Ken Conklin at it again.

On November 30, 2004 Ken Conklin was at it again in a letter to the editor of the Washington Times:

Playing racial politics in Hawaii

"Three attorneys for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs have defended a bill to give federal recognition to ethnic Hawaiians, comparing them to an Indian tribe ("Hawaii bill in line with U.S. political tradition," Forum, Sunday).

This dangerous bill would badly damage not only Hawaii, but the entire United States. It will be introduced again in 2005. This bill is based on a new theory of the Constitution, that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to arbitrarily select any group of "indigenous people" and create a "tribe" for them out of thin air, regardless of the group's history and lack of continuity as a political entity.

This theory would, for example, allow Congress to recognize a "Nation of Aztlan" comprised of all people having any Mexican/Aztec ancestry who live in California, Texas, Arizona, etc. It would also encourage hundreds, perhaps thousands, of additional phony "tribes" to seek recognition.

Census 2000 says there are more than 400,000 "native Hawaiians," including 240,000 in Hawaii, 60,000 in California, and 100,000 in the other 48 states. This phony new "tribe" would be larger than any genuine tribe. "Native Hawaiians" make up 20 percent of Hawaii's population — no other tribe has such a large percentage of a state's population.

The Hawaiian recognition bill is, in effect, apartheid legislation that would carve Hawaii into separate racial jurisdictions. Twenty percent is a huge voting block when push comes to shove in disputes between a tribe and a state (tribal members also vote as citizens of a state).

Ethnic Hawaiians are highly intermarried and widely dispersed throughout all neighborhoods of Hawaii. Their "tribal lands" would be similarly scattered, creating jurisdictional nightmares.

The history of native Hawaiians is completely different from the history of American Indian tribes. There was never a unified political entity or nation whose members were exclusively native Hawaiian. Europeans and Americans helped create the kingdom of Hawaii. Because of decisions made by the sovereign kings of Hawaii exercising self-determination on behalf of their people, thousands of native-born and naturalized whites had voting rights and property rights as full-fledged citizens of the kingdom.

Most cabinet officers, and many elected members of the legislature, were white. By the time the monarchy was overthrown, 60 percent of the population was white or Asian. Yet the Hawaiian recognition bill ignores that history and proposes to give political recognition exclusively to the 20 percent of Hawaii's people who have at least one native ancestor.

The real purpose of this bill is to protect more than 160 racially exclusionary government programs that benefit ethnic Hawaiians. Of course, such race-based government programs are unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment equal protection clause; and they are now under attack in the courts. Large, wealthy ethnic Hawaiian institutions are spending millions to lobby for the Hawaiian bill so they can stay in business.

The Hawaiian recognition bill is unconstitutional. It would lay a foundation for further ethnic balkanization of America. It would give encouragement to racial identity politics, racial entitlement programs, racial separatism, racial reparations for historical grievances, etc.

KENNETH R. CONKLIN
Kane'ohe, Hawaii"


Seen at www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20041129-095028-6916r.htm


He seems to be the one who is mentioning race. The irony is that Ken Conklin only targets Hawaiians.