When Sen. Daniel Akaka authored the 1993 Apology Resolution he contemplated that an American expression of regret to the Native Hawaiian population would enable a meaningful reconciliation dialogue. As the report of the session held in Lihu’e on Dec. 5
When Sen. Daniel Akaka authored the 1993 Apology Resolution he contemplated
that an American expression of regret to the Native Hawaiian population would
enable a meaningful reconciliation dialogue. As the report of the session held
in Lihu’e on Dec. 5 shows, he was wrong.
It is axiomatic that for
discussions with a reconciliation goal to be successful there must be
acceptance by the parties of agreed conditions and agenda. These requirements
did not exist at the recent hearing.
The declaration by the Federal
representatives that they were not authorized to discuss statehood or the
formation of an independent nation was inconsistent with what the audience
wished to talk about.
Thus there was no mutuality in the desire for a
productive discussion and no meaningful dialogue could be expected in these
circumstances.
A threshold disagreement related to the question of
applicable law. The native Hawaiian attendees asserted that their rights should
be determined under international law although they were vague about their
standing under such law or the forum which could adjudicate any claims they may
wish to assert.
The Federal representatives were specific that the
discussions would occur under American law and under the Constitutional
framework.
As cases cannot be tried under international law against a
sovereign nation without its consent or cession of sovereignty through treaty
or otherwise and no effort has been made under American law it is difficult to
see the means by which any rights of members of the Hawaiian community,
individually or collectively, against the United States could be determined
under any legal process.
Similarly another impasse developed when a member
of the audience asked if the State had political power in Hawai’i, and if so
where did the State purchase Hawai’i from.
While the question was rather
absurd as states are formed under Article IV of the Constitution without
“purchasing” the territory to be governed, a response was not readily available
as stating the truth would not have been considered conciliatory.
A further
deterrent to a fruitful exchange was the indicated pressure to achieve some
resolution before the end of the Clinton administration.
It is not
reasonable to expect the disposition of matters which have been pending for
over 100 years to be compressed into any such short period.
The format for
the meetings also was ill advised. While a session which is structured to allow
an iteration of grievances may offer a measure of satisfaction, it does not
accomplish anything. Progress can only occur when there is an opportunity for
the disposition of issues raised.
It would seem that the reconciliation
path chosen by Sen. Akaka is doomed to failure unless discussions are
conditioned on some arrangement which is mutually agreeable and the dialogue is
limited to matters within such a framework.
Is it too much to hope that
these basic terms which are needed for any issue resolution process can be
obtained and applied in the Native Hawaiian context?
Walter
Lewis
Princeville
Abramo misses mark
To The Forum
In
response to the Sports To Ponder article in The Garden Island dated Nov. 23, I
have a few words to express in regards to Nick Abramo’s article “Up Next:
St. Louis Goliath’s.”
Do you not get complete facts before printing
articles or even judging people? First of all, St. Louis Crusaders has four of
our island’s well-respected boys in their program that I think you may need to
apologize to.
Mr. Ikaika Curnan, Mr. Kawai Curnan, Mr. Enoch McKeague, and
Mr. Troy Isera are presently playing their hearts out for this program that
you make sound so bad and unsportsman like.
Some facts and things that I
think people should know is that when the Crusaders are winning the game by
over 80 points, the starting team from the sportsmanlike Crusaders are sitting
on the sidelines.
What are you gonna tell your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th team
players to do? Are you going to tell them not to play hard? Coaches don’t teach
players to not play hard or to be losers on or off the field.
Another
thing, Mr. Abramo, your part about players boozing it up and hanging with
strippers is one fact I’ll have to give to you. But like I’ve wrote in prior
articles to the forum, because there’s a bad apple in the box, it doesn’t mean
the whole box is no good!!!
You find me a high school football team in
this state that don’t have some kind of alcohol or drug problem that they had
to deal with one time or another.
Another thing, Mr. Abramo, do you know
that the boys that are playing there from Kaua’i were very happy and proud of
the Waimea Menehunes and their great performance against a great team like
Kailua. Let it also be known that the percentage of kids that go to St. Louis
attend well known colleges throughout the United States.
You act as though
the St. Louis players do not practice hard to get where they are today. Did you
see their 3rd class facilities that they are so proud to practice and train on?
It seems that you do not, by the way you make them seem to be.
And last of
all, I think your article has no relevance to what the outcome to Friday
night’s game will be. And you should question your own sportsmanship by the way
you are trying to degrade a well respected football team as the Crusaders are.
Robert Cremer, Jr.
Waimea High Football Fan
OHA chair
reflects on good and bad
To the Forum:
I appreciate the opportunity to
share with your readers the gratification and unfortunately a few
disappointments of this eventful year, as I recently celebrated my first year
as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.
I
promised I would keep everyone informed as to what OHA is currently working on,
and I am delighted to report the successful programs, actions, and items that
our Board has seen to fruition during the last six months.
*Trustees
launched a successful initiative in Washington D.C., winning the Hawaiians and
the state the support of U.S. Solicitor General Seth Waxman in Rice vs.
Cayetano. He filed one of two dozen briefs urging the Supreme Court to consider
constitutional OHA’s election.
*The Board approved amendments to S. 225, a
bill extending the Native Americans Housing Assistance and Self-Determination
Act to Hawaiians.
*Grants totaling $116,996.60 were awarded for Native
Hawaiian projects.
*$1.2 million was appropriated to guarantee a loan
supporting Hawaii County Department of Water Supply’s application for federal
funds for road construction and clearing Hawaiian homestead lots in
Kikala-Keokea.
*We approved funds for initiatives in alternative
education.
*We voted to support the Dollars-to-Classroom Act.
*We
amended the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act to widen its scope.
*We appropriated $120,000 for the Molokai Dialysis Treatment Center and
$7,200 for home kidney dialysis machines.
Regretfully, OHA’s Board
appropriated only a small fraction of the Puwalu, or self-determination
consensus-building workshops. Only $243,000 was earmarked for community
education by Paepae Hanohano, OHA’s volunteer self-determination advisory
board. The request was $1,056,463 for two years.
The board also
deadlocked on the Native Hawaiian Health Care Initiative. This project aimed to
supplement the Medicare Part B of 23,000 needy kupuna.
On Maui, we heard 3
1/2 hours of testimony from kupuna urging trustees to act favorably. The issue
was revisited on Oahu when neighbor island kupuna flew into testify in its
favor.
An independent task force made up of outstanding professionals such
as former trustee Gladys Brandt, Dr. Charmin Akina, and attorney Beadie Dawson
recommended the plan.
Trustees Clayton Hee, Colette Machado, Haunani
Apoliona, and A. “Frenchy” DeSoto objected to appropriating a mere
$43,500 to get this plan off the ground.
In point of fact, trustee Machado
quipped, “Do you think that I would support this health initiative, just
because kupuna came here in a wheelchair?”
Trustee Machado’s comments
are hypocritical in the wake of her oath of office vowing to better the
conditions of the Hawaiian people.
Meanwhile, a recent Honolulu newspaper
article reported negative comments made by Trustee Mililani Trask about U.S.
Senator Dan Inouye. Let me make it perfectly clear I do not condone
name-calling of any kind and I believe people must be responsible for their
behavior and comments.
That said, the people who leaked those comments to
the press should also take responsibility for their actions. Trustees DeSoto,
Apoliona, and Machado took an internal tape, paid to have it transcribed, and
then sent it to the Senator and to the press.
On a more pleasant note, I
look back with satisfaction on the nine years I worked with Trustee Moses
Keale, who recently retired after 19 years of service. Trustee Keale is the
longest serving trustee, and the most popular, garnering 33,000 votes from
Niihau and Kauai beneficiaries in one election.
As I bid farewell to him,
it occurs to me his replacement has big shoes to fill.
In closing, I
wish you a safe and very happy holiday season. Mele Kalikimaka kakou and God
bless you all!
Rowena M.N. Akana,
Chairman, Board of Trustees
