Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 20, Number 6, 1 June 2003 — 'Educational entertainment' at the expense of native dignity [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

'Educational entertainment' at the expense of native dignity

For the powerful people of our state, nothing entertains while creating a facade of cultural appreciation quite like the presence of performing Hawaiians. Seldom is there an opening day ceremony, project ground-breaking, campaign kick-off, or discount super-center opening, whieh does not include some form of hula, oli, mele, Kahu blessing, or combination thereof, to amuse the masses. No matter what injustices Hawaiians may face, or rights are taken away, Hawai'i's socio-eco-nomie power structure will always have a plaee for us as entertainment. This past April 2nd dozens of Hawaiians packed into a conference room too small to accommodate them, to oppose Senate Bill 1151 after it was amended to eliminate revenues transferred to OHA from buildings and other improvements

on ceded lands. Hundreds more who could not be there in person submitted written testimony in opposition. When interviewed later that evening on a loeal newscast the House Speaker, a strong supporter of the amendment, claimed to be "glad" that Hawaiians eame out to protest it. "I hope the discussion is very educational for members of the finance committee," he said. Indeed. After all, it is hard to match the passions and emotions of a people who have had their land stolen and their culture debased. To anyone seeing it for the first time, Hawaiians lobbying ean be a very "educational" experience. Sadly, the spectacle of fervent Hawaiians in protest is about the only educational aspect that could be derived from this whole sordid ordeal, as the eontent of the original Senate Bill

(whieh had already been through two committee meetings in both the Senate and House) was based entirely on the previous Act 304. One would think that someone who was actually a legislator when the State established the act would already be educated on the history of and arguments for it. And yet, there was still a plaee for us as entertainment. While not enacting a new formula would have been dismal, passing the bill as the House had amended it would have been devastating. House leadership cleverly put itself into a position where they could not only obviate the Bill, but give the outrageous impression that they were doing Hawaiians a favor. "The testimony represented a lot of strong feelings," the House Finance Committee chairman had the audacity to say after getting his commit-

tee to hold the measure, "We want to honor them." So for the second year in a row, contrary to the Supreme Court instructions, the House of Representatives refused to enact a funding formula to replace Act 304. Moreover, Hawaiians were onee again made to perform for the amusement, or "education," of those in power. Our love for our culture, our traditions, and our rightful entitlements, further exploited and made into an exhibition for the status quo. In a heartbreaking testimony Frenchy De Soto, often referred to as the "mother of OHA," expressed to the House Finance Committee members how she felt that they would probably be more comfortable with her sitting under a palm tree, playing the 'ukulele. How painfully ironic. ■

[?]

John D. Waihe'e IV Trustee, At-large