Friday, January 19, 2007

The Akaka Bill: It's Baaaccckkk!
Gail Heriot

Last year, the Bush Administration finally put the Akaka Bill in its well-deserved grave by announcing the President's opposition.  But in Washington, nothing ever stays dead .... 

Peter Kirsanow reports on National Review Online that Senator Akaka has now re-introduced the bill.  Calling it "[t]he worst piece of legislation ever analyzed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights," Commissioner Kirsanow obviously isn't pleased.  Neither should anyone be.  Let's hope that Bush maintains his resolve.

For those of you who would like to review my comments on the Akaka Bill, you'll find them here, here, here, especially here, here, here, here, here and here

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Akaka Bill: It's Baaaccckkk!
Gail Heriot


Could you call this a "Don Crow" law??

Just asking.

Posted by: cliiff | Jan 19, 2007 8:41:07 AM

Hawaii had these laws on the book until the Supreme Court overturned them in 2003 or so. It is not like they seceded or there was some huge discrimination against non-native Hawaiians. How is this different from Indian Tribes being sovereign in over a quarter of Arizona's land mass? I thought we did not like the Supreme Court taking away people's long established property rights without compensation. That is what the abrogation of these trusts (approved by the votes of all Hawaiian to join the Union) did. It is terribly unconservative to allow this type of pettifogging to injure people's interests in actual property for a parade of horribles that did not occur for 100 years of the existence of the trusts for and controlled by indiginous Hawaiians. (I have no dog in this fight having never been to Hawaii).

Posted by: jjv | Jan 19, 2007 8:59:15 AM

You are right about all the Indian tribe nonsense. These treaties should have all been abrogated years ago. They idea needs to be explained to them that "you lost" and move on. Give outright title to some of the land as private property just as everyone else has. Buy it, sell it, develop what ever you see everyone else.

Posted by: mrbill | Jan 19, 2007 9:31:42 AM

Being from hawaii I be able to offer a little insight. The Akaka Bill is a peice of trash. The reason this is different than the Indians being given their own land, is most of the indian tribes still acted as tibes. They had a chief, the community relied on their customs. No such Hawaiian tribe exists here. The families that have been around since Hawaii was sovereign all assimilated into a western lifestyle before Hawaii even bcame a US territory. The different small groups of Hawaiians asking for sovereignty all bicker with each other about who should rule etc. It's sad really.

Posted by: Big Mac w/ an Egg | Jan 19, 2007 2:31:56 PM

oops... I MIGHT be able to...

Posted by: Big Mac w/ an Egg | Jan 19, 2007 3:13:20 PM

BMwE hits the nail on the head. Recognized Indian tribes have continued to function as independent governments and "nations" within the US, somewhat analogous to the functioning of a State or municipal government. The Akaka bill creates new institutions that are entirely racially based. It's as if someone in Mississippii proposed offering the same organizational rights to blacks because their ancestory originally came from some tribe in Africa.

Posted by: submandave | Jan 22, 2007 7:30:59 AM

hello, i like this post because has useful information.

Posted by: Invertir en oro | May 11, 2011 1:41:46 PM