debate

By Dennis Camire
Advertiser Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — A bill creating a pathway to Native Hawaiian self-government is scheduled to come before the full House for debate tomorrow and a possible vote, while the Bush administration issued a statement yesterday saying it "strongly opposes" the bill's passage.

This is the second time the full House has taken up the bill, known as the Akaka bill for its sponsor, Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawai'i, which originally passed the chamber in 2000. But the measure has remained stalled in the Senate because of fierce Republican opposition since then.

This year, the bill cleared the House Natural Resources Committee in the spring on a voice vote with no changes.

The Senate Indian Affairs Committee also approved a similar bill in the spring, but so far no floor action has been scheduled.

The bill would create a process for a Native Hawaiian governing entity to be formed and gain federal recognition. The new government would be able to negotiate with the United States and Hawai'i over the disposition of Native Hawaiian land, assets and other resources.

The bill faces ongoing vocal opposition from Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate, and a possible White House veto.

"If (the bill) were presented to the president, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto" it, the Bush administration said in a statement of administration policy issued yesterday.

The statement said the bill would "divide the governing institutions of this country by race" and raise "significant constitutional concerns."

"The administration strongly opposes any bill that would formally divide sovereign United States power along suspect lines of race and ethnicity," the statement said.

But in another statement issued yesterday, Reps. Neil Abercrombie and Mazie Hirono, both Hawai'i Democrats, said the bill has been "misinterpreted and mischaracterized" by opponents.

"The legislation allows Native Hawaiian people to decide for themselves the organization of a government entity to represent their interests in a relationship with the U.S. government," the statement said. "The relationship parallels that of Native American tribes and Alaskan natives."

Abercrombie and Hirono said the bill does not create an entitlement and is not based on racial groups, as opponents charge.

"It doesn't turn over assets of the U.S. government, nor give anyone title to anything they do not already own," they said.

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071023/OPINION01/710230301/1105/OPINION01
Honolulu Advertiser, October 23, 2007
EDITORIAL

Delegates should offer clarity on bill

Congressional leaders have agreed to give the so-called Akaka bill a little momentum by bringing it to a vote this week on the floor of the U.S. House, where it has faced less opposition than in the Senate.

That is fortunate, but it appears that the perennial push for Native Hawaiian federal recognition will need more than a little momentum. Yesterday, the Office of Management and Budget within the White House issued a statement of the Bush administration's opposition to H.R. 505, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.

If the bill does come to the House floor tomorrow, as scheduled, Hawai'i delegates need to make the case for the bill as forcefully as possible. The object will be to secure bipartisan support for the measure, in part to counter the White House statement.

That statement contains its share of mischaracterizations of the bill, along with a recommendation that the president veto any such measure that would come to him. For example, it quotes a federal court opinion that Hawaiian history is "fundamentally different" from that of indigenous groups and federally recognized Indian tribes.

Of course, it's a different history. But the difference doesn't negate essential characteristics that all indigenous groups share: They occupied sovereign territory before being displaced by the U.S. government, and held a political status apart from mere racial differences.

More than ever, the bill needs supporters from both sides of the aisle, those who believe recognition of native peoples need not become a partisan battleground. If the bill does emerge intact from the Senate, where it faces far longer odds, it's essential that the president sees it has broad support in both houses; he may then be less likely to bother with a veto, which would be tough to override.

The bill, named for Hawai'i Sen. Daniel Akaka, is a reasonable means for reconciliation of past divisions, not the specter of the White House description. It will take leadership to help ensure that cooler heads prevail.

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

http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/23/news/story05.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, October 23, 2007

Akaka Bill faces White House fight

By Jaymes Song
Associated Press

** This article in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin is exactly identical to the Associated Press "breaking news" story published by the Honolulu Advertiser online the previous day, so no need to copy it again -- except that the Star-Bulletin leaves out the closing sentence of the Advertiser article.

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?f6266ead-d30a-4779-96d7-b8efde47e2f1
Hawaii Reporter, October 23, 2007

Scrutinizing the Office of Hawaiian Affairs

By Richard O. Rowland

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, a State government agency, placed an advertisement in The Honolulu Advertiser on Oct. 14, 2007. It is quoted below:

Hawaiian Recognition

Q. What will Hawaiian recognition secure for Hawaiians and Hawaii?

A. Fairness in U.S. policy toward Hawaiians. A process of U.S. recognition is already available to American Indians and Alaska Natives, and enactment extends a similar process to Native Hawaiians. Protection of Native Hawaiian culture, as well as existing Native Hawaiian rights, trusts, assets and programs for future generations. Enactment establishes a single U.S. policy reaffirming that as the indigenous people of Hawaii, Native Hawaiian people have a special political and legal relationship with the U.S., consistent with our Hawaii Constitution, more than 160 existing Federal laws and the U.S. Constitution. Through a recognized Native Hawaiian governing entity, Native Hawaiians with our unique culture, values, history, assets and institutions can focus on solving problems specific to Native Hawaiians. End quote.

Here are some questions and comments that come to mind when reading this advertisement:

In what specific way is U.S. policy unfair to Hawaiians?

How is Native Hawaiian culture not being protected? What Native Hawaiian rights, trusts, assets and programs for future generations are going unprotected?

Any and all Native Hawaiian special entitlements must be paid for. By whom?

It is proposed via Hawaiian Recognition that Native Hawaiians will answer to four governments (U.S., State, City/County, NHGE). What Rational person would ask for a new, additional government which would tax, pass law, impose rules, and have police? Some in Hawaii would report to four governments, with most reporting to only three.

Richard O. Rowland is the president of the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. More at http://www.grassrootinstitute.org/

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?9493ece5-c3b5-4863-aa2c-cc03d90faad9
Hawaii Reporter, October 23, 2007

The Greening of Hawaii Politics

By James Growney

If concern about the environment has become such a big issue, the citizens of this state and our elected officials should turn the light of public scrutiny on the Akaka Bill. This legislation could be the Queen Mary of environmental monsters compared to the measly Hawaii Superferry. The risks go far beyond whales and invasive species.

Surprisingly, no one has asked that there be a study to determine its potential economic impact on our state. There have been charges that it is fraught with constitutional and other legal problems, might have serious social implications, and a nagging discomfort that it might cause civil disturbances that could make the Kauai demonstrations look like a preschool outing.

In the absence of any data offering the slightest clue to the potential impacts of this bill, it is reasonable to speculate that the native Hawaiians and the non-Hawaiians could both be adversely affected. For those who have not bothered to read it, there are no assurances whatsoever that passage will result in the creation of a sovereign Hawaiian nation.

Native Hawaiians are directed to hold an election limited to Hawaiians only, in order to select a slate of blood brothers to represent them, a procedure specifically branded as unconstitutional by the Rice vs. Cayetano decision. If this was "Monopoly," the native Hawaiian players would be directed to immediately forfeit all of their money to pay the costs of a prolonged legal battle.

To further complicate the negotiations, the bill provides nothing that will provide the Hawaiian team with leverage necessary to achieve whatever goals their negotiating team brings to the table. Sitting before the nefarious Department of the Interior, the Darth Vader Emperor of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the negotiators for the Hawaiian people will face a devious adversary without advantage. Because the Bill provides no negotiating weapons to press their advantage, they will be unarmed. For protection, they will have nothing but their wits and their skin.

The non-Hawaiians are also exposed to great danger. No one will represent them in negotiations that could result in the loss of substantial portions of our state being seized by the United States government without compensation, and handed over with the attendant values and tax revenues to the new Hawaiian nation.

No one has the slightest idea whether the confiscation of these properties will be a bonanza or a catastrophe. But there is a genuine potential for serious economic mischief. One thing stands out: not a single politician, political leader, non-Hawaiian or Hawaiian has stated that the Akaka bill will be pono for the non-Hawaiians or the Hawaiians, and not a one of them has expressed the slightest desire to find out. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

If the uproar over the Hawaii Superferry is the harbringer of more stringent efforts by the electorate to protect the environment, doesn't it also makes sense to ensure that the people of Hawaii have a greater voice in the approval of important legislation like the Akaka Bill?

Let's ask our elected officials to do a thorough environmental impact statement, without fear or favor, on the potential benefits and dangers of this legislation on all of Hawaii's people -- Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians alike.

James Growney is a U.S. Citizen and Native Hawaiian.

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

Akaka bill -- U.S. House of Representatives Republican Study Committee official statement of October 24, 2007. Available as a 10-page pdf on colorful official stationery, and also as simple text.

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

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTMyMTlmNjlhZWIyZThmNmJiZDczYzhlY2ZmYmQ0ZDA=
National Review online, October 24, 2007, 4:00 a.m.

Multicultural Racism
The insidiousness of Hawaiian separatism.

By Peter Kirsanow

The House of Representatives is poised to pass the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act (known in the Senate as the "Akaka Bill"), the apogee of an aggressive multiculturalism that has manifested itself in local, state, and federal legislation in the last two decades. The bill faces a certain White House veto, but it's unclear whether there are enough votes in the Senate to sustain it. If the Senate overrides the veto, it will speed the country's embrace of a form of post-nationalism (already held by many elites) — a confederation of various races, ethnicities and interest groups competing for special privileges, exemptions and recognition.

The Akaka Bill creates a race-based government for native Hawaiians. Even its supporters don't deny that the bill could lead to outright secession. In the meantime, the bill will produce a regime of racial preferences, reparations, and lawsuits fueled by ethnic grievance, victimhood, and entitlement.

The Akaka Bill is just the most audacious manifestation of an accelerating trend toward elevating racial/ethnic identity over American citizenship. Hyphenated-Americans have existed throughout our history; Americans have never suffered from a shortage of ethnic, cultural or regional pride. But for most of that history official primacy wasn't given to race/ethnicity; and when such primacy was accorded, it supported the loathsome institutions of slavery, segregation and Jim Crow, institutions eradicated at a staggering price in lives, blood and societal upheaval.

Too many politicians, it seems, slept through history class. They blithely repeat the mistakes of the past.

Today government policies encourage tribalism and reward racial obsessives. State privileges and benefits are dispensed on the basis of skin tone and ancestry. The Supreme Court says that state universities can prefer some races over others. Federal, state and local governments award billions of dollars of contracts, not on the basis of who has more qualifications, but who has more melanin. Voting districts are designed to cluster voters by race and ensure that candidates of the right race are elected.

The phrase "equal treatment" has been supplanted by the platitude "celebrate diversity." As Thomas Sowell has shown — repeatedly — societies organized around the latter phrase without the former as a predicate are usually riven by strife, discord, and civil war.

Yet "diversity" remains the feel-good term for our times. In many quarters it trumps freedom of speech, due process, equal protection and other annoyances actually contained in the Constitution. Not surprisingly then, witnesses appearing before Congress or federal agencies these days are as likely to be petitioning for special treatment as equal treatment; for "racial sensitivity" as colorblindness. The general welfare often is a concern secondary to ethnic advantage.

While government bureaucracies, media and the academy promote slow-motion American balkanization, the ranks of those trying to preserve our national unity dwindle. Washington, D.C. is waist-deep in special pleaders making their cases to politicians eager to appear progressive, sensitive and tolerant. Quite often, the politicians yield. Last year's cloture vote on the Akaka Bill was 56-41, that is, 56 senators of the United States of America, including 13 from the party of Lincoln, thought a bill that would create a separate race-based government was worthy of consideration; a bill whose proponents acknowledge secession as a possibility merits a vote. And the 2006 election added to congress even more members likely to be sympathetic to the bill.

The Akaka Bill would provide the incentive and rationale for other ethnic groups to push for separate, privileged legal status. A century and a half ago a war costing 600,000 lives couldn't sever the country. Now, strategic use of the words "victim," "race," "oppression," and "disadvantage" may be all it takes.

The Akaka Bill is a legislative abomination on steroids. Its spirit runs counter to our animating principles and national ideal. As I've stated before, the bill is the worst piece of legislation ever analyzed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (that's saying something). In a few weeks the members of the world's greatest deliberative body will have a chance to kill the bill for a second time and reaffirm that we are one nation, indivisible.

— Peter Kirsanow is a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. He is also a member of the National Labor Relations Board. These comments do not necessarily reflect the positions of either organization.

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

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2U5MGEwNDQxZDNmZjg1OGI5NzBkMjU3NzI5ZDc1ZGQ=
National Review online, October 24, 2007, 6:30 a.m.

The Hawaiian Race

By The Editors

Today, the House will take up the question whether the federal government should recognize ethnic Hawaiians as a new Indian tribe. The Bush administration has promised to veto the bill if it passes, arguing that — in the words of a policy statement — it would "discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege." The president deserves to be commended for this position.

The bill is sponsored by Sen. Daniel Akaka (D., Hawaii). It would create a nine-member panel to decide who counts as a "native" Hawaiian and enroll the members of the "tribe." This governing entity could then negotiate with federal and state government to acquire land (and would certainly become the beneficiary of huge federal earmarks). It could establish schools that discriminate against non-Hawaiian children. And it could hold elections with racial criteria for participation, immune to challenges under the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution. (Indeed, the bill was written to circumvent a 2000 Supreme Court decision that forbade the state's Office of Hawaiian Affairs to hold an election in which only "native" Hawaiians could participate.)

Proponents of the bill argue that Hawaiians are merely seeking the recognition already given to Indian tribes, which are allowed to create their own governments. But there are important historical differences. Indian tribes saw their land seized by the federal government. Hawaiians, by contrast, exercised self-government on June 27, 1959, when they voted by an 86 percent margin to make their archipelago the 50th state. And unlike Indian tribes, aboriginal Hawaiians are not geographically segregated, but live interspersed among Hawaiians of all races.

More fundamentally, there is no good reason to recognize racial groups as distinct nations simply because they are ethnically unique. Doing so overturns the idea of E pluribus unum, and sets a terrible and divisive precedent. John Edwards's fantasy of "two Americas" might well become reality — except that there would be many more than two Americas if every ethnic group followed Hawaii's example.

The Akaka Bill may pass both houses of this Democratic Congress. Conservative congressional staffers, determined to fight it, have wondered whether they could count on the White House's support. In 2005, the Bush administration suggested a few changes to the bill rather than opposing it outright. Last year, the bill received 56 Senate votes for cloture. It would have been 59 if all senators had been present, putting it just one vote short of the required 60. There is little doubt that it will pass that threshold this year.

The administration's opposition this time around, then, is most welcome. Among other things, it denies cover to a handful of Republicans in the House and Senate who are cosponsoring the bill. They include not only Alaska's congressional delegation, but Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma and Sens. Norm Coleman of Minnesota and Gordon Smith of Oregon.

Unfortunately, the attempt to divide Americans by race will not end if President Bush vetoes the Akaka Bill. Hillary Clinton voted for it in 2006 — and she may sign it into law yet, if Americans make her their president.

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

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=41020
American Chronicle, Wednesday, October 24, 2007

House to vote on Establishing Hawaiian Race-Based Government

by Bill Haymin

EAGLE FORUM

eagle@eagleforum.org

For those of you who thought that modern American society viewed racial division and ethnic separation as offensive and a thing of the past, well, think again! The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to bring a bill to the floor this week which will create a Hawaiian race-based government by establishing a Native Hawaiian "tribe."

Sponsored by Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI-1), the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 (H.R. 505), will create a Hawaiian race-based government for people with Native Hawaiian blood living anywhere in the United States. H.R. 505 would create a racially separate government that would operate like an Indian tribe with its own laws and racial voting restrictions anywhere in the United States. This new "tribe" would include about 20 percent of Hawaii's residents plus some 400,000 Americans nationwide, making it larger than any actual Indian tribe.

H.R. 505 has many problems:

•To become part of the "tribe," wherever located, one must only prove direct lineage of an aboriginal Hawaiian. According to the bill, a Native Hawaiian is anyone of the "indigenous, native people of Hawaii" who is a "direct lineal descendant of the aboriginal, indigenous, native people." So, you don't have to have lived in Hawaii or ever had any affiliation with Native Hawiian culture, language or politics. All you need is one drop of the right kind of blood!

•It is unconstitutional for Congress to create a tribe. To create a race-based government is discrimination. The 14th Amendment states, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

•Citizens in all 50 states will be Balkanized: different laws enforced for different races within the same community. The Supreme Court, in Rice v. Cayetano, stated, "One of the reasons race is treated as a forbidden classification is that it demeans the dignity and worth of a person to be judged by ancestry instead of by his or her own merit and essential qualities."

•This bill does not assure that the new race-based government will be democratic. The bill gives Native Hawaiians "self-determination" to choose total independence or any other form of government.

Native Hawaiians should not be treated as a separate racial group, but as U.S. citizens, just like the rest of us! The House will vote this week! Call your Representatives and tell them to vote NO on H.R. 505!

Target list of Representatives: Alexander, Bono, Boyda (KS), Hastert, Hunter, Pearce, Peterson Peterson(PA), Pryce (OH), Rahall, Renzi, Cannon, Capito, Cole (OK), Davis (KY), Ellsworth, Emerson, Jones (NC), Kingston, LaHood, LaTourette, LoBiondo, Lucas, Marshall, Shadegg, Shimkus, Simpson, Skelton, Smith (NJ), Fortenberry, Gilchrest, Gingrey, Wilson (NM), Young (AK).

Call Your Representatives Today!
Capitol Switchboard: (202)-224-3121

Further Reading:
Does Hawaii Want To Secede From The Union?
by Phyllis Schlafly, 9-28-05

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

** SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE U.S. HOUSE FLOOR DEBATE ON WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 24:

The House Democrat whip maintains a webpage which continuously identifies issues coming up in the next few days, and provides access links to all relevant procedural and substantive documents. The whip's webpage is at
http://democraticwhip.house.gov

For the week of October 22 the whip's page included a package of materials related to H.R.505 at
http://democraticwhip.house.gov/whip_pack/#HR505

Included in the H.R.505 whip package was the following:

Amendment Process Announcement
Oct 18, 2007

Amendment Process for H.R. 505 - The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007

Dear Colleague:

The Committee on Rules is expected to meet the week of October 22, 2007 to report a rule which may structure the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 505, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007.

Any Member wishing to offer an amendment to H.R. 505 must do the following by 12:00 PM on Monday, October 22, 2007 in order for the amendment to be considered by the Rules Committee:

Submit to the Rules Committee in room H-312 of the Capitol: 30 copies of the amendment
One copy of a brief (1-2 sentences) explanation of the amendment A completed Log-in form (attached)
Submit an electronic copy of the amendment via the Committee's web page (http://www.rules.house.gov/amendment_form.asp). Electronic submission of an amendment is required in addition to physically filing the amendment with the Committee.
The amendment must be drafted to the bill as ordered reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. The bill is available on the Rules Committee website (www.rules.house.gov).

Members are strongly advised to adhere to the amendment deadline to ensure the amendments receive consideration. Amendments should be drafted by Legislative Counsel and also should be reviewed by the Office of the Parliamentarian to be sure that the amendments comply with the rules of the House. Members are also strongly encouraged to submit their amendments by fax (6-1366) to Bob Sunshine at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for analysis regarding possible violations of Clause 10 of Rule XXI (PAYGO).

If you have any questions, please contact Tim Sheehan of my staff at extension 5-9091.

Sincerely,
/s
Louise M. Slaughter
Chairwoman

----------

** Also included in the H.R.505 whip package was the following:

http://www.rules.house.gov/SpecialRules_details.aspx?NewsID=3095

Report of the Rules Committee:

COMMITTEE ACTION: REPORTED BY A RECORD VOTE OF 9 to 3 on Monday October 22, 2007.
FLOOR ACTION:
MANAGERS: HASTINGS(FL)/SESSIONS
110th Congress
1st Session
H.RES. 764
[Report No. 110-404]

H.R. 505 – Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007

Structured rule.

Waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.

Provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources. Provides that the bill shall be considered as read.

Waives all points of order against provisions of the bill. This waiver does not affect the point of order available under clause 9 of rule XXI (regarding earmark disclosure).

Makes in order only the amendment printed in the Rules Committee report if offered by Rep. Flake or his designee.

Provides that the amendment made in order shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for ten minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House.

Waives all points of order against the amendment printed in the report except for those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.

Provides one motion to recommit H.R. 505 with or without instructions.

Provides that, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the bill to a time designated by the Speaker.

RESOLUTION

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 505) to express the policy of the regarding the relationship with Native Hawaiians and to provide a process for the recognition by the of the Native Hawaiian governing entity. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions of the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, and any amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources; (2) the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by Representative Flake of Arizona or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order (except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI) or demand for division of the question, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable for ten minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Sec. 2. During consideration of H.R. 505 pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated by the Speaker.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT MADE IN ORDER
(summaries derived from information provided by sponsors)

1. Flake (AZ):

Amendment states that nothing in the Act shall relieve any sovereign entity, including a Native Hawaiian governing entity, from complying with the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution.

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

** U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FLOOR ACTION ON WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 24 -- Akaka bill passes 261-153 after failed attempt to amend it and/or send it back to the Resources committee.

The House floor was occupied by the Akaka bill for three hours including debate on the procedural rule for the bill, debate on the bill itself, Rep. Flake's proposed amendment and his attempt to reword it from the floor, Rep. Flake's motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Resources for reworking of amendment language, and 15 minutes for each of four roll-call votes along the way including final passage.

In the end the bill passed unamended, with identical language to the Akaka bill S.310 that has passed the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and now awaits Senate floor action whenever Leader Harry Reid chooses to schedule it.

The text of the Akaka bill AT THIS POINT IN TIME can be seen at
https://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/Akaka110s310hr505.html

TRANSCRIPT OF THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON THE FLOOR OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, TAKEN FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, IS AVAILABLE AT:
https://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/AkakaHouseFloor102407CongRec.html

** Below are two "breaking news" reports followed by reports of the YEAS and NOES on each of the four roll-call votes, taken from the website of the Clerk of the House.

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

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Oct/24/br/br5872439016.html
Honolulu Advertiser, BREAKING NEWS, Updated at 9:21 a.m., Wednesday, October 24, 2007

House passes Hawaiian Recognition bill

Associated Press

The U.S. House has passed the Hawaiian Recognition bill.

The House approved the bill 261-153 to support the House version of the Akaka bill in the Senate.

Earlier, the House rejected a motion that Congressman Neil Abercrombie said could have undermined the legislation which is identical to the Akaka bill in the Senate.

Arizona Republican Rep. Jeff Flake sponsored the amendment which he said was aimed at ensuring that no racially defined exceptions to law are granted to Hawaiians. Abercrombie is leading proponents of the legislation in the House.

Abercrombie, in floor debate in Washington, told the House that polls show the people of Hawaii support the legislation, including Republicans, Democrats and independents.

Opponents are saying the legislation is race-based and would push special status for Native Hawaiians.

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

** 15 MINUTES LATER A DIFFERENT STORY IS BEING TOLD BY THE HONOLULU ADVERTISER IN ITS "BREAKING NEWS" AT THE SAME URL. This means the report above, which included information about Rep. Jeff Flake's attempt to amend and recommit the bill to the Resources Committee, will never be seen again.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Oct/24/br/br5872439016.html
Honolulu Advertiser, BREAKING NEWS, Updated at 9:36 a.m., Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Native Hawaiian bill wins House approval

By DENNIS CAMIRE
Advertiser Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- For the second time in seven years, the House approved a bill today that would set up a process to create a future Native Hawaiian government and gain federal recognition.

The House passed the bill on a 261-153 vote, leaving the next step to the Senate, where the bill has been stalled since it was first introduced in 2000.

Rep. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawai'i, said that Native Hawaiians, like Native Americans and Alaska Natives, have an inherent sovereignty based on their status as indigenous, native people that was lost when Kingdom of Hawai'i was overthrown in 1893.

"This is a historic vote and one that helps to perpetuate righteousness by righting a historic wrong," she said..

But Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., said the bill undermines the idea that the U.S. is one nation that has come from many people.

"The legislation is divisive and would give a group of United States citizens special rights over other citizens based solely on race," he said. "Our Constitution seeks to eliminate racial separation, not promote it."

The bill creates a process for reorganizing a Native Hawaiian government, including the development of a roll of Native Hawaiians and the election of an interim governing council. The council would develop the documents on which the government would be based.

Once the United States recognizes the new government, negotiations would take place on the disposition of Native Hawaiian land, natural resources and other assets.

Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai'i, said the bill was enabling legislation and wasn't a final resolution.

"This creates the opportunity for Native Hawaiians to take responsibility for their own actions with regard to the control and administration of their own assets," he said.

The bigger obstacles facing the bill's enactment into law will be moving it through the Senate, where it has stalled for the past seven years in the face of staunch conservative Republican opposition. If approved by both houses, it would have to overcome a possible presidential veto.

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

The YEAS and NOES on all roll-call votes in the House are available at
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/index.asp

For each roll-call vote one can see how many Republicans and how many Democrats voted yea or no, the totals, and a complete list showing how each individual voted. The list of individuals has Democrats in roman print, and Republicans in italic print. Only the totals will be presented here. Those who want to see how individual Representatives voted should go to the House clerk's website as indicated.

For H.R. 505, the Akaka bill, on October 24, 2007 there were 4 roll call votes. They are vote numbers 997, 998, 999, and 1000 on the list (the main vote on the Akaka bill was the 1000th recorded vote in the House in the 110th Congress that started in January, 2007) which can be found at
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/index.asp

Lower-numbered votes happened before higher-numbered votes; but of course that means the lower-numbered votes were about amendments or procedures and the highest-numbered vote was the final vote on the main bill itself.

Here are the results on all four recorded votes on the Akaka bill on October 24, 2007.

-----------

Vote #1000 was the final vote on the Akaka bill. It passed 261-153. Among Democrats there were 222 YEAS and 1 NAY (Maxine Waters of Los Angeles, CA). Among Republicans there were 39 YEAS and 152 NAYS. 18 members did not vote. Complete results are available at
http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=1000

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

During the floor debate there was a discussion of an amendment proposed by Rep. Jeff Flake. He had submitted an amendment in writing to the Rules Committee and was authorized to present the amendment on the floor. The amendment would have gutted the Akaka bill by requiring that the Native Hawaiian Governing entity would be required to obey the 14th Amendment equal protection clause (no racial discrimination allowed) on the same basis as any state government. However, Flake admitted that he had written the amendment's language in an overly broad way that would have caused trouble for the mainland Indian tribes, and so he wanted to revise the language of his amendment to narrow it to apply only to the Native Hawaiian Governing Entity. But Rep. Neil Abercrombie, chief sponsor of the Akaka bill, refused to allow Flake's proposed new language to replace the original language; because, Abercrombie said, such language must be carefully written and studies by lawyers and should not be casually put forward without such care. Rep. Flake then asked that the Akaka bill be recommitted (sent back) to the Resources Committee so that the amendment could be thoroughly studied and properly formulated; but Abercrombie opposed such recommittal and wanted to pass the bill immediately without amendment. Full text of both Flake's original amendment language and Flake's proposed revised amendment language will be available in the Congressional Record.

Vote #999 was a roll call vote on the question whether the Akaka bill should be recommitted (sent back) to the Resources Committee as Rep. Flake wanted. The totals were 178 YEAS and 235 NAYS. Among Democrats there were 224 NAYS and zero YEAS. Among Republicans there were 178 YEAS and 11 NAYS. Complete results are available at
http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=999

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

Votes # 997 and 998 were two roll call votes on procedural issues regarding whether to adopt the procedural rule proposed by the Rules Committee regarding how much time should be available for the floor debate, how many amendments would be allowed, and how many motions to recommit would be allowed.

Vote 998 had 217 AYES and 179 NOES. Among Democrats there were 217 AYES and 1 NO; among Republicans there were zero AYES and 178 NOES. Complete results can be seen at
http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=998

Vote 997 had 218 AYES and 175 NOES. Among Democrats there were 217 AYES and 1 NO; among Republicans there was 1 AYE and 174 NOES. Complete results can be seen at:
http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=997

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

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

** October 24: News reports and commentaries after the House passed the Akaka bill

http://outsidethewire.mensnewsdaily.com/2007/10/24/racial-division-hawaiian-style/

Men's News Daily - Guerneville, CA, USA, October 24, 2007

Racial Division, Hawaiian Style

by Bob Parks.

U.S. House Approves Race-Based Government for Hawaii

Washington, D.C. - The U.S. House of representatives today approved a far-reaching bill that would create a race-based government with substantial power over the affairs of the state of Hawaii.

The "Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007" (H.R. 505, also called the "Akaka Bill") was adopted by a 261-153 vote.

Members of the Project 21 black leadership network say the legislation directly conflicts with the spirit of inclusion and equality that civil rights activists fought so hard to create.

"It is contemptibly dishonest, not to mention completely disingenuous, for the very politicians who are best known for decrying racial division to eagerly push legislation to institutionalize race as the guiding principle for a body of government within our United States," said Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie. "Surely, such a radical proposal deserves more attention and certainly a lot more debate."

The Akaka Bill, which has not been adopted by the Senate, would create a native Hawaiian government with sovereign immunity akin to that enjoyed by Indian tribes. This proposed government is likely to be determined on racial terms, restricting eligible voters exclusively to those of Hawaiian ancestry. Experts say this limits the voting pool to approximately 400,000 Americans nationwide - roughly 160,000 of whom do not even reside on the Hawaiian Islands. Critics say the proposal would create a virtual caste system on the Hawaiian Islands and might even allow those affiliated with this race-based government to ignore various laws and safety regulations.

President Bush has said he will veto the measure should it reach his desk.

Gerald Reynolds, chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, has said the Akaka Bill "would authorize a government entity to treat people differently based on their race and ethnicity… This runs counter to the basic American value that the government should not prefer one race over another." The U.S. Supreme Court overwhelmingly ruled in 2000 that a similar "Hawaiian only" provision for voting for the trustees of the state's Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) was unconstitutional.

A May 2006 poll commissioned by the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii found almost 67 percent of the population of Hawaii opposed the Akaka Bill as introduced in the previous session of Congress, while over 80 percent generally oppose race-based preferences. Almost 70 percent of Hawaiian residents also preferred a statewide referendum on such a proposal rather than having it decided by the U.S. Congress.

"Polls have been conducted and federal Civil Rights Commission hearings have been held that find strong and legitimate public opposition to the Akaka Bill. Rushing a vote now is dismissive and disrespectful," added Project 21's Massie, "Instead of representing all people equally, regardless of race and ethnicity, it seems congressional leaders want to ram this legislation through before logic and cooler heads can prevail."

Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992.

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

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1675198,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

Time Magazine, Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2007

Also similar article in
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/politics/story/174968.html
San Luis Obispo Tribune, October 24, 2007
[and many other AP affiliates]

House Passes Native Hawaiian Bill

By AP/JIM ABRAMS

(WASHINGTON) — Native Hawaiians should regain some of the self-governance powers lost when the islands' queen was overthrown more than a century ago, the House decided Wednesday.

The White House threatened a veto, saying the legislation that passed by a 261-153 vote would divide Americans "along suspect lines of race and ethnicity."

The bill would give the 400,000 people nationwide of Native Hawaiian ancestry the right to form a governing entity that could negotiate with the state and federal governments over such issues as control of natural resources, lands and assets. The interior secretary would have to approve that governing body.

Native Hawaiians, who have long sought the bill, insist they deserve many of the self-autonomy rights provided to American Indians and Native Alaskans.

The legislation is backed by Hawaii's Republican governor, Linda Lingle, its Legislature and the state's all-Democratic congressional delegation, including Native Hawaiian Sen. Daniel Akaka.

The vote on the proposal was the first in the House since the chief sponsor, Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, won passage in 2000. Last year Akaka fell four votes short of the 60 needed to advance the bill to a final vote in the Senate.

To win over critics, the legislation spells out that the Native Hawaiian government could not take private land or set up gambling operations similar to those allowed to Indians.

The bill would not affect military facilities in the state and Native Hawaiians would not gain new eligibility for programs and services available to Indians.

Rep. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii said the measure would begin to "provide a measure of justice" to Native Hawaiians who "have an inherent sovereignty based on their status as indigenous people."

Abercrombie said Native Hawaiians have ceded some 1.8 million acres since Queen Lili'uokalani was driven from the throne in 1893. "This creates the opportunity for Native Hawaiians to take responsibility for their own actions with regard to the control and administration of their own assets," he said.

But the White House said the bill "raises significant constitutional concerns that arise anytime legislation seeks to separate American citizens into race-related classifications rather than according to their own merits and essential qualities."

The House GOP leader, Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, said "granting broad government powers to an exclusive group based on race is simply unconstitutional."

Republican opponents of the legislation also said it could open the door for Native Hawaiians to declare territorial independence from the United States.

The rights of Native Hawaiians have been an issue since the 1893 coup.

In 1959, when Hawaii became a state, the federal government pledged to use lands and assets to the benefit of Native Hawaiians. In 1993, on the 100th anniversary of the coup, Congress approved a resolution apologizing for the illegal overthrow and acknowledging that Native Hawaiians never directly relinquished their claims to sovereignty over their lands.

The legislation still needs to be considered by the Senate, where it is backed by two of the chamber's most senior members — Hawaiians Akaka and Sen. Daniel Inouye.

Find this article at:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1675198,00.html

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

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20071024%5cACQRTT200710242042RTTRADERUSEQUITY_2019.htm&

NASDAQ news

House Votes To Give Native Hawaiians Self-Governance Powers

(RTTNews) - The House voted 261-153 on Wednesday to extend some self-governance powers to Native Hawaiians despite a veto threat from the White House that argues the legislation would divide Americans along "lines of race and ethnicity."

The proposal, introduced by Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, would give the 400,000 people nationwide of Hawaiian ancestry the ability to form a governing entity that would be able to negotiate with the federal government over such things as land, natural resources and other assets that were lost since Queen Lili'uokalani was overthrown in 1893.

"The legislation allows Native Hawaiian people to decide for themselves the organization of a government entity to represent their interests in a relationship with the U.S. government," Abercrombie said in a statement. "The relationship parallels that of Native American tribes and Alaskan natives."

Last year, a proposal fell four votes short of the 60 needed to advance to a final vote in the Senate. This time, to allay some criticism, the legislation would forbid the Native Hawaiian government to take private land or set up gambling operations similar to those allowed to Indian nations.

In a statement, the White House said the Bush administration is opposed to any bill that would divide the nation.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, voted against the proposal saying that "granting broad government powers to an exclusive group based on race is simply unconstitutional."

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

http://www.thehawaiichannel.com/news/14417809/detail.html?rss=hon&psp=news
KITV 4 Television, Hawaii, October 24, 2007
POSTED: 2:24 pm HST October 24, 2007
UPDATED: 2:48 pm HST October 24, 2007

Akaka Bill Passes U.S. House Vote

Native Hawaiian Recognition Yet To Make Senate Floor Vote

HONOLULU -- The Native Hawaiian Recognition passed a major vote in the U.S. House on Wednesday.

The House of Representative voted in favor of the measure, dubbed the Akaka Bill after Sen. Daniel Akaka, but there is still a long uphill battle. The Akaka Bill passed in the House of Representatives with a significant number of votes, 261 to 153. The measure had support on both sides of the aisle.

"This creates the opportunity for Native Hawaiians to take responsibility for their own actions in regard to the administration of their own assets," Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, said.

Every public official in Hawaii has supported the Akaka Bill. On Wednesday, 39 Republicans voted for it.

"I think, fundamentally as conservatives, we ought to allow the people of Hawaii to manage their own affairs as they see fit," Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., said.

Not everyone agrees with the measure.

"I think the legislation is divisive and will give a group of citizens special rights over other U.S. citizens based solely on race," Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., said.

The Akaka Bill has never been voted on in the full U.S. Senate.

Akaka does not yet have enough votes to bring it up for a floor vote. However, his office representatives said he has the support of the majority leader.

The White House has said the measure is discriminatory and that the president will veto the Akaka Bill.

The House can override a presidential veto.

Akaka Bill supporters acknowledge the measure is by no means veto proof, but Akaka said it does have more momentum with Wednesday's passage in the House.

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

http://www.grassrootinstitute.org/GrassInReview/GrassInReview10-24-07.shtml
Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, blog, October 24, 2007

Sometimes Talk is Cheap
A Message from Dick Rowland

As we went to press on October 24, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Akaka Bill with 261 Ayes, 153 Nays. That action should put all on notice that further education and debate on this important issue is appropriate.

Please note this quote from our very own Senator Dan Inouye in his remarks on introduction of the Akaka Bill, January 25, 2005:

Because the Native Hawaiian government is not an Indian tribe, the body of Federal Indian law that would otherwise customarily apply when the United States extends Federal recognition to an Indian tribal group does not apply.... That is why concerns which are premised on the manner in which Federal Indian law provides for the respective governmental authorities of the state governments and Indian tribal governments simply don't apply in Hawaii.

What is one to make of that? The whole justification for the Akaka Bill rests on the Indian precedent. There is no doubt that the Akaka Bill provides for a new government in the midst of federal, state, and city & county jurisdictions. And there is no doubt that the Interior Department has a key role (as it does with Indian tribes).

So some people in Hawaii are going to have a new government to report to. This government is going to pass laws because that is what governments do. Then it is going to enforce those laws. Thus members of the new Hawaiian nation will have to obey four governments while others obey three (city & county, state and federal).

What is the advantage for anyone subjected to such a complicated scheme? If we are not to look to the Indian model, where are we to look? And if the Indian model does not apply, why are Indian tribes so much in favor of the Akaka Bill?

The people who keep pushing this construct never have any details. Most are from the government, as in, "I am from the government and I am here to help." Please trust them, they accept responsibility. But they never will be held personally accountable. Not possible. Cheap talk.

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071025/NEWS01/710250363/1001
Honolulu Advertiser, Thursday, October 25, 2007

Hawaiian recognition bill clears U.S. House

By Gordon Y.K. Pang and Dennis Camire

A bill that could pave the way toward federal recognition for Native Hawaiians took a key step forward yesterday by winning approval from the U.S. House of Representatives.

But it was a decidedly small step, with a bigger fight expected in the Senate, where the bill has stalled since it was first introduced in 2000.

After failing to make it out of the last two-year legislative cycle that ended in December 2006, the bill is now essentially where it was then, with an OK from the House but no vote scheduled for the Senate.

And formidable opposition lies ahead, including a likely veto by President Bush if the measure is approved by the Senate.

Both supporters and opponents of the legislation, nicknamed the Akaka bill after Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawai'i, took heart from yesterday's vote.

Clyde Namu'o, administrator of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, said the House approval gives impetus to senators to do what their colleagues have done.

"We believe that having the bill move out of the House provides momentum for the Senate to take this up," Namu'o said.

H. William Burgess, whose group Aloha For All opposes federal recognition and Hawaiians-only programs on the grounds that they discriminate against other races, said he's encouraged by the vote.

If the bill moves out of the Senate, there do not appear to be the 290 out of 435 votes necessary to override a presidential veto.

"Hopefully, this bill doesn't make it to the president and ends up in the trash can where it belongs," Burgess said.

He added that he believes yesterday's vote was a wake-up call for those who oppose federal recognition. "It will now galvanize those people who oppose the bill to now believe, that as absurd as it is, this bill may actually pass," he said.

The current legislative cycle ends in December 2008 and any action must conclude by then or start over again in a new session.

The House voted 261-153 to approve the bill after spirited testimony.

U.S. Rep. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawai'i, a sponsor of the bill, said Native Hawaiians, like Native Americans and Alaska Natives, have an inherent sovereignty based on their status as indigenous native people that was lost when the Kingdom of Hawai'i was overthrown in 1893.

"This is a historic vote and one that helps to perpetuate righteousness by righting a historic wrong," she said.

But Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., said the bill undermines the idea that the United States is one nation that has come from many people.

In a statement, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said granting broad governmental powers to an exclusive group based on race "is simply unconstitutional."

"This kind of divisive proposition is precisely what our Founding Fathers crafted the Constitution to prevent," he said.

FOR SOME, A FIRST STEP

The highly charged debate revolves around the issue of what, if anything, Native Hawaiians are owed as a result of the Islands' annexation to the United States.

Supporters of the Akaka bill say it's the first step in correcting historic injustices done to Native Hawaiians by the U.S. government and is necessary to protect Hawaiians-only programs.

Some opponents believe federal recognition grants too many powers to a Hawaiian entity at the expense of non-Hawaiians. A segment of Hawaiians opposes federal recognition because they don't feel it goes far enough.

The bill, which the House approved once before in 2000, creates a process for establishing a Native Hawaiian government, including the development of a roll of Native Hawaiians and the election of an interim governing council.

The council would develop the documents on which the government would be based.

Once the United States recognizes the new government, negotiations would take place on the disposition of Native Hawaiian land, natural resources and other assets.

U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai'i, also a sponsor of the bill, told House members the bill was only enabling legislation, not a final resolution on its own.

"This creates the opportunity for Native Hawaiians to take responsibility for their own actions with regard to the control and administration of their own assets," he said.

But in a statement of administration policy on Monday, the White House Office of Management and Budget said the bill was "divisive" and discriminatory.

The statement said the bill would "divide the governing institutions of this country by race" and raise "significant constitutional concerns."

"If (the bill) were presented to the president, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill," the statement said.

Namu'o said OHA was not surprised by the Bush administration's statement, noting that it had been provided with a draft in advance.

"We are still hopeful that (Gov. Linda Lingle, a Republican) will be able to convince the president that this legislation is good for Hawaiians (and) good for Hawai'i," he said.

BIG HURDLES AHEAD

Despite supporters' enthusiasm, major obstacles facing the bill's enactment into law remain, not the least of which is the possible presidential veto.

The Senate Indian Affairs Committee passed the bill in the spring, but no floor action has been scheduled yet.

Akaka said he and other supporters are working to bring it to the Senate floor as soon as possible.

"Today's House action provides great momentum in our effort," Akaka said. "I was thrilled to see bipartisan support for this long-needed legislation that underscores our ongoing efforts toward reconciliation across our Islands."

U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, D-Hawai'i, co-sponsor of the bill, said he was pleased with House approval of the bill. "House passage gives added momentum to this important measure," he said.

But expected Republican opposition in the Senate means leadership would have to make time for lengthy debate in an already clogged legislative calendar.

A taller hurdle would be a Bush veto, which now seems more certain if the bill makes it to the president's desk.

BILL 'A CLEAR THREAT'

A veto override requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate, an unlikely prospect given that none of Bush's vetoes has been overcome so far.

Even Abercrombie has said supporters "don't have the votes" to do that. Inouye has said it would be "hairy at best."

Haunani Apoliona, OHA chairwoman, called House passage of the bill "marvelous."

"We are anxious to get it acted on in the Senate," she said. "We expect some of the same rhetoric on the floor of the House today to surface in the Senate, but it's rhetoric that is not accurate. It's misinformation."

Joe A. Garcia, president of the National Congress of American Indians, said allowing a Native Hawaiian government is a matter of fundamental fairness.

"Like American Indians and Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians deserve the right to determine their own future," he said.

A spokesman for Hui Pu, an umbrella group of Hawaiian organizations opposed to federal recognition, said he was disappointed but not surprised by the House vote.

Hui Pu member Ikaika Hussey said millions of dollars spent by OHA on "lobbyists and chocolate-covered macadamia nuts" paid off.

Hussey said the Akaka bill remains "a clear threat to the movement for self-determination" and that Hui Pu members will be meeting to decide their next move.

Hussey encouraged Congress to hold legislative hearings on the issue in Hawai'i.

Bumpy Kanahele, head of the group Nation of Hawai'i, also called for local hearings.

"If we're going to present something to the U.S. government, it should be something we're all a part of," Kanahele said. What's currently before Congress is "a desperate attempt by the U.S. congressional delegation in Hawai'i to settle all future claims."

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

http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/25/news/story03.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, October 25, 2007

U.S. House passes Akaka Bill again

Associated Press

Hawaii's congressional representatives and officials of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs applauded yesterday U.S. House passage of a bill awarding self-governance rights to those with native Hawaiian ancestry.

U.S. Rep. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) said the vote on the House version of the so-called Akaka Bill shows the majority recognizes justice for native Hawaiians is long overdue.

"This is a victory for all the people of Hawaii," Hirono said in a statement.

The House version of the identical Senate Akaka Bill must still pass the Senate and be signed by the president to become law.

The White House threatened a veto, saying the legislation, which passed by a 261-153 vote, would divide Americans "along suspect lines of race and ethnicity."

The bill would give the 400,000 people nationwide of native Hawaiian ancestry the right to form a governing entity that could negotiate with the state and federal governments such issues as control of natural resources, lands and assets. The interior secretary would have to approve that governing body.

Native Hawaiians who support the bill insist that they deserve many of the self-autonomy rights provided to American Indians and native Alaskans.

But the White House said the bill "raises significant constitutional concerns that arise any time legislation seeks to separate American citizens into race-related classifications rather than according to their own merits and essential qualities."

The vote on the proposal was the first in the House since the chief sponsor, U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, won its passage in 2000.

It was the second time in seven years of trying that House supporters had managed to get the bill passed by the full House. Last year the legislation fell four votes short of the 60 needed to advance to a final vote in the Senate.

U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, the bill's namesake, said the passage would give his efforts momentum.

"I was thrilled to see bipartisan support for this long-needed legislation that underscores our ongoing efforts toward reconciliation across our islands," Akaka said.

Hawaii Democrats U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye and Abercrombie, who led debate for the bill on the House floor, also commended the vote.

Haunani Apoliona, head of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, said the Akaka Bill would shield programs for Hawaiians from legal challenges as well as provide for a process for official U.S. recognition of a future native Hawaiian governing entity.

"Today's vote in the House is an important step toward the goal of achieving our inherent right to self-determination, and a better Hawaii," said Apoliona, who chairs OHA's board of trustees.

Separately, four members of the state civil rights advisory committee spoke in favor of the vote.

The members -- Amy Agbayani, Daphne Barbee, Linda Colburn and Wayne Tanna -- cautioned they do not represent the opinion of the entire 17-member Hawaii body, which advises the national Civil Rights Commission on local issues. But they said they hoped the U.S. Senate would pass the companion bill to the House legislation.

The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission spoke in favor of the Akaka Bill in 2001. But the national Commission on Civil Rights, which has opposed the legislation, appointed 14 new members to its Hawaii advisory body this year. They include William Burgess, a lawyer and activist who has fought Hawaiian-only government programs.

The Hawaii advisory committee did not take a position on the Akaka Bill this year.

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

http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/25/editorial/editorial01.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, October 25, 2007, EDITORIAL

OUR OPINION

Revisit Hawaiian sovereignty after Bush leaves office

THE ISSUE
The House has approved a Hawaiian sovereignty measure but not by the margin needed to override a veto promised by President Bush.

House approval of the Hawaiian sovereignty bill by a 261-153 vote fell far short of the two-thirds needed to override a presidential veto, rendering futile continued action on the bill while President Bush remains in office. Any effort to pass the bill also would be useless in the Senate, where support has been inadequate. Proponents should wait until the next administration before renewing their cause.

Neither yesterday's House vote nor the White House declaration of opposition should have come as a surprise. The Bush administration has opposed Hawaiian sovereignty for four years, and the 262-162 House vote in March for federal funding of Hawaiian housing indicated the absence of veto-proof support. Advocates of Hawaiian sovereignty seem to have been in denial during recent years but now must acknowledge reality.

The White House indicated its opposition in 2003, when William Moschella, assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, sent a letter to a Senate committee maintaining that a measure that included federal funding of Hawaiian small-business programs "raises constitutional concerns." Gov. Linda Lingle brushed aside the letter's importance, saying, "Some person down in an office who wrote a letter does not represent the policy of the Bush administration."

On the eve of last year's cloture vote on the Akaka Bill in the Senate, that same "person down in an office" asserted in a letter to then-Majority Leader Bill Frist that Hawaiian recognition would "divide people by their race." The 56-41 vote fell four short of proceeding with consideration of the bill and 11 short of overriding a potential veto.

In his letter to Frist, Moschella quoted Bush as having said "we must ... honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples." The White House Office of Management and Budget cited the same quote on Monday in stating that Bush "has eschewed such divisive legislation as a matter of policy."

Of course, the assertions by Moschella and the White House that the Akaka Bill is unconstitutional are mistaken. Congress has the authority to recognize indigenous people through the commerce clause of the Constitution, which gives it the power to regulate commerce with Indian tribes, and the Supreme Court has recognized that "plenary" authority time and again. Such recognition has been extended to Alaskan natives.

However, the view that the Akaka Bill is racially discriminatory has hardened over the years in the Bush administration and what Rep. Neil Abercrombie has called "an element in the Republican Party that is hell-bent on attacking Hawaiians as symbolic of their opposition to native interests."

Like it or not, the issue of Hawaiian sovereignty has become a partisan issue, despite Republican Lingle's support. Hawaii's congressional delegation would be wise to attach Hawaiian funding programs to noncontroversial bills until a person sympathetic to sovereignty moves into the White House and the Akaka Bill can be resurrected.

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?35515160-61f7-4f98-8796-907b393c04d3
Hawaii Reporter, October 25, 2007

Coming Together to Avoid Coming Apart

By Barb Lindsay

One Nation United is working with the Heritage Foundation, the Center for Equal Opportunity, Americans for Tax Reform, and other concerned organizations on a national campaign to raise public awareness about the egregious Akaka Bill (S.310/H.R.505), now ready for a vote in both the House and Senate.

The Akaka Bill would create a race-based "tribal" government in Hawaii. Twenty percent of Hawaii's population, along with 400,000 other citizens nationwide, would belong to our nation's newest and largest Indian '"tribe.". Never before in American history has Congress carved up a state along racial lines to create a government to benefit just one "elite" group of people. This unconstitutional legislation would put the Bill of Rights of every U.S. citizen on the table as bargaining chips.

If the Akaka Bill becomes law, it would be the first step in the breakup of the United States. The premise is that Hawaii needs two governments: One in which everyone can vote,that would become smaller and weaker; The other in which only Native Hawaiians could vote, growing ever more powerful since transfers of lands and waters, governmental authority, as well as civil and criminal jurisdiction are unlimited in scope under the terms of this anti-American measure.

Remember that there are living descendants of indigenous people now residing in every state. They will surely take notice and demand their own self-governing "tribal" governments, too. ONU members and supporters are urged to contact your U.S. congressional representatives and senators, asking them to vote "NO" on S.310/H.R.505. Write also to President Bush,thanking him for strongly opposing this bill last June and urging him to please veto this legislation if it passes Congress.

Also be sure to view a brief video by the Heritage Foundation explaining what passage of the "Native Hawaiian Reorganization Act of 2007" would mean to America's future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF7vu81djM0. For more information about One Nation United, please visit http://www.OneNationUnited.org or call 206-660-3085 to be added to e-mail list and/or mailing list for ONU Newsletters.

Barb Lindsay is the National Director and spokesperson for One Nation United, a nonpartisan umbrella group working to defend private property rights, the rule of law, and our civil liberties, all being undermined by current failed federal Indian policy.

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?5349fa92-5491-43c8-b6e2-ec25021c4794
Hawaii Reporter, October 25, 2007

Why The Akaka Bill Stinks

By Sheriff Richard Mack (Ret.)

Hawaii is one of the most lovely places in the Universe. It has beautiful scenery, wonderful people, and a sense of authentic serenity and peace. It is, by far, my family's favorite vacation destination. The memories we have of Hawaii are beyond priceless. We can't wait to come back!

Now, amid the beauty of Hawaii comes the stench of politics. It has the potential of changing Hawaii's natural beauty and making it politically correct like the rest of the nation. I am referring to the Akaka Bill. It intends to force Polynesians in Hawaii to become another native tribe equal to the other indigenous tribes in Arizona, Oklahoma, South Dakota, etc. These tribes are all supposedly "sovereign nations" within our own "sovereign" nation with distinct and separate jurisdictions that are both confusing and troubling. Of course, Hawaii's federal tribal designation (Akaka Bill) would not allow the Hawaii tribe "casino status," even though the other native tribes have dotted the American landscape with an overabundance of such "lucky" establishments.

There are so many questions that the proposed Akaka Bill raises and so many of them impossible to answer. Why is the federal government trying to do this? Is something broke? Is something wrong with Hawaii the way it is? Do we need a federal designed tribe here? What will such a law accomplish or harm? And what about the entire federal tribe designations in the first place; are they appropriate and are they proper or lawful? Is the federal tribal system with its corresponding Bureau of Indian Affairs bureaucracy working so well that Hawaii just can't wait to be a part of it all?

America was founded on the proposition that "all men are created equal." But of course the feds are charged with designating which people are more equal than others and which ones get preferential treatment for jobs, and special consideration for college placement, or which ones get casinos or water rights or the use of their own lands. Freedom and equality belong to all people as a fundamental tenet of American idealism. Trusting the federal government to play with that principle and the power to control it is not what America was intended to be.

If anyone as a race or as an individual has been harmed or damaged, let them seek redress and justice accordingly. But seeking government apologies or preferential treatment or certain class designations is not the answer. Keep Hawaii free and beautiful. Keep your lands and keep your tranquility. Run your own parks and keep your autonomy. Tell DC to keep their stinky hands hands off of Hawaii and their smelly politics to themselves.

Former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack has over 20 years experience in law enforcement.

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

http://www.metropulse.com/articles/2007/17_44/commentary.html
Knoxville (TN) Metro Pulse (weekly), Week of October 25

COMMENTARY

One Nation...Indivisible
Scrap the Hawaiian Nation idea

by Barry Henderson

Oddities transpiring in Washington, D.C., often give us pause. One of those quizzical items is before Congress now. It would formally recognize and approve of a racial divide in the state of Hawaii and pave the way for a separate Polynesian-based nation within the state. Though it is likely to be found unconstitutional, it has passed the House by the stunning vote of 261-153.

Titled the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, the legislation would establish an American-Indian style tribe for native Hawaiians, however that distinction might be defined, allowing for the formation of a tribal government not bound by U.S. law or even our Constitution. The bill is moving along, having been passed by the Indiana Affairs Committee of the Senate, where it failed by only four votes last year. The Bush administration has vowed to veto it. It may be one of the rare instances where I’d agree with a Bush veto. The whole idea is an abomination against the spirit of the Republic.

Where to start? In the 1990s, I spent considerable time in Hawaii during a period when native Hawaiian nationalism was in full bloom. It was an interesting time to be a Haole, the Hawaiian term for foreigner, which is used derisively toward Caucasians. It was my first experience with being discriminated against as a minority, and it was an eye-opening one. It allowed me to sense personally for the first time in my life some of the feelings that racial discrimination generates among minority members.

These were not debilitating feelings in my case, though, because I was consciously grounded in my U.S. citizenship and my appreciation of the racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity that goes to make up the American melting pot.

Native American Indian tribes were never afforded the unmitigated opportunity to dive into that melting pot, and the un-American gesture of consigning them to reservations was Washington’s way of perpetuating tribal distinctions. We allowed them to form tribal governments as a part of that misguided patronization, and we’ll have to live with it, at least for the foreseeable future, and so will the tribes.

Such was never the case in Hawaii, where there were no enforced reservations established, where intermarriage among races was a common practice, and where Hawaiians, including island natives and all other citizens of those islands who voted, claimed U.S. statehood by an overwhelming margin in 1959.

So now some of the natives of Polynesian ancestry want out of that contract. It’s ironic, to say the least, what with the state’s population being among the most diverse in the nation. In-migration from the mainland and from Asia has contributed mightily to the melting-pot status of the 50th state, although African Americans are still underrepresented there. The frictions among racial and ethnic groups—and such expressions still do exist—seem almost healthy as the pot is continually stirred, tending to diminish those frictions.

Don’t let Congress give up and allow one racial group, meaning the native Hawaiians however defined, to form its own government within our government. It would set an awful precedent for furthering ethnic separatism elsewhere in the nation, where ethnic pride and prejudices might be exploited to motivate new nations, based on tribalism, within our own. Don’t let Congress divide us against ourselves. Assimilation into the United States of America and its unique culture has made this country what it is, despite initial tendencies by immigrants to live and function within their own distinct neighborhoods.

Siding with conservatives is usually difficult for me. But in this instance it is easy. Defeat the Native Hawaiian bill or veto it. If Congress overrides a veto, it will be up to the courts to declare it unconstitutional, which they surely would. Don’t, under any circumstances, allow the native Hawaiians independence from the rest of us. That’s a formula for America’s ultimate failure.

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

** President Bush's threat to veto the Akaka bill if it reaches his desk, combined with the House passing the bill, prompted Honolulu Star-Bulletin cartoonist Corky to publish this cartoon on October 26, originally with URL
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/26/news/corky.html

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

http://indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096416001
Indian Country Today, October 26, 2007

Native Hawaiian bill faces Bush opposition in the House

by: Jerry Reynolds / Indian Country Today

WASHINGTON - After relying on mischaracterizations from proxies outside of government and in the conservative press to attack the Akaka Bill in past years, the executive office of President Bush launched a frontal assault on it Oct. 22.

Shortly after the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives scheduled floor time for H.R. 505, the Office of Management and Budget issued a strong statement of administration policy against the bill, which would authorize a Native Hawaiian governing entity as a first step toward federal recognition of Native Hawaiians. Proponents contend the federal recognition of Native Hawaiians would complete the framework of U.S. governmental relations with indigenous peoples, begun among tribes and Alaska Native villages.

The Bush administration insists it would create race-based governance and abandon the ''melting pot,'' the traditional metaphor for blending many peoples into one nation. ''This bill would reverse this great American tradition and divide the governing institutions of this country by race. If H.R. 505 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend he veto the bill. ... The Administration strongly opposes any bill that would formally divide sovereign United States power along suspect lines of race and ethnicity.''

Patricia Zell, of Zell and Cox Law in Washington, is a longtime advocate of the Akaka Bill. (The reference is to Sen. Daniel Akaka, the bill's sponsor in the Senate. The companion bill in the House has been introduced and shepherded along by Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii. The entire Hawaii congressional delegation, a wide majority of state legislators and Republican Gov. Linda Lingle, supports the bill.)

Of the administration's contention that ''substantial historical and cultural differences between Native Hawaiians as a group and members of federally recognized tribes'' make federal recognition ''unwise'' and constitutionally weak, Zell said the same differences can be found between federally recognized tribes of different regions, for instance the Southeast and Northwest, or California and the East Coast. Such differences have not restrained Congress from recognizing tribes in different regions, she added, because the same Native-specific issues apply to various tribes and peoples.

Indigenous peoples, including Native Hawaiians, have consistently been called ''Indians'' at the time of first contact, she added, undermining the administration's stated concern about the Constitution and its reference to ''Indian tribes.''

With the scheduling of the bill for debate in the House Oct. 24, a potential amendment came to light from Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., as follows: ''Nothing in this Act shall relieve any sovereign entity within the jurisdiction of the United States, including a Native Hawaiian governing authority, from complying with the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution.''

The Native Hawaiian bill passed the House on Oct. 24. Flake did not offer his amendment as written, and the Rules Committee did not permit him to revise it. He offered a longer version that was less controversial for tribes a motion to ''recommit,'' and it was defeated.

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

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=41074
American Chronicle, Saturday, October 27, 2007

President Bush Reinstate Native Hawaii Government Now

by Mike Graham

America has to undo a great wrong committed against the Native Hawaiian people. The illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaiian Government on January 17, 1893 by the United States Government Minister John L. Stevens and a company of uniformed U.S. Marines and two companies of U.S. Sailors has to be dealt with now by reinstating the International legal Hawaiian historic government!

President Bush is being ill advised in making statements he will not support a race based Native Hawaiian Government, that is not the case on this issue. Native Hawaiians are a people, the U.S. Government recognized the former Native Hawaiian Government under these same International guide lines as it still does today toward other governments seeking U.S. recognition!. President Bush is aware America recognize's Middle Eastern countries that are set up based on race and religion!. President Bush should say a prayer, sign the bill and say Aloha.

The Akaka Bill (Senate Bill 310) and House Bill 505 is a good start toward America making amends to the Native Hawaii people. It should be given full support by House and Senate members to include President Bush. By not passing the Akaka Bill our federal government will be sending the wrong message to the world, "Do as we say, not as we do".

Today, America is engaged in a global war after terrorist events on 9-11. Native Hawaiians have enlisted in U.S. Armed Forces in large numbers to defend America in our time of need; when in reality their fighting and giving their lives defending the U.S. government, the very government that through show of force overthrew their government. I ask you, would you submit and fight for a government that overthrew America?

The Native Hawaiian homeland was attacked during World War Two, Native Hawaiians fought side by side with U.S. troops to win that war. Their support of Americas well being is unquestionable, it's time for America to step up to the plate and do right by the Native Hawaiians by passing the Akaka Hawaiian Government Bill.

The biggest opponent against the Akaka Native Hawaiian government bill is corporate America, the same business institutions that supported the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian government. Their lobbyist are flashing millions of dollars in support for representatives in their re-election if they keep their name off the Akaka bill. Plus you have corporate supported national anti-Hawaiian groups like One Nation United and Citizens Equal Rights Alliance (CERA) posing as concerned citizens. Citizens Equal Rights Alliance boast of a national organization of community education groups and citizens in 28 states who reside within or near federally recognized Indian reservations. Yes, they want Indian nation sovereign government a thing of the past as well.

These anti-Indigenous groups are also lobbying federal representatives against the Akaka Bill. These groups are nothing more than wolves in suits backed by big corporate money. They should be looked upon as a new form of KKK. Their pumping out press releases to media groups that support their hate rhetoric, the Wall Street Journal allows numerous columns from supporters of these anti-Indigenous groups, further proof of corporate companies spear heading the demise of Native Hawaiians having their government reinstated.

Their hitting the Native Hawaiian media groups as well with words like; race-based government; Hawaiian government will divide America, turning taxpayers into indentured servants and Divide and conquer America. What ever it takes in the media to scare people, they're doing it. It's the same old media tactic used by our government to scare people back in the 1800s so they could send in the U.S. Army and massacre American Indians and take their land. Their heads are spinning faster than Linda Blair in the Exorcist in trying to scare people over the Akaka Bill.

Yes their are two sides to every issue; the Akaka Bill is not a cure all. It's a start to make up for what misguided members of our federal government did to the Hawaiian people. They deserve nothing less than to be able to govern themselves just like our federal government and state governments do while being united together for the betterment of our home land.

Bringing about a Native Hawaiian government will be good for America and appreciated in the eyes of people around the world. It's time America cleaned up it's own back yard of wrong doing toward Native Hawaiians. Stand up America and say no to the anti-Hawaiian hate groups supported by big corporate companies that are making billions off the Native Hawaiian homelands. It's time the Native Hawaiians have a voice over their true homelands, not Washington's one-sided double talk. Over the past five years, the member tribes of the National Congress of American Indians have approved four resolutions that support the sovereign rights of Native Hawaiians and call on the federal government to establish a government-to-government relationship with them.

Historic events & time lines Hawaii history

Acknowledgment and Apology US Public Law 103-150

This resolution explicitly apologized "to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination."

Queen Lili'uokalani 1893

I do this under protest, and impelled by said force yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the Constitutional Sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands.

Morgan Report February 26, 1894,

The Morgan Report to President Cleveland ended all efforts by the president to reinstate the monarchy.

Rebellion

In 1895, a failed rebellion led by Robert Wilcox attempted to overthrow the Republic of Hawaii, and led to the conviction and imprisonment of the former Queen Lili'uokalani.

Hawaii Statehood 1959

President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed a bill on March 18, 1959, which allowed for Hawaiian statehood. Hawaii formally became the 50th state of the Union on August 21, 1959 after a vote of over 94% in favor of statehood.

Mike Graham is a citizen of the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation. Founded United Native America in 1993 to form a national group to take action on American Indian issues. The groups main issue is to bring about a federal national holiday for Native Americans. Graham has been a guest speaker on national and international radio talk shows to include television programs. He has traveled across the country discussing issues with Indian nation leaders. United Native America website: www.UnitedNativeAmerica.com

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

http://www.molokaitimes.com/articles/7102821213.asp
Molokai Times, October 28, 2007

House passes Akaka Bill

by Kate Bradshaw

President Bush has threatened to veto law intended to establish Hawaiian self-determination

Last Wednesday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would get the ball rolling in the establishment of a Native Hawaiian governing entity.

The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act (HB 505) is known popularly as the Akaka Bill; Senator Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) being the bill's original sponsor. The bill passed by a margin of 261-153 votes. Congresswoman Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Congressman Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) co-introduced the bill.

"Native Hawaiians, like American Indians and Alaska Natives, have an inherent sovereignty based on their status as indigenous, native people," Hirono said as she spoke on the house floor just prior to the vote. "They desire the right to exercise management over their own affairs and land."

If the bill clears the senate and the president signs it into law, however, the process of forming a Native Hawaiian governing entity won't take place overnight. Instead, the bill outlines a process that would eventually result in the formation of a Native Hawaiian governing entity. It would represent the interests of Native Hawaiians in negotiations with federal and state government on issues like land transfers and protection of resources vital to Native Hawaiians.

The bill does not affect jurisdiction of criminal or civil courts at any level, nor does it allow the Native Hawaiian governing entity to set up gambling operations in Hawaii.

The bill requires a nine-member commission to set up a roll of Native Hawaiians who choose to participate and who meet the definition of Native Hawaiian. Hirono said that the bill requires no blood quantum and that Native Hawaiian in this case means anyone descended from one or more Native Hawaiians who were here before the 1893 overthrow. Native Hawaiians on the roll would eventually be able to vote for officials to represent them within the Native Hawaiian governing entity.

Fending off criticism from those who claim that the bill is race-based and thus in violation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Hirono said that the Constitution — Article One, Section Eight, Clause Three — gives Congress the authority enact the Akaka Bill because it deals with an indigenous people and does not give racial preference.

In her speech on the House floor, Hirono described the overthrow of Hawaii and deposition of Queen Lili'uokalani "by an armed group of businessmen and sugar planters, who were American by birth or heritage, with the support of U.S. troops."

She described the suppression of Hawaiian culture and language as well as attempts in recent decades by the state and federal government to restore and revive land and cultural resources for Native Hawaiians. These included the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920, which "set aside some 200,000 acres of land for Native Hawaiians," and the creation of Hawaiian language immersion schools.

"We can trace the genesis of this bill, embodying the hope of an indigenous people to control their own fate, all the way back to the overthrow of 1893," Hirono said. "It has been a long road."

Department of Hawaiian Homelands spokesman Lloyd Yonenaka said that he sees the bill's passing as a good sign that Native Hawaiian interests will be protected in the future.

"We support the passing of the Akaka Bill because it will provide additional protection for DHHL from those who wish to see our trust dissolved," Yonenaka said. "We also recognize the need to protect other Hawaiian trusts and programs and the Akaka Bill will also provide protection for these entities."

The Akaka Bill had been stalled in the senate since 2000, but its supporters see Wednesday's vote as one that may provide momentum for the bill to clear senate. The Akaka Bill would then face potential veto from the president, who has already issued a statement that threatens to do so.

Hirono said that this won't stop the bill's supporters from moving forward. "I always say that one can always see the light," she said.

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

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=278549878227306
INESTORS BUSINESS DAILY, Monday, October 29, 2007, EDITORIAL

Hawaii Oh-Oh

Congress: Nearly five decades after statehood, the U.S. House passes a bill classifying American citizens by race and establishing apartheid in Hawaii. Is the U.S. about to have its own separatist movement?

We have observed that if there was ever a place that came close to Martin Luther King's dream of people being judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin, it is Hawaii.

"One of the greatest examples of a multiethnic society living in relative peace" is how the state's longtime U.S. senator, Democrat Daniel Inouye, once described it.

Last Wednesday, the House voted 261-153, with an incredible 39 Republicans in the majority, to approve the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, sponsored by one of Hawaii's two representatives, Democrat Neil Abercrombie.

The other, Democrat Mazie K. Hirono, says: "This is a historic vote and one that helps to perpetuate righteousness by righting a historic wrong."

The bill would essentially classify "native Hawaiians" as the rough equivalent of an American Indian tribe, with similar rights to form a separate governing entity with the power to negotiate with state and federal governments over issues such as control of natural resources, lands and assets.

But under the definition of "tribe" established by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, "native Hawaiians do not qualify as a tribe." The people who make up a tribe must be geographically isolated as a group like, say, the Navaho or Cherokee nations.

The 400,000 or so "native Hawaiians" are interspersed among the general populations of all 50 states. And, unlike American Indians, native Hawaiians didn't have their lands taken by force but willingly joined the United States.

We're not sure what "historic wrong" Rep. Hirono wants to righteously correct. This bill, and a similar one sponsored by Hawaii's other senator, Democrat Daniel Akaka, was spawned by a historically flawed resolution passed in 1993 and signed by President Clinton.

It apologizes for America's aiding and abetting the overthrow a century earlier of the Native Hawaiian government of Queen Liliuokalani — in effect stealing Hawaii from the Hawaiian people.

Except it didn't happen quite that way.

Hawaiian scholar Rubellite Johnson, who helped establish the Hawaiian studies program at the University of Hawaii, says much of the supposed historical justification for this legislation is "a distortion of the truth." Not only was the U.S. "not directly involved" in the forced abdication of Queen Liliuokalani, Johnson says, but most of the Hawaiian monarchy supported U.S. annexation.

In any event, the issue was available for discussion in 1959. That's when native Hawaiians voted for statehood in a plebiscite that officially transferred sovereignty to the U.S. and rendered moot the question of whether Hawaii was stolen from its people.

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a similar effort to create a state-sanctioned, race-based entity composed of native Hawaiians back in 2000. In Rice v. Cayetano, it ruled that under the 15th Amendment, which forbids discrimination in voting based on race, a race-based government in Hawaii was unconstitutional.

Ambercrombie's legislation would establish an American Quebec, only worse, and could become a conduit for reparations and other subsidies at the expense of U.S. taxpayers, much as reparations are demanded for the institution of slavery.

The fact that the measure is being taken seriously lends encouragement to other segments of the ethnic grievance industry, such as those who insist the southwest United States was stolen from Mexico. Would they demand similar recognition?

Not even a presidential veto may stop this bill. Hillary Clinton voted for the Senate version in 2006, and she would undoubtedly sign it into law as president.

Presidential candidate John Edwards is fond of saying there are two Americas. Prepare for two, three, and maybe even more.

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071029/OPINION03/710290304/1110/OPINION03
Honolulu Advertiser, October 29, 2007
COMMENTARY

Hawaii needs federal recognition law now

By Haunani Apoliona

The U.S. House of Representatives vote in favor of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 is a significant step in exercising our inherent right to self-determination that will lead to a better Hawai'i.

We thank Hawai'i's representatives, Neil Abercrombie and Mazie Hirono, for their efforts in making successful passage of H.R. 505 the 1,000th vote of the year, a U.S. House record. And we applaud their exemplary action and persuasive debate on the floor, fighting off attempts to falsely label this legislation as "race based" and, therefore, unconstitutional.

We look forward to Sens. Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye leading the charge in the Senate to approve the companion measure, S310. They have also passionately worked for passage as recent as 2006. Despite setbacks, our delegation has persevered because this issue is vitally important to every single resident in the state of Hawai'i and especially important to Native Hawaiians.

We also thank Gov. Linda Lingle who has long maintained that "what is good for Hawaiians is good for Hawai'i." The governor and members of her administration, including our state attorney general, continue to be vocal and not deterred in challenging the misinformed conservative "think tankers." Her administration's outreach to Republican leaders, including Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole and others, have contributed to the success.

These 39 Republican House members who voted in favor of H.R. 505 rejected erroneous White House statements and joined Hawai'i's political leadership by exhibiting bipartisan support for the bill.

And while the vote was significant, we are not blind nor naive to the roadblocks ahead.

We are disappointed by the White House statement regarding federal recognition as it repeats the erroneous theme that this legislation is "raced based."

American Indians and Alaska Natives are already recognized as groups that are not defined by reference to race or ethnicity, but by the fact that their ancestors exercised sovereignty over the lands and areas that subsequently became part of the United States.

The same should apply to America's other native group, Native Hawaiians. The Akaka bill is not based on race. It is based on our unique history as aboriginal, indigenous native people and our special legal and political status.

We are appalled at the conduct of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and its legally flawed and highly political decision last year against federal recognition. That shameful, patchwork report, which lacks credible substance, is the banner and rallying cry for opponents. The Washington, D.C., reach into Hawai'i by the USCCR in its extended attempts to defeat the bill is made transparent by the stacking of the membership of the Hawai'i State Advisory Committee to the USCCR with anti-Hawaiian litigators like H. William Burgess and supporters of the Grassroot Institute of Hawai'i.

In Wednesday's House debate we listened to Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia speaking in opposition to the bill, describe the Grassroot Institute as "nonpartisan" and touting a Grassroot poll as credible evidence that most Hawai'i residents oppose the bill.

We appreciate Rep. Abercrombie for citing for both colleagues and C-SPAN viewers, the specific, misleading question, successfully discrediting this "push" poll by Grassroot Institute of Hawai'i.

He immediately cited credible polls, which consistently find the majority of Hawai'i residents support federal recognition.

Now that the bill has passed the House, be prepared to hear the Grassroot types regurgitate false claims in the attempt to fan fears that the bill will result in secession, bring gambling and result in residents losing their private property. No veracity to their claims — they know it. It's because of the litigators that we are in this situation to begin with. Federal recognition will provide a key shield against the rash of federal litigations filed since Rice v. Cayetano, which ripened the diabolical plan to erode and eliminate Hawaiian programs and assets once and for all.

We know that these attorneys are out prospecting for future clients to attack the Kamehameha Schools, DHHL and OHA, and also strike down the $70 million a year in federal funds that flow into our state and are used for programs serving Hawaiians that benefit all of Hawai'i. If these programs are struck down and unfunded, state resources will need to fill those gaps in service and be significantly diverted — another reason Hawai'i needs federal recognition now.

Haunani Apoliona is chairwoman of the Board of Trustees for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. She wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.

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

** Kansas City newspaper republishes part of Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial from October 25.

http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/340576.html
The Kansas City Star, Tue, Oct. 30, 2007, editorial

PRO-CON: SHOULD NATIVE HAWAIIANS FORM OWN GOVERNMENT?

The Bush administration has opposed Hawaiian sovereignty for four years. Of course, assertions by William Moschella, assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, and the White House that the Akaka Bill is unconstitutional are mistaken.

Congress has the authority to recognize indigenous people through the commerce clause of the Constitution, which gives it the power to regulate commerce with Indian tribes, and the Supreme Court has recognized that “plenary” authority time and again.

However, the view that the Akaka Bill is racially discriminatory has hardened over the years in the Bush administration and what Rep. Neil Abercrombie has called “an element in the Republican Party that is hell-bent on attacking Hawaiians as symbolic of their opposition to native interests.”

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

Send comments or questions to:
Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

You may now

GO TO THE INDEX OF TOPICS FOR THE HISTORY OF THE AKAKA BILL FOR THE ENTIRE 110TH CONGRESS, JANUARY 1, 2007 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008, WITH LINKS TO SUBPAGES COVERING EACH PERIOD OF TIME

SEE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE HAWAIIAN GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION BILL (AKAKA BILL)

GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE