Lingle's Stance On Ceded Lands Justified
Gov. Linda Lingle is taking a beating from Native Hawaiians in the legal dispute over ceded lands, but she has little choice other than to defend the state's right to manage its resources for the benefit of all citizens.
The act specified betterment of Native Hawaiians as one of five purposes the lands should be put to, along with public education, farm and home ownership and general public improvements.
The Hawai'i Supreme Court ruled in January, however, that the state can't sell or transfer any of the lands until Hawaiian native claims are reconciled — a process that could take decades while restricting the state's ability to address other priorities in the act.
Hawaiians excoriated the Lingle administration for requesting a review of the state ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which took the case and has scheduled oral arguments on Feb. 25.
In a Nov. 24 rally at the Capitol, some Hawaiian protesters shouted for Lingle's impeachment and an attorney representing the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in the lawsuit has accused her of taking an "immoral position."
The harsh tone of the criticism is unfair.
Lingle, who inherited the lawsuit from the Cayetano administration, recognizes that Hawaiians have "strong moral claims" to compensation for lands taken after the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, but disputes the state Supreme Court's view that the state's title to ceded lands granted by the Admissions Act was effectively nullified by a 1993 congressional resolution apologizing for the overthrow.
Sen. Daniel Inouye told colleagues at the time that the measure was "a simple resolution of apology" and had "nothing to do" with Hawaiian land claims.
Lingle believes land claims must be sorted out via the Akaka bill in Congress and has made several trips to Washington to lobby for the measure despite opposition from conservatives in her Republican Party.
The Hawai'i Supreme Court ruling was extraordinary in the way it interpreted federal laws to strip the state of sovereign rights.
It's little wonder that 29 other states worried about their own sovereign rights joined Hawai'i in seeking a U.S. Supreme Court review, and that the court considered it of sufficient national interest to hear the case.
Hawaiians are worried the court might erode their rights beyond the ceded lands issue, and it's a shame the dispute has gotten this far.
Reasonable people should have been able to reach a settlement that allowed the state to sell lands when necessary to meet the purposes of the Admissions Act, but with the understanding that it would do so with restraint until Hawaiian claims were resolved.
It's not as though the state planned a fire sale of ceded lands; the 1994 OHA lawsuit now before the Supreme Court involved a sale of 1,500 acres on Maui and the Big Island for affordable housing — one of the mandates of the act — with OHA getting one-fifth of the proceeds.
The case poses huge practical implications for the state, and Lingle isn't in a position to stand down now; even if the Akaka bill passes next year, it could take decades to reconcile Hawaiian land and sovereignty claims.
Hawaiians have no recognized leadership to negotiate with the federal government and objected to setting a 20-year deadline for settling the issues in the Akaka bill. Many Hawaiians oppose the Akaka bill altogether.
No state can operate effectively with its ability to manage its resources in indefinite limbo.
David Shapiro, a veteran Hawai'i journalist, can be reached by e-mail at dave@volcanicash.net. His columns are archived at www.volcanicash.net. Read his daily blog, Volcanic Ash, at volcanicash.honadvblogs.com.
Reach David Shapiro at dave@volcanicash.net.
ALOHA Kakou, Hawaii, Governor Lingle should be Impeached. As governor of the State of Hawaii, Lingle is the Executive Trustee of the Public Land Trust. Lingle has Betrayed the trust of many Hawaiians who supported and voted for her during the past six years. After six years of being governor, Lingle is supporting the Overthrow of the Inherent Sovereign Right of the Indigenous Hawaiian people to their national lands of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
KU I KA PONO, December 26, 2008, o Pomaikaiokalani
Comments
When are you going to insert the truth into what you are informing and educating the general public about. Most of what you are writing about is irrational and very, very inaccurate! Did you ever study and talk to Kupuna's about what really is going on? From your fictional articles that you are writing, it seems to me that you are very much numb to the truth. Did you ever wonder why the lands are currently held in "trust", David? Let me give you a little insight, the state does NOT have real ownership. It's holding it for it's real owner- the successors and heirs to the Kingdom. Ahhh!!!
This is what your next article should be about if you want to be "part of the solution" instead of contributing to being "part of the problem" that has been going on for over 115 years now. The "Choice" is yours? Are you going to be "part of the problem" or "part of the solution", David?
Mahalo,
Kaleo
"The Voice"