Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
Aloha dear voters.
In mid-September the State of Hawaii Office of Elections made it possible for you to find your polling place, and see the ballot you will actually use for the general election of November 4, 2014. You put your name and date of birth into the online form, and what comes back is all the information about where you vote; and you can see a photo of both sides of the ballot for your precinct, including proposed Constitutional amendments:
In the general election there are many issues for voters to consider when choosing a candidate for whom to vote. This essay gives top priority to Hawaiian sovereignty issues. Should the state or federal governments help create a race-based tribal government for ethnic Hawaiians, whether through legislation or through administrative rule-making or executive orders? Should Hawaii break away from the U.S. to become an independent nation? My answers to those questions are NO, so I recommend whom to vote for or against based on whether the candidates agree with me. If competing candidates seem to hold basically the same position as each other on sovereignty, then their positions on other issues will also be taken into account.
** Note: A 1600-word summary of this webpage was published September 28, 2014 at
OUTLINE OF TOPICS (Scroll down to the one that interests you; some sections are quite lengthy)
INTRODUCTION: RECOMMENDING CANDIDATES TO SUPPORT OR OPPOSE ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR VIEWS ON HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY (Supporting unity and equality; opposing racial separatism and ethnic nationalism)
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAWAII DISTRICT 1 (urban Honolulu)
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAWAII DISTRICT 2 (rural Honolulu and all the other islands)
Senate district 24 (Kaneohe, Kailua, He'eia, Ahuimanu, Marine Corps base Mokapu)
House district 37 (Mililani, Waipio Gentry, Waikele)
House district 44 (Wai'anae, Makaha, Makua, Ma'ili)
Request for help: Please note that I have only researched the candidates for one state Senate contest and two state House contests. If any reader has recommendations for any other senate or house contests, please let me know, including any sources of information you have. I'm willing to add more legislative contests to my list of recommendations on this webpage.
5 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
INTRODUCTION: RECOMMENDING CANDIDATES TO SUPPORT OR OPPOSE ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR VIEWS ON HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY (Supporting unity and equality; opposing racial separatism and ethnic nationalism)
I believe racial separatism and ethnic nationalism are the greatest threats to long-term peace and stability in Hawaii. Yes, it's true that our nation and state face great difficulties related to budget deficits, unemployment, taxation, foreign policy, etc. But racial strife is a far greater threat than any of those things. Other places in recent years have also had severe budget deficits and unemployment, but racial strife dwarfed those concerns. Consider Bosnia, where Europeans of three different ethnicities were living, working and playing together and intermarrying (similar to Hawaii), until Serbs, Croats, and Muslims started killing each other, engaging in ethnic cleansing and racial separatism. Consider Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Darfur, East Timor, Sri Lanka, etc. where ethnic strife led to civil war and mass atrocities. Consider Iraq and other countries where Muslims hate Kurds and where Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims are killing each other by the thousands. And don't forget Myanmar (formerly known as Burma) where groups of Buddhists, known throughout the world as lovers of peace, are killing minority Muslims.
We in Hawaii must do all we can to defeat racial separatism before it pulls us apart and leads to violence. I appeal especially to conservative Republicans who think it's very important to increase Republican control of the U.S. House. But my friends, I say to you that there comes a time when we who live in Hawaii must give top priority to what's best for Hawaii, even if it means we send to Congress people who will vote the wrong way on national economic matters and foreign policy. The threat of racial separatism in Hawaii is far more important than all other national issues combined.
Despite Hawaii's reputation as a place where all racial groups are minorities living together harmoniously in a spirit of aloha, the most important issues in Hawaii are racial. There are more than 850 racially exclusionary programs for the benefit of ethnic Hawaiians, who already benefit from all other government programs; but there are no corresponding programs for other ethnicities. The legislature of the State of Hawaii has authorized a project, now underway (Kana'iolowalu), to assemble a list of ethnic Hawaiians for the purpose of creating a race-based government. The racial governing entity will then make demands to divide the lands and people of Hawaii along racial lines and will seek federal recognition as an Indian tribe. From 2000 through 2012 there was legislation in Congress (the Akaka bill) to create a Hawaiian tribe. The failure of that legislation has caused the Obama administration to begin a process of rule-making in the Department of Interior to help create a Hawaiian tribe, or to smooth the path for a state-recognized Hawaiian tribe to seek and receive federal recognition. OHA, the branch of the state government which is spearheading the creation of a state-recognized tribe, is also cooperating with secessionist groups who want to reinvent Hawaii as an independent nation with racial supremacy for ethnic Hawaiians. To understand these threats read the book "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State", especially Chapter 1 which is available for free at
All the recommendations below for voting in 2014 are focused on defeating candidates who promote racial favoritism (race-based government benefits), racial separatism (Hawaiian tribe), or ethnic nationalism (make Hawaii an independent nation).
Three candidates in the general election of 2014 stand out as deserving support because of their positions on these issues: Keli'i Akina for OHA trustee at-large; Cam Cavasso for U.S. Senate; and Emil Svrcina for state House District 37. State Senator Sam Slom is also worthy of strong support, but his seat does not come up for election until 2016.
In many contests there is no good candidate but we can choose the least-bad one.
Two especially dangerous candidates stand out as needing strong opposition: Charles Djou seeking the Congressional seat for U.S. House Hawaii district 1 (urban Honolulu); and Al Frenzel, a retired Army colonel seeking the legislature seat in state House district 44. Both men are nice people and sincerely believe they are doing the right thing -- and they probably ARE doing the right thing on many other economic and social issues -- characteristics which make these candidates seem rational and attractive to voters but which therefore add to the dangerousness of their badly misguided views on Hawaiian sovereignty. The sugar in the Kool-Aid makes it easy to swallow the cyanide.
On a very positive note: We got rid of several powerful racists or socialists who lost their seats in the primary election. Governor Abercrombie pushed the Akaka bill through the U.S. House three times, and then pushed through the state legislature the Act 195 (2011) and Act 77 (2013) racial registry bills to create a state-recognized tribe. But Abercrombie lost his primary by a huge margin. Abercrombie's political career is over, unless perhaps President Obama appoints him as U.S. ambassador to the newly independent nation of Hawaii. State Senator Clayton Hee, formerly Chairman of OHA who pushed the tribal concept and the DHHL Sandwich Isles racially exclusionary cable phone boondoggle, arrogantly ran for Lieutenant Governor instead of re-election to the Senate; and lost. State Senator Malama Solomon, who was Chair of the Senate committee on Hawaiian affairs, lost her primary. State House Representative Faye Hanohano was Chair of the House committee on Hawaiian affairs. Hanohano was infamous for her blatantly racist rants to government workers in her office, in open committee meetings when she directed racially offensive language toward witnesses giving testimony, and on the floor of the House. She lost her primary by a large margin. In all these cases, the replacement candidates are far more moderate. Congratulations voters!
I am Kenneth Conklin, Ph.D. Hawaii has been my permanent home since 1992. Immediately upon arrival I began studying Hawaiian language, history and culture full-time. During a period of several years I became moderately fluent in Hawaiian language, knowledgeable about Hawaiian history and culture, and participated in several Hawaiian-focused cultural activities including heiau, fishpond, and ahupua'a restoration. At first I was inclined to go along with the views of Hawaiian sovereignty activists because they seemed to be grounded in spirituality and historical fact. But the more questions I asked and the more research I did, it steadily became apparent that historical fact was being twisted to support political demands for racial separatism and/or ethnic nationalism, and a superficial spirituality was actually a particularly zealous and pernicious form of Hawaiian religious fascism and anti-Americanism. By 1998 the pieces of the puzzle finally coalesced and I began to step forth publicly in opposition to both the independence movement and the racial separatist tribal movement. In February 2000 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Rice v. Cayetano that all registered voters in Hawaii, regardless of race, have a right to vote for OHA trustees. I then instigated, and became a plaintiff in, a followup lawsuit (Arakaki v. Hawaii) to make it possible for all registered voters regardless of race to run as candidates for OHA trustee; and I became the first person with no Hawaiian native blood to run for OHA trustee, placing 4th out of 20 candidates for one at-large seat on the OHA board. Since then I have devoted full-time to supporting unity, equality, and aloha for all; while opposing racial entitlement programs, the establishment of a race-based government for ethnic Hawaiians, and the independence movement. For more information about my background see
Below are my recommendations for voting in the general election of 2014 on Tuesday November 4. I am making recommendations only for seats where there are at least two candidates, who have notable differences of opinion related to Hawaiian sovereignty or racial entitlements, or significant differences of personal style and background. If two candidates hold basically the same views on sovereignty and entitlements, then I will lean in favor of the candidate who espouses the more conservative or libertarian viewpoint overall and can be expected to work toward cutting the size and intrusiveness of government. A Republican candidate will usually get my recommendation rather than a Democrat, simply because the Democrats are an entrenched power elite serving labor unions and big government. We need a viable opposition with enough legislators to force open debate and to embarrass Democrats who otherwise could push hidden agendas in secret. A Republican candidate will usually get my recommendation rather than a Libertarian or Green or other little-known party, simply because the only candidate who might be able to attract enough votes to defeat a Democrat is a Republican. Also, some Libertarians and especially Greens (like Keiko Bonk) are even farther to the left than the Democrat candidate regarding heavy taxation, "social justice", over-regulation, communal ownership, and big government.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 7-2 vote in year 2000, in Rice v. Cayetano, that all registered voters in Hawaii have a right to vote for OHA trustee, regardless whether they have Hawaiian native ancestry. Some people with no native blood abstain from voting in OHA contests because they view OHA as a vehicle for racial self-determination for ethnic Hawaiians. However, OHA is an agency of the State government, owns assets of more than $600 Million in state government land and money, and makes decisions affecting all Hawaii's people. We all have not only a right but also a duty to participate in choosing OHA's board of directors. OHA must not be allowed to function as the mother-ship of racial apartheid in Hawaii.
Three seats up for election in 2014 on the OHA board are labeled "at-large", meaning that the candidates can be residents on any island in the state. There are 6 candidates for these three seats (ten others were eliminated during the primary election). Voters may vote for any one, or two, or three of the six candidates, and the top three vote-getters will win.
I strongly recommend voting for Keli'i Akina, Ph.D., and only for Dr. Akina. You are under no obligation to use all three of your votes. If you vote for any other at-large candidate in addition to Dr. Akina, that other candidate would thereby be helped to get more votes than Dr. Akina, with the possible result that Akina might not place among the top three vote-getters.
Dr. Akina has a Ph.D. in Philosophy, with specialization in business ethics (much needed at OHA!) and the works of Confucius. He is the ONLY OHA candidate who says he is proud to be an American as well as proud to be Hawaiian. He is the ONLY OHA candidate who says that OHA belongs to all Hawaii's people regardless of race. He is the ONLY OHA candidate who opposes OHA's racial separatist Kana'iolowalu nation-building effort and also opposes the Department of Interior effort to create a federally recognized Hawaiian tribe and also opposes the secessionist effort to make Hawaii an independent nation.
See Dr. Akina's OHA campaign webpage -- especially the sections on "issues" and "videos"-- at
Two of the six candidates in the at-large contest are incumbent trustees seeking re-election. Rowena Akaka has been a board member for 20 years; John Waihee IV has been on the board for at least 10 years. Both of them get a lot of votes from uninformed voters who simply recognize their names but don't know how bad they are. Both should be blamed for spending about $20 Million on lobbying Congress for the failed Akaka bill, for creating both the Kau Inoa and the Kana'iolowalu racial registries, and for pushing the Department of Interior to create a federally recognized tribe. John Waihee IV gets most of his votes merely because he is the son of former governor John Waihee III; but baby Waihee has done virtually nothing during his decade on the OHA board and does not even bother to write the half-page editorial each trustee is entitled to write in every monthly OHA newspaper. Lei Ahu Isa previously served in the legislature and as an elected member of the state school board; but it's unclear what her views are on the big issues facing ethnic Hawaiians. Mililani Trask, sister of the fiery Haunani-Kay Trask, is a secessionist who was active for many years pushing the cause of an independent Hawaii at the United Nations. Don't vote for any of them. Dr. Keli'i Akina is the only at-large candidate who deserves a vote.
Veterans in Politics International, an organization representing military veterans of all branches, has endorsed Keli'i Akina, Ph.D. for Trustee-at-Large in the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Dennis Egge, President of the Hawaii Chapter of VIPI, says, "Dr. Keli'i Akina is a true patriot who can bring together the military and local communities. He is a leader who unites people and will serve the interests of all in Hawaii." According to Dr. Akina, "A healthy relationship between the military and Hawaiian communities is vital for the future of Hawaii. If elected Trustee-at-Large of OHA I will work toward harmony and respect between the U.S. military and Native Hawaiians. I am proud to have grown up in both of these communities, just as I am proud to be both American and Hawaiian. Mahalo to Veterans in Politics International for your trust in me."
Only two of the six at-large OHA candidates bothered to show up for a hearing with the Veterans in Politics endorsement committee -- Keli'i Akina and Lei Ahu Isa. Several of the other four have spent years protesting against the U.S. for its "illegal overthrow" of the Hawaiian Kingdom and for more than a century of "illegal belligerent military occupation of our homeland." The endorsement interview can be seen in its entirety. It's easy to observe that Dr. Akina is highly articulate, whereas Ms. Isa's answers are generally brief and vapid. The interview also shows Ms. Isa displaying discomfort and disrespect on at least two occasions -- she spent some time idly scrolling through her cellphone during the first minute of the interview and again during the fourth minute. Her body-language says "How much longer do I have to spend with these military guys?"
There is also a contest for the OHA trustee for the Maui seat. It's called the Maui seat because candidates are required to live on Maui, although all Hawaii voters get to vote for them. Please vote for Carmen Hulu Lindsey, the incumbent seeking re-election, who has lived on Maui for a long time and owns a real estate business there (OHA is one of the state's largest landowners and recently was given $200 Million worth of real estate on the waterfront in Kaka'ako). Her opponent is Mahealani Wendt, formerly Mahealani Kamau'u, who lived on O'ahu for many decades where she was head of the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation using state government money to file lawsuits on behalf of ethnic Hawaiians against corporations or people with no native blood. She recently married her new husband and moved to Maui to be with him. From a political standpoint she can be regarded as a carpetbagger. Wendt is also the Maui representative on the Kana'iolowalu racial roll commission working toward creating a Hawaiian tribe. Wendt is a bitter old woman who uses foul language toward people she dislikes, and who is skillful at saying one thing while meaning another.
There was also a contest for OHA trustee for the O'ahu seat. However, Peter Apo won that contest in the primary election when he got more than 50% of all the votes in a field of 4 candidates where the other three were little-known.
Please vote for the Republican candidate Cam Cavasso. He has always opposed the Akaka bill. Cavasso also opposes the racial separatist Kana'iolowalu process for building a race-based state-recognized tribe. And he opposes the federal Department of Interior proposal for rule-making to create a Hawaiian tribe and give it federal recognition even without Congressional approval and without a vote by the people of Hawaii. In a televised debate among Republican primary candidates for Senate on PBS Hawaii "Insights" program June 19, 2014, Mr. Cavasso unfortunately expressed support for continuing federal funding for the large number of Hawaiian racial entitlement programs. However, it's doubtful any candidate for Congress would run on a platform disavowing pork barrel money which stimulates Hawaii's economy. See
On August 24, 2014 a YouTube podcast was published, containing a 45-minute interview of Cam Cavasso by Keli'i Akina as part of the weekly ThinkTech Hawaii series. See it at:
By contrast, the Democrat candidate Brian Schatz is merely a tool of Hawaii's Democrat power-elite. His stance on the Akaka bill and federal recognition of a Hawaiian tribe is exactly what anyone would predict. He is so devoted to Hawaiian racial entitlements that he requested and received a seat on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee where he can continue the work of both Senator Inouye and Senator Akaka who were on that committee for decades, both of whom chaired that committee, and who repeatedly inserted the phrase "and Native Hawaiians" into all legislation that was intended to provide benefits in health, housing, and education to federally recognized genuine Indian tribes.
Senator Schatz spent his first 6 months in the Senate saying nothing at all on the Senate floor. On June 11, 2013 (the Kamehameha Day holiday in Hawaii) Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D,NV) said "Mr. President, I would ask the Chair at this time to recognize the Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Schatz, who replaced Senator Inouye. I understand he is going to give his maiden speech in the Senate today." (Page S4071 of the Congressional Record)
The "first time" for a Senator is as significant as for teenagers or young adults. A Senator will remember his maiden speech forever, and so will his colleagues. Senator Schatz waited six months before giving his maiden speech (he replaced the deceased Senator Inouye in December 2013).
Unfortunately he chose a topic which other Senators consider unimportant special-interest constituent service. It would benefit only the large, wealthy institutions serving a 21% racial minority of Hawaii's people. He squandered his political capital, thereby harming Hawaii's people of all races who depend on him to take care of us all.
One might think that a Senator's maiden speech would be deserving of special attention. Schatz certainly thinks so, because the headline of his press release containing full text of it is "Schatz Delivers Major Floor Speech On Achieving Fairness for Native Hawaiians" But the scheduling and circumstances of his speech indicate that Majority Leader Reid did not think it was very significant. His speech came during a quorum call in the middle of a contentious discussion of a controversial bill to overhaul America's immigration laws. A quorum call is a parliamentary way to keep the lights on and pass time when no other Senators are waiting to speak. This one happened around noontime, leading up to the regular Tuesday afternoon Republican and Democrat caucus luncheons -- a good time to let a new backbench Senator squeeze in a short speech on an irrelevant topic. It's the sort of circumstances and scheduling that might be expected for a Senator speaking in praise of a Little League team that won a championship, or introducing a resolution to rename a post office.
The entire maiden speech was a plea to support federal recognition for a phony Hawaiian tribe, even though no legislation had yet been introduced and none was ever introduced on that topic during the 113th Congress. Full text of Schatz' embarrassing maiden speech, and a substantive rebuttal to the main points in it, are at
There is a Libertarian candidate, Michael Kokoski, who is not worthy of consideration. He has no endorsements, and has written nothing about Hawaiian sovereignty. His campaign webpage is at
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAWAII DISTRICT 1 (urban Honolulu)
Please vote for the Democrat candidate Mark Takai (against the Republican candidate Charles Djou). This is not an endorsement, but rather a suggestion to choose the less bad candidate. Charles Djou is not only a bad candidate, he is a very dangerous one regarding Hawaiian sovereignty, as explained below. There's no doubt Republicans will continue to hold a large majority in the U.S. House, so Hawaii citizens need not fear they will tilt the balance of power in Washington by once again sending a Democrat.
What's wrong with Charles Djou? In 2010 Congressman Neil Abercrombie resigned in order to campaign for Governor. There was a 3-way contest to fill the remainder of Amercrombie's term. Djou got the largest number of votes, but still less than 50%, in a winner-take-all three-way contest where the Democrat candidates Ed Case and Colleen Hanabusa split the Democrat vote. Djou portrayed himself as a fiscal conservative who would work cooperatively with Democrats on social justice issues. During the campaign he made no public statements about the Akaka bill. Except once. On Tuesday October 5, 2010 he was interviewed for 20 minutes on a weekly radio program paid for by OHA. He said:
"For myself first of all, of course as a Congressman, I eagerly look forward to hopefully passing the Native Hawaiian recognition bill ... Over the ten years I have represented Hawaii [in the state House and the Honolulu City Council] ... I have been a clear and consistent advocate for increasing opportunities for Native Hawaiians, and for expanding access to housing and the just entitlements I think Native Hawaiians deserve."
Interviewer Randy Hudnall asked "Now, you just mentioned the Akaka bill. What will you do to garner support for the Akaka bill if it should pass the Senate and return to the House this Congress?"
Djou answered with excitement in his voice: "You know, I think what I can offer is a bipartisan solution -- bipartisan support for the Akaka bill. That's absolutely essential ... It can't come from just one political party, it has to come from both. Hawaii has been trying ... for over a decade to move the Akaka bill ... and we've been unsuccessful, and the reason for that is it's been entirely one-sided. What we need is support from both political parties. Should the Akaka bill come back to the U.S. House I'm confident that I'd be able to garner far more Republican support for the Akaka bill -- make it bipartisan -- make it less controversial, and make its passage far smoother."
Djou also made clear in the interview that he supports not only the Akaka bill but also the plethora of racially exclusionary entitlements in areas such as housing, education, and healthcare; and that he will support those programs that treat ethnic Hawaiians like an Indian tribe even if the Akaka bill fails.
This author, Ken Conklin, circulated these quotes among conservative Republicans, many of whom had sent campaign contributions to Djou. They were stunned. Djou was forced to say he would support a referendum in Hawaii on the Akaka bill -- but only a NONBINDING one. He stubbornly opposed inserting language into the Akaka bill that would allow it to be implemented only if Hawaii's people approved it in a ballot referendum. Having lost the support of the Republican base, Djou lost the election.
Once again in 2014 Djou is trying to hide from the topic of federal recognition for a Hawaiian tribe. But on September 14, 2014, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser published a news report "Rivals differ on strategies for Native Hawaiians -- Charles Djou vows to get his party to take up sovereignty, and Mark Takai would focus on preserving federal benefits." Once again, "Former congressman Charles Djou says he is the only candidate for Congress who would be able to change minds and persuade fellow Republicans on Capitol Hill to end a stalemate over federal recognition for Native Hawaiians." "The early tentative moves by the Department of Interior are wrong, in my opinion," Djou said. "It should be an act of Congress. I think if Native Hawaiian recognition were done by a bureaucratic regulation, it would cheapen Native Hawaiian recognition and make it very easily reversible because any administration then, in the future, could easily yank it back." "He said only a Republican in the delegation would be able to speak to members of the GOP majority in the House -- and potentially a GOP majority in the Senate -- and work to win over conservative votes."
That same newspaper report said "Mark Takai says he will ensure that benefits continue while taking a wait-and-see approach on what steps to take toward recognizing Hawaiians. ... he supports the Native Hawaiian Roll Commission in its efforts. At the congressional level, his greatest concern is ensuring that federal benefits to Native Hawaiians continue. ... He said he would support any effort at recognition that is backed by a majority of Native Hawaiians. "I believe the Native Hawaiian community needs to work together and reach a consensus and I will support whatever consensus is reached," Takai said. "If there's any federal issues that need to be worked on, I will work to make sure that they're implemented effectively and efficiently. The biggest concern that I have is the benefits to the Native Hawaiian community and we're going to make sure that especially the federal benefits continue."
However, the online newspaper "Hawaii Independent", a front for the Hawaiian independence movement, did a 55 minute interview with Mark Takai on April 7, 2014. An audio recording of the interview is on the newspaper's website at
The hosts for the interview were well-known Hawaiian independence activist Tom Coffman ("Nation Within -- The History of the American Occupation of Hawai'i) and the far-left activist Mari Matsuda (UH Law School professor specializing in feminism, critical race theory, reparations, and affirmative action). At minute 33 on the tape the discussion begins to focus on Hawaiian independent nationhood, the Department of Interior rule-making process, and the DOI hearings in Hawaii. Minute #37: "The Akaka bill is the best route." Takai says DOI rulemaking is the latest substitute for it. Note that this position is basically the same as the position taken by Djou in the Star-Advertiser report. Takai says racial entitlements need to be protected. Takai agrees the overthrow of the monarchy was illegal, but today's ethnic Hawaiians must decide what they want.
Meantime pass the Akaka bill to protect entitlements. The discussion of sovereignty ended around minute #41.
Interestingly, OHA candidate Keli'i Akina did an interview of Mark Takai published on April 7, 2014 as part of the weekly ThinkTech series. The 50-minute video entitled "Emerging Leadership Among Hawaii Democrats -- K. Mark Takai" is at
The published Description says: "Hawaii's Democratic party is far from monolithic, and new leaders are emerging. K. Mark Takai has been in politics since his days as student body president at the University of Hawaii through his present post as a state legislator and his current bid for a seat in Congress. Akina and Takai will discuss trends and dynamics in the Democratic Party as well as their respective views on key issues facing Hawaii." But there was no discussion at all about Hawaiian sovereignty, racial entitlements, tribe, federal recognition, etc. The interview makes clear that Akina and Takai have been longtime friends. Akina is clearly avoiding any contentious issues where they would disagree, and following his Larry King style of non-confrontational soft story-telling.
Likewise Mark Takai's campaign website does not raise the issue of Hawaiian sovereignty, tribalism, or federal recognition. However there are tons of endorsements by Democrat party leaders and labor unions.
On September 23, 2014 Chad Blair, at Honolulu Civil Beat, reported that "Charles Djou leads Mark Takai 46 percent to 42 percent in Civil Beat's latest poll. Just 12 percent of voters are undecided. ... Takai is a lieutenant colonel with the Hawaii National Guard and deployed to the Middle East as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2009. Djou is a major in the U.S. Army Reserve who served in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan in 2011-2012. Though both are veterans, VoteVets.org is backing Takai, and supported him with TV ad buys in the primary. But Djou has been named a Young Gun by the National Republican Congressional Committee and can count on its support this fall." Thus both Takai and Djou are military veterans who have served honorably on active duty and continue to serve in the reserves; but for whatever reason, a major veterans group has endorsed Takai.
In conclusion: Mark Takai is a shill for the policies of the Democrat Party establishment. The best we can hope for is that his support for Hawaiian racial entitlements and federal recognition will be quiet in a tepid back-bench sort of way in the House, more or less like Mazie Hirono in the Senate (although he is far more intelligent and personable than she). But Takai is less dangerous than Djou regarding Hawaiian sovereignty and racial entitlements, because the Republican majority will ignore Takai while they might be persuaded by their fellow Republican Djou. It would be nice to have an extra Republican in the House to fight against Democrat tax-and-spend big-government socialism; but the Republican majority in the House is not threatened. Hawaii cannot afford to send a Republican hell-bent on persuading fellow Republicans to create Hawaiian apartheid. Therefore please vote for Mark Takai.
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAWAII DISTRICT 2 (rural Honolulu and all the other islands)
Please vote for Democrat incumbent Tulsi Gabbard (against Republican Kawika Crowley and Libertarian Joe Kent). If you cannot tolerate voting for Gabbard, then you could vote blank in this contest; although that could be risky because Crowley has won a couple of significant endorsements from conservative groups. Or if voting blank seems irresponsibly easy, then give a vote to Libertarian Joe Kent for the same reason a high school graduating class might elect a Down Syndrome girl to be homecoming queen (she made an effort and needs the encouragement).
The Republican nominee is Kawika Crowley. Who? He's virtually unknown -- a scruffy-looking homeless middle-aged cigar-smoking Caucasian man living in a van, who has no chance against the popular, young and beautiful Tulsi Gabbard. Crowley is a conservative on most issues that concern Republicans including deficit reduction, support for veterans and a strong military, and opposition to Obamacare. Crowley's gruff, swashbuckling style will appeal to those Republican men who favor rugged individualism, Tea Party activism, gun rights, and who feel emasculated by radical feminism.
In his campaign in 2012 Crowley supported the Akaka bill, and Hawaiian racial entitlements, as reparations for what he sees as the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom by the U.S. military. But he says status as an Indian tribe doesn't go far enough, and Hawaii should be an independent nation. His support for Hawaiian sovereignty is intensely personal -- almost mystical. He has no Hawaiian native blood, but Hawaiianized his David to Kawika to show his support.
Crowley says "The Nation of Hawaii will arise soon, and I will do everything in my power to help that become a reality. Many think I'm part Hawaiian, but I have not a drop of Hawaiian blood. I am English, Irish, Scotch, and Cherokee. I am indeed proud of my heritage. It is my Cherokee blood, from the survivors of the dreadful Trail of Tears, that allows me to relate and empathize with the Hawaiian people and their desire to resurrect their nation. I am indeed humbled to have been one of the writers of the classic sovereignty song, "Hawaii 78" made popular by Bro. IZ and the Makaha Sons back in the seventies. To this day over 35 years later it touches millions around the world."
On August 12, 2012 the West Hawaii Today newspaper reported an interview with Crowley, saying "he would like to see a return of a sovereign Hawaiian government, with the United States awarding Kahoolawe to that government."
But in 2014, his campaign webpage proclaims a much more grandiose proposal: "If elected to Congress, one of my top priorities will be to convince the Federal government and the Obama administration to begin the process of Federally Mandating 400,000 acres located on the South Point region of the Big Island as the HOME-BASE for the Restoration of the New Nation. The South Point region is one of the most pristine regions in the Hawaiian islands. The Big Island is comprised of about 2.5 Million acres. The 400,000 acres bordered in the South Point region will be about the size of Oahu. ... In my estimation, it will take $800 Billion to $1.2 Trillion to get through the first few phases, that of "bordering", the beginning planning of Infrastructure mapping, layout, design, and construction, specifically roads, highways, boulevards etc. From a world class Airport, to a first class breakwater and Harbor, to Electric Power Plants and Grid, To Water Supply systems. The key to overcoming this huge financial necessity is to complete the writing and Ratification of the Constitution. ... with much worldwide fanfare, coverage, and blessing, a large contingent of the Hawaiian Leaders and tens of thousands of onlookers will assemble at some point designated (the sublime cliffs of the Point, perhaps). The Leaders will proclaim to the world THE BEGINNING OF THE NEW SOVEREIGN NATION OF HAWAII!!! The next phase is the most critical. It is the appointing of AMBASSADORS to over 50 nations across the planet, WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF WRITING AND SECURING TRADE AGREEMENTS AND TREATIES, AS WELL AS the garnering immediately of CAPITAL FUNDING VIA LOANS AND INVESTMENTS FROM AND WITH EACH NATION. Now what Nation Leader would refuse the opportunity to secure investment ties with The New Nation of Hawaii, being re-birthed over 120 years following its overthrow? ..."
Dare we say it? Kawika Crowley is a nut with a tin-foil hat, and should not be sent to Congress. He won the Republican primary in 2014 receiving 9,094 votes, against Marissa Capelouto with 6,926 votes. Capelouto had views that were far preferable, and considerable experience as an elected member of a neighborhood board; but she lacked the aggressive boisterousness of Crowley's style and she may have suffered a bit from her Filippina accent. She also suffered from the fact that many well-informed and politically active Republicans crossed over to vote in the Democrat primary because of high interest in very competitive Democrat contests. The unopposed Democrat incumbent, Tulsi Gabbard, got 90,032 votes with 22,080 blanks.
During September 2014 the news came out that the Maui Chamber of Commerce has endorsed Crowley over Gabbard. The veterans group Veterans in Politics has also endorsed Crowley over Gabbard. Both of these endorsements are very unsettling, because the groups command considerable respect.
Tulsi Gabbard is the incumbent Democrat Congresswoman for CD2. She worked as an aide to Senator Akaka. She strongly supports the Akaka bill and the racially exclusionary government entitlements for ethnic Hawaiians. She has Samoan ancestry and feels solidarity with ethnic Hawaiians as fellow Pacific islanders with a mutual history of independent nationhood and dependence on handouts from the federal government.
Gabbard's small but flashy campaign webpage is at
At the bottom her section on "Native Hawaiian Issues" seems unchanged from her campaign of 2012.
"The fact that our country overthrew the government of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893 is a great injustice and something that weighs heavily on my heart. As I consider this unjust act, I think of my two years working with Senator Akaka, watching him work tirelessly trying to get the Akaka Bill passed into law. Now, that Senator Akaka is retiring, I look to making the passage of this legislation to recognize Hawaiians as an indigenous people one of my top priorities. This is Senator Akaka’s legacy and something that’s got to be done for the Hawaiian people. I realize that not everyone supports the Akaka Bill, but at its core, it’s about giving Hawaiians some form of self-determination and protecting all the important programs and services for Hawaiians, which are constantly under attack in the courts. Having said that, I want to be clear that my door is always open. I’m willing to sit down and listen to your concerns and/or suggestions about this issue and all issues that affect you and your ohana. I believe the U.S. government through an act of Congress should more formally recognize the special legal/political status of Native Hawaiians. Pending re-organization of a Native Hawaiian Governing Entity, through the process commenced by Act 195 (2011) or a Native Hawaiian-driven process, I would immediately work with the delegation to pass a bill or administrative regulation acknowledging this status, without the government building components that would be difficult to pass at this time."
Even if all 22,080 blanks in the Democrat primary were to be counted as hostile to Gabbard and likely to vote for Crowley in November, Gabbard would still get three times as many votes as Crowley. Someone who wants to stand on principle in opposition to racial separatism and ethnic nationalism might choose to vote blank in this contest, because both candidates are unsatisfactory and because the more dangerous Crowley will be defeated in any case. However, Crowley's endorsements from the Maui Chamber of Commerce and the Veterans in Politics show that he might have more support in the general election than would seem to be indicated by the results in the primary. Those who feel a need to leave nothing to chance should vote for Gabbard.
Oh gosh, did I forget? There's a third candidate for CD2 -- Joe Kent, a Libertarian. Joe Kent teaches elementary music K - 5 in Hawaii. He's been a journalist, teacher, and writer. His campaign webpage is at
Kent is a Ron Paul fan, and spends most of his webpage on short discussions of topics like the bitcoin fraud, high taxes, private roads, and why milk is so expensive in Hawaii. He never mentions Hawaiian sovereignty, tribalism, or racial entitlements. We can ignore him, as nearly all the voters will surely do. If you want to vote against both Gabbard and Crowley, and if you feel a blank is a lazy way of making a protest, then go ahead and vote for Joe Kent just to show you'd like to encourage Libertarians. Sort of like a grade-school athletic competition where even the worst loser gets a trophy.
For Governor, please vote for the Republican candidate Duke Aiona. This recommendation might come as a surprise, because Aiona is an ethnic Hawaiian. And I have previously written a major webpage explaining that it's a bad idea to put ethnic Hawaiians into positions of power as top-level decision-makers in state and county government, including governors, mayors, department heads, state and county legislators, and judges. See webpage "Ethnic Hawaiian government officials have a severe conflict of interest regarding the Akaka bill. If the Akaka bill passes then no ethnic Hawaiian should represent the state or counties in deciding how to divide land and jurisdiction between the state and the tribe. Therefore no ethnic Hawaiian should be elected or appointed to high office this year or in any future year until the bill is abandoned, for fear the bill will pass. Regardless of whether the Akaka bill passes as federal legislation, this webpage raises issues that have immediate relevance because Hawaii Act 195 was signed into law in 2011 to begin a process to establish a state-recognized version of the Akaka tribe." at
It's a very difficult decision for an opponent of Hawaiian racial entitlement programs and of creating a Hawaiian tribe, to choose which of the four candidates for Governor deserves a vote. The truth is, none of them deserve a vote. All four are scary. But Aiona is the least scary and otherwise the most likely to succeed in standing up against the entrenched Democrat power-elite.
Although Duke Aiona is ethnic Hawaiian, he has never been a sovereignty activist. His current campaign website mentions many topics, but never mentions the Akaka bill, the Kana'iolowalu process, the Department of Interior proposal for rule-making, etc.
In his previous campaign for Governor, Aiona also said very little about these issues. When pressed, he responded as follows in an interview reported on July 26, 2010 in the Star-Advertiser:
"If elected, Aiona would be the state's second native Hawaiian governor. Asked about the actions of the first native Hawaiian governor, John Waihee, who on Jan. 17, 1993 -- the 100th anniversary of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii -- ordered that the American flag be lowered from the state Capitol while Hawaii's flag still flew, Aiona said he did not remember it.
"I am not in favor of an independent sovereign nation, nor I am I in favor of seceding from the United States," says Aiona. "I want what is best for the people of Hawaii. I firmly believe that what is best for the Hawaiian people is best for Hawaii, because this is Hawaii." Aiona said passage of the Akaka Bill in Congress, speeding up ceded-land payments and encouraging the work of the state Department of Hawaiian Home Lands would be priorities for him. The state, he said, should not be discriminating against or favoring any group. "I will always support both native Hawaiians and the people of Hawaii and any other ethnic group in the state of Hawaii," he said."
Aiona's statement "I firmly believe that what is best for the [ethnic] Hawaiian people is best for Hawaii, because this is Hawaii" is a very dangerous concept, putting the demands of a racial group ahead of the greater good for all Hawaii's people. But is was merely a well-rehearsed repetition of the same slogan so often said by Aiona's boss Governor Lingle. The truth is actually the other way around: A rising tide lifts all boats; therefore, what's best for all the people of Hawaii is also best for ethnic Hawaiians.
I take some comfort from the fact that Duke Aiona served for a considerable time as a judge. The training, experience, and oath of judges obligate them to set aside their personal prejudices to listen to all the evidence and make an unbiased decision. There is no evidence, nor even any accusation, that Aiona gave racial favoritism to ethnic Hawaiian plaintiffs or defendants during his service on the bench. None of the other candidates for Governor has the experience of putting on a judicial robe and giving an impartial hearing to all sides in a dispute, guided by law and precedent while setting aside personal bias.
Aiona is also an intelligent and very personable gentleman. On January 20, 2014 Dr. Keli'i Akina, President of the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, did a 45-minute interview with Aiona on the weekly ThinkTech Hawaii series "E Hana Kakou." Unfortunately there was zero discussion about Hawaiian sovereignty, because Dr. Akina prefers to do interviews in the non-confrontational style of Larry King, avoiding contentious issues. But the interview does display Duke Aiona's personality and intelligence very nicely.
David Ige's campaign webpage focuses on news reports, poll results, family and friends. There's hardly anything substantive on the issues. Perhaps the best way to summarize David Ige is the same way I summarized Mark Takai: He is a shill for the policies of the Democrat Party establishment. The best we can hope for is that his support for Hawaiian racial entitlements and federal recognition will be quiet in a tepid back-bench sort of way, more or less like Mazie Hirono in the Senate. The June 24 issue of the Washington Times, reporting on a televised debate between Democrat primary candidates Abercrombie and Ige, said this: "Asked what they would do to help Hawaiians reinstate their sovereignty, Abercrombie said he supported programs like the Native Hawaiian Roll Commission and efforts for Native Hawaiian people to form their own government. Ige said sovereignty efforts can’t be rushed, and he thinks recent meetings hosted by the federal government on possible federal recognition of Native Hawaiians as a tribe were premature. “In 1893, a great injustice was done to the Hawaiian community and the Hawaiian nation … and we have been struggling with how to right that injustice for every year since,” Ige said."
My own view on Ige is best displayed in a news release from the Republican Governors Association on August 10, 2014 commenting on Ige's strong victory over Abercrombie. "Duke Aiona has a vision for Hawaii’s future and knows the state can do better," said RGA Chairman Chris Christie. "A tested leader with years of experience serving Hawaii, Aiona has a strong record of accomplishment to build on. He is prepared to restore accountability in state government and preserve the Aloha State's tradition as a place where opportunity and prosperity are available to all. The Republican Governors Association is proud to support Duke Aiona for governor. David Ige may have beat out Governor Abercrombie tonight, but his far-left approach would only take Hawaii further in the wrong direction," said RGA Executive Director Phil Cox. "After four years of Abercrombie's weak leadership and poor stewardship of taxpayer dollars, the last thing the state needs is another tax-and-spend liberal in the statehouse. It's time for a big change in Hawaii and Duke Aiona will deliver that change."
On September 23 Star-Advertiser commentator Richard Borreca mentioned that Ige continues to follow the same campaign strategy that he used in his overwhelming victory over Abercrombie -- small coffee-hour meetings in local neighborhoods; listening and not talking. My own observation is that this is a terrific political strategy: Go meet with a small group, don't talk too much, don't say anything controversial, just let the people spew whatever nonsense they want to get off their chests; nod, say yes, ah FEEL yore PAIN; and at the end the people will think their concerns have been heard and the candidate is a really wonderful guy who will do the right thing. Great way to avoid the issues, say nothing that could be embarrassing, don't get locked in to any campaign promises that you might be held accountable for later. It sort of reminds me of what happens during a committee hearing at the legislature. Legislators don't really care what the public says, but gotta give them a chance to speak, make them feel important, make them think their concerns have been heard. Gotta get past this stage of the process. Then, later, go ahead and do whatever you were going to do all along. Ige was a legislator for 20 years. That's where he got this idea for his campaign technique. So he's a clever campaigner; but that doesn't lend him credibility as someone whom we can trust to truly listen to our concerns and change his mind in the face of evidence. On the other hand, his professional background before politics was engineering, where facts and logic dictate decisions. So perhaps there's hope for us if he wins the election.
Mufi Hannemann's campaign webpage says nothing about Hawaiian sovereignty.
The executive summary of his platform, released September 21, 2014, says nothing about it.
However, looking back to his 2012 candidacy for Congress (he lost badly to Tulsi Gabbard in the Democrat primary), Hannemann answered OHA's survey questions as follows:
1. Do you believe that the United States government should formally acknowledge the special legal and political status of Native Hawaiians, as it has done for Native American and Alaska Native Groups? If so, what would you do to secure such ackowledgment for Native Hawaiians? If not, why not?
"I have been a longtime supporter of federal recognition and have testified in Washington, D.C., for the Akaka bill. My proven ability to work across the aisle will be an asset to ensure that future legislation recognizing Native Hawaiians passes the House. I will reach out across the aisle, as I have successfully done in the past to support jobs and secure federal funding for infrastructure."
2. What are some examples of actions that you have personally taken to better the conditions of Native Hawaiians?
"My strong track record with the Native Hawaiian community includes my first official act as mayor repealing the city’s mandatory leasehold-conversion law to protect trust lands; transferring stewardship to protect sacred lands like Waimea Valley and Kawainui Marsh; creating the 21st Century Ahupua‘a Program, an award-winning sustainability plan to protect our ‘äina; supporting for Native Hawaiian culture, arts and festivals; and establishing the Leeward Coast Community Benefits Program, which provided grants to Native Hawaiian organizations."
3. How would you address the challenges of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Act and the Native Hawaiian Education Act?
"I will first consult with Native Hawaiian organizations to see if amendments need to be made. Hawai‘i’s delegation must also be vocal in educating colleagues from both parties about the special educational and health needs of Native Hawaiians. I will reach out in a bipartisan way to ensure that vital programs like these receive proper reauthorization hearings and funding."
There are serious doubts about Hannemann's ability to listen actively to voices in the community; he has a well-deserved reputation as a bully. Perhaps more worrisome is his reputation for corruption. Bullying and corruption have caused some people to refer to Hannemann and his entourage as "the mufioso" by analogy to the mainland mafioso. On August 13, 2014, Ian Lind authored an article in Honolulu Civil Beat whose title says it all: "Perusing the Financial Disclosures of Hawaii Gov Candidates Ige and Aiona are boring compared to Hannemann." For details read
There is a fourth candidate for Governor: Jeff Davis, a Libertarian. His campaign webpage says nothing about Hawaiian sovereignty, and very little about most of the other issues facing Hawaii. He has participated in all the public debates sponsored by various groups, where he has made a point of saying that although he himself has no Hawaiian blood, he has family members who do, and he is very sympathetic to their economic needs and their historical grievances. There's really "no there there."
So there are four names on the ballot, but only three real candidates. Hannemann has a big name but no chance; he's only a spoiler who might allow either Ige or Aiona to win the Governorship with perhaps as little as 40-45% of the votes. I am not happy with either Ige or Aiona. My main concern with Ige is that he is merely a shill for the Democrat power elite and the labor unions (especially the teachers union and the government employees union). He will push a sovereignty agenda, tribalism, and racial entitlements as aggressively (or quietly) as his Democrat Party tells him to do so.
My main concern with Aiona is that he is ethnic Hawaiian who therefore has a built-in conflict of interest on all matters related to Hawaiian sovereignty, tribalism, and racial entitlements. What will he do when push comes to shove as a federally recognized Hawaiian tribe makes demands on the State of Hawaii for land, money, and jurisdictional authority? How actively will he put the interests of his blood brotherhood above the interests of all Hawaii's people, 80% of whom have no native ancestry? But Aiona is an intelligent, honorable man who has no history of using his previous positions of power (Judge, and Lieutenant Governor) to bestow racial favoritism. What I hope for from Aiona is what actually happened in the final two years of the Lingle administration, where Aiona was Lieutenant Governor. Governor Linda Lingle and Attorney General Mark Bennett had worked for the Akaka bill and Hawaiian racial entitlements as hard as they possibly could for their first six years in office. But at the end, they stepped away from Hawaiian racial activism in two ways. (1) When Congressman Abercrombie introduced an extremely radical version of the Akaka bill in the House committee, trying to sneak it past all Republicans in the House and also Lingle, Lingle and Bennett publicly objected to it and notified all 100 Senators of their opposition.
(2) When the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled 5-0 that the State was prohibited from selling any ceded lands without permission from ethnic Hawaiians, Lingle and Bennett filed an appeal directly with the U.S. Supreme Court over strong objections from the ethnic Hawaiian power elite and sovereignty activists. They knew that no state could tolerate being hamstrung by a racial minority from exercising the right of a state government to control its state government lands. Lingle/Bennett won their appeal with a 9-0 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court overruling the Hawaii Supreme Court.
I'm going to trust Duke Aiona's judicial temperament and his experience as Lieutenant Governor under Lingle to make righteous decisions in the best interest of all Hawaii's people regardless of race, just as Governor Lingle did at the end of her term. I'm nervous, but hopeful. Trust but verify.
All 51 members of the House are up for election, along with half of Hawaii's 25 Senators. There's no way I can keep track of all these contests. But some of them are worthy of special attention on my most important topic of Hawaiian sovereignty, and on other topics such as downsizing government, eliminating excessive regulation, taking back power for the people and away from labor unions, and helping Republicans get enough seats to be able to interfere with a runaway Democrat power elite.
Hawaii Political Info has a wonderful webpage providing multiple links to candidate webpages and interview videos, where you can do your own research
Here are the three contests where I am able to make well-informed recommendations with a focus on Hawaiian sovereignty issues. For all other contests, my advice is to vote for the Republican candidate simply to reduce the size of the Democrat majority; or if there is no Republican, then vote for the Libertarian.
SENATE DISTRICT 24 (Kaneohe, Kailua, He'eia, Ahuimanu, Marine Corps base Mokapu):
Please vote for Democrat candidate Jill Tokuda (Against Republican candidate Kilomana Michael Danner). District 24 is where I live, so I am very familiar with the issues and with Senator Tokuda. She works very hard and I constantly see her at numerous local events. She is a Democrat, so I would prefer to replace her with a Republican. But NOT THIS REPUBLICAN. Mike Danner is the brother of the infamous sisters Robin Danner and Jade Danner -- pushers of the Akaka bill, Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Kau Inoa and Kana'iolowalu racial registries, and Department of Interior rule-bending process to create a Hawaiian tribe. He has a small footprint -- not well known among sovereignty activists or racial entitlement service providers. Nevertheless, it would not be good to have him in the legislature, so let's stick with the hardworking Democrat honcho Jill Tokuda.
HOUSE DISTRICT 37 (Mililani, Waipio Gentry, Waikele):
Please vote for Republican candidate Dr. Emil Svrcina (against incumbent Democrat Ryan Yamane). Dr. Svrcina is probably THE BEST CANDIDATE RUNNING FOR THE LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR, so if you are fortunate to be a registered voter in this district, you have a wonderful chance to help elect a truly outstanding representative. Dr. Svrcina is a refugee from Soviet-dominated Communist Czechoslovakia. He studied optoelectronics and computer technology at the Czech Technical University in Prague and is currently a research scientist at the University of Hawaii Cancer Center. His life story is highly inspirational, including his support for religious, political, and economic freedom, his opposition to centralized government and communalism, his opposition to ethnic balkanization, and therefore his opposition to race-based government entitlements and creation of a phony Hawaiian tribe. His previous campaign webpage was apparently hacked. See his updated webpage including campaign events (and how to pronounce his name), at
See his 44-minute conversation with Dr. Keli'i Akina on the weekly ThinkTech program:
HOUSE DISTRICT 44 (Wai'anae, Makaha, Makua, Ma'ili):
Please do NOT vote for Libertarian Party candidate Al Frenzel, who MIGHT BE THE MOST DANGEROUS CANDIDATE FOR THE LEGISLATURE IN 2014 regarding Hawaiian sovereignty. Outwardly Frenzel seems to be the most intelligent candidate with the best plan for Hawaii's future in light of national plans to downsize the military. But he seems to have a hidden agenda of pushing the military out of Hawaii as the first step toward pushing the U.S. itself entirely out of Hawaii to reestablish Hawaii as an independent nation. Whether Frenzel is actively working with Hawaiian secessionists as his primary political mission is unclear; but in fact he is working closely with them regarding demilitarization; and his proposals, if implemented, would give aid and comfort to them. Adding to concerns about his likely support for secessionism is his appearance as a panelist on a TV secessionist propaganda program alongside secessionists Poka Laenui, Leon Siu, and Kioni Dudley. Adding further to concerns that he might be an agent for secession are elements on his campaign webpage that are subtle enough to be missed by average readers but which will be recognized by Hawaiian secessionists and which lead to hidden secessionist propaganda when the surface-level elements are clicked upon. See below for further information.
Please give your vote to either the Democrat incumbent Jo Jordan to ensure defeat of Al Frenzel; or if you want to give well-deserved encouragement to an outstanding young man, then vote with your heart for the Green Party candidate Cedric Asuega Gates. Each of them has positive and negative aspects. There is no Republican candidate.
There was a 50-minute candidate forum with all three participating, see video at:
The residents of House District 44 are blessed to have three outstanding candidates. Each one of them is highly intelligent, extremely hardworking, courageous, and dedicated to projects that are helpful and important to the very needy people of this district. Each candidate's accomplishments and character shows enormous potential for personal growth which will increase service to the community and the rest of Hawaii. It's a shame that only one of them can win the contest.
One of Jo Jordan's best aspects is that she is an incumbent Democrat, which gives her the best chance to defeat Al Frenzel. She also has great courage and strength of character -- she is a lesbian who voted against the marriage equality bill, whose concept she strongly supports. She voted that way in the special session because she is committed to ensuring that the people she represents can have their voices heard by the legislature, and she believed the bill was being railroaded through the legislature by the [her own] Democrat leadership without giving due deference to the views of the people. For evidence of her hard work on many projects important to the people of her district, take a look at her 46 videos at
and more on her YouTube channel at
One of Jo Jordan's worst aspects is that she is an incumbent Democrat, and can be expected to support the Democrat entrenched power elite on nearly all issues.
Green Party candidate Cedric Asuega Gates is not well known, but should be. He's the sort of man college admissions officers or corporate recruiters dream of finding among their applicants.
His biography page says "He attended Kamaile Elementary School where he graduated Student of the Year. He then attended Waianae Intermediate and later attended Waianae High School; upon completing 10th grade Cedric dropped out and attended a City and County sponsored alternative Learning Program called "Youth Build Hawaii" where he graduated at the age of 16 and learned valuable lesson about life, law and civic engagement. ... his mother passed away ... at 43 years of age from a heart attack, and at the age 14 my dad suffered his second stroke he was 46 years old." At age 21 Mr. Gates "is currently the Chief Operating Officer and a co-founder of the Active Hawaii Organization; at the age of 17 with the help of his brothers and father Cedric and his family created the organization to promote an active lifestyle and make childhood obesity a well-known issue in their community. ... at the age 19 he was elected Vice-Chair of the Waianae Coast Neighborhood Board #24 and Chair of the boards Park and Recreation subcommittee making him the youngest neighborhood board member in the State of Hawaii; his goal is to one day be the youngest State Representative for District 44. He has interned with Council Member Kymberly Marcos Pine and recently completed an internship for State Representative Karen Awana; in addition Cedric holds a seat on the Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center Board of Directors and two different DOE school advisory boards (Waianae High School and Makaha Elementary) and is involved with numerous grassroots organization, movements and individuals. Cedric was a proud recipient of Hawaii’s 2013 Outstanding Children and Youth Advocate Award by Governor Neil Abercrombie and the State of Hawaii Legislature. ... Cedric is currently enrolled in Leeward CC pursuing his associates degree in Business Management." Mr. Gates lays out a campaign platform identifying clearly-stated and worthy goals, and a list of experience, community works, honors and awards showing his strength of character, his persistence in the face of obstacles, and good work habits. Please see his beautifully designed webpage at
All things being equal, Mr. Gates is the candidate I would vote for. The trouble is that in politics all things are never equal. It's important to defeat Al Frenzel for reasons discussed below. A very youthful Green Party candidate simply will not attract enough votes to accomplish that mission.
So what's the story with Al Frenzel? Why do I call him possibly the most dangerous candidate for the legislature in 2014? (It's not because he has a highly stylized moustache reminiscent of General Emiliano Zapata, or artist Salvador Dali, which probably impresses the heck out of the ladies far more effectively than mine!)
Al Frenzel is a retired U.S. Army Colonel. Thus we know he is highly intelligent, with plenty of administrative and bureaucratic skills, and experience running a large organization with a hefty budget. He is also the Waianae Coast Neighborhood Board’s Oahu Metropolitan Transportation Organization’s representative to the very powerful but little-known Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization (OMPO).
Here are the sources for the information being discussed below:
Mr. Frenzel's campaign webpage is at
which includes a subpage proclaiming his support for Army downsizing at
Al Frenzel has for several years been Director of the Oahu Council for Army Downsizing, whose webpage is at
On August 18, 2014 there was a 42-minute interview of Mr. Frenzel by Dr. Keli'i Akina as part of the weekly ThinkTech series; the video is at
Retired Army Colonel Al Frenzel notes that Hawaii will be forced to undergo very large cuts in the number of active duty personnel. It will happen partly because Inouye and Akaka are no longer in the Senate and our delegation has very low seniority or influence. Frenzel recommends that Hawaii should accept the inevitable, not fight it, and embrace it with an orderly transition (not like the horrible transition at Barbers Point); and ask Obama for money to facilitate the transition. He says let's have the Army move completely out of Schofield and Wheeler and send any residual personnel to Fort Schafter. He says the two bases being liberated have thousands of recently-built housing units, and good infrastructure including warehouses, post offices, fire stations, libraries, etc. He says those liberated turnkey towns should be given partly or entirely to DHHL (Department of Hawaiian Homelands) to greatly reduce the DHHL waiting list, and perhaps the barracks could be used for housing homeless people.
Frenzel says it is urgent that we embrace military downsizing because this is an opportunity we might never have again. He sounds like a used car salesman or high-pressure telephone salesman saying "Buy now! Don't let this opportunity pass you by!" When someone says that, we should be on guard against fraud. Someone is saying "Do it now and don't think about it too much or do research." Nonsense.
Frenzel also says large military downsizing in the near future is inevitable, because of Hawaii's low seniority in both the Senate and the House; and because a huge sequester of military funds was forced upon Republicans by Democrats two years ago to avoid a government shutdown (the deal was that Republicans must agree to military cuts as severe as the cuts in social programs the Republicans were demanding). Politicians often try to steamroll their opponents by saying something is inevitable. It's like the popular Star Trek shows where the evil Borg always tried to intimidate the good guys by warning "Resistance is futile; You will be assimilated." It reminds me of a guy with a knife at a woman's throat saying "You're going to be raped; there's nothing you can do about it; so just lie back and enjoy it." But in the case of military downsizing, it might not be so inevitable. During the coming lame duck session after the election, Congress must once again pass a budget bill or at least a "continuing resolution" before December 11 to avoid a government shutdown, and there will be very severe hard bargaining over the military sequester. Considering all the military turmoil in Iraq and Syria, and threats from Russia and China, the military sequester might be lifted because Congress might decide we need a strong military after all. And in January it seems likely that the Senate will have a Republican majority along with the House, resulting in more friendliness toward the military budget.
Here's how I became suspicious of Al Frenzel's motives. My first encounter with him was when I watched the ThinkTech video, which on the surface seems to have a retired Army Colonel presenting some good ideas for how Honolulu should make use of military housing that will be vacated by what he describes as an inevitable downsizing of the Army under federal budget constraints. Frenzel pushes the idea that instead of resisting and lobbying against the downsizing we should welcome it, and thereby ingratiate President Obama and Congressional delegates from other states who will be happy to see Hawaii take the brunt of the downsizing and will be willing to steer billions of dollars to Hawaii to help with the transition. Frenzel mentioned only briefly and only a couple of times that maybe the entire towns with ready-to-go military housing and infrastructure could be turned over in whole or in part to DHHL -- a proposal that would in effect (although Frenzel did not explicitly say so) provide billions of dollars of land and infrastructure to become part of the reservation lands of the forthcoming Hawaiian tribe and eventually of the future independent nation of Hawaii. Frenzel probably views this as a wonderful down-payment on the reparations owed by the U.S. to the Native Hawaiians for the illegal overthrow, illegal annexation, and illegal Statehood vote (although I had not yet attributed that motive to Frenzel at the time I watched the video).
After viewing the video I googled him and discovered that he is a candidate for the legislature in House District 44 -- something never mentioned in the video. Then I realized that his district includes Wai'anae, Makua, and Makaha, where there are large numbers of ethnic Hawaiian activists and their Caucasian supporters who have been battling against the Army for about 20 years over the use of Makua Valley for military training (including live-fire training). I noted that his biographical page says he has been a resident of the area for 12 years; and I recalled that 12 years ago was the height of the Battle of Makua between Hawaiian activists and the Army, including public hearings for an environmental impact statement which featured highly publicized protests and TV coverage of contentious testimony. See webpage created in 2002 at
Then I remembered how bitterly the Hawaiian independence activists hate the U.S. military both for historical grievances and because of current complaints over military use of "Hawaiian" lands. Recall that in 1893 the U.S. landed 162 peacekeepers off a ship in the harbor at the time of the Hawaiian revolution, to protect American lives and property and to prevent rioting and arson. The troops never gave help to the local revolutionaries, did not patrol the streets, and were never really needed. Nevertheless today's Hawaiian activists describe the peacekeepers as "an armed invasion" which overthrew Queen Lili'uokalani and set up a U.S. puppet regime (the Provisional Government followed by the Republic of Hawaii) which continues to today as a belligerent military occupation of the continuing independent nation of Hawaii. The activists also complain that the U.S. military controls large amounts of land in Hawaii for military bases, often damaging lands that they claim are sacred or have historical significance.
With these thoughts in my mind I then explored Al Frenzel's candidate webpage and discovered that on the top it displays only the Hawaiian flag but not the U.S. flag (typical of sovereignty activists and very out of character for a U.S. Army colonel if he is actually a proud and loyal American). My suspicions were growing. Then I scrolled down and found a picture of the red/green/yellow Hawaiian sovereignty flag present on the left margin of that webpage for no apparent reason; and upon seeing my cursor indicate that the flag is actually a clickable link, I clicked on it and found that it revealed a photo of Queen Lili'uokalani on the throne, with a blatantly secessionist paragraph. Needless to say, all that was quite alarming. Here is the treasonous paragraph along with the Lili'uokalani photo, as taken on September 24, 2014 directly from Frenzel's webpage:
Note that the paragraph is the words of Al Frenzel giving his own personal testimony of treason.
Then I saw Al Frenzel featured as a panelist on the August TV program which is one of twelve 90-minute monthly secessionist propaganda forums ("The Sovereignty Conversation", Channel 53) where nearly all the presenters or guests month after month are the most radical secessionists including Hayden Burgess (alias Poka Laenui), Leon Siu, Kioni Dudley, Jonathan Osorio (UH Professor) etc., or occasionally more moderate racial separatists like Mahealani Kamau'u Wendt (Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and Kana'iolowalu board of directors), Dante Carpenter (former OHA trustee and recently retired head of the Hawaii Democrat Party), and Soulee Stroud (head of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, very active on promoting state legislation and also the Akaka bill and the Department of Interior rule-bending proposal to create a Hawaiian tribe).
What's going on in the mind and heart of Retired U.S. Army Colonel Al Frenzel to cause him to give the testimony of treason he wrote under the photo of Queen Lili'uokalani on the throne? We might ask the same question about other American military men who have defected to North Korea, the Soviet Union, or the Haqqani network in Afghanistan (Bowe Robert Bergdahl). Indeed, we might ask the same question about other well-educated people with no Hawaiian blood who came to Hawaii and eagerly enlisted as Hawaiian independence activists.
I cannot see into someone else's heart and mind, especially someone I have never personally met. And I deplore the casual psychoanalysis some political activists administer to their opponents as a way of belittling or shaming them (Oh, he's a sad, tired, angry, bitter little man). But I will offer a few comments based on my own personal growth since coming to Hawaii and my observations of people with whom I have had relationships.
There are a few ethnic Chinese, Japanese, and Filipinos, with no Hawaiian native blood, who have chosen to become Hawaiian sovereignty activists (almost always for independence, not for the tribal concept). I have personally known and been (formerly) friendly with several of them. But the great majority of Hawaiian sovereignty activists with no native blood are Caucasians. I have known perhaps a hundred of them either face-to-face or through the internet. Some were born and raised in Hawaii; many came to Hawaii as adults, usually from mainland U.S. What motivates these people to become Hawaiian sovereignty activists? Some of them are merely hippies, or people trying to "find themselves", or radicals without a cause who latch onto Hawaiian radicalism and embark on a zealous jihad. But some of them are like I once was, who feel they have found a spiritual home and want to spend their life making things pono. Eventually I hope they will keep their spirituality and quest for righteousness, but realize that righteousness requires commitment to unity and equality, not separatism, blood nationalism, or racial supremacy.
I was a teacher/professor on the mainland, with 10 consecutive weeks of summer vacation each year during my 25 years of full-time employment after earning the Ph.D. I came to Hawaii during three summer trips (1982, 1986, 1989), and always lived inexpensively, spending several days or a week in someone's spare bedroom and becoming immersed in the local community before moving on to the next spare bedroom in a different town or different island, or traveling on to Asia. The first time in Hawaii I felt like I was returning to a long-lost home. The second time I knew I would retire here permanently. The third time was partly the joy of simply being here and partly a search in which particular town to purchase a home three years later. I have lived permanently in Kane'ohe since 1992 and have never left the islands since then.
For me it was (and remains) the spirituality of the land, sea, and sky. Then the beautiful rainbow of races and cultures among the people of Hawaii, and especially the ethnic Hawaiians. The spiritual core of Hawaiian music, language, hula. The jewel-like fish in the reef. The clouds, rains, and mists swirling over and among the Ko'olau mountains greeting me every morning. I see and touch the ancient gods every moment, and feel within me the Cosmic Spirit, also called the Aloha Spirit.
I felt this spirituality calling to me when I first arrived in 1982, but it got stronger on the next two visits and has become the core of my being. Because that spirituality was my main reason for becoming hanai to Hawaii, I naturally gravitated toward Hawaiian cultural practitioners and the political activists who associated with them. I arrived with pre-conceived notions that what the activists were saying about history was true. Surely the people who produced such beautiful music, language, and hula must be telling the truth about history and politics. I spent 5 years in full-time study of history, language, and culture; attended hundreds of sovereignty rallies and forums at UH and small discussion groups in peoples' homes. But the more I learned, the more doubts I had about the accuracy of the history and the righteousness of the politics. I started asking questions and not getting very good answers. As my questions became more probing, the answers became more hesitant and then hostile. After several years of this all the little dots in the canvass finally coalesced into the big picture, and I saw the face of evil looking back at me from the Hawaiian sovereignty movement.
I would like to give the benefit of the doubt to Al Frenzel. The best thing would be if his work on military downsizing and environmental protection in Makua/Makaha are simply his way of using his knowledge and skills as an Army officer to do what's best for all Hawaii's people in the face of inevitable economic forces. If that's not a correct analysis of his motives, then the next best thing would be if he is merely a sincere admirer of Hawaiian culture and eager to help ethnic Hawaiians restore what Frenzel feels they are rightfully entitled to as reparations for alleged U.S. historical misdeeds. Frenzel's testimony of treason under the Lili'uokalani picture could be accepted as a harmless statement of his personal motivation and commitment to "do the right thing." But from a political standpoint, it really doesn't matter whether Frenzel merely has good intentions to help people with historical grievances, or whether Frenzel's testimony of treason is in fact a renunciation of his pledge of allegiance to the United States and an announcement of his jihad to bring down the sovereignty of the United States in Hawaii. Either way, Frenzel's proposal to embrace military downsizing makes him an ally of the Hawaiian secessionists, and the secessionists have warmly embraced him and included him as a panelist on TV programs like "The Sovereignty Conversation" (hosts Poka Laenui and Kioni Dudley) and "First Friday." (Hosts Mililani Trask and Manu Kaiama). AL FRENZEL MUST NOT BE ELECTED TO THE LEGISLATURE OF A STATE HE IS TRYING TO UNDERCUT.
Request for help: Please note that I have only researched the candidates for one state Senate contest and two state House contests. If any reader has recommendations for any other senate or house contests, please let me know, including any sources of information you have. I'm willing to add more legislative contests to my list of recommendations on this webpage.
CON AMEND #1: Relating to Disclosure of Judicial Nominees
"Shall the judicial selection commission, when presenting a list of nominees to the governor or the chief justice to fill a vacancy in the office of the chief justice, supreme court, intermediate appellate court, circuit courts or district courts, be required, at the same time, to disclose that list to the public?"
Please vote YES to support transparency in government.
CON AMEND #2: Relating to Agricultural Enterprises
"Shall the State be authorized to issue special purpose revenue bonds and use the proceeds from the bonds to assist agricultural enterprises on any type of land, rather than only important agricultural lands?"
Please vote NO. A revenue bond becomes a debt of the State of Hawaii in case the beneficiary of the bond fails to earn sufficient revenue to pay the interest or amortized annual principal. The State already has too much debt. A landowner should be able to float his own bonds. Inability to do that is evidence that the marketplace has doubts about the economic viability of his project.
CON AMEND #3: Relating to State Justices and Judges
"Shall the mandatory retirement age for all state court justices and judges be increased from seventy to eighty years of age?"
Please vote NO. The main purpose of this proposed amendment is to allow judges appointed by reigning Democrats to remain in office even if a Republican wins the election. We need younger people with fresh eyes to see issues more clearly and to bring the perspective of young people into judicial decision-making.
CON AMEND #4: Relating to Early Childhood Education
"Shall the appropriation of public funds be permitted for the support or benefit of private early childhood education programs that shall not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex or ancestry, as provided by law?"
Please vote NO. (a) For many years Project Headstart has provided federal funds for pre-kindergarten schooling for racial minorities and economically disadvantaged children. Most research has shown that children in the program make noticeable gains which last for a few months, but that the advantage fades after a while and the program has no long-term impact on success in school. Thus, early childhood education is little more than babysitting at taxpayer expense. (b) The amendment says the programs must not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, or ancestry. However, that only means that the programs must allow children to apply and be admitted without such discrimination. It does not prevent viewpoint discrimination in the content of what is taught. Jewish kids attending a program in a Catholic school might wonder why that guy on the wall has nails in his hands. Kids born and raised in Hawaii but with no Hawaiian native blood, attending an ethnic Hawaiian charter school, might wonder why they are regarded as having no family relationship with the 'aina or are not allowed to say "He Hawai'i au."
CON AMEND #5: Relating to Dams and Reservoirs
"Shall the State be authorized to issue special purpose revenue bonds and use the proceeds from the bonds to offer loans to qualifying dam and reservoir owners to improve their facilities to protect public safety and provide significant benefits to the general public as important water sources?"
Please vote NO. A revenue bond becomes a debt of the State of Hawaii in case the beneficiary of the bond fails to earn sufficient revenue to pay the interest or amortized annual principal. The State already has too much debt. A landowner should be able to float his own bonds. Inability to do that is evidence that the marketplace has doubts about the economic viability of his project. Dam and reservoir owners are legally responsible to maintain their property and provide for public safety. They should have insurance to cover their liability; and if they cannot pay the insurance or ensure public safety then they should declare bankruptcy and turn over their land to the government or to a conservation group such as the trust for public lands, the Audabon Society, etc.
Send comments or questions to:
You may now
SEE MORE WEBPAGES ABOUT HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY ISSUES