Oren Ethelbert Long Papers
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Lunch with U.S. Climate Alliance Governors and Climate Leaders Guest Biographies
LUNCH WITH U.S. CLIMATE ALLIANCE GOVERNORS AND CLIMATE LEADERS GUEST BIOGRAPHIES Jerry Brown, Governor, California Jerry Brown is a politician, author and lawyer serving as the 39th and current Governor of California since 2011. He previously held the position from 1975– 1983. Governor Brown instituted cutting-edge environmental protections that became guidelines for the nation to follow. Since taking office for his current term, he has dramatically cut the state budget deficit, improved California’s credit ratings and cut waste and inefficiencies throughout government. Governor Brown also enacted historic public safety realignment, raised the state’s clean energy goal to 33 percent and is seeking the public’s support for new revenues to protect education and public safety funds. John Hickenlooper, Governor, Colorado John Hickenlooper is a politician, businessman and the 42nd and current Governor of Colorado, in office since 2011. Governor Hickenlooper's goal is to create the most pro-business state government, but with the highest environmental and ethical standards. His administration has created the Colorado Innovation Network (COIN) and provided Advanced Manufacturing Grants to accelerate start-ups and early stage technology businesses. David Ige, Governor, Hawai’i David Ige is a politician serving as the eighth and current Governor of Hawaii since 2014. Governor Ige is increasing affordable housing, reducing homelessness, moving toward the state’s 100% renewable energy goal, and remodeling public education to prepare students for the innovation economy of the 21st century. Under his leadership, the state has aggressively moved to ensure financial sustainability and enable future growth. He believes that we can achieve our shared goals because we have always been better together than alone. -
RICE V. CAYETANO, GOVERNOR of HAWAII Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
528US2 Unit: $U29 [06-15-01 20:43:16] PAGES PGT: OPIN OCTOBER TERM, 1999 495 Syllabus RICE v. CAYETANO, GOVERNOR OF HAWAII certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 98–818. Argued October 6, 1999—Decided February 23, 2000 The Hawaiian Constitution limits the right to vote for nine trustees chosen in a statewide election. The trustees compose the governing authority of a state agency known as the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, or OHA. The agency administers programs designed for the benefit of two sub- classes of Hawaiian citizenry, “Hawaiians” and “native Hawaiians.” State law defines “native Hawaiians” as descendants of not less than one-half part of the races inhabiting the islands before 1778, and “Ha- waiians”—a larger class that includes “native Hawaiians”—as descend- ants of the peoples inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands in 1778. The trust- ees are chosen in a statewide election in which only “Hawaiians” may vote. Petitioner Rice, a Hawaiian citizen without the requisite ancestry to be a “Hawaiian” under state law, applied to vote in OHA trustee elections. When his application was denied, he sued respondent Gover- nor (hereinafter State), claiming, inter alia, that the voting exclusion was invalid under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. The Federal District Court granted the State summary judgment. Survey- ing the history of the islands and their people, it determined that Con- gress and Hawaii have recognized a guardian-ward relationship with the native Hawaiians, which is analogous to the relationship between the United States and Indian tribes. It examined the voting qualifica- tions with the latitude applied to legislation passed pursuant to Con- gress’ power over Indian affairs, see Morton v. -
State Legislative Update
Journal of Dispute Resolution Volume 2004 Issue 2 Article 4 2004 State Legislative Update Robert J. Fisher Katherine M. Massa Benjamin B. Nelson Cassandra A. Rogers Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr Part of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons Recommended Citation Robert J. Fisher, Katherine M. Massa, Benjamin B. Nelson, and Cassandra A. Rogers, State Legislative Update, 2004 J. Disp. Resol. (2004) Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2004/iss2/4 This Legislation is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Dispute Resolution by an authorized editor of University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Fisher et al.: Fisher: State Legislative Update State Legislative Update* Robert J. Fischer Katherine M. Massa Benjamin B. Nelson CassandraA. Rogers I. STATE LEGISLATIVE Focus A. Confidentiality in Mediation: FloridaSenate Bill 1970' Bill Number: Florida Senate Bill 1970 Summary: This bill creates the Mediation Confidentiality and Privilege Act. It provides for standardized proceedings, so that both court-ordered and non court-ordered mediation are entitled to the same confidentiality status. Status: Signed by Governor, June 10, 2004 1. Introduction Confidentiality in mediation communications is an issue of vital importance to all those involved. The assurance of confidentiality in mediation proceedings promotes openness and candor between the parties. Often, it is openness that will lead parties to a resolution of a dispute. With the passage of Senate Bill 1970 the Florida legislature has recognized the importance that confidentiality protections play in the encouragement of successful mediations. -
Establishment of the Public Archives of Hawaii As a Territorial Agency
Establishment of the Public Archives of Hawaii as a Territorial Agency By CHESTER RAYMOND YOUNG Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/american-archivist/article-pdf/30/1/67/2744960/aarc_30_1_xq4852040p211x1u.pdf by guest on 25 September 2021 Vanderbilt University T THE Honolulu office of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, on January 26, 1903, William DeWitt Alexander A received a caller from Washington, D.C. This stranger was Worthington C. Ford, Chief of the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, then on his way to Manila to inspect the archives of the Philippine Islands. Listed as bound for Hong Kong, Ford had arrived in port the preceding afternoon aboard the liner Korea of the Pacific Mail Steamship Co., less than 5 days out of San Francisco.1 Doubtless he called on Alexander as the corre- sponding secretary of the Hawaiian Historical Society and the leading Hawaiian historian of his day. In his diary Alexander recorded the visit with this brief note: "Mr. W. C. Ford of the Congressional Library called, to inquire about the Govt Archives."2 Ford learned that the records of the defunct Kingdom of Hawaii were for the most part in Honolulu in various government buildings, particularly in Iolani Palace, which served as the Territorial Capitol. The Secretary of Hawaii was charged with the duty of keeping the legislative and diplomatic archives of the Kingdom, but his custody of them was only legal and perfunctory, with little or no attention given to their preserva- tion. Other records of the monarchy officials were in the care of their successors under the Territory of Hawaii. -
Prayer Practices
Floor Action 5-145 Prayer Practices Legislatures operate with a certain element of pomp, ceremony and procedure that flavor the institution with a unique air of tradition and theatre. The mystique of the opening ceremonies and rituals help to bring order and dignity to the proceedings. One of these opening ceremonies is the offering of a prayer. Use of legislative prayer. The practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer is long- standing. The custom draws its roots from both houses of the British Parliament, which, according to noted parliamentarian Luther Cushing, from time ”immemorial” began each day with a “reading of the prayers.” In the United States, this custom has continued without interruption at the federal level since the first Congress under the Constitution (1789) and for more than a century in many states. Almost all state legislatures still use an opening prayer as part of their tradition and procedure (see table 02-5.50). In the Massachusetts Senate, a prayer is offered at the beginning of floor sessions for special occasions. Although the use of an opening prayer is standard practice, the timing of when the prayer occurs varies (see table 02-5.51). In the majority of legislative bodies, the prayer is offered after the floor session is called to order, but before the opening roll call is taken. Prayers sometimes are given before floor sessions are officially called to order; this is true in the Colorado House, Nebraska Senate and Ohio House. Many chambers vary on who delivers the prayer. Forty-seven chambers allow people other than the designated legislative chaplain or a visiting chaplain to offer the opening prayer (see table 02-5.52). -
Board of Land and Natural Resources State of Hawai'i in the Matter Of
1 BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES STATE OF HAWAI’I IN THE MATTER OF ) CASE No. BLNR-CC-16-002 Contested Case Hearing ) Re Conservation District Use ) WRITTEN DIRECT TESTIMONY Application (CDUA) HA -33568 ) OF WILLIAMSON B. C. CHANG for the Thirty Meter Telescope ) AS TO APPLICANT'S LACK OF at the Mauna Kea Science Reserve , ) TITLE TO THE SUMMIT Ka'ohe Mauka, Hamakua, ) OF MAUNA KEA AND THE LACK OF Hawai'i, TMK (3) 4-4-015:009) ) TERRITORIAL SUBJECT MATTER ) JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD OF ) LAND NATURAL RESOURCES TO ) ISSUE THE PERMIT ) CONTESTED CASE HEARING ) DATE: October 18, 2016 ) TIME: 9:00 a.m. ) HEARING OFFICER: Hon. ) Riki May Amano (Ret.) ) ____________________________________) WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF WILLIAMSON CHANG I. The Critical Preliminary Issue is Whether or not the State, by its Board of Land and Natural Resources has Territorial Subject Matter Jurisdiction1 There are two preliminary issues that must be resolved. Although such issues are not 1 See Chang, Darkness over Hawai’i: Annexation Myth Greatest Obstacle to Progress," 16 Asian-Pacific Law and Policy Journal 70 at pages 94 -102. (2016) http://blog.hawaii.edu/aplpj/files/2015/09/APLPJ_16_2_Chang.pdf [Last checked April 8, 2016 750pm] Received Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands 2016 Oct 16 11:07 am Depatement of Land and Natural Resources State of Hawaii 2 listed in the Amended Notice of Contested Case Hearing, See Order of Hearings Officer Hon. Judge Riki May Amano, (Ret.), October 5, 2016. Such issues are always in issue in any legal proceeding, whether a judicial or administrative proceeding of this nature. -
February 23, 2021 the Honorable Karl Rhoads Chair, Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee Hawaii State Capitol 415 S
February 23, 2021 The Honorable Karl Rhoads Chair, Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 204 Honolulu, HI 96813 The Honorable Jarrett Keohokalole Vice Chair, Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 231 Honolulu, HI 96813 The Honorable Rosalyn H. Baker Chair, Hawaii Senate Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 230 Honolulu, HI 96813 The Honorable Stanley Chang Vice-Chair, Hawaii Senate Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 226 Honolulu, HI 96813 RE: ATA SUPPORT FOR SENATE BILL 970 On behalf of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA) and the over 400 organizations we represent, I am writing to express our support for Senate Bill 970, which clarifies that a patient-practitioner relationship may be established during a telehealth appointment. The ATA is the only national organization completely focused on advancing telehealth. We are committed to ensuring that everyone has access to safe, affordable, and high-quality care whenever and wherever they need it. This empowers the health care system to provide services to millions more patients every year in an efficacious manner. The ATA represents a broad and inclusive coalition of technology solution providers and payers, as well as partner organizations and alliances, working to advance industry adoption of telehealth, promote responsible policy, advocate for government and market normalization, and provide education and resources to help integrate virtual care into emerging, value-based modalities. Senate Bill 970 serves as an important and rational expansion of Hawaii’s state telehealth policy. -
U.S. House Report 32 for H.R. 4221 (Feb 1959)
86TH CONoRESS L HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT 1st Session No. 32 HAWAII STATEHOOD FEBRUARY 11, 1959.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. AsPINALL, from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H.R. 4221] The Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 4221) to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The purpose of H.R. 4221, introduced by Representative O'Brien of New York, is to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union. This bill and its two companions-H.R. 4183 by Delegate Burns and H.R. 4228 by Representative Saylor-were introduced following the committee's consideration of 20 earlier 86th Congress bills and include all amendments adopted in connection therewith. These 20 bills are as follows: H.R. 50, introduced by Delegate Burns; H.R. 324, introduced by Representative Barrett; H.R. 801, introduced by Representative Holland; H.R. 888, introduced by Representative O'Brien of New York; H.R. 954, introduced by Representative Saylor; H.R. 959, introduced by Representative Sisk; H.R. 1106, introduced by Representative Berry; H.R. 1800, introduced by Repre- sentative Dent; H.R. 1833, introduced by Representative Libonati; H.R. 1917, introduced by Representative Green of Oregon; H.R. 1918, introduced by Representative Holt; H.R. 2004, introduced by Representative Younger; .H.R. -
War and the Birds of Midway Atoll
THE CONDOR VOLUME 48 JANUARY-FEBRUARY, 1946 NUMBER 1 WAR AND THE BIRDS OF MIDWAY ATOLL By HARVEY I. FISHER and PAUL H. BALDWIN Concern about the fate of the Laysan Rail and the Laysan Finch and about the possible effect of war activities on insular populations of birds in the Hawaiian Archi- pelago led the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Board of Agriculture and Forestry of the Territory of Hawaii to make a survey of the bird life of Midway Atoll. The United States Navy cooperated in furnishing air transportation to and from Midway. This report combines the observations of Baldwin who represented the federal bureaus, and of Fisher who represented the territorial board. ,The original plan was to capture, if possible, rails and finches for transplanting back to their original home, ‘Laysan Island, and to observe the effects of the war on populations of birds at any islands visited. A careful search from May 7 to 18, 1945, convinced us that no rails or finches re- mained on either Eastern or Sand islands, the two islands constituting Midway; conse- quently, we did not go to Laysan but spent the entire time observing the birds on Mid- way. We attempted to obtain accurate estimates of the number of colonies and of the sizes of the populations of the various species.‘This information was to provide the basis for comparing present bird life with pre-war bird life to determine the trend of the populations. Subsequent perusal of published notes and articles, however, indicated that few observers had estimated the numbers of birds present, and those doing so did not distinguish between breeding and migrating individuals and did not record the means by which they arrived at their estimates. -
Treaty of Annexation of Hawaii
Treaty of Annexation of Hawaii Negotiated in 1897 (Never ratified by the United States) The United States and the Republic of Hawaii, in view of the natural dependence of the Hawaiian Islands upon the United States, of their geographical proximity thereto, of the preponderant share acquired by the United States and its citizens in the industries and trade of said islands and of the expressed desire of the government of the Republic of Hawaii that those islands should be incorporated into the United States as an integral part thereof and under its sovereignty, have determined to accomplish by treaty an object so important to their mutual and permanent welfare. To this end the high contracting parties have conferred full powers and authority upon their respectively appointed plenipotentiaries, to-wit: The President of the United States, John Sherman, Secretary of Sate of the United States. The President of the Republic of Hawaii, Francis March Hatch, Lorrin A. Thurston, and William A. Kinney. ARTICLE I. The Republic of Hawaii hereby cedes absolutely and without reserve to the United States of America all rights of sovereignty of whatsoever kind in and over the Hawaiian Islands and their dependencies; and it is agreed that all territory of and appertaining to the Republic of Hawaii is hereby annexed to the United States of America under the name of the Territory of Hawaii. ARTICLE II. The Republic of Hawaii also cedes and hereby transfers to the United States the absolute fee and ownership of all public, government or crown lands, public buildings, or edifices, ports, harbors, military equipments, and all other public property of every kind and description belonging to the Government of the Hawaiian Islands, together with every right and appurtenance thereunto appertaining. -
September 28, 2020 the Honorable David Y. Ige Governor of Hawaii
U.S. Department of Labor Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training Washington, D.C. 20210 September 28, 2020 The Honorable David Y. Ige Governor of Hawaii Executive Chambers State Capitol Honolulu, HI 96813 Dear Governor Ige: Thank you for your waiver request submission to the U.S. Department of Labor (Department) regarding certain statutory and regulatory provisions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) and the accompanying plan to improve the statewide workforce development system (enclosed). The waiver requests were received on July 16, 2020. This letter provides the Employment and Training Administration’s (ETA) official response to your requests and memorializes that Hawaii will meet the outcomes and implement the measures identified in its plan to ensure accountability agreed to by Hawaii and ETA. This action is taken under the Secretary’s authority to waive certain requirements of WIOA Title I, Subtitles A, B, and E, and Sections 8–10 of the Wagner–Peyser Act in WIOA Section 189(i). Requested Waiver: Waiver of the obligation of eligible training providers (ETP) to report performance data on all students in a training program at WIOA Sections 116(d)(4)(A) and 122 and 20 CFR 677.230(a)(4) and (5) and 20 CFR 680.430(b)(5). ETA Response: The State’s request to waive the obligation of ETPs to report performance data on all students in a training program is approved through June 30, 2021. ETA reviewed the State’s waiver request and plan and has determined that the requirements requested to be waived impede the ability of Hawaii to implement its plan to improve the workforce development system. -
Bibliography of Native Hawaiian Legal Resources
Bibliography of Native Hawaiian Legal Resources Materials Available at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Libraries Center for Excellence in Native Hawaiian Law William S. Richardson School of Law University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Lori Kidani 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS CALL NUMBER LOCATIONS.....................................................................................................1 BIBLIOGRAPHIES......................................................................................................................2 CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE AND PROPERTY ............................................................................3 LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES.........................................................................................5 LAWS, CURRENT ......................................................................................................................9 LAWS, HISTORICAL ................................................................................................................10 LEGAL CASES .........................................................................................................................18 NATIVE RIGHTS AND CLAIMS................................................................................................20 OVERTHROW AND ANNEXATION..........................................................................................23 REFERENCE MATERIALS.......................................................................................................26 SOVEREIGNTY AND SELF DETERMINATION........................................................................27