"The only one of the committee members that wondered whether the object of HB 1627 was legal or not was Rep. Gene Ward. Nevertheless, he accepted the beat-around-the-bush answer from one of the proponents and the committee passed the measure, patting themselves on the back for opening up dialog about this important topic." by Leon Siu
It is illegal to assert that native Hawaiians are less than 50% plus blood quantum. A Rehabilitaion Act of 1923, that defined native Hawaiians and had set aside 200,000 acres for their co-habitation. Land that, we squat on for the purpose of 'Keeping up with the dying race".
Representative Gene Ward is a Republican and ( I am guessing) based his concession to the status quo of the Republican Party stance. I don't know what it is except maybe to industrialize the 200,000 acres for its speculative market values and development as an equilibrium measure. Which in my mind ties in taxation by the force of the military. I believe this is the way out from under 'slavery' or subjugation. Military force was always the Republican Party stance in Hawaii.
Gene Ward is also a haumana of the late Dr. George Kanahele that taught his students entrepreneurial skills. What ever the market will bear, I believe was his intention for a free sovereign state.
From the last Nanakuli association meeting the push was for light industrial, thus an exceptance of military and their toxic pollution.
Is there a compromising deal on the horizon? If it's a free and sovereign state, are we looking at light industrial and military shared force on all things that are culturally unavoidable by nationalizing our Historic sites?
At this juncture, I would rather pay attention to 'occupation' in addition to HB1627.
Replies
So my question is if there is a compromising political position on the horizon, are we selling lands to benefit the general public economic needs? If so, isn't that the illegality question that Rep. Gene Ward was alluding to? Why not question the issue of the 'states' populace vote in 1979 or 1980, I can't remember when the election existed. I believe it was 1980 when the populace voted for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs State Office. From their instant inception of the definition of native Hawaiians to include themselves, the general public, to all in Hawaii, as one whole union in American cultural style of doing business? Which is by military force of taxation?
I'm dialoguing the dialogue in my own way which comes from the 1974 experiences.