Native debate revisits key issue
By Derrick DePledge
Advertiser Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — Native Hawaiians seeking federal recognition as an indigenous people are brushing up against a moral and legal issue that has divided lawmakers and the courts:
Do past injustices warrant special treatment today?
The difficult question is at the heart of sensitive debates over affirmative action, women's equality in education and slavery reparations as the government struggles to weigh history and fairness in an increasingly diverse society.
The United States apologized in 1993 for its role in the overthrow of the kingdom of Hawai'i, and Congress has approved dozens of programs over the years to help preserve Hawaiian health, education and culture.
A federal recognition bill, which would establish a process for Hawaiians to form their own government, has been pending in Congress since 2000 over conservative objections that it would sanction race-based preferences.
Hawaiians who support the bill argue they should have the same sovereign rights as American Indians and Native Alaskans, although they stress that a new Hawaiian government may not mirror the tribal or regional corporation models. Some Hawaiians also are uncomfortable with direct comparisons between Hawaiian-only programs and affirmative action, even though lawyers defending Kamehameha Schools' admissions policies make that connection.
The Bush administration has not taken a position on Hawaiian recognition, but lawyers at the Justice Department have questioned whether Hawaiian-only programs are constitutional. Lawsuits challenging the validity of Hawaiian programs have created urgency among supporters of federal recognition, who fear that the courts will settle the issue before Congress acts.
Haunani Apoliona, chairwoman of the board of trustees for the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs, said she believes that unified support for the bill from the Hawai'i congressional delegation, Gov. Linda Lingle and indigenous and civil rights groups will ultimately make the difference.
"I believe that the voices are rising," said Apoliona, who will travel to Washington with other trustees in September to lobby for the bill.
Conflicting signals
Administration officials have sent some conflicting signals this year.
U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, appearing before the Supreme Court, argued for race-neutral college admissions policies and described racial preferences at the University of Michigan as a "thinly disguised quota." The court in June struck down a race-based point system for undergraduate admissions at Michigan but upheld the use of race as a factor in law school admissions.
Olson, as a private attorney, won the Rice v. Cayetano case at the Supreme Court in 2000 when the justices found that Hawaiian-only voting for OHA trustees was unconstitutional.
The Bush administration, however, opted not to tinker with Title IX, the law that requires sex equality in education and has led to a surge in women's sports. After a yearlong review, the administration decided in July to keep guidelines requiring schools to provide athletic programs in proportion to the gender breakdown of the student population, or add women's sports, or offer sports that are locally popular.
Wrestling coaches and others have complained that the guidelines created a quota system that has forced many schools to eliminate men's sports teams.
Ken Conklin, a retired teacher in Kane'ohe, describes Hawaiian recognition as "affirmative action gone berserk."
The bill, he said, "is nothing but pork-barrel politics seeking to preserve unconstitutional race-based handouts by converting a racial minority into a phony Indian tribe to circumvent the 14th Amendment."
Congress, confronted with claims of racial or ethnic injustice, has applied various remedies.
Apology, reparations
In 1988, Congress apologized to Japanese Americans who were sent to internment camps or had property confiscated during World War II and agreed to provide them more than $1 billion in reparations. Just last year, Congress approved a commission that will study whether people on Guam deserve reparations for their treatment by Japanese invaders during the same war.
Bills that would study reparations for the descendants of African-American slaves have stalled in Congress, but lawsuits have been filed against corporations that allegedly profited from slavery.
Although the issues and circumstances are different, Hawaiians understand it will be difficult to convince lawmakers that federal recognition is necessary and practical. A new Hawaiian government would be recognized as a political entity, not a racial group. It would be able to conduct government-to-government relations with the state and federal governments and could potentially control Native Hawaiian programs.
"I'm cautiously optimistic," Apoliona said. "The first hurdle is getting it passed out of the Senate."
