Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Reconciliation at a Crossroads: The Implications of the Apology Resolution and Rice v. Cayetano for Federal and State Programs Benefiting Native Hawaiians Summary Report of the August 1998 and September 2000 Community Forums in Honolulu, Hawai‘i June 2001 A fact-finding report of the Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights prepared for the information and consideration of the Commission. Statements and recommendations in this report should not be attributed to the Commission, but only to participants at the community forums or to the Advisory Committee. The United States Commission on Civil Rights The United States Commission on Civil Rights, first created by the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and reestablished by the United States Commission on Civil Rights Act of 1983, is an independent, bipartisan agency of the Federal Government. By the terms of the 1983 act, as amended by the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994, the Commission is charged with the following duties pertaining to discrimination or denials of the equal protection of the laws based on race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice: investigation of individual discriminatory denials of the right to vote; study and collection of information relating to discrimination or denials of the equal protection of the law; appraisal of the laws and policies of the United States with respect to discrimination or denials of equal protection of the law; investigation of patterns or practices of fraud or discrimination in the conduct of Federal elections; and preparation and issuance of public service announcements and advertising campaigns to discourage discrimination or denials of equal protection of the law. The Commission is also required to submit reports to the President and the Congress at such times as the Commission, the Congress, or the President shall deem desirable. The State Advisory Committees An Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights has been established in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia pursuant to section 105(c) of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and section 3(d) of the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994. The Advisory Committees are made up of responsible persons who serve without compensation. Their functions under their mandate from the Commission are to: advise the Commission of all relevant information concerning their respective states on matters within the jurisdiction of the Commission; advise the Commission on matters of mutual concern in the preparation of reports of the Commission to the President and the Congress; receive reports, suggestions, and recommendations from individuals, public and private organizations, and public officials upon matters pertinent to inquiries conducted by the State Advisory Committee; initiate and forward advice and recommendations to the Commission upon matters in which the Commission shall request assistance of the State Advisory Committee; and attend, as observers, any open hearing or conference that the Commission may hold within the state. This report is available on diskette in ASCII and WordPerfect 5.1 for persons with visual impairments. Please call (202) 376-8110. Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Reconciliation at a Crossroads: The Implications of the Apology Resolution and Rice v. Cayetano for Federal and State Programs Benefiting Native Hawaiians Summary Report of the August 1998 and September 2000 Community Forums in Honolulu, Hawai‘i Letter of Transmittal Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Members of the Commission Mary Frances Berry, Chairperson Cruz Reynoso, Vice Chairperson Christopher Edley, Jr. Yvonne Y. Lee Elsie Meeks Russell G. Redenbaugh Abigail Thernstrom Victoria Wilson Les Jin, Staff Director Attached is a report from the Hawaii Advisory Committee based upon a community forum held August 22, 1998, to collect information on the impact of the 1993 Apology Resolution enacted to recognize the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, and subsequent meet- ings with Nā Kūpuna held September 28, 2000, and a community forum convened September 29, 2000, to collect information on concerns of Native Hawaiians and others on the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Rice v. Cayetano on Native Hawaiians. All meetings were held in Honolulu, the capital of Hawai‘i. Commission Vice Chairperson Cruz Reynoso and Commission members Yvonne Y. Lee and Elsie Meeks joined the Hawaii Advisory Commit- tee in the September 2000 effort. The issue of Native Hawaiian sovereignty and the impact of the 1893 overthrow is com- plex. The passage of over 100 years and the migration of various peoples to the territory and later, the island state of Hawai‘i, has compounded the impact. What was clear from the 1998 presentations was the need for continued dialogue and a concerted effort by Native Hawai- ians to outline the essential parameters of reconciliation. While this dialogue was taking place, Rice v. Cayetano was working its way through the federal court system and eventually found its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Rice v. Cayetano that a voting procedure allowing only Native Hawaiians to vote for members of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs violated the 15th Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits race-based exclusion from voting. While the decision was lauded by some, Native Hawaiians complained that it overlooked the historical facts of what the Apology Resolution acknowledged as the illegal overthrow of their constitu- tional monarchy over a hundred years ago. The Rice decision has occurred during a flourish- ing movement for self-determination and self-governance, fueling feelings of anger and frus- tration within the Native Hawaiian community. At its meeting of March 30, 2000, the Hawaii Advisory Committee determined it should conduct an open meeting on the impact of the Rice decision. Because of questions regarding equal protection and the constitutionality of purported “race-based entitlement programs” evoked by the Rice decision, the Hawaii Advisory Committee further determined that it should request involvement of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. The Commission decided that it would assist the Advisory Committee in obtaining information at an open session through the participation of members of the Commission. Many participants at the open meeting voiced their opinion that the decision negates at- tempts to remedy past inequities and impinges efforts to assist Native Hawaiians in such areas as education, employment, and health care. Others suggested that the decision affirms constitutional guarantees for equality. iii The Advisory Committee appreciates the support of Vice Chairperson Cruz Reynoso and Commissioners Yvonne Y. Lee and Elsie Meeks, who participated in this forum, and the vol- untary contribution of the people of Hawai‘i, both native and non-native, who appeared be- fore the Advisory Committee panel. The Advisory Committee approved submission of this report to the Commission without objection. It is hoped that the report will add to the dialogue for constructive change and an equitable solution. Respectfully, Charles Maxwell, Sr., Chairperson Hawaii Advisory Committee iv Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Charles Maxwell, Sr., Chairperson Helen R. Nagtalon-Miller Pukalani Maui Kaneohe Patricia M. Cook Alan T. Murakami Wailuku Honolulu David Michael Forman Julianne R. Puzon Honolulu Wahaiwa Quentin K. Kawananakoa Oswald K. Stender Kailua Honolulu Faye Kennedy Anthony S. Vericella Honolulu Honolulu Acknowledgments The Hawaii Advisory Committee wishes to thank staff of the Commission’s headquarters office in Washington, D.C., and the Western Regional Office in Los Angeles for their assis- tance in the preparation of this report. The project was the principal assignment of Thomas V. Pilla with support at the open meetings from Grace Hernandez, Arthur Palacios, and An- gelica Trevino, all of the Western Regional Office, and David Aronson, Pamela A. Dunston, Deborah Reid, and Mireille Zieseniss, all of the Commission’s Washington, D.C., office. Mireille Zieseniss and Deborah Reid prepared an initial draft of this report, with review by Thomas V. Pilla. Kim Ball conducted the legal sufficiency review. The Advisory Committee would like to thank David Forman and Alan Murakami of the project subcommittee for their invaluable contribution to the final report, and Ruby G. Moy for work during the project’s planning phase. Dawn Sweet provided editorial assistance and prepared the report for publi- cation. Dorothy Pearson-Canty was responsible for duplication services. The project was car- ried out under the supervision of Philip Montez, regional director. v Contents PREFACE ................................................................................................................................ix INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. 1 Social Cohesion and Conflict ...................................................................................................1 Cultural Identity ....................................................................................................................... 2 THE PAST THAT HAUNTS: A HISTORY OF HAWAIIAN ANNEXATION .........................................