Saturday, April 5, 2008

Native Hawaiian bill to get its turn in Senate

Go to Original
By Dennis Camire

House already passed measure but it could still face presidential veto

WASHINGTON — Changes in the membership of the U.S. Senate seem to give the Akaka bill a better chance of passage this year than when it was blocked repeatedly in the past.

The bill, which sets up a process for Native Hawaiian self-government, will be considered by the full Senate this year, said a spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

"It will come up this year, I just don't have an exact timing on it yet," said spokeswoman Regan Lachappelle.

The House has twice passed the legislation, nicknamed the Akaka bill, but it has been stymied in the Senate.

U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawai'i, sponsor of the legislation, said he hopes that the addition of more Democrats to the Senate in the 2006 election has created enough votes for passage.

"It would seem that with the increase in Democratic senators, the chances of the bill passing increases," said Haunani Apoliona, chairwoman of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

She said she hopes that means it will move out soon.

However, the Bush administration opposes the bill and the president may veto it if it passes.

The bill's best chance of becoming law could come if a Democratic president is elected.

The two leading Democratic presidential contenders — U.S. Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama — both voted for the bill in 2006 and recently reiterated their support for it.

Only the presumptive Republican nominee, U.S. Sen. John McCain, can't be counted as a supporter.

The legislation creates a process for organizing a Native Hawaiian government, including development of a roll of Native Hawaiians and the election of an interim governing council. The council would develop the documents on which the government would be based.

Once the United States recognizes the new government, negotiations would take place on the disposition of Native Hawaiian land, natural resources and other assets.

Akaka has been pushing Reid for almost 11 months to schedule the bill for Senate floor action. "I will continue to work with him to find an appropriate time," he said.

But a crowded Senate schedule dealing with the Iraq war, immigration, health insurance and more recently the mortgage crisis has kept the bill in the background.

An expected filibuster from some Republicans in the Senate means Reid would have to make time for lengthy debate.

The House originally approved the bill in 2000 and passed it again in October.

If Akaka can get the bill on the Senate calendar, he stands a good chance of mustering the 60 votes needed to break the Republican filibuster that stopped the bill last time.

When the bill was last before the Senate in June 2006, he had the unanimous support of all the Democrats voting and 13 Republicans, but the 56-41 vote was still short of the 60 needed for a cloture motion to overcome the Republican filibuster. Since then, more Democrats and an independent have taken seats in the Senate, giving the party a 51-49 edge.

All 13 Republicans who voted for cloture are still in the Senate, but two of them, McCain and Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., are expected to oppose the bill.

If Akaka can keep the other 11 Republicans — four are co-sponsoring the bill this year — and again gain unanimous Democratic support, he could have 62 votes, more than enough to break a filibuster and bring the bill up for a final vote.

Akaka said he is optimistic that he will have the "bipartisan support necessary for a debate and up-or-down vote."

"I continue to reach out to my colleagues to share with them the unique history of Hawai'i and the long overdue need for federal recognition," Akaka said.

At least four of the new Democratic senators have supported the bill, but the others haven't made up their minds yet.

But even if Akaka and other supporters gain Senate passage, the bill still faces a possible presidential veto.

The White House Office of Management and Budget said the bill was "divisive" and discriminatory and raised "significant constitutional concerns." If the bill went to the president, "his senior advisers would recommend that he veto" it, the statement said.

A veto override requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate, an unlikely prospect given that only one of Bush's vetoes has been overcome.

No comments: