Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 23, Number 5, 1 May 2006 — Hawaiian issues misunderstood by U.S. Commission on Civil Rights? [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Hawaiian issues misunderstood by U.S. Commission on Civil Rights?

Haunani Apoliona. MSW Chairpersūn TrustEE, At-large

Aloha nui kākou, e nā 'ōiwi 'ōlino, nā pulapula a Hāloa, mai Hawai'i a Ni'ihau, a puni ke ao mālamalama. Kau Inoa enrolhnent, the puhlie land trust OHA revenues legislation, and passage of the Native Hawaiian Govermnent Reorganization Act in Congress continue to be in focus for May. We expect defining state legislative action on the OHA revenue hill and defining U.S. Senate action on S. 147, the Native Hawaiian Govermnent Reorganization Act. Recent developments from the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) spark alarm and eoneein, however. In January, a USCCR media advisory headline said, "USCCR to examine Native Hawaiian Govermnent Reorganization Act: proposed legislation described by critics as racial balkanization." In April, a USCCR media advisory headline said, "USCCR to examine Census 2010: Connnission to probe legal and policy implications of new racial categories." The advisory further stated that bureau directors would advise commissioners concerning "utility of racial categories planned for use in Census 2010"; and the Office of Management and Budget would answer "are these new policies effective?" The 2000 census implemented the statistical category for Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders and provided the opportunity for citizens to mark more than one racial category. As a result of these census innovations, the number of Native Hawaiians in the 50 states in Census 2000 totaled approximately 401,162. Any Commission effort to undermine the present census methodology may negatively impact Native Hawaiian counts across the country. Native Hawaiians are reaching out to eaeh other across the 50 states and organizing mutual efforts; barriers to and deceleration of identifying where Native Hawaiians reside would be non-productive. The USCCR Commission, at its April meeting, was also slated to decide its actions on the Akaka hill; citing, "The hill will

allow Native Hawaiians to organize their own govermnent, whieh opponents have characterized as tantamount to racial balkanization." Letters of eoneem were transmitted by indigenous groups, concerned individuals, the Native Hawaiian Bar Association, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the State of Hawai'i, the Hawai'i congressional delegation, the HSAC and others to the seven members of the Commission. Four of the members, including the chairperson, are appointed by the president of the United States, and the remaining three members are appointed by Congress. In their letter to the USCCR chair, the members of Hawai'i's congressional delegation noted, "we learned through puhlie notice that the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) Briefing Report on the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act (NHGRA) is listed on the meeting agenda for the April 7, 2006, meeting of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. We express our eoneem about the perception of bias in the review of this legislation. As you are aware, we are the principal sponsors of the NHGRA and this week we have heard constituent concerns about the potential bias in the Commission's review. We ask that you address the following concerns raised by our constituents: 1) the press release issued by USCCR announcing Jan. 20, 2006 and April 7, 2006 USCCR review of the NHGRA are not neutral. The press release fails to provide basic information about the hill, including the purpose and intent of the hill, and includes categorizations of the legislation by opponents. At a minimum if negative perspectives are to be represented, a balanced approach addressing the perspective of those who support the hill is warranted; 2) the Hawai'i State Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights was not asked to provide input on the legislation for the USCCR briefing held Jan. 20, 2006; 3) constituents have asked for and not received the transcript of the Jan. 20, 2006 USCCR meeting, nor was it posted on the USCCR web site. We look forward to the Commission's responses to these matters so we ean advise our constituents appropriately. We also stand ready to answer any questions you may have about the legislation." At the April 7 USCCR meeting, the decision on the Akaka hill was deferred. 18/48

LEO 'ELELE • TRUSTEE MESSAGES