Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 16, Number 5, 1 May 1999 — Rice vs. Cayetano [ARTICLE]

Help Learn more about this Article Text

Rice vs. Cayetano

WITH THE strucmre of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs eleeūon process now under assault, OHA is gearing up for a vigorous resistance. On March 22, the United States Supreme Court certified it would review Rice vs. Cayetano in whieh Big Island rancher Harold "Freddy" Rice is ehallenging provisions in the Hawai'i constitution limiting participation in OHA elections to Hawai'i residents of Native Hawaiian ancestry. Rice alleges this limitation is illegal under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, whieh prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and the Fifteenth Amendment, whieh protects the right to vote. The lower comts have upheld the Hawai'i law, and Rice is asking the Supreme Court for a reversal. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs will certainly be affected by any decision. Therefore, it may petition the Supreme Court for permission to file an amicus curiae (literally, "friend of

" - V • >«* the court") brief in whieh OHA expresses the rationale for an outcome consistent with its interest in maintaining the curent structure of the voting process. According to the attorney for OHA's Board of Trustees, Sherry Broder, Native Hawaiians ean be distinguished as a political group, rather than a race, and limiting participation in the OHA eleehon to Native Hawaiians is based on authority set forth in the United States Constitution. At press time, Broder and OHA's administrative staff were preparing to recommend to the Board of Trustees the most eompetent attorney team to draft an amicus brief. Applications currently under review were received in response to an announcement OHA published in the Washington Post and on the Internet. On Apiil 1 1 , OHA Chairperson Rowena Akana, Vice Chairperson Hannah Springer, Deputy Administrator Colin Kippen and Broder flew to See RICE VS. CAYETANO on page 9

LEGISlATION

continued from page 1 SCRl09 whieh would have relocated Queen Lih'uokalani's statue. This resolution was defeated, and the statue will remain where it is. On Apiil 22, the Conference Committee met to discuss SB1635 calhng for a committee to smdy the issues related to the puhlie land trust. At its April 14

meeting, OHA's Government Affairs and Sovereignty Committee had expressed eoneem regarding the eomposition of the proposed committee whieh would consist of four representatives from the state and only two from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Likely to be considered by the Confer-

enee Committee before the end of session is SB456 providing tuition waivers for Hawaiian smdents in the University of Hawai'i system. As drafted, the bill would credit these waivers against payments due OHA from ceded lands revenues, whieh would limit mihon benefits to Hawaiians of at least 50 percent blood quanmm. According to Keala, the legislature continues to look to OHA to fund projects and programs for whieh the state should assume responsibility. "Because the state cannot tell OHA how

to spend its tmst funds," said Keala, "it is using the ploy of a "credit" against the settlement now under negotiation. This amounts to dictating to OHA and it drives a wedge between OHA and its beneficiaries if the trastees stand on principle." Also expected to be discussed in the Conference Committee before the end of session is SCR56 requesting an inventory of the pubhc land trast and a resolution of ceded land payments to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. ■