---

STAR-BULLETIN / 1998 The Akaka bill would extend the federal government's policy of self-determination for Hawaiians. Above, a man carries the Hawaiian flag and follows a torch bearer past Pearl Harbor during a march around Oahu.

---

Akaka bill a part
of vital process

It has been six years since my colleagues and I in Hawaii's congressional delegation worked on legislation that would extend the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination to Hawaii's indigenous people, native Hawaiians. Throughout these years, I have engaged in discussions with a number of individuals, some who support the legislation and some who have expressed concerns.

My bill does three things: establishes an office in the Department of the Interior to serve as a liaison to native Hawaiians and to provide permanency to the reconciliation process; establishes an interagency coordinating group composed of federal officials from agencies with programs and services affecting Hawaiians; and provides a process for the reorganization of the native Hawaiian governing entity for the purpose of a federally recognized government-to-government relationship with the United States.

Since its conception, I have reviewed all of the input received on this bill, whether it has been through oral or written testimony, letters, meetings or phone calls. In some instances, I have made the recommended changes. This is my responsibility as the principal author of this legislation -- to ensure that as I address the many comments, I preserve the intent of the legislation, which is to extend the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination to Hawaiians. It is my responsibility to ensure that, following discussions with all sides, we have a bill that can be enacted.

Federal legislation takes a number of years to enact. The apology resolution, for example, was considered for five years before it was enacted in 1993. After six years of negotiations and responding to input on Senate Bill 147, we are now negotiating time for debate and a roll call vote on the floor. Holding additional hearings in Hawaii at this time, as some have suggested, would place us at the beginning of the process we started in 2000. I agree that continued input on the bill is necessary. This is why educational briefings on federal recognition by organizations, such as the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, and State Council of Hawaiian Homesteaders, are so important. These gatherings provide opportunities for Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians to understand and discuss the legislation. They are helping to lay the groundwork for the bill's implementation upon enactment.

For me, what distinguishes this bill is that its aim is not a predetermined outcome but a process; a process that furthers empowerment and reconciliation. I have been approached by many people -- opponents and proponents alike -- who want me to add provisions that would predetermine the outcome of the reorganization process for the native Hawaiian governing entity. The federal policy of self-governance and self-determination is based on the concept that native peoples are best able to manage their resources for themselves.

Following the recognition of the Hawaiian governing entity, negotiations between the entity and the federal and state governments will begin to address the potential transfer and control of lands, natural resources and assets, and the exercise of governmental authority by the Hawaiian governing entity. This is the structured process that we have needed in the past to address longstanding issues resulting from the overthrow of the kingdom of Hawaii.

This discussion has been avoided for far too long because we have not known how to address the emotions that arise when these matters are discussed. There has been fear as to what the discussion would entail, causing people to avoid the issues. Such behavior has led to high levels of anger and frustration as well as misunderstandings between Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians. This structured process, which is inclusive and empowers the people of Hawaii, is necessary to alleviate the growing mistrust, misunderstanding, anger and frustration about these matters. This process will unite rather than divide the people of Hawaii.

I am saddened by the efforts of those who have tried to garner opposition to the bill by exploiting the fear and frustration about these matters of individuals who are not familiar with the bill. I am proud of the delicate balance the bill achieves between providing structure and allowing flexibility for Hawaiians to determine the outcome of their reorganized governing entity and interested parties to be represented in the negotiations process mentioned. State and federal laws will need to be amended to implement the outcome of the negotiations.

As I have stated over and over, this bill sets up a process -- one that is inclusive, empowers citizens and fully utilizes our democratic system. It is wrong for us to predetermine the outcome of this process. For that reason, I have rejected suggestions to include provisions that would, for example, limit jurisdiction, determine membership criteria in the entity, or address land issues. I have confidence that this bill is flexible enough to provide for appropriate participation by all interested parties in a process that will move us all forward as we strive to provide a better future for the children of Hawaii.

---