By Jerry Burris
Advertiser Editorial Editor

It's been something of a race to the finish line between supporters of the Akaka bill for Hawaiian recognition and those who have gone to court seeking to end race-based programs that the Akaka bill seeks to protect.

At this point, those who seek to achieve their ends in court are clearly in the lead.

Most of those involved in this — including players on both sides — believe that a court decision most likely would turn against Hawaiian programs and entitlements. They cite the Supreme Court's decision rejecting a Hawaiians-only requirement for voting for OHA trustees. Granted, that was narrowly based on voting rights issues. But most observers say the decision suggests which way the courts would go when it comes to racial entitlements.

They also note that the political climate is not particularly warm for racially based programs. The Bush administration has been actively campaigning for racially neutral laws and programs. So, unless conditions change dramatically, supporters of Hawaiian entitlements see their chances of victory in court as slim, at best.

Which brings them to the Akaka bill. It would, in effect, recognize Hawaiians as a political entity, not a race. And the federal government is free to make agreements with political entities that easily pass constitutional muster.

Some of the opposition to the Akaka bill comes from the same people who object to any race-based legislation. That's an irony, because the bill seeks to achieve precisely the opposite: It seeks to eliminate the race issue altogether.

Washington bureau reporter Derrick DePledge reported Friday that a Senate Republican has placed a "hold" on the Akaka bill, an informal maneuver in which an individual senator can keep a measure from coming up for a vote.

Hawai'i political leaders say they hope something can be salvaged, but the signs aren't good.

Gov. Linda Lingle canceled a trip to Washington to lobby on the measure. Our congressional delegation remains publicly optimistic, but it is clear that unless they can convince a skeptical Bush administration to push the bill in Congress, their chances are slim.

This brings political leaders both at home and in Washington to a delicate point. Should they continue to hang their hopes on the increasingly difficult task of getting the Akaka bill passed? Or should they acknowledge reality and begin looking for a different solution?

Hawaiians, including those who oppose the Akaka bill, will tell you that it isn't needed to create Hawaiian sovereignty or self-determination. That is inherently something asserted, rather than granted.

But the many programs that benefit Hawaiians, from homesteads through numerous federal health, economic development and social programs, stand to crumble if matters continue on their current path.

Is there anyone out there clever enough to come up with a fresh solution?