We have overcome tremendous odds to arrive at this moment. There are many issues for this Committee to investigate: allegations of foreign money influencing federal campaigns, the use of federal facilities to raise money, dramatic increases in soft money donations, unregulated independent expenditures and issue advocacy, and the improper use of tax-exempt organizations. It is my hope that we will have a non-partisan and color blind hearing, without blinders on, which will lead us to the facts on the numerous allegations which have been made. This should enable the Committee to offer meaningful campaign reform legislation to stop those practices which are inimical to good government. To this end, I hope that the Majority will reconsider its decision not to issue the bulk of the subpoenas which have been requested by the Minority.

I hope that the aisle separating our two parties have not engulfed our good judgement and clouded our vision. Up until last week, I was disheartened by the lack of cooperation, which would block any hope of a bipartisan investigation. I also knew that the cynicism held by the American people for their elected officials would only deepen without a full and open hearing, which can be allayed by the issuance of subpoenas on a bipartisan basis.

This Committee was on its way to undermining the investigation and confirming the belief that Congress just doesn't get it when it comes to reforming our campaign finance system. Throughout the process of putting together this investigation we contended with colleagues opposed to redoing our campaign finance laws. We found ourselves confronted by the Senate Rules Committee which rewrote this Committee's unanimously adopted definition of scope that our Committee, in a display of bipartisanship, hammered out. Fortunately, the definition crafted by the Rules Committee, which deleted improper acts, was discarded after several of our Republican colleagues expressed an unwillingness to go along with the Majority effort to scuttle this investigation.

Without the exclusive definition crafted by our Committee, we would have been forced to wear blinders because the Rules Committee wanted us only to look into illegal activities connected with the 1996 election cycle. We would have had to look the other way if an activity was merely improper. Fortunately, reason prevailed, and the Senate amended the ill-conceived scope provision by adding the word improper--which the Governmental Affairs Committee included in its definition of scope on January 30.

I sincerely hope that the expressions of goodwill and desire to conduct open and bipartisan hearings are not 20-second sound bites. The allegations of illegal and improper activities relating to the 1996 election cycle are serious; they touch Democrats and Republicans alike; and they threaten to undermine the integrity of our election system. I am confident that we will conduct our inquiry in a bipartisan and fair manner, which has been a hallmark of the Governmental Affairs Committee.

Only last Friday, our nation celebrated its Independence Day, marking America's break with England and its beginnings as the world's greatest democracy. Our forefathers built this country on the premise of free and open elections.

The mandate of this Committee's investigation is to explore allegations of illegal or improper campaign financing and spending practices in the 1996 federal election campaigns. According to the Federal Elections Commission, total expenditures for the 1995-1996 election cycle were approximately $2.3 billion, plus an additional $400 million in soft money.

It is incomprehensible to me that with the tremendous explosion in campaign expenditures that there is opposition to reforming our campaign finance laws. And although we're being told that only wrongdoing was on the part of the Democrats, let us not forget that Republicans raised far more money than the Democrats during the 1995-1996 election cycle.

There will be issues discussed, testimony received, and documents reviewed that will make the members of this Committee uncomfortable because we are investigating the system under which we were elected.

It is our responsibility to scrutinize all allegations brought before this Committee. However, without analyzing the way we run our national elections and revamping our campaign finance laws, we will do a disservice to our nation.

With less than 50 percent of voting age Americans going to the polls in the last election, we have so much at stake. The public is cynical, and who can blame them? The deep distrust of this nation's elected officials by the voters will continue if the only thing that comes from these hearings is political rhetoric. We must seek as our goal the enactment of substantive campaign finance reform legislation.

And, conversely, only when the American voters demand a change in the way we run elections will those who oppose reform bills drop their objections. The strength of campaign finance reform rests with the American people, and I am hopeful that these hearings will generate a quickened movement toward enacting legislation that will stop some of the practices we're about to investigate. My expectations are high and my belief in the American people strong--we have an extraordinary opportunity to craft a meaningful bill on a bipartisan basis.

I also wish to reaffirm my belief that if this Committee is seriously committed to investigating the breadth of allegations into abuses of federal election laws, we cannot be caught up in partisan posturing and name-calling.

Let us not tolerate assumptions made on the basis of an individual's race or ethnic background, and I ask my colleagues to remember that the United States is a nation of immigrants. Let us take to heart the lessons of history when waves of Irish, Italian, German, Jewish and other immigrants were negatively stereotyped. We are not here to conduct a witch hunt and we must ignore the temptation to assign guilt by association. Other than indigenous peoples--American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians, American Samoans, and Chamorros from Guam and the Northern Mariana islands, the proud people who make up this great country came from somewhere else.

While I am three-quarters Native Hawaiian, my grandfather emigrated to the Kingdom of Hawaii from China, which classifies me as a Native Hawaiian-Chinese-American. But foremost I am an American, just like some of the individuals of non-European heritage who will come before us as witnesses.

I am seriously concerned with the negative impact that the allegations of fundraising abuses have had on the Asian Pacific American community. I do not have to remind my colleagues of the contributions Asian Pacific Americans have made to our society. And yet, despite well-known contributions, Asian Pacific Americans have been targeted and misrepresented from the moment the press saw a good story in the allegations of foreign contributions to the 1996 elections. When the story of possible fundraising abuses first broke last fall, the media was quick to toss around references to "Asian connections, Asian funds network, people with tenuous connections to this country"--phrases applied equally to people who are American citizens and non-citizens alike. We do a disservice to the Asian Pacific American Community. It is this lack of distinction--by both the media and the public--that threatens to cast doubt on the integrity of Asian Pacific Americans.

Our country has a deep history of racial discrimination against Asians and it would be a disservice to our democracy to fall prey to the evils of prejudice again. Asian Pacific Americans have been singled out for joining together to support candidates of their choice during the last election cycle. Contributions made by persons with Asian and those whose names merely sound Asian have been scrutinized. People have been asked for bank records, and investigators have jumped whenever an Asian Pacific American name is mentioned in connection with this probe.

I strongly condemn illegal fundraising activities, but I do not hold all Asian Pacific Americans responsible for the alleged actions of a few. Asian Pacific Americans should not be held to a different standard than other citizens, nor should we believe that all Asian Pacific American political contributions to any political party are suspect. We must not be guilty of selective harassment of those with Asian surnames. Such actions only underscore the Asian Pacific American community's fear that they are being asked to pay for the alleged transgressions of some individuals who happen to be of Asian heritage.

With the majority of Americans choosing not to vote, let us not discourage Asian Pacific Americans from participating in the development of public policy because they believe the system is against them. As we investigate the allegations of fundraising abuses, let us remember that bigotry, prejudice and discrimination are unacceptable to this Committee.

I also wish to comment very briefly on allegations that the only reason why Asian Pacific Americans participated in the last election was to influence U.S. immigration policies. Let me remind everyone that an unlikely alliance of high-tech companies, the Christian Coalition, Americans for Tax Reform, business groups, religious organizations, and immigration rights groups fought cuts in legal immigration. The elimination of most provisions dealing with legal immigration was not the result of a concerted effort by the Asian Pacific American community, but the effort of a diverse coalition that included the most conservative and most liberal groups in the country.

In closing, I think that it is most appropriate that I share our state motto with you: "`Ua mau ke`ea `o ka `aina `i ka pono." The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness. As we conduct these hearings, I think it behooves us to keep this in mind, particularly the concept of "pono," or righteousness. If we do this, I believe that at the end of the day, we shall have done what is right for our nation.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for allotting this time to me. I look forward to these hearings and anticipate a spirited and informative time.