AKAKA BILL HISTORY FROM JULY 1, 2006 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2006

SUMMARY OF NEWS REPORTS AND COMMENTARIES, IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER FOR JULY 1 2006 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2006

** In June 2006, immediately following defeat of the Akaka bill cloture motion, OHA began planning to implement the process of nation-building even without federal recognition. The result would be a state-recognized ethnic Hawaiian governing entity to which the state would then transfer huge areas of land, hundreds of millions of dollars, and political power. OHA's "Plan B" was contained in a confidential memo leaked to the press, and has been the focus of numerous published news reports and commentaries which are NOT compiled below but instead are compiled on a separate webpage devoted to Plan B at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/OHAplanBmemojune2006.html

** In addition, OHA has actually begun building its "nation" by gaining title to large land parcels, planning a headquarters (national capitol?), and considering purchase of a television station. News reports and commentaries about the growth of the "evil empire" are NOT compiled below but instead are compiled at:
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/EvilEmpireOHA.html

The monthly newspaper published by the State of Hawai'i Office of Hawaiian Affairs has a circulation of more than 60,000 copies, mailed free of charge to subscribers at state government expense. The newspaper for July 2006 contains the first "official" reaction of OHA to the defeat of the Akaka bill cloture petition on June 8. Important news reports were published on pages 10 and 11; and important commentaries by several OHA trustees were published by Apoliona p. 17, Carpenter and Dela Cruz p. 18, Stender and Mossman p. 19. The entire newspaper for July 2006 can be downloaded from
http://www.oha.org/cat_content.asp?contentid=568&catid=51

July 1: Webpage compiling press releases and news reports that businesses owned by ethnic Hawaiians are booming, and are being created at more than triple the rate of businesses owned by other ethnicities.

July 4: (1) Honolulu Advertiser: "Sovereignty support eroding" reports results of a poll it commissioned. The poll began on the same day when the Akaka bill failed to survive a cloture motion on the floor of the U.S. Senate, which was also immediately after a blitz of TV, radio, and newspaper ads by OHA supporting the Akaka bill. Great timing by a newspaper that repeatedly editorializes in favor of the Akaka bill! And still the newspaper was forced to report "Sovereignty support eroding." (2) Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, apparently on summer vacation in Hilo, writes about "The Disconnect Between Hawaii & America", especially regarding political support for things that are illegal under American law including Kamehameha Schools admissions policy, the Akaka bill, and a law requiring state residency to apply for state or local government jobs.

July 6: Honolulu Advertiser reports "Akaka says he still thinks Native Hawaiian measure can pass" (He was quoted while filing nominating papers in Honolulu to run for re-election to the Senate).

July 12: Jerry Coffee, Republican, has filed papers to run against Dan Akaka for the U.S. Senate. Coffee was a prisoner of war in Viet Nam for 7 years, along with Senator John McCain, and is a personal friend of McCain. Coffee is a strong opponent of the Akaka bill, and wrote a letter to McCain pleading with him to oppose the Akaka bill, shortly before the cloture vote of June 8. During the cloture debate, McCain made a statement, in the Congressional Record, that he was voting in favor of cloture to fulfill an agreement made two years previously, but would vote against the bill if it survived cloture. Provided below are two news reports about Coffee's candidacy, plus links to Coffee's letter to McCain and McCain's statement of opposition to the Akaka bill. [Unfortunately, on August 7, while traveling in Texas, Jerry Coffee suffered heart problems requiring emergency bypass surgery. He thereafter suspended his campaign; thus, it appears there will not be any credible candidate opposing Senator Akaka who opposes the Akaka bill.]

July 15: London Daily Telegraph article "Defiant Hawaiian unfurls the flag of freedom" glorifies Bumpy Kanahele's secessionist movement and Dan Akaka's apartheid proposal.

July 28: Garry Smith notes that politicians in Hawai'i are avoiding any mention of the Akaka bill in their campaign speeches, websites, and printed materials. He guesses they are embarrassed by their earlier votes and lobbying activities that supported the bill.

July 31: Honolulu Advertiser reports that ALL 13 candidates for the open U.S. House seat (being vacated by Senate candidate Ed Case) support the Akaka bill or some sort of federal legislation for federal recognition of an ethnic Hawaiian entity. The only one supporting placing the issue on the ballot for Hawai'i voters is Republican primary election candidate Bob Hogue.

August 2: Powerful essay by Rockne Johnson, "Libertarians and Hawaiians", republished by Hawaii Reporter with author's permission, taken from the Honolulu Star-Bulletin of 1980. At that time, of course, the Akaka bill was not yet created, but a powerful movement was underway demanding Congressional legislation to provide "reparations" to ethnic Hawaiians for the 1893 overthrow of the monarchy.

August 8: Senator Dan Akaka, an ethnic Hawaiian, has a primary election opponent, Congressman Ed Case, who has no Hawaiian native ancestry. Therefore it might be assumed that ethnic Hawaiians would be likely to vote for Senator Akaka. On August 8 a webpage was created containing a memo accusing Case of being anti-Hawaiian. The memo is notable because it was written by an ethnic Hawaiian attorney who has been President of the Native Hawaiian Bar Association and who represents the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in lawsuits against the State of Hawai'i asserting racial rights to government land. The memo is also notable because it is being circulated by a leader of Kamehameha Schools alumni who is generally recognized as a proxy spokesperson for that institution. Since the ethnic Hawaiian establishment is now attacking Ed Case and is clearly supporting Dan Akaka, there is no reason why Ed Case should continue trying to curry favor with that institutional establishment; thus, Case has an opportunity to step forward and oppose the Akaka bill (which is opposed by about half of all ethnic Hawaiians and 67% of the population as a whole). For analysis, and full text of the memo, see:
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/HawnEstabAttacksEdCase.html

August 25: Letter to editor: "Racial bill's supporters should be voted out"

August 27: Honolulu Advertiser profile of Senator Akaka's background and accomplishments (or lack thereof) includes analysis that he is criticized as being ineffective in obtaining and maintaining support for the Akaka bill.

August 30: Letter to editor by Stephen Aghjayan: "While the Akaka bill failed by four votes this last time around, that procedural cloture vote count does not tell the whole story. A number of Democratic and Republican senators who voted with Akaka on the cloture vote said they would not have voted for the bill's final passage. Included on this list is Sen. Jon Kyl, Sen. John McCain, Sen. Ted Kennedy and undoubtedly many others. They all felt that the bill was unconstitutional. I have to believe that Sen. Dan Akaka and his staff must have known they did not have the votes to move the bill forward. They also must know that they will not have the votes to pass the bill after the election even if the Democrats control the Senate."

August 31: Televised hour-long debate between Senator Akaka and Congressman Case -- portion of debate transcript consisting of one question regarding the Akaka bill, and their answers.

September 11: Candidate profile of Bob Hogue, running in Republican primary for open seat in U.S. House of Representatives. Hogue is the only candidate (among 10 Democrats and 2 Republicans) who favors allowing Hawai'i's people to vote on whether the Akaka bill should pass or be implemented. Former candidate Jerry Coffee, who strongly opposed the Akaka bill, withdrew from the contest after emergency heart surgery.

September 12: Candidate profile of Quentin Kawananakoa, running in Republican primary for open seat in U.S. House of Representatives. Kawananakoa strongly favors the Akaka bill. He has great wealth, and is often called "Prince" because he is a descendant of the heir-apparent to the throne of the Kingdom of Hawai'i.

September 20 and 21: In the Republican primary contest for an open seat in Congress, Quentin Kawananakoa accuses Bob Hogue of aligning himself with conservative Republicans who oppose the Akaka bill. Hogue replies that he favors federal recognition, but that if the proposal is to make fundamental changes in the structure of government in Hawai'i, then all the people of Hawai'i should have the right to vote on it.

September 21: In the Democrat primary contest for U.S. Senate, challenger Ed Case (who is white) says that incumbent Senator Dan Akaka's aggressive courting of ethnic Hawaiian support has become "incredibly polarizing and divisive. ... Should we elect Sen. Akaka to the Senate just because he is native Hawaiian? I don't believe so, any more than I should be elected to the Senate because I am white," Case said.

September 29: Governor Linda Lingle and her Democrat opponent, Randall Iwase, appeared before the 5th annual convention of the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement. Both pledged strong support for the Akaka bill to protect race-based programs against legal attacks. Iwase blamed Lingle for failing to persuade her fellow Republican President Bush to support the Akaka bill or at least to remain neutral. Lingle said OHA knows the bill would never have gotten as far as it did without her active lobbying efforts.

October 6: Letter to editor by Wilbert Wong calls Akaka bill racist and says it would cause great dissention in Hawai'i; run-up to gubernatorial debate describes Lingle as proud of President Bush for proclaiming the Northwest Hawaiian Islands National Monument, but very disappointed in Bush for his last-minute opposition to the Akaka bill.

October 7: Excerpts from news report on the gubernatorial debate between Governor Linda Lingle (R) and challenger Randall Iwase (D). Iwase notes that Lingle claims to be close to President Bush, but Bush torpedoed the Akaka bill and then within a week afterward he proclaimed the Northwest Hawaiian Islands national monument. Iwase speculates that Bush created the monument as a consolation prize, but Lingle says there was no connection.

Sept-Oct 2006 edition of New Zealand Maori-oriented news magazine gives excellent description of Hawaiian independence activist opposition to Akaka bill, giving the activists great credit for blocking the bill; while barely mentioning the strongest opposition, which came from conservative Republican Senators and Hawai'i defenders of unity and equality.

October 13: OHA Administrator Clyde Namu'o responds to October 6 letter from Wilbert Wong which had called the Akaka bill "racist" and said it would cause "great dissention" in Hawai'i.

October 18: Honolulu Advertiser publishes article headed "Federal recognition at forefront for OHA races" saying that the Akaka bill and OHA's proposal for a state-recognized tribal government are the main issues in the election contests for seats on the board of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Advertiser also publishes a related article "What the candidates say about a primary issue facing OHA."

October 29: (1) Martha Ross, Washington D.C. bureau chief for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, publishes lengthy commentary saying "Recognition would bring Hawaiians justice, not special treatment"; (2) Honolulu Star-Bulletin election voter guide special section on OHA, says "Making the push for Hawaiian self-governance to supercede future legal entanglements will be a major mission for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, which has five open spots among its board of trustees ... with 23 candidates overall. ... Chief among the concerns for the new board is the ongoing threat of lawsuits challenging the agency's constitutionality"; (3) Letter to editor asks voters to vote for OHA candidates Bumpy Kanahele and Jackie Burke because they oppose Akaka bill.

October 30: Gallup New Mexico newspaper runs lengthy article based on Arizona Democrat Party webpage about Republican Arizona Senator Jon Kyl's record on Indian issues, saying Kyl's senior policy analyst Joe Matal worked closely with "anti-Indian" organization One Nation United to defeat the Akaka bill.

November 8: Boyd Mossman, who was re-elected as OHA trustee, says his top priority is to pass the Akaka bill; and he is confident newly elected trustee Walter Heen also supports it.

November 10: Both Honolulu daily papers report that Senator Akaka will re-introduce the Akaka bill next year, with the same language as the bill had this year; and he expects the bill to pass easily because the Democrats will control both House and Senate. (But it was unclear whether the bill's language will be the S.147 on which cloture was attempted, or the abortive decoy S.3064 introduced days before the cloture vote as an alleged compromise with the Department of Justice)

November 11: Honolulu Advertiser front page large-type headline for today says: "Renewed hope for Akaka bill" -- despite the fact that a shorter article the previous day had reported similar information, and despite the fact that there is no urgent news event other than the election results from four days previously.

November 14: Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial jumps onto the bandwagon started by the Advertiser -- editorial notes that the Democrat takeover of Congress will make it easier to overcome Republican obstruction of the Akaka bill; editorial gives some faux legal arguments, such as "Although the Akaka Bill is indeed race-based, Congress has broad authority to determine and grant sovereignty to indigenous societies, such as Indian tribes."

November 15: (1) Advertiser columnist commentary says OHA should move forward with Plan B, because there is no guarantee Congress will pass the Akaka bill despite the new Democrat majority; (2) Letter to editor says Akaka bill needs full disclosure to Hawai'i people and should be voted on the ballot; (3) Star-Bulletin editorial cites Census statistics reported yesterday as evidence that ethnic Hawaiians need the Akaka bill to protect race-based government handouts.

November 18: (1) OHA announces Hawaiian nation-building meeting; (2) The Press-Enterprise (Serving inland Southern California) published a news report about an OHA-sponsored conference at University of California Riverside focusing on the Akaka bill, including signup for the racial registry Kau Inoa.

November 19: Two commentaries in Star-Bulletin question the legitimacy and interpretation of ethnic Hawaiian victimhood data recently published. (1) Hamilton McCubbin, former CEO of kamehameha Schools, notes that all ancestries should be honored, and it's demoralizing to portray Hawaiians as helpless victims; (2) John Goemans, attorney who represented Rice in Rice v. Cayetano, notes that 90% of ethnic Hawaiians have less than 50% native blood, and the victimhood statistics seem to indicate that even a small fragment of the Hawaiian gene is enough to make Hawaiians "victims of a cruel fact of biology."

November 20: Honolulu Advertiser business section has interview with Beadie Dawson, owner of multimillion dollar Dawson Group (construction) -- Dawson is a major player in pushing the Akaka bill, and in the past has described herself as suffering on account of being ethnic Hawaiian.

November 25: President Bush had a layover in Honolulu on his way home after a visit to Asia. He met with the troops, and had conversations with Governor Lingle; but she reports there was no discussion of the Akaka bill despite (or because of) the fact that Bush torpedoed the Akaka bill in the Senate in June.

November 27: Honolulu Advertiser investigative reporter says OHA spent millions of dollars lobbying the Akaka bill, and provides spreadsheet for 2003 to 2006 showing that OHA lobbying was more than 4 times as much as any other Hawaii institution. Reply on Dec. 3 by OHA Administrator Clyde Namu'o

November 30: Letter writer asks: Would passage of the Akaka bill pave the way for legalized gambling?

December 3: OHA Administrator Clyde Namu'o published a commentary in response to investigative reporter Jim Dooley's news report of November 27 regarding OHA's massive lobbying expenditures.

December 4: Senior Policy Analyst for Grassroot Institute publishes commentary: "The High Stakes of the Akaka Bill"

December 6: On December 5 the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down an en-banc decision by a panel of 15 judges. By a vote of 8-7 they reversed a previous 2-1 ruling and upheld the racially exclusionary admissions policy of Kamehameha Schools. Some commentators, including Senator Akaka, believe this decision could have implications favorable to Congressional passage of the Akaka bill, because some of the 8 judges in the majority said the category "Native Hawaiian" is not only racial, but also political.

More December 6: A major speech by Haunani Apoliona, Chair of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, included lengthy commentary on OHA's plans for pushing very hard to pass the Akaka bill in 2007; and for enrolling 200,000 ethnic Hawaiians on a racial registry as part of "nation-building"

December 7: A press release strongly opposing both the Kamehameha Schools court decision and the Akaka bill was published by Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization of politically conservative African-Americans.

December 9: Letter to editor says Akaka bill and Kamehameha Schools admissions policy are Hawaiian tribalism. Both of them pit one racial group against others; and both are unconstitutional.

December 9: The 109th Congress adjourned permanently, without passing the Akaka bill. The 110th Congress is scheduled to begin on January 3, 2007; and undoubtedly the Akaka bill war will begin again soon thereafer.

December 12: Letter to editor looks to 110th Congress to pass Akaka bill; says that even though the bill might not be perfect, we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

December 18: Honolulu Advertiser weekly "Hot Seat" one hour live on-line interactive blog features OHA Chair Haunani Apoliona answering questions. Complete transcript is provided. Most questions focused on the Akaka bill, and the racial registry, and what would happen if ...

December 19 and 20: Illinois Senator Barack Obama visits Hawaii for his annual Christmas visit with his family (he grew up in Honolulu, and the media have called him "Hawaii's third Senator.")

===========

DETAILS OF NEWS REPORTS AND COMMENTARY FOR JULY 1, 2006 UNTIL NOW

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

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

Native Hawaiian Businesses Booming -- U.S. Census Bureau report issued June 2006 shows that Native Hawaiians (and other Pacific islanders) are creating new businesses at triple the rate of other ethnic groups (and they are doing so without federal recognition of an Akaka tribe). Webpage provides the Census Bureau press release, several newspaper articles, and a link to the entire 283-page Census report.
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/NatHawBusnBoomCensusJun2006.html

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

** Note from website editor Ken Conklin: The Honolulu Advertiser hired a local firm specializing in public relations and surveys to do a poll about Hawaiian sovereignty. The newspaper describes the timing of the poll this way: "The Advertiser Hawai'i Poll was conducted on June 8 and from June 21-27. Ward Research Inc. of Honolulu surveyed 602 Hawai'i adult residents, interviewing them by telephone." Look at those dates!! June 8 was the second of two consecutive days when the Akaka bill was being debated on the floor of the U.S. Senate. It was the date when the Akaka bill failed to survive a cloture vote. It followed several weeks of a TV, radio, and newspaper advertising blitz by OHA which included an hour-long prime time TV infomercial broadcast twice within a 7-day period before the poll was taken. The timimg of this poll was extroardinarily favorable to the sovereignty supporters. Note also that there was a very strange and unexplained 13 day pause in polling between June 8 and June 21. Only 602 adults were polled. By contrast, a telephone survey conducted a few weeks previously and released on May 23 obtained more than 20,000 responses to the question "Do you support the Akaka bill?" and 67% said NO.

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060704/NEWS01/607040355
Honolulu Advertiser, Tuesday, July 4, 2006

Poll: Sovereignty support eroding

By Gordon Y.K. Pang

Support for an independent Native Hawaiian government may have stalled over the past six years, according to the latest Advertiser Hawai'i Poll.

Results from last month's polling show 63 percent of respondents support a recognized Hawaiian entity � marking a decline from the 73 percent who supported it when virtually the same question was asked in November 2000.

The margin of error for the latest poll was 4 percentage points, while the 2000 poll had a margin of error of 4.9 percentage points.

While a majority of respondents supported the idea of a Hawaiian entity "similar to the special recognition given to American Indian tribes," support falls to less than half when a preface to the question refers to "a sovereign Hawaiian nation."

Regina Tauala, 54, of Halawa, is among those polled who supports a Native Hawaiian government. "We gotta start somewhere, and the only way to be recognized is by the United States so that (the Hawaiians) can form something here and so that they can have some kind of rights ..." said Tauala, who is part-Hawaiian. "I know you cannot change history, but at least they should have something," Tauala said. "Just so that there's some respect and dignity for the Hawaiian people."

Andrea Kolander, 66, of Kane'ohe, was among those who disagree with the notion of a Native Hawaiian government separate from the state. Kolander, who moved to Hawai'i in the 1970s, said she previously lived in Arizona and saw how Native Americans have not fared well with special benefits they receive. "I realize things have been done to ruin the Hawaiian people's lands, some of their beliefs and customs," Kolander said. "How do I put this so that it doesn't sound callous? It's just one of those things in life that I just don't think you can do anything about. I just feel like yes, it's unfair ... I just don't think you can go backward."

WANTS MORE AGREEMENT

Magnolia Soares, 61, of 'Ewa Beach, said she cannot support a Native Hawaiian entity, at least not until there can be more agreement among the indigenous people here. "The Hawaiians, they can't get it together," said Soares, who is also part-Hawaiian. "They're always fighting among themselves. They don't agree, and unless you get the Hawaiians together, it'll never happen." Soares said that, in general, she does not particularly support programs designed to help Hawaiians only. While the monarchy was overthrown, "we still had the opportunity to progress like everyone else," Soares said. "We weren't denied our rights."

Some observers said much of the poll's results arose from the way the questions were asked.

"It's a pretty scary thing for a lot of people, to create a nation within a nation," said Donald Clegg, a longtime Hawai'i pollster. The question referencing a sovereign nation, he said, "appears to give more independence to the Hawaiian people" than the second question, which poses recognizing Hawaiians as a distinct group, similar to what Native Americans now receive.

Clyde Namu'o, administrator for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, also believes the phrasing of the "sovereign Hawaiian nation" question was a key reason the "agree" votes were not higher. "You would need to secede from the union to have a sovereign nation," he said, adding that neither federal nor state law allows that. "Clearly, there's a lot of work still to be done in terms of educating our community about what a Native Hawaiian governing entity would look like and how it would affect everyone's lives."

But Thurston Twigg-Smith, who is affiliated with Aloha For All, a group opposed to special federal recognition for Native Hawaiians, contends that the question, in which 48 percent of respondents supported a sovereign Hawaiian nation, was skewed in favor of those who support the concept. Twigg-Smith, a former publisher of The Advertiser, said the preface to the question should not have referred to sovereignty as a proposed benefit for Native Hawaiians. "That's a really loaded question," he said. "It implies that (the federal recognition bill) is a good bill and that being opposed to it means you're opposed to helping Native Hawaiians." Twigg-Smith said he believes the percentage of respondents supporting sovereignty would be much lower if the description of a Hawaiian government were not part of the question.

On a third question, the poll shows overwhelming support for Kamehameha Schools and its Hawaiians-first admissions policy.

'A LITTLE BIT OF ANXIETY'

Those on various sides of the issue of a Native Hawaiian entity agree that the 10 percent drop in support for a federally recognized Hawaiian entity similar to Native Americans from 2000 to 2006 is not a good sign for those who support the movement.

"I think that people are beginning to understand the problems of the Akaka bill," said Twigg-Smith. When the question was first asked in 2000, he said, not much was known about federal recognition and what it meant. Now, he said, people are more familiar with the pitfalls of the argument for a Native Hawaiian entity "and people are beginning to react to that."

Namu'o, the OHA administrator, acknowledged Twigg-Smith's argument and countered, "With clarity comes a little bit of anxiety" about the powers and authorities such an entity may hold. Supporters need to do a better job of allaying those fears, he said. Despite the apparent decline in support, "60 percent is a respectable number," Namu'o said. "We're very pleased that there are that many people who still support the concept of federal recognition of Native Hawaiians."

Charles Rose, former president of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, attributes the decline to changing demographics. There are many more residents in Hawai'i who were not born here and are more likely to have less empathy for the plight of Native Hawaiians, Rose said. Nonlocals, he said, don't understand that "Hawaiian people need to have their culture preserved and protected." Native Hawaiians, he said, haven't done a good job explaining that.

Longtime Hawaiian activist Kekuni Blaisdell, who rejects the model of a Hawaiian government within the existing U.S. framework, also believes there is less support for it now that the issue has been widely debated. He said people are starting to realize that a federally recognized entity would be no more than a "puppet government." "It's not really Hawaiian at all, it's American."

An effort to force debate on the Akaka bill on the Senate floor failed this year.

Poll respondents, by a more than 4-to-1 margin, favored keeping the existing Kamehameha Schools' Hawaiians-first admissions policy. Ronald Okura, 63, of lower Makiki, said Kamehameha Schools should be left alone. "The princess made it in the will. And what's in there, they shouldn't change it." A challenge to the admissions policy is under way in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

ABOUT THE POLL

The Advertiser Hawai'i Poll was conducted on June 8 and from June 21-27. Ward Research Inc. of Honolulu surveyed 602 Hawai'i adult residents, interviewing them by telephone. Margin of error for the results is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

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

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/the_disconnect_between_hawaii.html
Real Clear Politics, July 04, 2006

The Disconnect Between Hawaii & America

By Peter Brown

Hilo. Hawaii - Americans who visit Hawaii often feel they are in a foreign country, and if those tourists cared about the island's politics that might make them even more likely to wonder if they really are in the United States.

Three recent developments raise the question of whether the people and politicians in the nation's 50th state have much in common with the traditions and Constitution of the nation of which they are part.

-- The state's political establishment is backing a school that wants to continue openly discriminating on the basis of race in its admissions practices.

-- Hawaii's government has, until rebuked by a federal court, banned the hiring of Americans who are not Hawaii residents from state jobs.

-- Because Congress refused efforts to create self-rule for native Hawaiians, there is a growing movement to set up a native Hawaiian government that would seek billions of dollars in state assets.

Hawaii's demographics - more than two-thirds of residents are of Asian descent -- lead to the cultural differences with the mainland. Its physical isolation exacerbates a sense of Hawaii exceptionalism.

This mentality is best exemplified by the manager of one Marriott hotel, who explained the chain's properties on the islands operate under polices that govern its Asian, not U.S., facilities.

Nothing illustrates the island's political mind-set better than a long-running school admissions case that would likely be laughed out of court elsewhere in America. The arguments made for it - and even embraced by the state's first Republican governor in 40 years - sound eerily familiar to those of 1960s southern segregationists.

For 118 years, the Kamehameha Schools have limited enrollment to those with native-Hawaiian blood. Its highly regarded K-12 schools are funded by an almost $7 billion trust left by 19th century Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop.

Supporters claim that because no tax money is involved discrimination is permissible, although federal courts decades long ago dismissed that same argument in Dixie by segregation academies.

Enrollment is offered to all "qualified" native-Hawaiians. If spaces there left over, members of other races may be considered. But only a handful of the 5,400 students on the school's three campuses are not of native Hawaiian descent.

. School officials say a history of unfair treatment of native Hawaiians justifies the policy. The Supreme Court has allowed racial preferences to compensate for past discrimination in limited cases.

A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals last August said the schools' policy does not meet that criterion. The decision triggered a massive protest demonstration by native Hawaiians.

The full 15-judge Ninth Circuit in June heard an appeal. Regardless of the verdict, the case seems destined for the U.S. Supreme Court.

In another legal matter, a U.S. District judge last month threw out a state prohibition on non-Hawaiian residents applying for state jobs. That rule, if approved by the courts, could have reshaped the relationships between states that have existed for more than two centuries.

Nevertheless, Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett will appeal to sustain the law, which was enacted to discourage immigrants, but would seem based on a belief this state is a separate entity, rather than one of 50.

Then there is the drive to create a separate government for the about 20 percent of the state's population who have native-Hawaiian blood. Some believe they deserve special treatment because their monarchy was overthrown more than a century ago in a conspiracy engineered by sugar barons and aided by the U.S. government.

Since Congress refused to give native Hawaiians that status earlier this year, a movement with substantial political clout has surfaced to have a referendum create a separate nation for native Hawaiians.

The goal is an entity that would be unique in the United States to represent native Hawaiians that could negotiate with a friendly state government for billions of dollars in assets.

In this unusual political incubator it can't be dismissed as it would be elsewhere in the USA.

Peter A. Brown is assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. He can be reached at peter.brown@quinnipiac.edu

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060706/NEWS23/607060363/1173/NEWS
Honolulu Advertiser, Thursday, July 6, 2006

Akaka says he still thinks Native Hawaiian measure can pass

By Gordon Y.K. Pang

U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Akaka said he believes chances remain good of passing a bill authorizing a federally recognized Native Hawaiian government entity.

"I think people understand that the Akaka bill is very, very important to the future of, not only of Hawaiians, but the future of all people of Hawai'i, and we need to continue to work on that," said Akaka, who filed his nomination papers seeking re-election at the Leiopapa O Kamehameha State Office Tower yesterday.

Supporters of the bill, named after Akaka because he is its chief sponsor, last month failed to gain the necessary 60 votes on a cloture motion that would have forced a debate on the measure. But Akaka said the cause is not lost.

"It was amazing to know that all of the Democrats voted for it and to know that 13 Republicans voted for it," Akaka said. "As far as I'm concerned, that bill is a bipartisan bill ... and we will continue to work on it for the benefit of the people of Hawai'i."

Last week, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs voted unanimously to proceed with a process of establishing a separate government entity without the endorsement of Washington officials. Akaka said yesterday he does not view that move as a signal by OHA that it lacked confidence that the Akaka bill will pass.

"This tells me that they are very anxious to set up some kind of governance," Akaka said, acknowledging he did not know all the details of the OHA plan. He added that he expects the bill to pass in the next session.

"I believe that we need to continue to educate some of our colleagues and the rest of the country about the Hawaiians as an indigenous people of our country," Akaka said. "Our country takes care of indigenous people, and somehow the Hawaiians are not included in that and this is an attempt to bring recognition to the indigenous people of Hawai'i, the Native Hawaiians."

U.S. Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawai'i, Akaka's chief challenger for his seat, said he will continue his support for the bill if he replaces Akaka, but added that he believes Akaka's analysis of the situation is too simplistic.

"The Akaka bill is a lot more problematic than what the senator indicates," Case said. "The opposition of the administration was pretty direct and unambiguous."

Case said he cannot say that he will do a better job of arguing for the bill than Akaka. "What I do know is that he tried, and that his effort was not successful," he said.

His overall approach as a senator would be different, Case said. "I will simply bring a different style to the Senate. I will bring a different energy level to my work, and I believe I would bring a different, overall direction."

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

** Note from website editor Ken Conklin: The following two articles report that Jerry Coffee has filed to be a Republican candidate for Senate, opposing Senator Akaka. Jerry Coffee is an outspoken opponent of the Akaka bill. He's a Republican in the style of Reagan -- politically conservative, mild-mannered, soft-spoken, self-assured, and inspirational. He's a personal friend of John McCain and, along with McCain, was a prisoner of war in Vietnam for 7 years. Coffee wrote a powerful letter to McCain just before the cloture vote on the Akaka bill (which was June 8) pleading with him to oppose the Akaka bill. Coffee's intensely personal letter was published at:
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?052a37cb-2f94-43a2-8283-91624cd15f7d
McCain's statement in the Congressional Record at the time of the debate on the cloture motion for the Akaka bill (June 7) includes the following passage:
"The sponsors reached an agreement in the 108th Congress that they would be afforded an opportunity to bring the bill to the Senate floor during this Congress. To fulfill that agreement, in my capacity as the chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, I have worked to ensure that the legislation would be reported by the committee. I will also support the motion to proceed to the bill's consideration because of the agreement that was reached in the last Congress. I would like the record to reflect clearly, though, that I am unequivocally opposed to this bill and that I will not support its passage should cloture be invoked."
McCain's complete statement as taken from the Congressional Record can be seen at:
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?75d24e41-590f-4631-b705-0006c5a27acb

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060712/NEWS05/607120345/1009/NEWS
Honolulu Advertiser, Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Vietnam POW Coffee enters U.S. Senate race

By Derrick DePledge
Advertiser Government Writer

JERRY COFFEE (R)
Age: 72
Occupation: U.S. Navy, 1957-85; motivational speaker, 1985-present; MidWeek columnist.
Personal: Born in Modesto, Calif.; commercial art degree from the University of California at Los Angeles; married to Susan Page; lives in Aiea.
Web site: www.captaincoffee.com

Jerry Coffee, a decorated U.S. Navy pilot who spent seven years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, announced yesterday he will run in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate.

Coffee, 72, a motivational speaker and MidWeek columnist who lives in 'Aiea Heights, said his background and his perspective on terrorism and national security would give voters an alternative to the winner of the Democratic primary between U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka and U.S. Rep. Ed Case.

"We face an implacable enemy who is totally dedicated to our death and the annihilation of our country and our way of life and the values of Western civilization as we know them today," Coffee said at a morning news conference at the Korean and Vietnam War Memorials near the state Capitol. "In my mind, too many people just don't get it yet. And the direness of the situation needs to be articulated in ways that people understand the alternatives. "And the fact of the matter is there aren't any alternatives. We must win this war."

Gov. Linda Lingle, Lt. Gov. James "Duke" Aiona and other prominent Republicans appeared at Coffee's announcement, indicating he has the full support of the state GOP. But his late entry into the race and his lack of political experience raise doubts about whether he can compete against Akaka or Case.

Coffee came close to upsetting state Rep. Blake Oshiro, D-33rd (Halawa, 'Aiea, Pearlridge), in a House race in 2004, but has no other campaign experience to prepare him for a statewide race.

But Coffee is a nationally recognized speaker with contacts in the influential veterans' community. He told reporters yesterday that U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a former Vietnam POW, may appear with him in the Islands in August. Coffee said he is scheduled to meet with McCain next week in Washington, D.C., before he leaves with his wife on a monthlong humanitarian trip to Africa.

Neal Milner, a political science professor at the University of Hawai'i-Manoa, said Coffee is not well-known statewide and will have the disadvantage of campaigning in a traditionally Democratic state. "But he's feisty. He'll campaign hard and he'll certainly bring a conservative voice," Milner said.

Case and a spokeswoman for Akaka's campaign recognized Coffee's military service yesterday. Coffee's reconnaissance jet was shot down by enemy fire in North Vietnam in 1966 and he was held and tortured until his release in 1973. He was awarded the Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, two Purple Hearts and other decorations and retired from the Navy as a captain.

"Jerry is an inspiration to many, including me," Case said. "He would be a worthy opponent in the general election."

But Case said he did not believe Coffee would have much influence on independent or Republican voters who may choose to vote in the Democratic primary. "Voters that want change, which is most voters, will have a first bite at the apple in my primary on Sept. 23, and I believe they are going to take that bite," he said.

Elisa Yadao, Akaka's campaign spokeswoman, said, "Captain Coffee has a distinguished record of service to our nation and to our state but the Akaka campaign will reserve any further comment on his candidacy at this time. Our efforts are currently fully focused on the primary election."

Coffee has been critical of a Native Hawaiian federal recognition bill that has been supported by Akaka, Case, Lingle and most of Hawai'i's political establishment. He said yesterday that the bill, which would recognize Hawaiians as indigenous people with the right to form their own government, could lead to the creation of two states within Hawai'i.

Coffee said his campaign also would touch on such issues as preventing crime and drug abuse, improving education and using nuclear power as an energy source.

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

http://starbulletin.com/2006/07/12/news/story09.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, July 12, 2006

Ex-POW enters race for U.S. Senate

By Richard Borreca

Jerry Coffee, retired Navy captain and prisoner of war in North Vietnam, will run for the U.S. Senate as a Republican.

Coffee, who was encouraged to run for the state House in 2004 by Gov. Linda Lingle, was supported during yesterday's announcement by Lingle, Lt. Gov. James "Duke" Aiona and a group of local GOP leaders.

"I am a big supporter of Jerry Coffee. I think he is a terrific candidate and will make it a very exciting race," Lingle said. "It is really in the public's interest to have at least one person in Washington who is from the Republican Party, and we could not have a better candidate than Jerry Coffee," Lingle said to reporters.

Already running for the Senate are incumbent Democrat Sen. Dan Akaka and U.S. Rep. Ed Case.

Coffee, who lost to Rep. Blake Oshiro (D, Aiea-Halawa) by 54 votes in 2004, picked the Vietnam and Korean War memorial on the grounds of the state Capitol as the site of his announcement to highlight both his 28-year career as a naval flight officer and a POW in Hanoi for seven years.

Coffee's former prisonmates include Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Orson Swindle, a Republican candidate for Hawaii's 1st Congressional District seat in 1994 and 1996.

"I have seen the face of our enemy up close and personal and that gives me an edge when we talk about our enemy of the present," Coffee said.

Asked about the war in Iraq, Coffee said he supports President Bush's decision to invade and a continued presence until "the people of Iraq can stand on their own two feet with their own army and their own militia, police force and an operating democracy."

Coffee, who writes a column for MidWeek, said he won't start campaigning until August, when he returns from a mission to Africa, serving with an orphanage coordinated through a faith-based organization, Heart for Africa, a commitment he made before deciding to run for the senate.

Coffee also said he thought the native Hawaiian sovereignty bill championed by Akaka will not likely be brought up in the Senate again.

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

** [Unfortunately, on August 7, while traveling in Texas, Jerry Coffee suffered heart problems requiring emergency bypass surgery. He thereafter suspended his campaign; thus, it appears there will not be any credible candidate opposing Senator Akaka who opposes the Akaka bill.]

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

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/15/whawaii15.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/07/15/ixnews.html
The London Daily Telegraph, July 15, 2006

Defiant Hawaiian unfurls the flag of freedom

By Francis Harris in Hawaii

The Stars and Stripes is nowhere to be seen. Among the neat bungalows beneath the steep green mountains of Ko'olau only the flags of the Hawaiian state are on display. They are all upside down.

"It is the international maritime signal of distress," said Bumpy Kanahele, who has devoted much of his life to a seemingly quixotic quest for independence from the United States. "It's saying, 'We're in trouble.' "

A Royal Navy officer working with the Hawaiian king is said to have come up with the design in 1816, placing the Union flag in a prominent position and arguing that the stripes were an acknowledgment of America's role in the islands.

Mr Kanahele, wearing a T-shirt reading "Hawaiian by birth" on the front and "American by force" on the back, is the inspiration behind the beautifully situated village. Mauka is a patch of 45 acres where Hawaii's original inhabitants hold sway and Washington's writ has little force.

Here, among banana and coconut trees and blood red hibiscus, 100 people live a life in contemptuous rejection of the American dream.

"This is not America," Mr Kanahele said. "That is 3,000 miles away."

He has some grounds for complaint. In 1893, Queen Lydia Liliuokalani was deposed in a coup organised by Stanford Dole, an American pineapple magnate, and supported by US marines. Five years later the islands were annexed.

On the coup's anniversary in 1993, America formally apologised "for the overthrow of the kingdom of Hawaii � and the deprivation of the rights of native Hawaiians to self-determination".

Mr Kanahele said that was an admission that the US was illegally occupying Hawaii.

But nurturing a grievance is one thing; overturning decades of history is another. Asked whether Hawaii really could recover its independence, Mr Kanahele affected a breezy confidence: "Oh yeah," he said. "It is inevitable; it could happen within three to five years." At the moment, it seems a remote dream. America treasures its strategic Pacific island state and the hard-line independence movement probably numbers only a few thousand.

Native Hawaiians, even generously defined, number only 20 per cent of the state's 1.2 million population while, on the beaches of Waikiki, smiling Hawaiian girls are everywhere in the company of white American boys. Mixed marriages are commonplace.

However, there are grounds for hope among those seeking independence or a measure of self-government. Opinion polls show that almost two thirds of residents believe that native Hawaiians should be given special status akin to that offered to America's 500 Indian tribes. Many supported an attempt last month by the Hawaiian senator, Daniel Akaka, to create a new native authority, a government within a government for native issues.

The Bill was blocked by a minority of Republican senators using the filibuster technique, but the idea is proving hard to kill. Mr Akaka and many other senators have promised to try again.

Opponents argue that the Hawaiian sovereignty movement strikes at the heart of American democracy: the idea that everyone is equal before the law. They point out that 93 per cent of Hawaiians voted to become America's 50th state in 1959.

William Burgess, a lawyer who founded the anti-sovereignty movement Aloha for All, said: "Sovereignty means that native Hawaiians would be the supreme, absolute rulers of the islands and everyone else would be subservient to them."

The Wall Street Journal decried the plans as "race-based government" and the Right-wing Heritage Foundation think-tank suggested that native Hawaiians were so blended with American society as to be almost non-existent as a distinct group.

Mr Kanahele rejected the race argument. "We never knew what race was until these guys came," he said.

-------

** Letter to editor sent to the Daily Telegraph by Ken Conklin:

Telegraphing the Wrong Message About Apartheid or Secession in Hawai'i

An article by Francis Harris on July 15 seemed to glorify a movement for secession in Hawai'i led by Bumpy Kanahele. The article also glorified a proposal for Hawaiian apartheid by Senator Dan Akaka which Akaka himself agrees could lead to secession.

Your newspaper certainly may allow Mr. Harris to use it as a megaphone to promote racial separatism or ethnic nationalism. But it's quite disappointing to see you publishing numerous false or misleading statements. Let me correct some of those.

The leader of the revolution that overthrew the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, who then became President of the internationally recognized Republic of Hawaii, was Sanford B. Dole (not Stanford Dole). Even Queen Victoria, a personal friend of ex-queen Lili'uokalani, gave formal diplomatic recognition to President Dole's Republic of Hawai'i. Contrary to Mr. Harris, Dole was not the same man who later established the now-famous pineapple company. There were 162 American sailors who came ashore as peacekeepers to protect American lives and property during the revolution, and to guard against anticipated rioting and arson; but contrary to Mr. Harris, they did not conspire with nor provide support to the revolutionists. See the 808-page report by the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in 1894: http://morganreport.org

Mr. Harris mentions one opinion poll showing "that almost two thirds of residents believe that native Hawaiians should be given special status akin to that offered to America's 500 Indian tribes." He fails to mention that poll contacted only 602 residents and was sponsored by the main lobbyist in favor of the Akaka bill (Office of Hawaiian affairs). Harris never mentions that two opinion polls a year apart, which received over 10,000 responses each, showed that 67% of Hawai'i's people oppose the Akaka bill. He also got wrong the percentage who voted yes for Statehood in the 1959 plebiscite -- it was 94%.

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?548d0729-60e1-4a03-985a-6ccd4601c56c
Hawaii Reporter, July 28, 2006

This Election Season, Why Aren't Politicians Still Promoting the Akaka Bill?

By Garry P. Smith

With all political campaigns now in full swing, I wonder what happened to the nearly unanimous support for the failed Akaka Bill?

There is no mention in any campaign literature being mailed or on radio/tv ads, except for OHA candidates about what our politicians are planning to do once elected/re-elected with respect both to the Akaka Bill and for "plan B" by OHA.

Plan "B" to create a race based sovereign government without the need for the Akaka Bill or even permission from the legislature which is required even to properly cross the street in a crosswalk and would create an entire government unlike any that ever existed before.

What happened to the support of 75 of the 76 legislators, support from 85 percent of the native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians (per an OHA survey) and the Akaka Bill being "the most important piece of federal legislation in Hawaii this year" per our Congressional delegation? Even Senator Akaka, the creator and namesake of the legislation has not mentioned his own bill and what it would do in Hawaii in his political ads.

If creation of a separate government is so locally popular why isn't it the first item our politicians mention in their campaign ads?

Could it be that they know it is unpopular among voters and they were supporting it when they thought they could woo the Hawaiian votes they needed but do not actively support it now that it has been determined to be "racist" by the United States Civil Rights Commission and would be vetoed by President Bush?

There appears to be a belief of safety in numbers when they vote en masse at the legislature to support the bill without constituent input but when it comes down to a personal conviction based on whether or not they are re-elected on the issue they decide maybe to hide, are they shamed? I would like to see our prospective legislators inform their prospective constituents of their support for the creation of a distinct race based government proposed by the Akaka Bill and the new "plan B" created by OHA and what they will do once re-elected.

Since no referendum on the bill or the issue is being allowed, the voters at least should be allowed to know how their politicians stand before they enter the voting booth.

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060731/NEWS01/607310330/1001
Honolulu Advertiser, Monday, July 31, 2006

Congress candidates back Hawaiian entity

By Gordon Y.K. Pang

All of the major candidates vying for the open 2nd Congressional district seat support the move toward federal recognition of a Native Hawaiian government entity but they differ on how it should be addressed.

Most support legislation that would, at least, stave off legal challenges to the millions of government dollars that go to health, education and other assistance programs aimed at Hawaiians.

Some believe it may be time to re-evaluate the long-stalled Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, dubbed the Akaka bill after its chief sponsor, U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, D-Hawai'i. First proposed six years ago, the bill sought eventual Hawaiian federal recognition and self-government rights. Despite the tenacious efforts of many of Hawai'i's political leaders, a bid to bring the bill to the Senate floor for debate was rejected last month. But one candidate maintains that issues such as federal recognition should be addressed by Hawai'i voters in a referendum.

Political observers tracking Native Hawaiian issues are not surprised by the support expressed by the candidates for federal recognition and their defense of Hawaiian programs.

Tom Coffman, historian and author of "Nation Within," a book about the 1893 overthrow of Queen Lili'uokalani and the 1898 annexation into the U.S., said the answers "reflect the momentum for federal recognition that was achieved over the last 15 to 20 years." Coffman contends "there's still a pretty solid majority" in Hawai'i for federal recognition. Such support is also based on "an understanding of history and how the United States routinely deals with indigenous people," he said.

H. William Burgess of the group Aloha For All, which believes any legislation designed to help Hawaiians only is discriminatory, also isn't surprised. "Basically, anybody running for office is reluctant to offend any potential voting bloc," Burgess said. "That's sort of the first rule of politics � you don't offend any vocal group, if you can avoid it."

Ikaika Hussey of the group Hui Pu, which opposes the Akaka bill on the grounds it does not do enough for Hawaiians, said there has been "a general approval for increasing self-determination for Native Hawaiians" built up over the past three decades. Hussey said those in his group, as well as others, assert that candidates should be promising more. "What the survey shows is that they've given the easy answer," he said. "But what we're looking for is real courage from the congressional candidates to talk about real self-determination, real justice for Hawaiians which would not be accomplished through federal recognition."

Former state Rep. Quentin Kawananakoa said the history of Hawai'i shows an obligation is owed to Native Hawaiians. "The United States and the state of Hawai'i need to honor their commitment to the Native Hawaiian people," Kawananakoa said, noting that statistics show the need for health and education programs that help Hawaiians. "Native Hawaiians have the worst social indices of any people here in the state.

Former State Sen. Matt Matsunaga echoed those sentiments. "We definitely have a moral and ethical obligation to preserve and protect the host culture," Matsunaga said. Citing statistics showing Hawaiians ranking high in prison population and poor in health categories, he added, "Native Hawaiians still have a significant way to go before we can bring them up and the Akaka bill certainly would have been a way to fend off the attacks in the courts."

State Rep. Brian Schatz said there are two reasons for federal recognition. "The first is to preserve what it means to be Hawai'i � it has to be recognized by the United States government that there is an aboriginal people of the state of Hawai'i and that there was a nation that preceded" annexation and the move toward Hawai'i's statehood in 1959. The second reason for recognition, he said, is to preserve Hawaiian programs and entitlements. Over the past 26 years, more than $1.2 billion in federal money has been distributed to hundreds of Hawaiian programs, according to the office of U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, D-Hawai'i, who is largely credited with steering the money to the state.

State Sen. Colleen Hanabusa said there is "overwhelming support" among Hawai'i residents for federal recognition. A compelling indicator is the support residents have exhibited for Kamehameha Schools as it defends a Hawaiians-first admissions policy in an ongoing court challenge. "I believe these people also feel (federal) programs for Native Hawaiians should be preserved as well, be they in the form of health-related or educational issues," Hanabusa said.

Honolulu City Councilman Nestor Garcia said he strongly supports the Akaka bill. In addition, Garcia wants to fight for more money for programs aimed at helping Hawaiians, particularly programs geared toward post-high-school education opportunities extended through the Native Hawaiian Education Act.

State Sen. Gary Hooser said federal recognition is "a good first step in the right direction and is key to bringing the proper focus to moving the Hawaiian community forward." He also wants to see various health and educational programs maintained and expanded, and would seek guidance from leaders in the Hawaiian community on what is best for Hawaiians.

State Sen. Ron Menor said he supports the Akaka bill "or similar legislation that might be introduced in Congress in the future" that supports Hawaiian programs. He also supports efforts by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to establish a separate government entity without the support of Congress.

Former Lt. Gov. Mazie Hirono said she supports the Akaka bill, but believes an alternative plan suggested by Inouye should perhaps take priority now. Following last month's procedural vote that ensured the Akaka bill would not be voted on this year, Inouye pledged to introduce alternative legislation that would protect Hawaiian program funding without addressing the issue of federal recognition. "First things first, we need to ensure that resources for Native Hawaiian programs are not spent fighting lawsuits against these programs," Hirono said. "So I support Senator Inouye's efforts to draft legislation that would protect these programs from legal attacks."

State Sen. Clayton Hee, a former OHA trustee, said the Akaka bill as presented, tried to do too much. "The Akaka bill was not possible because it was overly broad because it included issues such as sovereignty and land claims," Hee said. "I would suggest that the bill needs to be redrafted and more narrowly focused."

State Sen. Bob Hogue was the lone candidate interviewed who favored a slower approach involving a referendum of all Hawai'i residents, Hawaiian or not.

"Bring the debate back here and talk about all of these concerns that have been brought up and ultimately put it on the ballot and let everybody vote on it," Hogue said.

"There should be some sort of federal recognition," he said, but added that concerns regarding a new government entity's authority need to be thoroughly addressed.

** Chart showing photos of each candidate plus short quote about Akaka bill
http://honoluluadvertiser.com/assets/gif/M136058731.GIF

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

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?91f5287c-5eb0-41fb-91ad-3759dc5021b4
Hawaii Reporter, August 2, 2006

Libertarians and Hawaiians

By Rockne H. Johnson

Author's note: This article was published in 1980 in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin in response to a group called the Aboriginal Lands of Hawaiian Ancestry Association (ALOHA) which demanded reparations to native Hawaiians. It is reprinted here with permission.

** Ken Conklin's note: This article was originally published in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin of October 8, 1980 on page A-16. It was published uner the title "Libertarians and Hawaiians." The author Rockne H. Johnson was the candidate of the Libertarian Party of Hawai'i, running for Congress. Mr. Johnson was at that time the husband of Rubellite Kawena Johnson, University of Hawai'i Professor of Hawaiian Language and Literature, who was co-founder of the UH Center for Hawaiian Studies. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs had just been created by the Constitutional Convention of 1978, and the state Legislature had only recently been passing legislation to provide funding for OHA equal to 20% of revenues from the ceded lands. **

REPARATIONS MEANS payment by a defeated nation to a victor as compensation for damage during a war. The word that properly applies to compensating a victim is restitution. The Libertarian Party platform has this to say about restitution: "We support restitution for the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or wrongdoer."

How does this principle of justice apply to the Hawaiian experience? Have the Hawaiian people suffered injury or loss at the hands of the U.S. government? I answer, "Yes."

But governments have always conducted various forms of war against the populace within their domains. The present government divests us of our property through taxation and inflation, tyrannizes us with myriad regulations, penalizes us by declaring crimes where there are no victims, and even claims a right to the lives of young men by a military draft. Our injuries are truly great and our just claims incalculable.

IN WHAT WAY is the case of the Hawaiian people unique? Simply this: in 1893 and again in 1898, their ancestors exchanged the tyranny of one government for the tyranny of another.

Let us not fool ourselves that the Hawaiian people, maka'ainana and kauwa, were any less victimized by the ali'i than they are by the American government of today. Under the kapu system all crimes were crimes without victims and all punishment was death.

The kapu system was overthrown in the Hawaiian libertarian revolution of 1819, but the domination of the commoners by the chiefs continued. All land was claimed by the king, and the labor of the commoners was claimed by the chiefs. While their gardens lay neglected, the people slaved in sandalwood forests to provide modern comforts to the chiefs. And then whatever they did succeed in producing was taxed at all levels of the chiefly hierarchy.

A general social enlightenment gradually improved the lot of the people, but the ali'i never relinquished their stranglehold on the land. This concentration of land in the hands of the king enabled the present government to continue that stranglehold.

Who lost out in 1893 and 1898? Certainly it was the ali'i who lost the land and power which they had usurped or inherited from earlier usurpers. For the common people the change was a mixed blessing. Who can say whether American or Hawaiian citizenship conferred the lesser disadvantage?

But there is one respect in which ethnic Hawaiians have certainly lost out, and that is through enactment of racially discriminatory legislation.

UNDER THE OLD REGIME, the chiefs owned all the land and allowed the people their kuleanas. But anyone could be thrown out at any time if the chief took a dislike to him or if he wasn't producing enough tax.

Under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, the government still owns the land, the people still pay the tax, and the children are thrown off the land if they don't have enough Hawaiian blood.

Now, it is bad enough that Hawaiian homesteaders are denied true ownership of their land. What is worse is the psychological effect of telling a race of people that they are not competent to own land, that they cannot be trusted to value it properly, and that they must be taken care of by the government.

This is called a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you treat people as inferior, then you will succeed in convincing them that they are inferior.

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs is another piece of racially discriminatory legislation which will have the effect of reinstating an ali'i class who will supposedly help the government to take care of the Hawaiian people. I maintain that you cannot help people by urging them to seek substitutes for developing their own potential as productive individuals.

LET ME RETURN to the Libertarian position on restitution. "We support restitution to the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or wrongdoer."

We are all the victims of government oppression, but by which criminal or wrongdoer will we be repaid?

Not by our members of Congress who presume to govern us. If you demand money from these gentlemen they will not reach for their wallets. Instead they will reach for their guns, otherwise known as the IRS, and proceed to rob all the people in order to make the demanded payment. The government has no money that it does not take, under threat of violence, from someone else.

In fact the government spends money faster than it steals it. But the one thing that the government has not spent faster than it has stolen it is land.

Federal and state governments claim 48 percent of the land in these Islands. We should demand that this land not simply be transferred from one level of government to another but that it be released for settlement and full ownership by people of all races. Homesteading would be one way to do this. We should demand this, not just of government land, but of all lands claimed by ali'i estates solely through right of conquest.

"Ua mau ke ea o ka 'aina I ka pono" was the motto of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Today most politicians would have us believe that the life of the people is preserved in government handouts.

Let me propose another motto, as true today as it would have been 2,000 years ago: Seek ye first a society of free men and its economic opportunity and all things shall be added unto you.

Rockne H. Johnson, whose Ph. D. in geophysics is from the University of Hawaii, was a Libertarian Party candidate for US Senate in 1976 and for US House of Representatives in 1980, 1982, and 1992. He is currently living with his wife Glennis in Sedona, Arizona.

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

Senator Dan Akaka, an ethnic Hawaiian, has a primary election opponent, Congressman Ed Case, who has no Hawaiian native ancestry. Therefore it might be assumed that ethnic Hawaiians would be likely to vote for Senator Akaka. On August 8 a webpage was created containing a memo accusing Case of being anti-Hawaiian. The memo is notable because it was written by an ethnic Hawaiian attorney who has been President of the Native Hawaiian Bar Association and who represents the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in lawsuits against the State of Hawai'i asserting racial rights to government land. The memo is also notable because it is being circulated by a leader of Kamehameha Schools alumni who is generally recognized as a proxy spokesperson for that institution. Since the ethnic Hawaiian establishment is now attacking Ed Case and is clearly supporting Dan Akaka, there is no reason why Ed Case should continue trying to curry favor with that institutional establishment; thus, Case has an opportunity to step forward and oppose the Akaka bill (which is opposed by about half of all ethnic Hawaiians and 67% of the population as a whole). For analysis, and full text of the memo, see:
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/HawnEstabAttacksEdCase.html

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

http://starbulletin.com/2006/08/25/editorial/letters.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, August 25, 2006, Letter to editor

Racial bill's supporters should be voted out

Voting is a right and an obligation so as to keep our nation great or it will cease to exist as a great nation.

Locally, there are some divisive issues, and politicians who support these issues, which need attention and must be decided by independent-thinking voters before it's too late.

Perhaps one issue would be the Akaka Bill, which is designed to create a fourth form of government in addition to our federal, state and county governments. I feel the Akaka Bill is a racist bill that will benefit only those who have a least 1 percent of Hawaiian blood, and will cause racial discord within our social system. We should vote against all politicians who have endorsed and worked to pass this bill and have stated that they will continue to work toward its passage.

In the Hawaiian kingdom, people of other ethnicities were citizens and members of the Hawaiian government. So if you believe the Akaka Bill conflicts with the actions of the former kingdom, vote to get all the supporters of the racial Akaka Bill out of office.

Wilbert W. Wong
Kaneohe

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060827/NEWS05/608270339/1001
Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday, August 27, 2006

AKAKA VS. CASE

Senator's accomplishments aren't as clear as his friendliness

By Derrick DePledge

** Excerpts related to the Akaka bill, taken from a very lengthy article describing Senator Akaka's overall background and candidacy for re-election to the Senate. [An equally lengthy article about his challenger, Congressman Ed Case, says nothing about the Akaka bill.]

Akaka's kindness and humility have made him among the most likable Democrats in the U.S. Senate but left him in an odd position for someone who has been in politics for three decades. Facing what could be his most difficult campaign, a primary against U.S. Rep. Ed Case, he has learned that many voters have little idea what he has accomplished.

At 81, a time when he could be discussing his legacy, Akaka has instead had to explain why he deserves another six-year term.

His campaign has downplayed the frustrating struggle over his Native Hawaiian federal recognition bill � which was stopped by a procedural vote in June � but he has been subtly using it as a motivator, telling friendly audiences the bill would pass easily if Democrats take control of Congress after the November elections.

U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye and the party's establishment in the Islands and Washington are helping Akaka with money and strategy, while labor unions are complementing the senator's field operation with organizing that could rival any recent campaign.

His most recognizable achievement is a 1993 resolution signed by President Clinton formally apologizing for the U.S. role in the overthrow of the kingdom of Hawai'i. The resolution came on the 100th anniversary of the 1893 overthrow, and has given Akaka the framework to advance federal recognition and a form of self-government for Hawaiians.

Akaka considers himself a loyal Democrat. One of the few times he has differed with the party on an important national issue is his support for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which has disappointed environmentalists. Hawai'i and Alaska lawmakers have had an alliance over the years in Congress, but Akaka has said he based his decision on a promise he made to the Inupiat who live on the refuge and see drilling as an indigenous right.

Akaka has tried to persuade the Senate for the past six years to approve legislation � known as the Akaka bill � that would recognize Hawaiians as an indigenous people similar to Alaska Natives and American Indians. The bill would give Hawaiians the right to form their own government that could negotiate with the United States and the state of Hawai'i over land use and cultural preservation.

Akaka and Inouye believed in June that they finally had the 60 votes necessary to overcome procedural roadblocks from conservative Republicans who think the bill is race-based and unconstitutional. But they fell four votes short. Akaka has blamed the defeat on a last-minute letter from the U.S. Department of Justice opposing the bill.

"I thought we had the votes," Akaka said, "so I wanted to take it."

DID HE DO ENOUGH?

But several people who were involved, including some who do not want to criticize Akaka publicly because of the primary, wonder whether Akaka properly locked down the votes or used his full power as a senator as leverage against Republicans. Some also thought Akaka's performance on the Senate floor during the debate was not persuasive.

Akaka has promised to bring the bill back at the first opportunity and predicts it will pass if Democrats pick up seats or retake the Senate after the November elections. But his work on the bill � the issue he is probably known for most among voters � has not been a significant theme in his campaign.

Several people have told The Advertiser that Akaka's allies have discouraged Hawaiians from talking about sovereignty until after the primary because it may hurt the senator among Japanese-American voters who fear the bill might influence private property rights. The Akaka campaign acknowledged this concern in May, after both Inouye and Ariyoshi publicly sought to assure Japanese-Americans that the bill would not take away private property.

Many Hawaiians who have differences with Akaka on federal recognition � including some who oppose it as too weak � remain faithful to the senator as a person and leader.

"How can I explain it? It's like when you have a favorite uncle or favorite grandfather, when you have someone who listens to you," said Jalna Keala, a former government affairs officer for the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs. "Even those people who disagree with the bill, it doesn't mean they don't love him."

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060830/OPINION02/608300317/1108/LETTERS
Honolulu Advertiser, Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Letters to the Editor

AKAKA BILL MISGUIDED, FAILS TO SERVE RESIDENTS

I read with interest the comments in Sunday's paper (Akaka vs. Case) stating that "Akaka has promised to bring the (Akaka) bill back at the first opportunity and predicts it will pass." He says this based upon the prediction that the Senate may go Democratic in the upcoming elections. This would surely be a waste of time and effort.

While the Akaka bill failed by four votes this last time around, that procedural cloture vote count does not tell the whole story. A number of Democratic and Republican senators who voted with Akaka on the cloture vote said they would not have voted for the bill's final passage. Included on this list is Sen. Jon Kyl, Sen. John McCain, Sen. Ted Kennedy and undoubtedly many others. They all felt that the bill was unconstitutional.

I have to believe that Sen. Dan Akaka and his staff must have known they did not have the votes to move the bill forward. They also must know that they will not have the votes to pass the bill after the election even if the Democrats control the Senate.

The whole idea behind the Akaka bill is misguided. Federal Indian policy on the Mainland is in shambles. The last thing most senators want to do is create another constitutionally questionable, race-based, quasi-governmental entity to be managed by the Department of Interior.

Sen. Akaka's position regarding Native Hawaiians is wrong-minded and does not serve the interests of the majority of the residents of Hawai'i or the interests of the country as a whole. The majority of the U.S. Senate understood this and hopefully always will. Maybe it is time for a change.

Stephen Aghjayan
Waikiki

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

http://www.hawaiinews.com/archives/politics/000414.shtml

Akaka, Case debate transcript [** Excerpted by Ken Conklin to contain the entire portion of the transcript for the single question dealing with the Akaka bill **]

Posted by Ryan Kawailani Ozawa at 7:26 PM on Aug 31, 2006

The first � and probably only � live, televised debate between Rep. Ed Case and Sen. Daniel Akaka took place tonight. Organized by AARP Hawaii, moderated by UH communications chair Gerald Kato, and broadcast on PBS Hawaii, it was not available online nor via other networks. It will nevertheless be closely watched and heavily reported, as this primary race is remarkable on both the local and national level. HawaiiNews.com has transcribed the debate to benefit those who were unable to watch it live.

MODERATOR: Sen. Akaka, you have the next question. Both you and your opponent supported the Native Hawaiian Government Recognition Act, which stalled last June. What steps would you now take to achieve this federal recognition?

AKAKA: As is history now, my bill went to the floor under a procedural vote on cloture to proceed to the floor. And we're shy four votes out of 60. I feel that we made tremendous gains in the six years to educate the American public and to educate our colleagues as well. And to make it a bipartisan bill that �s supported by the Governor of this state, the Legislature, most of the Hawaiian organizations, and most of the Hawaiians in Hawaii, and the population of Hawaii as well. This bill really brings parity to an indigenous group of Hawaii, the state of Hawaii, which are the Native Hawaiians. The American Indians have that recognition. The Alaska natives have that recognition, and the Hawaiians should have that recognition also. I will continue to strive to move it forward. Talking to the Majority leader at this point. It seems as though we're not going to be able to bring it up to the floor this year, but possible changes in the election in November, we will be able to bring it up to the floor. If not in the remainder of this session, it will be the next session. This bill is very very important to the people of Hawaii and to the Native Hawaii, and it is something that this nation owes them.

MODERATOR: Congressman Case, your response?

CASE: I continue to believe in the establishment of a relationship between our federal government and the indigenous peoples of Hawaii, the Native Hawaiians, which is similar to the relationship that has existed between our federal government and other indigenous peoples of the Mainland and in Alaska for over 150 years. I believe this is not only fair and just for Native Hawaiians, but also good for our Hawaii, because I don't want to live in a Hawaii that does not have a core of the Native Hawaiian peoples and cultures. What and how that relationship would evolve is up for debate and discussion as we go forward. I by the way don't believe that it should end up with any form of independence as Sen. Akaka speculated publicly some months ago. But I do believe in some form of autonomy for Native Hawaiians within Hawaii, similar to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. For now, I believe this issue is best left in the Native Hawaiian community, so that they can deal with the failure of the Akaka bill in the U.S. Senate and decide the way forward.

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060911/NEWS05/609110337/1009/NEWS
Honolulu Advertiser, Monday, September 11, 2006

** Candidate profile of Bob Hogue, a state government senator running in the Republican primary election for the U.S. House of Representatives seat being vacated by Ed Case. EXCERPTS FOCUSING ON THE AKAKA BILL **

Hogue playing up the positive

By Johnny Brannon

BOB HOGUE
Age: 53
Occupation: State senator since 2000
Experience: Television sportscaster, certified public accountant, basketball coach, sports columnist, Pohai Nani Retirement Center Advisory Council member, volunteer with American Heart Association.

He enjoys high name recognition with Hawai'i voters, partly from the many years he worked here as a television sportscaster before entering politics. He's also a certified public accountant. On the Senate floor, Hogue could be outspoken and adamant without being shrill. Behind the scenes, he could be a peacemaker among fractious colleagues. He's vowed to run a positive campaign and said he strongly believes politics needs to include more positive attitudes and messages. After serving two terms, he now hopes to become the first Republican to represent Hawai'i's 2nd Congressional District, which includes Central, Leeward, Windward and North Shore O'ahu and the Neighbor Islands. Hogue's opponent in the Sept. 23 Republican primary election is former state Rep. Quentin Kawananakoa. Ten Democrats are also competing against one another for that party's nomination. Hogue's campaign had raised about $30,000 by July, according to the Federal Election Commission. That's not much for a congressional race, but Hogue said he's making the most of it and running an aggressive grassroots campaign.

Among the 10 Democrats and two Republicans running for the 2nd Congressional District, Hogue has most sharply questioned Sen. Daniel Akaka's proposal to grant federal recognition to Native Hawaiians.

Hogue said he supports the concept of recognition but believes the Akaka bill is too broad, and that all Hawai'i's residents should have a say in the matter.

"The Akaka bill, as it was written, is very vague in its wording as to the governance issue," he said. "As I went out and talked to a lot of people, people were saying, 'How does this work with property rights, with jurisdiction?' There was a great deal of concern about it."

The Akaka bill would establish a process for federal recognition of a Native Hawaiian governing entity, which could then negotiate with the state and federal governments for rights to property and revenue, and responsibilities. The bill does not immediately grant recognition or specific rights or jurisdictions.

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060912/NEWS05/609120386/1009/NEWS
Honolulu Advertiser, Tuesday, September 12, 2006

** Candidate profile of Quentin Kawananakoa, running in the Republican primary election for the U.S. House of Representatives seat being vacated by Ed Case. EXCERPTS FOCUSING ON THE AKAKA BILL **

Kawananakoa eager for comeback

By Johnny Brannon

QUENTIN KAWANANAKOA
Age: 44.
Occupation: Attorney.
Experience: State House representative and minority floor leader. Department of Hawaiian Home Lands commissioner. State Supreme Court law clerk.

Quentin Kawananakoa has had his ups and downs in politics, but the lawyer, former state representative and heir to the Campbell Estate fortune said his desire to serve Hawai'i has never waned. Kawananakoa was a rising Republican star when he won election to the state House in 1994, representing the 26th District (Punchbowl-Pauoa). He was a hard-charging opponent of tax increases and won re-election in 1996 by a landslide of 77 percent, then launched a campaign for Congress in 1998 to represent urban O'ahu. He was favored to win the Republican nomination for Congress but abandoned the race less than one month before the primary election, citing hypertension and other health problems. Nowadays, Kawananakoa is highly polished and radiates confidence, and said he's in excellent health. Kawananakoa's opponent in the Sept. 23 Republican primary election is state Sen. Bob Hogue. Ten Democrats also are competing for their party's nomination. Winners from each party will face off in the Nov. 7 general election.

Kawananakoa said he strongly favors federal recognition of Native Hawaiians but does not believe the recognition bill authored by Democratic U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka will ever be passed. Recognition would stand a better chance if Hawai'i's congressional delegation included a Republican, he said.

Kawananakoa was born in Honolulu and is a descendant of Hawaiian royalty. His great-grandfather was Prince David Kawananakoa � who was a cousin of King David Kalakaua � and his great-grandfather's brother was Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalaniana'ole.

Some Hawaiians also consider Quentin Kawananakoa a prince and heir to the Hawaiian monarchy, but he said he neither claims nor rejects the title and it has never been formally bestowed on him. Such a title would be honorific, rather than a source of actual political power, except in the sense that it emphasizes heritage and Island roots, he said.

"I don't allude to myself in that fashion, but I certainly am proud of my forefathers who in fact were of the royal family," he said. "But today what we have is perhaps a remembrance of our culture, and in that respect, I think many Hawaiians do recognize that we do come from our prior ali'i family lines."

Kawananakoa stands to gain an estimated $25 million when the Estate of James Campbell is transformed next year from a $2.3 billion trust to a new entity that's expected to be one of Hawai'i's largest privately held companies. He said he will be a shareholder, but he does not expect to work directly for the firm regardless of whether he's elected to Congress.

He's collected sizable campaign contributions from estate trustees and beneficiaries, and said he expects to spend up to $1 million on the race, including personal loans. He had loaned his campaign a total of $349,000 by last week, and had raised $185,000 more from donors, according to a report filed yesterday with the Federal Election Commission. Hogue, by contrast, had raised slightly more than $70,000 in donations.

Kawananakoa's views, background, good looks and resources have caught the attention of some Washington, D.C., Republicans. "Quentin Kawananakoa is someone who we believe is flying below the radar right now but has a chance to really make a big push for this seat," said National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Alex Burgos.

The group works across the nation on behalf of Republicans running for Congress but does not typically endorse candidates in primary races. It's clear that the committee favors Kawananakoa in this race, however. "To begin with, it's the resources he brings to this race," Burgos said of Kawananakoa's appeal. "He's a former elected official, and it's certainly an interesting personal tale, the fact that he is (an) heir to the Hawai'i throne as well."

Kawananakoa also has a past that's been used against him.

He was arrested for cocaine possession outside a Waikiki nightclub in 1988, when he was a student at the University of Hawai'i, and he later pleaded guilty to a single felony count. He was granted a deferred acceptance of his plea � a form of probation common for first offenders facing similar charges � and stayed out of trouble after that. The case was dismissed after less than three years, leaving his record free of convictions.

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

http://www.khnl.com/Global/story.asp?S=5437806
KHNL TV News, Hawai'i, September 20, 2006

Republican Candidates Face Off For Second Congressional District

By: Darren Pai

(KHNL) - State Senator Bob Hogue accused his opponent in Saturday's primary election of negative campaigning.

Hogue says Quentin Kawananakoa is trying to mislead voters about his position on Native Hawaiian issues.

Kawananakoa says he's simply stating the facts. A mailer distributed by republican Quentin Kawananakoa says his opponent Bob Hogue is close to activists known to oppose federal recognition of Native Hawaiians.

"My opponent, Mr. Hogue, my colleague, voted yes on the Akaka Bill on the floor of the legislature on the resolution. And now he's surrounded by some very conservative people," said Kawanakoa defending his mailer.

Kawanakoa said he wants to inform voters about Hogue's record on Native Hawaiian issues.

Protecting Native Hawaiian institutions, Hogue says, has always been one of his priorities.

He says he supported the Akaka Bill for that reason, "I have supported that and that has been my position all the way through. So it's unfortunate that there are these distorted mailers that have gone out that has distorted my position."

"If federal recognition results in a change in governance for Hawaiians," Hogue says, "the people of Hawaii should have a say in what happens. We should have a plebiscite, that is everyone should have an opportunity to vote on it because governance is so very important to all of us."

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

http://starbulletin.com/2006/09/21/news/story10.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, September 21, 2006

GOP House rivals clash in debate
Hogue takes issue with Kawananakoa's portrayal of his record

By B.J. Reyes

Two Republicans running to represent rural Oahu and the neighbor islands in the U.S. House tried to separate themselves on various issues, but also traded barbs over negative campaigning.

State Sen. Bob Hogue accused his opponent, former House Minority Leader Quentin Kawananakoa, of "distorting" his record of support for native Hawaiians in a flyer recently mailed to voters in the 2nd Congressional District.

"I just think it's unfortunate when anything like that happens," said Hogue, who has touted himself as an average person running a "positive" campaign. "I think that the electorate is tired of that. They don't appreciate it."

Kawananakoa said he saw nothing wrong or dirty about pointing out an incumbent's voting record. "Sharing someone's legislative record and how they might act in the future -- that's what we're supposed to talk about," he said. "Those are the issues that we want to hear about. "The idea that you can't say anything about someone's legislative history is silly. It's public document."

Hogue and Kawananakoa debated yesterday at the monthly general membership meeting of the Kailua Chamber of Commerce.

Their stance on native Hawaiian sovereignty came in response to a question from the audience on how they would address the issue, with the Akaka Bill now off the table.

"I can tell you that I do support native Hawaiian programs ... we need to protect that with federal recognition," Hogue said. "I've said all along, if there's a change in government, like the vague way that the Akaka Bill was written, that we should have an entire plebiscite (vote) and have everyone get an opportunity to vote on it."

Kawananakoa, in the campaign mailer and at the forum, criticized Hogue for "waffling," adding that he believes the senator has been influenced by "very conservative" groups that oppose Hawaiian sovereignty.

Regarding a resolution in the state Legislature voicing support for the Akaka Bill, Kawananakoa noted that Hogue had voted in support. "Now he's changed his story," Kawananakoa said. "He wants the same story that they (Akaka Bill opponents) believe -- that we have a plebiscite of the whole entire state. "I'm concerned with someone who has flip-flopped for support."

The two GOP candidates have clashed before. Last month, Kawananakoa urged Hogue to voluntarily suspend his weekly newspaper column, on the grounds that it gave him an unfair public forum for campaigning. Hogue refused, noting that the column contributes a substantial part of his income and is devoted to sports and recreation, not politics. The GOP winner will face one of 10 Democrats seeking their party's vote in Saturday's primary. Democrats in the race are: Hanalei Aipoalani, Nestor Garcia, Colleen Hanabusa, Clayton Hee, Mazie Hirono, Gary Hooser, Matt Matsunaga, Ron Menor, Brian Schatz and Joe Zuiker.

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

http://starbulletin.com/2006/09/21/news/story02.html Honolulu Star-Bulletin, September 21, 2006

Case blasts Akaka's pitches to [ethnic] Hawaiians
The challenger says ethnicity does not guarantee effectiveness

By Richard Borreca

Sen. Dan Akaka's appeals to native Hawaiian voters have become "incredibly polarizing and divisive," Democratic challenger Ed Case said.

Akaka yesterday had a news conference with organizations including the Native Hawaiian Bar Association and the Native Hawaiian Chamber of Commerce.

Former Gov. John Waihee also praised Akaka. As the first and only native Hawaiian in the Senate, Akaka is an important symbol, said Waihee, the nation's first native Hawaiian governor.

"Someday we may get past all of this, and there may be many more Hawaiian senators, but for right now it is a very important constituency, and Hawaii's should be within his constituency," Waihee said.

Case was not pleased with Akaka's appeal to native Hawaiians.

"Should we elect Sen. Akaka to the Senate just because he is native Hawaiian? I don't believe so, any more than I should be elected to the Senate because I am white," Case said.

"It doesn't take a native Hawaiian in elective office to do a good job for native Hawaiians. I do not believe Sen. Akaka has been an effective advocate for native Hawaiian issues in the U.S. Senate," Case said.

For instance, he said, Akaka was unable to get the native Hawaiian federal recognition bill, dubbed the Akaka Bill, passed this year. "Federal recognition failed because Sen. Akaka didn't leverage his position. And the statements that Sen. Akaka delivered federal money to native Hawaiians is virtually 100 percent because of Senator (Dan) Inouye, not Akaka," Case said. Akaka has insisted that the Akaka Bill was stopped at the last minute by opposition from the White House, and he was unable to move it.

Case says he's concerned that the Akaka campaign is relying on pitches -- like the argument made by fellow Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie, who called Akaka "the Hawaiian heart" of the state delegation. Akaka himself tells voters: "You need someone with heart, and someone who cares about the people of Hawaii and reflects the people of Hawaii in Washington."

Asked if he was calling Case someone who couldn't represent Hawaii, Akaka said no. "He was born and raised here, so there is no question he knows Hawaii, but there is so much more to know. I have lived here all these years, and I am still learning about Hawaii.

"I feel strongly that whoever represents us should be reflecting Hawaii, and not themselves," Akaka said. But Case said one does not have to be Hawaiian "to deliver Hawaiian values to Washington."

"We all believe in Hawaii, whether we are native Hawaiian, whether we are like me, who have four generations in the ground here, or whether we arrived yesterday.

"It is not something that only a native Hawaiian can do. I disagree with the underlying premise," Case said.

Akaka's news conference yesterday was not aimed at attacking Case so much as attempting to drum up support among native Hawaiian voters. The Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement notes that only about 16 percent of more than 153,000 potential native Hawaiian voters cast ballots in the 2004 election. "Hawaiians should be leading the charge in turning around voter apathy," said Robin Danner, council president.

Waihee said the Hawaiian vote could be key. In his first election as governor, he said, his ability to carry historically native Hawaiian areas was instrumental to his victory in the Democratic primary. "If there is nothing that excites them, then just like any other voting block, they don't come out," Waihee said. "If I were running the campaign, I would be worried about getting out my vote -- and the one constituency that should be about Dan Akaka is the native Hawaiian vote," Waihee said.

Akaka said the campaign has been working to get native Hawaiian voters to support him. "I just hope we can get the Hawaiian vote, because we have been working on it. We have been talking to them, we have been visiting homesteads and we have been canvassing and talking to as many Hawaiians as we can," Akaka said.

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060929/NEWS05/609290362/1001
Honolulu Advertiser, Friday, September 29, 2006

Lingle, Iwase address [Ethnic] Hawaiian issues

By Derrick DePledge

Gov. Linda Lingle said yesterday it is still important for the federal government to recognize Hawaiians as an indigenous people because it is the right thing to do and because it could protect [ethnic] Hawaiian programs that receive federal money from court challenges.

The Republican governor and her Democratic opponent, former Mililani state Sen. Randall Iwase, spoke at a luncheon sponsored by the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement at the Hawai'i Convention Center.

The appearances might be among the few times Lingle and Iwase are in front of the same audience before the November election, though the governor yesterday also agreed to a televised debate.

Lingle said if she is re-elected, she wants to be more involved in the strategy behind moving the federal recognition bill if the Hawai'i congressional delegation proposes it again next year.

"I am concerned about these legal challenges," Lingle said of claims that Hawaiian programs are based on race and are unconstitutional. "We do need to continue to fight for federal recognition."

Iwase told Hawaiians that the bill would advance if Democrats controlled Congress. He said Lingle failed to keep the Bush administration neutral and blamed a U.S. Department of Justice letter describing the bill as unconstitutional for a procedural defeat in the U.S. Senate in June.

"I'm going to know, if the president of the United States, if I call him my friend, and if I campaign for him, I'm going to know if he's going to submarine me, so that we can take action before that happens," Iwase said, referring to Lingle's ties to President Bush. "That did not happen here. That's what killed this bill."

Lingle and Iwase spoke separately at the luncheon, which was part of the council's annual convention, and answered questions on Hawaiian issues. The questions were provided to the candidates a day in advance, so each had time to prepare.

Lingle agreed yesterday to appear in a one-hour debate with Iwase next Friday that will be shown on the four commercial television networks. The governor also said she would do a joint appearance with Iwase at a Big Island forum with the Kona-Kohala Chamber of Commerce, the League of Women Voters and the Kona Outdoor Circle.

Iwase has called for debates in all four counties, which is unlikely to happen.

Both Lingle and Iwase told Hawaiians yesterday that they strongly support the federal recognition bill, which would recognize Hawaiians as an indigenous people like American Indians or Alaska Natives. The bill would create a process for Hawaiians to form their own government that could negotiate with the state and federal government on land use and cultural issues.

Conservative Republicans in the Senate have blocked the bill since 2000, arguing it is unconstitutional because membership in the new government could be based on race. But U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawai'i, and other supporters of the bill say the relationship would be political, not racial.

Some Republicans in Hawai'i have said there should be a popular vote in the Islands on the bill.

Lingle had been working to keep the Bush administration at least neutral on the legislation and had been in discussions with Senate and House Republicans to reduce opposition. The state Office of Hawaiian Affairs also hired a Washington, D.C., lobbying firm to help.

Lingle said it was the congressional delegation that came up with the legislative strategy. The bill failed to reach the Senate floor in June when Akaka was four votes short on a procedural motion.

"I think that the people at OHA would tell you that the matter would never have come to a vote without our help in the United States Senate," Lingle said after the luncheon.

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061006/OPINION02/610060400/1104
Honolulu Advertiser, Friday, October 6, 2006
Letters to the Editor

AKAKA BILL IS RACIST, WILL CAUSE DISSENSION

On Sept. 29, The Advertiser reported that both Gov. Linda Lingle and her opponent, Randall Iwase, stated that they support and will work toward passage of the Akaka bill.

Sen. Dan Akaka and his supporters stated that the Akaka bill is not racist. But it is racist because of wording that defines "Native Hawaiian" as "an individual who is one of the indigenous, native people of Hawai'i who is a direct lineal descendent of the aboriginal, native people." This means that only those who have at least 1 percent Hawaiian blood can be a citizen of the Hawaiian government and entitled to all benefits afforded to its citizens.

Racial prejudice within a society causes injustice, disharmony and social conflicts. It leads to unequal distribution of power, prestige, benefits or material wealth in society.

If the Akaka bill passes, the majority of Hawai'i's citizens who are not Native Hawaiians will incur an increased financial burden in having to pay for the cost of operations and various programs of four governments � the federal, state, counties and a racial Native Hawaiian government. This racist bill can be the spark that will cause great dissension within our state.

Wilbert W.W. Wong Sr.
Kane'ohe

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

http://starbulletin.com/2006/10/06/news/story07.html
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, October 6, 2006

Lingle and Iwase see debate as crucial
It is the challenger's first and best chance to present his case

By Richard Borreca

The low-key campaign for governor should heat up tonight as Republican Gov. Linda Lingle and former Democratic state Sen. Randy Iwase meet in a live television debate.

The debate is crucial to Iwase, who has little statewide exposure and is facing a well-financed incumbent with a $6 million campaign budget.

To prepare for the debate, Lingle said yesterday she had been reviewing both her administration accomplishments and the missteps.

"I look forward to it. I'm preparing in a couple of ways, mostly understanding what my opponent's record is and then renewing my own recollection of the achievements," Lingle said. "Also recollecting the mistakes that we've made that could be jumped upon by my opponent."

For his part, Iwase said he had slowed down his campaign schedule for the past two days to prepare for the debate. "I have been going over a scrapbook I have kept over the years," Iwase said, "and I have been going over some concepts and the issues that may arise."

Democratic campaign consultant David Wilson also talked to Iwase about preparing for the live debate with Lingle. "My suggestions are to stick to the issues, be gubernatorial and wear a good suit," Wilson said.

Iwase's campaign has a lot of questions to answer, Wilson said. First, Iwase jumped into the race only in May, after all other major Democrats who were considering the race declined. Second, despite a good showing in the primary election, Iwase has not attracted a lot of campaign donations or volunteers, Wilson added.

"In contrast, the Gov. Lingle campaign is very well organized, and it is combat-ready," he said.

But Iwase, an attorney, is "a quick study and is very articulate," Wilson added, "and he has just the right degree of passion and knows the mood of the community."

For Lingle, one of the big political hurdles will be her association with, and support of, Republican President George Bush.

Lingle said Bush has supported and helped Hawaii in some terms and been un-supportive in other areas.

"The designation of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands as a national monument was a really great thing," Lingle said.

But the last-minute opposition of the Bush administration to the native Hawaiian recognition bill was a disappointment, Lingle said.

"We've had great access to be able to get changes in the law that have brought hundreds of millions of dollars into our state in the area of reimbursements for state hospitals, in Medicaid waivers that have enabled us to insure thousands of additional children. So it's been a net plus for us, but there are things that I'm disappointed about, and the Akaka Bill was a big one," Lingle said.

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

http://honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061007/NEWS05/610070343/1001
Honolulu Advertiser, October 7, 2006
**EXCERPTS of a news report on the Gubernatorial debate between Governor Linda Lingle and challenger Randall Iwase

Iwase repeatedly invoked Lingle's ties to Bush, pulled out a picture of Lingle and the Republican president together, and noted that Lingle had once referred to Bush as one of the nation's best presidents ever.

Lingle said she was disappointed that Bush had opposed federal recognition for Native Hawaiians but applauded his designation of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands as a marine national monument, and said she is proud of her links to him.

Iwase suggested the monument designation had been a consolation prize for Bush's opposition to the Native Hawaiian recognition bill sponsored by U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka.

"It was within a week of the failure of the Akaka bill," Iwase said. "I think a favor was done to the governor by the president of the United States."

Lingle later told reporters that there had been "absolutely no connection" between the two issues, and that she believed Iwase had raised the issue to diminish the magnitude of the monument designation.

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

Spasific Magazine, Auckland, NZ
Sept/Oct 2006, Issue #16

Fight for Hawaiian sovereignty shifts .... and gains momentum as Akaka Bill fails

By Ana Currie

** Ken Conklin's note: This article was sent by e-mail to Scott Crawford, a Hawaiian independence activist, who posted it on his blog. The URL for the original source of the article is unknown; but Scott gave the article a URL on his own blog, at:
http://www.hawaiiankingdom.info/C608676235/E20061010085752/index.html

For those working for and against the so-called Akaka Bill, the events surrounding its recent demise were high drama.

The bill - nicknamed for the senator from Hawaii who introduced the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganisation Act - was originaly introduced in 1999. It has been floundering in Congress for six years amid multiple revisions and much political rhetoric. It proposed a process for a native Hawaiian government to be recognised by the federal government of the United States, giving it a political status similar to Native Amnerican and Alaskan Native tribes.

One of the key developments giving rise to the Akaka bill was the case of Rice v. Cayetano. There, the U.S. Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a system under which non-Native Hawaiians were barred from voting for or serving as trustees of the state's Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA).

The bill's supporters say that it will enable Hawaiians to continue to receive federal and state benefits - or "entitlements" - without fear of constitutional challenges based on race issues. It will also allow for a "nation within a nation" for Hawaiians that will preserve their U.S. citizenship while giving them a starting point for more fully exercising their political rights.

The oponents occupy two camps. First, those who are working to restore the lawful independent Hawaiian nation say that a careful reading of the bill reveals that it will not preserve any entitlements whatsoever. Nor will it protect against legal challenges, while it forecloses important options for true nation-building and will limit any future claims to the 2 million acres of "ceded lands" held in trust for the Hawaiian people. Further, because the Hawaiian kingdom that was unlawfully overthrown was multi-ethnic, they object to the creation of a separate, race-based government.

The other opposition group fears the bill gives native Hawaiians too much unwarranted rights, creates a race-based government that is an affront to the American ideals of equality of all and siphons public resources that might be used otherwise.

The complex issues have created some startling, almost bizarre alliances: Hawaii's Republican governor Linda Lingle, in defiance of her party's administration, joined with staunchly Democratic senators Akaka and Inouye in support of the bill. Meanwhile, Maoli leaders of the movement to re-establish the independent nation of Hawaii found themselves uneasily united in opposition to the bill with key Republican senators and ultra-right- wing groups, such as the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii and Aloha for All.

Three Kanaka Maoli who financed thir own travel to Wahsington D.C. to speak in opposition were Clarence "Ku" Ching, OLeon Siu, and Kili Kekumano. Ching is a former OHA trustee. The three pounded the pavement, visiting as many legislators as possible to give them their reasons. Their efforts were apparently an important factor in the final result.

"It's no wonder," says Ching, "that many senators in D.C. were flabbergasted when individual Hawaiians showed up in opposition to the bill. They were under the mistaken impression - intentionally designed and carried out - that the bill had the support of all Hawaiians."

Many had called for hearings to be held in Hawaii, but only one partial hearing was held there and all subsequent ones in Washington D.C. Hawaiians in opposition to the bill were shocked to find that the hearings in the capital were by invitation only and those who had traveled there to testify in opposition were not allowed to speak.

On the eve of the vote, members of Hui Pu, an umbrella organization of Native Hawaiian organizations and individuals united in their opposition to the bill, occupied 'Iolani Palace in Honolulu and hung upside-down Hawaiian flags - a symbol of a nation in distress - and other banners from the second floor balcony.

"Iolani Palace is more than just a symbol to Kanaka Maoli. It was the residence of Queen Lili'uokalani and the center of Hawaii's government that was unlawfully seized by American troops in 1893. The palace later became Lili'uokalani' s prison after an abortive attempt to restore the lawful Hawaiian government.

Hui Pu spokesman Andre Perez explained that the occupation was to make senators and the public aware that significant numbers of Hawaiians oppose the bill.

"We have total respect for the sanctity of the palace," said Hui Pu member Terri Keko'olani from the scene.

"This is not a museum to us. This is a place where government came together for our people and where we believe we have to continue. We're picking up our nation with a sense of aloha and purpose."

Hina Wong, also present at the event, said, "This is yet another attempt to reaffirm ourselves. The wrongs will never be made right by any form of legislation under the United States."

Police and palace security officers declined to make arrests at the gathering, which was peaceful but powerful. The impact of the message was not lost on the senators in the capitol.

The final vote was 56-41, with 60 votes needed to have the bill brought to the floor. Although this dramatic defeat does not preclude the bill being introduced yet again, a new development has shifted the debate back to Hawaii.

OHA has bounced back with an ambitious proposal to throw its substantial clout - and up to US$10 million - into an effort to go ahead and create the kind of nation-within- a-nation government delineated in the Akaka Bill. This time, however, it will be without any kind of go-ahead from the U.S. Congress.

Frustrated Maoli are appealing for OHA to go back to basics and find out what the Hawaiian people really want rather than ramming a repackaged Akaka-type scenario down their throats. Many find the race-based, "blood quantum" aspect repugnant.

"Let's step back a moment and observe that the 'race' issue does not find its beginnings in things Hawaiian," says Ching. "It was certainly not a pivotal issue in the Hawaiian Kingdom. It is only in the legislative history of the U.S. that race is elevated to the status it holds today."

Siu offers a compelling alternative.

"If it is indeed OHA's purpose to redress the injustices stemming from the 1893 illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, then the OHA beneficiaries should be the Hawaiian nationals (the remnants of a political entity), not Native Hawaiians, an ethnic sub-group of Hawaiian nationals," he says. "This shift in the beneficiaries from "natives" to "nationals" would provide OHA and other Hawaiian entitlement programs with the bulletproof political entity they have been flailing around to find."

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061013/OPINION02/610130325/1108
Honolulu Advertiser, Friday, October 13, 2006
Letters to the Editor

FEDERAL STATUS
AKAKA BILL REPRESENTS JUSTICE FOR HAWAIIANS

Wilbert W.W. Wong mischaracterized the Akaka bill as a form of racial prejudice, and said it would cause "great dissension" in Hawai'i. (Letter, Oct. 6) He's wrong on both counts.

For 2,000 years before Capt. James Cook's arrival in Hawai'i in 1778, Native Hawaiians exercised their sovereignty in these islands. Their political status as Hawai'i's indigenous people has remained constant through the overthrow of their beloved kingdom (achieved with the help of U.S. Marines), annexation and statehood.

During this time, Native Hawaiians lost not only much of their sovereignty and land, but were forced to stop practicing many aspects of their culture, specifically their language.

Over the years, Congress has dealt with Native Hawaiians as a distinct indigenous group through hundreds of congressional acts. Through the Akaka bill, Congress would formally recognize its political relationship with Native Hawaiians, thereby extending a federal status to Native Hawaiians already enjoyed by the two other indigenous groups in the U.S.: Native Americans and Alaska Natives.

The Akaka bill represents justice for Native Hawaiians and would help to heal many of the social wounds inflicted upon them over the past 200 years.

Clyde Namuo
Office of Hawaiian Affairs administrator

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

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061018/NEWS05/610180358/1009/NEWS
Honolulu Advertiser, Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Federal recognition at forefront for OHA races

By Gordon Y.K. Pang

Those who follow Native Hawaiian issues think there's a need for new ideas � and maybe new trustees � on the board of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in the aftermath of the latest failed bid for federal recognition in Congress.

The "what next?" question involving Hawaiian governance is foremost in the minds of those queried by The Advertiser about the upcoming OHA elections.

Last summer, Congress once again failed to hold a vote on the Akaka bill, which would establish a process that could lead to federal recognition of a Native Hawaiian entity that would represent the interests of Hawaiians. OHA, which strongly backed the measure, has since been proceeding with its own plan for establishing a governing entity that does not need the endorsement of Washington on the front end. That plan has drawn mixed reviews in the Hawaiian community.

But some of those interviewed by The Advertiser said OHA trustees should remember there are many other needs facing Hawaiians, from educational opportunities to housing concerns.

Five of the nine OHA board seats are up for grabs on Nov. 7, including three at-large seats, the O'ahu seat and the Maui seat. All registered voters can vote in all OHA races, regardless of where in Hawai'i they live.

In all, there are 14 candidates for the three at-large seats, seven hopefuls for the O'ahu seat and two people vying for the Maui post. All five incumbents whose current terms are up are seeking re-election: at-large trustees Rowena Akana, Oswald Stender and John Waihe'e IV, Maui trustee Boyd Mossman and O'ahu trustee Dante Carpenter.

They are joined by a number of others with name recognition. Former state Sen. Whitney Anderson, former state Rep. D. Ululani Beirne, former OHA trustee Roy Benham, musician and kumu hula Manu Boyd, and Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement chief executive Jade Danner are among the candidates for the at-large race.

So, too is Pu'uhonua Dennis "Bumpy" Kanahele, head of state of the Nation of Hawai'i.

Kekuni Blaisdell, chairman of the Kanaka Maoli Tribunal Komike, said those favoring independence from the United States and opposing federal recognition have been excluded from the dialogue at OHA.

"We feel very strongly that if OHA represents us, it should be representing all of us, including the independence movement," he said.

How well Kanahele and other independent candidates do can be considered somewhat of a referendum on voters' view of independence, Blaisdell said.

Another interesting battle is shaping up for the O'ahu seat, where retired judge and politician Walter Heen presents a serious challenge to Carpenter. On Maui, Blossom Feteira, founding member of the nonprofit Hawaiian Community Assets, is taking on Mossman.

GOVERNING ENTITY

Tony Sang, chairman of the State Council of Hawaiian Homestead Associations since 1998, said federal recognition is a critical issue for the upcoming OHA board. "The bottom line is updating federal recognition to fend off any more lawsuits" from those opposed to programs that benefit Hawaiians, Sang said.

Sang said he's skeptical of OHA's post-Akaka bill plan to seek a governing entity on its own, but added that he would support it if includes a move toward self-determination.

Charles Rose, immediate past president of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, said he is OK with the notion of moving past federal recognition and having OHA take the lead in pushing forth a Hawaiian entity.

"I think if that is accomplished, a unified Hawaiian people is a very formidable entity that would earn the respect of all of the people," Rose said. "I think we need to find (candidates) who are good communicators, be persuasive and be able to see the big picture."

State Sen. Clayton Hee, a former OHA chairman, said the Akaka bill failed in large part because it was not clearly explained and opponents raised specious arguments. "To me, the biggest challenge has always been in articulating what self-determination means in different facets of the community and different areas of the political landscape," said Hee.

Journalist and historian Tom Coffman said governance status is clearly the top issue facing OHA, and OHA voters, in the coming year. Coffman said it's disingenuous to call the issue "self-determination" unless the discussion is about secession.

"I think what we really most badly need to do is step back and have a renewed dialogue about what (governance status) means and how we go about doing it," Coffman said.

He believes that any proposal resembling the Akaka bill will not be successful under both a Republican administration and a Republican Congress. "Let's use the next two years (the remainder of President Bush's term) to back up and try to get a truer consensus on where we want to go," he said.

OTHER PRIORITIES

Those involved in Native Hawaiian concerns mentioned other issues that they believe are priorities for OHA.

Adrian Kamali'i, president of Pae 'Aina Communications, a public relations firm, said he understands the focus that's been paid to establishing a Hawaiian entity. However, he said, OHA trustees cannot lose sight of the many needs in the Hawaiian community, from finding houses for the homeless to providing assistance to Hawaiian charter schools.

"What we need are people who have the vision and can multitask both those issues � both the governance and the needs of the community."

Sang said his organization wants to see OHA become more involved in the social welfare of Hawaiians by partnering with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands on housing initiatives. OHA should also be more active in providing healthcare and job training for those who need it most, he said.

Ka'uhane Lee, president of the Ke Ala 'Olino Native Cultural Center, also echoed the call for OHA to be more involved in education, health and business initiatives. Lee, whose group is dedicated to preserving the Hawaiian and other Polynesian cultures through the exchange of cultural and spiritual connections, also said OHA needs to devote more sources toward perpetuating Hawaiian cultural and spiritual practices.

"This is who we are, and what makes Hawai'i Hawai'i," Lee said.

Hee, drawing from his years as a trustee, said "growing the portfolio" is the most critical issue facing trustees. The trustees oversee an annual operating budget of about $28.5 million, and the agency's investment portfolio is estimated at $400 million.

But according to Hee, "there's no shortage of agencies and individuals that are requesting funds."

H. William Burgess of the group Aloha For All, which believes Hawaiians-only programs unfairly exclude others, said voters should find OHA trustees who concern themselves with the welfare of more than just the Hawaiians here.

"As state officials, the OHA trustees have a fiduciary duty to all citizens of the state," Burgess said. "Look for real leaders rather than demogogues who pre