WASHINGTON — Even though opposition remains strong, several senators say opponents will not be able to continue blocking the historic Native Hawaiian Recognition Bill, also known as the Akaka bill, from finally coming to the floor for debate this week.

One of the chief opponents, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., told a panel at the conservative Heritage Foundation a week ago that the bill is "a truly dangerous piece of legislation and needs to be stopped in its tracks."

Even though the bill has drawn broad support, Alexander's remarks show the depth of sentiment by the opposition.

But, he conceded, there may not be enough votes for the opposition to block debate.

If the bill ultimately succeeds, Alexander said, it won't be because it's good legislation but because of the "great respect" the Senate has for Hawai'i's two Democratic senators and Republican Gov. Linda Lingle, who all support it.

He warned, though, "in this case, the principle is more important than our respect. If we go down this road, we're on the path toward gradually becoming a 'United Nations' of balkanized governments instead of one nation in which our allegiance is based upon our ideals and commitments rather than race and ancestry and tribes."

Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., a co-sponsor of the bill, said the vote to debate the bill would be "very close."

"After debate in our (Senate Republican) conference the other day, it seems to me that a lot of holes were punched in the arguments of the opponents," he said.

The bill, originally introduced in 2000, would create a process for a Native Hawaiian government to be recognized by the U.S. government, similar to the political status given to Native American and Alaskan Native tribes.

The state's two senators — Daniel Akaka, the bill's author and chief sponsor, and Daniel K. Inouye — are confident they have the 60 votes needed to overcome the procedural roadblock that some conservative Republican senators threw up last summer to stop the bill.

But even if a first vote to bring the bill to the floor is successful, as many as three more may be needed to pass it under Senate procedures. The whole process may require a week or more of Senate floor time.

AMENDMENTS TO BILL

Republican opponents, such as Alexander and Rep. Jon Kyl of Arizona, also are planning to offer amendments to the bill.

Some possible amendments that have been mentioned include requiring a statewide referendum on a Native Hawaiian government, applying the Bill of Rights and all U.S. civil rights to the new government and stripping out any racial classification.

Even if eventually approved, time is running out to get the bill through the House. If it doesn't receive approval from both chambers, supporters would have to start all over again when a newly elected Congress convenes in January.

"Our principal enemy in the House is time," said Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawai'i, a House sponsor of the bill. "Assuming it gets out of the Senate ... we would be down to under 40 work days in the House before the scheduled adjournment."

Case and Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawai'i, said House passage is still possible since they believe a majority of House members would vote for it.

"Whether we're able to get it out of committee and take it to the floor for a vote will depend on whether the White House wants to fight us or not," Abercrombie said. "I don't expect the (House Republican) majority to put a bill on the floor that the White House is actively opposing."

The Bush administration has not taken a position on the bill, although the Justice Department raised concerns about it last summer, especially the constitutionality of recognizing Native Hawaiians as an indigenous people similar to Indian tribes.

A revised version of the bill, introduced last month, addresses most of the objections by prohibiting Native Hawaiians from bringing land claims against the United States in court and barring a Native Hawaiian government from authorizing gambling.

But the Justice Department said it still has constitutional concerns.

LOBBYING CONTINUES

Lobbying on both sides is continuing at a stepped-up pace.

Some Republicans, such as Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, remain on the fence.

"I have concerns about how it defines the Native Hawaiians as a nation, but I haven't taken a stance yet on the bill," he said.

Akaka said he is talking with Republican senators to address their concerns, if any.

Lingle and state Attorney General Mark Bennett plan to be in Washington tomorrow and Tuesday to talk with Republican senators.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the assistant minority leader, also are checking the vote count among Democratic senators, Akaka said.

The bill's backers expect support from the Senate's 44 Democrats, one Independent — James Jeffords of Vermont — and at least six Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee.

Office of Hawaiian Affairs Chairwoman Haunani Apoliona said she is confident there are more than the minimum required 60 votes for the measure to pass cloture.

PROCEDURAL OBSTACLES

She worries, however, that opposing Republican senators could derail a floor debate by throwing procedural obstacles in the way.

Apoliona believes those senators are resorting to that tactic because they know if the bill ever gets a fair hearing it will pass the Senate and the House of Representatives and become law.

"Ultimately, the opponents of the bill need to pay attention to the fact that Native Hawaiians are aboriginal and indigenous peoples to this country. And under the United States Constitution the Congress has the right and authority to legislate on behalf of aboriginal and indigenous natives," she said.

Opponents have launched a campaign to get their message out, including through editorials and articles in newspapers and magazines, and on the Internet.

One new piece of ammunition they have been using is a report from the Republican-majority U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which recommended that Congress reject the bill. A draft copy of the report, which the commission approved, criticized the bill as a measure that "would discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American people into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege."

In many ways, the constitutional and racial issues surrounding the bill have become a Rorschach test on guarantees of equality and fairness.

"The question this bill poses is very fundamental to the existence of our nation," Alexander said. "If it passes, for the first time in American history ... it would establish a new sovereign nation within the United States based solely on race."

Alexander and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, say the bill's requirement that those participating in a Native Hawaiian government have some Native Hawaiian blood is what makes the bill unconstitutional.

"The question is, can you fix a constitutional problem with a statute?" Cornyn said. "I don't think you can."

Alexander also said a fundamental issue posed by the bill is diversity in the nation's population versus national unity.

"Our diversity is magnificent but that is not what made the United States of America a magnificent country," he said. "Even more magnificent and our greatest accomplishment has been to turn all that diversity into one nation — not based on race, not based on ancestry but primarily based on a few founding principles, which are found in our founding documents, our common language and our history as a country."

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

Akaka maintains that the bill is about treating indigenous people of Hawai'i the same as other indigenous people of the U.S.

"There's only one group that was there (in Hawai'i) first," Akaka said. "And our country is one that does care about its indigenous people. I'm looking for parity here for the indigenous people of Hawai'i."

Still, opponents of the bill counter that Hawaiians don't meet the federal rules for recognition as applied to Indian tribes.

Alexander said if the Hawaiians received recognition, other groups could as well, such as people descended from the Hispanics who lived in Texas before it became a state or religious groups such as Hasidic Jews or the Amish.

U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Michael Yaki said some opponents of the bill believe whenever race or ethnicity are recognized "there is a slippery slope that leads you right back to all the things they are against, such as affirmative action or special programs for minorities."

Yaki, a Democratic member of the commission, said the Native Hawaiian bill gets at the heart of the debate about immigration and affirmative action, which is whether diversity is a national strength or a weakness.

Staff writer Will Hoover contributed to this report. Contact Dennis Camire at dcamire @gns.gannett.com.