U.S. Civil Rights Commission Opposes Bill To Establish New Racial Government in Hawaii [My Title]

U.S. Civil Rights Commission ^ | August 28, 2009 | U.S. Civil Rights Commission

[kaehurowing]

[Today, a letter was sent to Congressional leaders by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, opposing the establishment of a new race-based government in Hawaii.]

Dear Distinguished Members of Congress:

Three years ago, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued a report opposing the passage of the proposed Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act. Although that report focused on an earlier version of the proposed legislation, that earlier version was substantially similar to S. 1011. Specifically, the report stated:

“The Commission recommends against passage of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act ... or any other legislation that would discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and further subdivide the American People into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege.”

We write today to reiterate our opposition to the proposal. We do not believe Congress has the constitutional authority to “reorganize” racial or ethnic groups into dependent sovereign nations unless those groups have a long and continuous history of separate self-governance. Moreover, quite apart from the issue of constitutional authority, creating such an entity sets a harmful precedent. Ethnic Hawaiians will surely not be the only group to demand such treatment. On what ground will Congress tell these other would-be tribes no?

(Snip)

[kaehurowing]

Native Hawaiian separatists are seeking passage of legislation, popularly known as the "Akaka Bill," to establish their own separate racially exclusive government in Hawaii. Obama supports this legislation and it faces a good prospect of passage now that Obama is president and Congress is controlled by Democrats.

This bill would allow "Native Hawaiians," defined as anyone with any percentage of Native Hawaiian blood, to form their own Native government in Hawaii that would treated like an Indian tribe. Approximately 1/5 of the people in Hawaii have some percentage of Hawaiian blood, as well as hundreds of thousands of people on the Mainland who would now be subject to this new nation. The new Native Hawaiian Governing Entity would be the largest "Indian Tribe" in the country

This would also open the door to Mexican-Americans to demand the same "national" recognition, based on their history as "indigenous" people of the American Southwest and California and "forcible loss" of their lands as a result of the Mexican-American war.

[Diogenesis]

Clearing the Smoke on Obama’s Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigator’s June 10 Report
"The Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii
In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an “original birth certificate” on record.
BC1. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parents’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).

BC2. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before “the local registrar of the district.”
It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent’s signature to a form and mail it in.
In addition, if a claim was made that “neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate.” (Section 57-8&9)
.... there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii.

BC3. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a “Delayed Certificate” could be filed, which required that “a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates”, which “evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file.”
The statute provided that “the probative value of a ‘delayed’ or ‘altered’ certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence.” (See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).”

BC4. If a child is born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year.
(See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961.)
In 1955 the “secretary of the Territory” was in charge of this procedure. In 1960 it was transferred to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor (“the lieutenant governor, or his secretary, or such other person as he may designate or appoint from his office” §338-41 [in 1961]).

In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fifth kind of “original birth certificate”. Under Act 182 H.B. NO. 3016-82, “Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that the proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.”
In this way “state policies and procedures” accommodate even “children born out of State” (this is the actual language of Act 182) with an “original birth certificate on record.”

[kaehurowing]

For further backround on this attempt to racialize Hawaii, read the following columns by Michelle Malkin:

“The Worst Bill You’ve Never Heard Of”
http://michellemalkin.com/2005/06/23/the-worst-bill-youve-never-heard-of/

“Apartheid in Hawaii”
http://michellemalkin.com/2005/07/12/apartheid-in-hawaii/

“Hawaii’s Secessionists”
http://michellemalkin.com/2005/02/28/hawaiis-secessionists/

“Apartheid for Native Hawaiians”
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin072701.asp

[muawiyah]

Not to worry, the evidence is in that the Mexicans, manifest as agents from MesoAmerica, came North to EAT the Anasazi, not to participate in a civilization.

I think we could pretty much disqualify any Mexican irrespective of the blood quanta.

[kaehurowing]

We Hawaiians used to like to eat people too. We ate Captain Cook. That’s why there’s a little English in all of us today.