Aloha. Thank you, Beadie. Mahalo for the Ilima and Kika leis. Mahalo for the hala lei, Cissy. Mahalo to the members of the Native Hawaiian Bar Association for providing me with this opportunity to join you today. Some time ago, the Native Hawaiian Bar Association graciously extended an invitation for me to speak to its members. I was pleased to accept, and though it took a little time to find a mutually agreeable date, today's gathering offers a timely chance to address an issue of considerable importance to Native Hawaiians. Indeed, the issue I would like to discuss is of great significance to all the people of Hawaii: the effort to clarify the current political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States.
I make it a point to share information pertaining to this legislation at every opportunity. I do this not to speak about my efforts, but to emphasize the importance of this issue. Whether you agree or disagree with this legislation, it is important to understand the current situation and to participate in determining the future for Native Hawaiians.
In March 2000, our Congressional delegation formed the Task Force on Native Hawaiian Issues. Our purpose is to clarify the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. As chairman of this Task Force I have worked to ensure an open process with the participation of many individuals from across Hawaii who bring different viewpoints and talents to the process. We created five working groups to assist us with this task: the Native Hawaiian community working group, State officials working group, Federal officials working group, Native American and Constitutional Scholars working group, and congressional members and caucus working group. We currently have close to 80 individuals participating as working group members.
These working groups served as advisors and liaisons to the community and organizations as we discussed the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. We held numerous meetings and conference calls. We also considered all the comments and testimony we received from Hawaii. This was not an easy task. The result of all of these efforts is the legislative measure that is being considered by the 107th Congress.
I want to thank everyone who is serving on the working groups, or has participated in any of the meetings, hearings, or workshops on this issue. Mahalo nui loa for your mana'o.
107TH CONGRESS
We introduced S. 81, on January 22, 2001, which was the first day that the Senate was accepting legislation. H.R. 617 was introduced by Representative Abercrombie and Representative Mink on February 14, 2001. Both measures were identical to the legislation introduced in the 106th Congress.
Between January and April 2001, we, as a delegation, considered comments on the legislation from our colleagues in the Senate and the House of Representatives. We reviewed the concerns expressed about the bill from the Native Hawaiian community during the hearings held in Hawaii last year. We assessed the anticipated response of the Bush Administration to the legislation. After doing all of this, we, as a delegation, revised S. 81, and introduced S. 746.
S. 746 was introduced in the Senate on April 6, 2001. The primary purpose of the legislation--to clarify the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States through the authorization of federal recognition of the Native Hawaiian governing entity for the purposes of a government-to-government relationship--remains the same. The bill favorably reported by the House Resources Committee on May 16, as amended, is identical to S. 746.
S. 746 retains the three objectives in the legislation. The three objectives are to establish an office within the Department of the Interior to focus on Native Hawaiian issues, to establish an inter-agency coordinating group to be composed of representatives from federal agencies to coordinate existing federal policies and programs impacting Native Hawaiians, and to extend the federal policy of self-determination and self-governance to Native Hawaiians.
MODIFICATIONS
The first and most substantive change in S. 746 is the removal of the reorganization process which previously mandated how the Native Hawaiian governing entity would be formed. The majority of the comments we received regarding this legislation dealt with the reorganization process. Even the most ardent supporters of the legislation expressed concerns with provisions within the reorganization process.
We are confident that the Native Hawaiian community is well on its way and is fully capable of organizing the Native Hawaiian governing entity without a federally mandated process. After reassessing the concerns expressed by the Native Hawaiian community and our colleagues in the Senate and the House of Representatives, we deleted the reorganization process from the bill.
We retained what we believe to be the most important aspect of the bill - the process for federal recognition. Once the Native Hawaiian governing entity has formed, approved its organic governing documents, and elected its officers, the officers then submit the organic governing documents to the Secretary of the Interior for certification. Once the organic governing documents meet the requirement certifications as outlined in the bill, federal recognition will be granted.
This is the most crucial point to that I want to address. During the last Congress, some in the Native Hawaiian community seemed to be waiting for the bill to pass before beginning efforts to reorganize the Native Hawaiian governing entity. This is a mistake. We also realize that the reorganization process included in bill may have contributed to this situation.
Let me be clear on these points: the bill, by itself, does not create the government-to-government relationship. The bill, by itself, does not federally recognize the Native Hawaiian governing entity. The bill, by itself, does not create the Native Hawaiian governing entity.
The Native Hawaiian community must reorganize the Native Hawaiian governing entity. Without the governing entity, there is no federal recognition. Without the governing entity, there is no government-to-government relationship. Without the governing entity, there is no clarification of the political relationship.
While the passage of S. 746 is an important step forward, it is just a first step. The Native Hawaiian community must reorganize the Native Hawaiian governing entity for federal recognition and the government-to-government relationship to be established.
The second substantive modification in the legislation is the addition of section 9, entitled, "Applicability of Certain Federal Laws." The purpose of this section is to clarify exactly what we have been saying regarding the bill's impact on program funding for American Indians and Alaska Natives and gaming. Section 9(a) clearly states that S. 746 does not authorize gaming in Hawaii under the Indian Regulatory Gaming Act. Section 9(b) states that S. 746 does not authorize eligibility in programs administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This legislation never did authorize gaming or eligibility in BIA programs. However, by including this section, we can squarely address the concerns expressed by our colleagues in Congress.
The third modification in the bill is the removal of the section entitled "Disclaimer." A disclaimer often raises concerns because it leads to additional scrutiny of what we are trying to protect. Instead of highlighting the fact that this bill does not act as a settlement of claims against the United States in a disclaimer section, we placed this language in section 7(b), which addresses the negotiation of lands, assets and resources between the United States, the Native Hawaiian governing entity and the State of Hawaii.
S. 746 focuses solely on the federal relationship and does not preclude Native Hawaiians from continuing their efforts at the international level. Let me be clear - It is not my intention, nor the intention of the delegation, to preclude efforts of Native Hawaiians at the international level. The scope of this bill is limited to federal law.
IMPORTANT CHANGES IN COMMUNITY
Up until a few years ago, the issue of sovereignty, self-determination, and the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States was a topic of discussion, but was not the Number One priority for the majority of Native Hawaiians. Many of us were more concerned about more basic needs, such as education, health care, and housing.
Our efforts at the Congressional level reflect these priorities. In 1988 we passed the Native Hawaiian Education Act and the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. In 1993, we passed Public Law 103-150, the Apology Resolution. In 1995 we passed the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act. Last year, we passed the Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000.
Over the past two years, however, the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States has become a top priority. This is not a new issue. Much of the increased scrutiny is based on the many legal challenges to Native Hawaiian programs. A positive result, however, has the been the participation of many Native Hawaiians in this discussion.
The time has come to act. We have spent many, many years discussing this issue. I have spent many years challenging the cliche that Native Hawaiians are unable to work together. I disagree with this stereotype. Indeed, the discussions within the Native Hawaiian community over the past two years have proven that not only can Native Hawaiians work together, but when we do, we are a political force to be reckoned with.
CONCLUSION
This bill is an important first step. It is not the final answer, but it is a substantial step forward in the clarification of the political relationship. I look forward to working with all of you as we continue our journey to preserve our culture, to honor our tradition, and to provide a better future for the children of Hawaii.
A hui hou.
