Aloha. I want to express my warm aloha to all of you in attendance here and particularly to the Council of Native Hawaiian Advancement for sponsoring this very important event. As a former teacher and principal, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of education. CNHA, in its relatively short existence, has done so much to create opportunities, like this one, for us to learn from other indigenous peoples so that we need not reinvent the wheel as we strive to bring more autonomy to Native Hawaiians in terms of controlling our natural resources and assets.
I applaud the efforts of Robin Danner, who has been fearless in her efforts to ensure that Native Hawaiians are provided with opportunities to network with others and to learn about all of the many programs and services that are available to help native people become more self-sufficient. Robin, you and your staff are to be commended for a job well done. I also thank the many members of CNHA and its Board members for working toward fulfilling CNHA's mission of empowering Native Hawaiians through informational initiatives. I applaud your continuing efforts to make -- what so many in the past have said we should do for the Native Hawaiian community -- a reality.
We stand, right now, on the brink of making critical decisions that will have a monumental impact on the future of Native Hawaiians. For many, many years, we have discussed the political and legal relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. No matter what we do, the status quo as we know it is about to change. Either Native Hawaiians will finally be accorded the respect they deserve as Hawaii's indigenous peoples, or Native Hawaiians will be categorized as being "not native enough" for the purposes of the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination that is extended to our brethren, American Indians and Alaska Natives. We have two choices -- we can either embrace the fact that the status quo is about to change and do all we can to change it in a way positive for us - or - we can let those who oppose native issues change it for us through countless lawsuits and efforts to erode the inherent rights of Native Hawaiians.
In the Senate, we are poised to take action on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2005. S. 147 provides two processes. The first recognizes the inherent rights of Hawaii's indigenous peoples to reorganize their governing entity for the purposes of a federally recognized government-to-government relationship. For the past seven years, people have asked me to predetermine the outcome of this process. For the past seven years, I have refused. I have full confidence in the ability of Native Hawaiians to determine the structure of the entity, the authorities of the entity and critical issues such as citizenship and membership.
The second process in the bill is a negotiations process between the recognized entity, and the state and federal governments. Everyone wants guarantees about lands, assets, and natural resources. Many have sought to predetermine the outcome of this process. I have refused. To me, this is the essence of the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination. Finally, people are recognizing the rights of Native Hawaiians to be consulted, to be included in discussions about policies, and to be informed of proposed changes that impact them. Many - non Native Hawaiians and Native Hawaiians - are afraid of what will happen when Native Hawaiians come together to reorganize their entity. Why? Because it will change the status quo.
I will be the first to tell you that we should not be afraid of change. As I said earlier, the status quo, as we know it, is about to change. As native peoples, we have two choices. We can either stand by and witness others making changes for us or we can embrace the opportunities presented to us and shape a better future for the children of Hawaii.
This is why education is so critical. This is why you are all here today to share manao on the tools that Native Hawaiians will need in reorganizing the Native Hawaiian governing entity. Why do we need a base roll? What is the difference between citizenship and membership? What should we be thinking about for citizenship requirements and how do we ensure that the process is fair? Finally, what does it all mean -- what do we get out of having the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination formally extended to us? These are all issues that will be discussed over the next two days -- these are issues that we need to start focusing on so that once the bill passes, we are ready - ready to begin our process of reorganization. These are the issues that need to be decided by Native Hawaiians -- not by federal legislation -- and this is why I have rejected all efforts to predetermine the outcome of the reorganization process.
Even though it's taken us close to seven years to get the bill passed, I'll tell you -- I have always believed enactment of the bill is the easy part. The reorganization of the entity will be the real challenge for our people.
I am in the final stages of negotiating the terms under which the Senate will consider the bill during the 109th Congress. I look forward to this debate for I believe it is important for my colleagues to truly understand our unique history and the reasons why federal recognition for Native Hawaiians is the right thing to do for Hawaii and for our Nation.
What will federal recognition mean for Native Hawaiians? At the most basic level, it means that the federal government, in dealing with Native Hawaiians, will recognize the fact that Hawaii's indigenous peoples, through their governing structure, are best able to determine how resources should be spent to take care of their people, assets, and natural resources. It means that the federal and state governments will consult with Native Hawaiians, again, through the governing structure, on changes to policies, services, or programs that impact Native Hawaiians. In essence, it gives Native Hawaiians a seat at the table in terms of policies and decision making.
There are currently 562 tribes that are federally recognized. While the historical dealings between the United States and Indian Country have left a lot to be desired, not one of these tribes has ever asked to give up its status as a federally recognized tribe. Why? Because federal recognition provides the greatest latitude under federal law for native peoples to exercise their sovereign authority. Because federal recognition provides the greatest latitude for native peoples to develop solutions to the challenges facing their people in a culturally sensitive manner. And finally, because federal recognition requires the United States to deal with native peoples through their representative government in a structured and respectful manner.
Over the past thirty years since President Nixon enunciated the blue print for the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination in his message to Congress on July 8, 1970, federally recognized tribes have made great strides in exercising their self-governance. In 1994, for example, President Clinton issued a directive to all executive departments and agencies of the federal government that as they undertake activities affecting tribal rights or trust resources, such activities should be implemented in a knowledgeable, sensitive manner respectful of tribal sovereignty. This directive was historical because a President was directing the entire federal government to respect the sovereignty of tribal governments. What an important step for native peoples.
Congress passed the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) of 1996, which reorganized the system of federal housing assistance to Native Americans and sought to provide federal assistance for native governments in a manner that recognizes the right of the Indian self-determination and tribal self-governance. The program has been providing assistance to members of more than 500 tribes and more than $600 million has been annually appropriated for NAHASDA grants. We were successful in amending the Act to include a title for the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to participate. We would, however, be able to better utilize the program if there were a federally recognized Native Hawaiian government.
Another example is in the area of welfare reform. The 1996 welfare reform law gave federally recognized tribes the option to design and operate their own case welfare programs for needy children with funds taken from their state's block grant for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). In 2004, there were 45 tribal TANF plans in operation in 16 states and their annual rate of federal funding was about $134.2 million. In addition, the law appropriated federal funding for work and training activities to tribes in 24 states that operated a pre-TANF work and training program, authorized direct federal funding to tribes for operation of child support enforcement programs, and set aside a share of child care funds for them. I cite these federal programs and examples not as sources of funding, but as illustrations of how, once a native government is allowed that seat at the table, it can work with the federal and state governments to allocate resources in a manner that best serves its people. It is important to remember that we do all of this within the federal system - that we can belong to the Native government and still be a part of the United States. The possibilities, within the federal system, are great.
However, before we can partake, we must reorganize our government. And to do that we must understand the basics of what self-governance means and we must know what we want in our relationship with the United States and the State of Hawaii. For that reason, the topics that will be discussed as part of this symposium are important as they will serve as tools for us as we begin to shape our future government.
I thank you for inviting me to join you today. I look forward to working with each of you to create a better future for our keiki, for the State of Hawaii, and for the United States.
A hui hou.
