Akaka bill could be delayed in Senate

Star-Bulletin reports that Senator Kyl from Arizona, who in past years was responsible for an anonymous hold on the Akaka bill that prevented a vote in the Senate, appears determined to use delaying tactics again to prevent the bill from passing by requesting 45 hours to debate the issue on the Senate floor. OHA administrator Clyde Namuo says his request "could make it difficult for (Majority Leader Bill) Frist to find that large a block of time for discussion." (Note, the article incorrectly spell's Kyl's name as Kyle.)

In the larger context, also keep in mind the senate debate over the so-called "nuclear option" regarding filibusters. The Washington Post reported last week: "Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is all but certain to press for a rule change that would ban filibusters of judicial nominations in the next few weeks, despite misgivings by some of his fellow Republicans and a possible Democratic backlash that could paralyze the chamber." If this happens, which it seems increasingly likely that it will, they ain't gettin' to the Akaka bill this year.

Also of interest in the S-B article are statements at the end from state Sen. J. Kalani English, who is our state senator here from East Maui (and Moloka'i and Lana'i) and Chair of the committee that includes International Affairs, arguing the issue of nationality under the kingdom. "Sen. J. Kalani English said he is pleased the bill seeks justice for native Hawaiians but asked, 'What about those not of Hawaiian blood who pledged loyalty to the king? The kingdom did not separate citizens by race,' English said. 'There were many people in the body politic who were not Hawaiians,' including many cabinet members and other government officials. Asian families also lost their Hawaiian citizenship and couldn't become Americans under annexation because of the Asian exclusion act, English said."

In response AG Bennett says that he doesn't think the Akaka bill would prevent non-Hawaiians from being included. I think he's wrong; the last known version of the bill defines Native Hawaiian as an individual who is "of the indigenous, native people of Hawaii and who is a direct lineal descendant of the aboriginal, indigenous, native people who resided in the islands that now comprise the State of Hawaii on or before January 1, 1893; and occupied and exercised sovereignty in the Hawaiian archipelago, including the area that now constitutes the State of Hawaii; or an individual who is one of the indigenous, native people of Hawaii and who was eligible in 1921 for the programs authorized by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (42 State. 108, chapter 42) or a direct lineal descendant of that individual." The bill leaves open the possibility of some blood quantum requirement, but it does seem to prevent non-Hawaiians from being included. And I certainly don't think Interior would approve a role that was defined by descendants of Hawaiian nationals, but it is noteworthy that the AG is forced to address the issue and make this statement.

English (who I am good friends with and whose website I maintain, I should say in the interest of full disclosure) has been openly pro-independence in the past, but recently I was somewhat disappointed to see some statements he made in favor of the Akaka bill, so it is great to see him articulating well this issue which I have been pounding on here and in letters to editors.

Meanwhile, the Maui News also has an editorial in today's paper that covers various concerns about the Akaka bill, for and against, and points out some important aspects of the bill.

Posted: Sun - April 17, 2005 at 12:21 PM

getBlogName(); > getCategoryName("C608676235"); >

Akaka bill could be delayed in Senate

> >