Who Wins and Who Loses With Sovereignty?
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1993-07-01
Guests: H. Bruss Keppeler (President, Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs)
Duration: 00:27:31

[00:00:00] Randall Roth: Bruce is capitalizing in real estate, corporate, and estate planning law. Bruce is of Hawaiian ancestry and a student of Hawaiian history. He currently is serving as president of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs. Bruce, you did a great job in the Price of Paradise book explaining why so many people, non-Hawaiians as well as Hawaiians, feel that a great injustice has occurred. Would you give us a brief summary of what you wrote in that book?

[00:00:26] H. Bruss Keppeler: Okay, well that's a kind of a tall order, but basically, we tried to trace the history from the time of the contact of Westerners with Hawaii and its people. And all of [unintelligible — audio glitch] impacts that were placed upon the Hawaiian people, and this place, too, as a matter of fact, over the years. And some of the stories that we that I told in that chapter 30 of the of the book are not too pleasant. Really had to do with the the greed of certain people with the clash of cultural approaches to to how even the very basic parts of life were practiced between Westerners and the Hawaiians. Leading to finally the overthrow of the the legal government, the government recognized internationally, headed by Queen Liliʻuokalani in 1893.

[00:01:15] H. Bruss Keppeler: We went on further to discuss, too, the Hawaiian Homes program, the Ceded Lands Trust, and other programs that have been scandals really in the way they've been administered over the years since the Hawaiian Homes program was enacted in 1921 through statehood in 1959 when the Ceded Lands Trust was established. And then ignored until really the constitutional convention of 1978 established the office of Hawaiian affairs. And then it was another 10 years before until 1990 before the real import of the Ceded Lands Trust and the income that was set aside in part to benefit native Hawaiians of 50% blood quantum or more was really understood. Recently the money, very recently, the money amounting to about $130 million concerning having to do with that ceded land trust income was paid over to the office of Hawaiian affairs.

[00:02:22] H. Bruss Keppeler: That's the story that we told in the chapter.

[00:02:38] Randall Roth: I remember in the chapter, you said something about we have a McKinley High School and a McKinley this and that, but no Cleveland anything. What's the significance of that?

[00:02:48] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, that's because of the fact that during January of 1893, when 13 Westerners took in what they called the committee of safety, overthrew Queen Liliʻuokalani and her rightful government with the help of the minister representing the United States government here and 162 sailors and marines from the USS Boston which was conveniently anchored in the harbor training its guns on the palace. After that incident, at the insistence of Queen Liliʻuokalani deposed, President Grover Cleveland sent a man named James Blount out here to do an investigation. Former Congressman Blount had been the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US of the US Congress. He came out here, and for a number of weeks studied the matter, did an investigation, and reported to the President that but for the notorious predilections of the United States minister, for annexation, but for the landing of the United States forces upon false pretenses, pretenses respecting the danger of life and property of the committee, but for the president presence of the United States forces in the immediate vicinity and in a position to afford all needed protection and support for the committee, the so-called revolution would never have happened.

[00:03:40] H. Bruss Keppeler: 

[00:04:19] Randall Roth: So, so the President of the United States sent someone out here who looked at the situation and said this was an illegal overthrow?

[00:04:27] H. Bruss Keppeler: That's right. And I've just read in part from a message the President Cleveland subsequently sent to Congress, the United States Congress on December 8th, 1893.

[00:04:38] Randall Roth: Well, what what's the problem if the President of the United States is saying that this was an illegal overthrow?

[00:04:42] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, he did. His investigator did look over the the whole matter, interviewed people, got testimony from people who were on the site. He was here very shortly after the events of January of 1893. He was talking with people who had been involved in the in the activity or had observed, observed all of this activity. And came back to the to Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, and said that that the US had in fact been involved in a plot to overthrow a legal persistent persisting internationally recognized, the monarchy had a number of treaties with all of the major powers in the world at the time, overthrew the government. This committee of 13, there was not a Hawaiian among them, and in fact, only seven, a slight majority of them, were even citizens of the kingdom at all.

[00:05:33] H. Bruss Keppeler: But after that, Cleveland wrote this report to Congress, and the annexationists, the 13 and their supporters, withdrew their pleas for annexation of Hawaii to the United States and waited. William McKinley, the next president, was much more favorable to them, and in fact in 1898, they accomplished annexation, again by an act which was less than legal. You may know of course that a 2/3 majority of the Senate is required, the US Senate, I'm talking about now, is required for the ratification of a treaty of annexation or a treaty of any kind. And in this case, they knew that they couldn't get the 2/3, so they passed the annexation through what's called the Newlands resolution by a simple majority in Congress.

[00:06:26] H. Bruss Keppeler: And so there's legal doubt as to whether or not Hawaii ever really was annexed as a territory.

[00:06:42] Randall Roth: Interesting. Bruce, I've been here for about 11 years, and when I first moved to Hawaii, when occasionally I would hear the word sovereignty, I had the impression that people weren't talking about it very seriously, at least the community didn't seem to to take seriously the possibility of the sovereignty movement. Now it seems as though one hears it every day, and it's being taken very, very seriously. Why is that?

[00:07:07] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, I think of course that it has to do with the centennial of the overthrow. January 17th, 1993, marked the hundred year anniversary of the event. And we've all been kind of building up and trying to educate the public to the those activities and actions that led up to that that event, and the tragedy that it represented for the Hawaiian people. And and also to to educate people concerning some of the other activity that took place thereafter. As is I guess we're all kind of comfortable with the the idea that as people emigrated, immigrated into the United States from other countries with their I remember now, all of the people that have come to the United States, gone to the United States over the years have done so on mostly on a voluntary basis except of course for the blacks who were taken there against their will.

[00:07:45] H. Bruss Keppeler: They chose to join in the United States dream, the dream of becoming just like everybody else, leaving their own culture behind, leaving many of them forever, their language. There are many, of course, Americans, my myself of part German ancestry and my German is quite limited, for example, I speak no French even though I'm part French. Some people did all of that by choice. The Hawaiians, on the other hand, were the process was reversed. The Americans took Hawaii over, and never never during this whole process in 1893 or in 1894, when on July 4th, 1894, these same revolutionists proclaimed the Republic of Hawaii when they realized that President Cleveland wasn't going to let them get their annexation dream.

[00:08:40] H. Bruss Keppeler: And then later on August 12, 1898, when Hawaii was annexed against its will in a sense, to the United States, never along the way, in fact, were any votes taken. All of these actions were taken by this oligopial oligopoly of 13 men, plus supporters amongst paramedical military groups and others.

[00:09:25] Randall Roth: I get the impression that the history is there, it's detailed, it's clear. Um the facts can't really be contested at this point and it's simply a matter of educating people as to what happened and with that you win them over to your side.

[00:09:40] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, the, you know, we spoke a little while ago about McKinley High School and everything that was named after McKinley and nothing after Cleveland. That's the kind of thing that went on during the first half of the century here. Many of these facts were not taught to me as a youngster going to a school that was close to the alliance for missionaries which will go unnamed which will go unnamed but begins with P and is in Manoa. But, and it wasn't you know, I don't know how that happened but from trustees on down that just these particular facts about Queen Liliʻuokalani's overthrow were never taught at that school, never taught at Princess Kaʻiulani's school, never taught at any of the schools in the then department of public instruction.

[00:10:07] H. Bruss Keppeler: These facts were hidden away in the Lincoln library in the in Washington, and you couldn't even guess some of this material here in Hawaii at all. And so what this process that we've been going through is to try to educate people of my generation and younger who have never had these facts presented to them before in order [unintelligible — audio glitch] develop an opinion either way. We were told that Queen Liliʻuokalani was a stubborn little old lady that needed to be overthrown. I kid you not. That's how long we were talking.

[00:10:55] Randall Roth: Interesting. You're listening to the Price of Paradise radio show. I'm Randy Roth, and I'm talking to Bruce Keppler, an attorney in private practice, who currently is serving as president of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs. Bruce, I understand Ka Lahui Hawaii is the largest of the many groups that have formed to address the issue of sovereignty. Can you tell us a little bit about that organization and their vision for a sovereign Hawaii?

[00:11:19] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, it's true that Ka Lahui is probably the largest group that has been formed strictly for the purposes of suing for sovereignty. It numbers about 18,000 by last report. It may not in fact be the largest group that has a position on on sovereignty because another group called the State Council of Hawaiian Homestead Association has a membership of about 30,000, and it's been developing a position on the issue of sovereignty. But Ka Lahui is probably one of the earliest of the groups pulled together for the strict purpose of demanding Hawaiian sovereignty.

[00:12:01] Randall Roth: And they seem to be better at getting press from from my informal observation.

[00:12:05] H. Bruss Keppeler: They certainly are. And if you read the um more organic documents of Ka Lahui Hawaii, which by the way in Hawaii, in Hawaiian means the nation, the Hawaiian nation, um you'll find that they are asking that that the Hawaiian people, formed together as a nation, request and apply for and and be able and and receive federal recognition as a nation within a nation. Much the same as the Chippewa, or the Navajo, or the Aleuts, or the Eskimo, although they're at different forms as you know, Alaskan Alaskans, native Alaskans went for a corporate form versus a tribal nation form. But there are many of these in the US already. That's what Ka Lahui wants to get.

[00:12:52] H. Bruss Keppeler: 

[00:12:55] Randall Roth: Bruce, when you mentioned um Indians, one thinks of reservations. Does nation within a nation mean a reservation?

[00:13:03] H. Bruss Keppeler: It doesn't have to mean that. As I say that said, these nations take all kinds of different forms. Many of them of course are are most active around reservation lands that have been set aside for them. And many of these are ancestral lands, although be because national policy has changed and labored and moved around over the years, many of them have reservations on what was someone else's land before, but at any rate, they do have reservations. I can't tell you right off the bat any example of one where there isn't some kind of land base that they consider to be the homeland. But um there that isn't a necessary ingredient. It's possible for them to not have them.

[00:13:47] H. Bruss Keppeler: For instance, there is a tribe at the present time that I understand is negotiating for the return to them of the Presidio of San Francisco. Whether they'll that whole tribe will be able to live on that property or not, I don't know. They may look at it as the as a basis, an economic base for their tribe, a way of collecting land rents, commercial rents and whatnot. Hawaiians are looking, I think many of us are looking in that direction. Ka Lahui certainly is too. Some land to live on. None of us are, I shouldn't say none of us, but very few of us really feel that we'd like to buy into the reservation aspect because there have been some pretty bad examples of that on the continent, Continental United States.

[00:14:17] H. Bruss Keppeler: 

[00:14:29] Randall Roth: Bruce, under the nation within a nation approach, would Hawaiians remain citizens of the United States, continue to enjoy all the rights and privileges that that involves, and simply have additional status by virtue of being a part of this nation within a nation, or would they give up those rights and privileges?

[00:14:47] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, I think you've said it exactly right. As I understand the approach that's used by the existing Indian nations, if you want to call it that, is that they do have dual citizenship. We have examples of a gentleman living on the reservation in a house provided to him or through his tribal membership, his tribal national citizenship, shall we say, donning his postman, US postman's uniform, piling into his pickup truck and driving into town to report for work as a federal worker. And certainly he has both an American citizenship and a Navajo citizenship, for example. That's very possible under this this particular approach.

[00:15:32] Randall Roth: You mentioned that there are a number of directions that this could go so far as land mass is concerned. It's my understanding that there are some individuals and a group or two that are promoting the separation of the islands, that one or more islands would be sovereign Hawaiian islands and other islands would remain together a state in the United States. Is that what they're really saying?

[00:15:54] H. Bruss Keppeler: As I understand it, now that's that's a brand new pretty new pretty new approach. I think it's an approach to go between those who would who are advocating complete separation of what we know now as the state of Hawaii from the United States, and the nation within a nation status with a patchwork quilt, where land ownership by the tribe wouldn't necessarily create a an area where you could call a particular area like a reservation that you could call Hawaiian. This this, by the way, Dr. Keoni Dudley, who's one of the proponents of that approach, and his his idea is that depending on how the communities voted themselves, certain of the islands would be, you know, if if all of the population on that island would would want it to happen, then a whole island or a major part of an island would become part of the Hawaiian nation and the rest of the islands would be would remain as part of the state of Hawaii and a part of the United States.

[00:16:28] H. Bruss Keppeler: 

[00:17:03] Randall Roth: What happens to somebody's home in Kailua if a majority of people on Oahu say we want to be a Hawaiian nation? What happens to their property?

[00:17:14] H. Bruss Keppeler: Um, actually, when we start when we are talking about land base, at least most of us are talking in terms of those of only of already government already government owned lands and not private land ownership. I realize there are people who think other ones on this issue. But I I believe that most of the groups now really think that there wouldn't be a way to disturb private ownership of land in any of these places. But it would be possible for someone to who is a private land owner to contribute his or her land into the nation, just as for instance now, the apartment I live on live in on street is part of the city and county of Honolulu sub government state of Hawaii sub government United States of America.

[00:17:41] H. Bruss Keppeler: I would have the opportunity to take that condo and put it in to the nation of Hawaii instead.

[00:18:08] Randall Roth: Pay them taxes instead of, uh, That's right.

[00:18:10] H. Bruss Keppeler: I don't think it'd make Mary Fassi very happy, but my real property taxes now would be paid to the to the new nation rather than to the city and county.

[00:18:19] Randall Roth: Yeah, I wonder if I could designate where my taxes go.

[00:18:22] H. Bruss Keppeler: Right. So, I don't know that you're going to have a whole lot of choice with respect to, you know, saying that perhaps uh you form a nation called the Nation of Randy Roth.

[00:18:31] Randall Roth: We better not even get into that. You're listening to the Price of Paradise radio show. I'm Randy Roth, and I'm talking to Bruce Kepler, an attorney in private practice, who currently is serving as president of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs. Bruce, I think something that a lot of non-Hawaiians are asking, is this a zero-sum game? In other words, if Hawaiians gain something from sovereignty, do non-Hawaiians lose something?

[00:18:57] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, it's uh, again, you have to understand the most the groups are talking in terms of with respect to land base, only about government lands. And in order to understand the impact on the rest of the population, one has to understand that certain lands were already set aside for Native Hawaiians. The Hawaiian Homes Act of, they call it the 1920, but was actually signed by the President of the United States in 1921, set aside approximately 200,000 acres for a special class of citizens who had to be 50% blood quantum, uh Hawaiian blood. Actually, the language is much more technical than than that. You have to have the trace ancestry um to uh uh residence of the islands prior to the arrival of Captain Cook.

[00:19:39] H. Bruss Keppeler: 

[00:19:51] Randall Roth: Right, and and I know you've written that that it's it's been a scandal that the benefits that were supposed to go to the Hawaiian people under those programs haven't. And hopefully whether or not we have sovereignty, that's going to be addressed. But is there something that the Hawaiians will gain from sovereignty? And if so, where does that come from?

[00:20:11] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, if you do a do adopt the approach that's being propounded by Ka La Hui, there are many, many advantages of that are only allowed to Indian nations on the continent and in Alaska at the present time. There are certain special pieces of legislation that allow for special economic advantages for Native Americans. Uh, recently, the Bush administration indicated that they've and and, in fact, blocked uh, appropriations that would have allowed monies to come in for uh, infrastructure construction on the Hawaiian Homes program, which has been one of the major problems over the years, based on the fact that it was that such monies would paid to a particular racial group would be unconstitution unconstitutional uh, as a as a racial uh, preference vise a viz uh, the kind of thing that is allowed under the United States Constitution for tribal nations.

[00:20:37] H. Bruss Keppeler: 

[00:21:16] Randall Roth: Can can Clinton change that?

[00:21:18] H. Bruss Keppeler: I believe his, uh, his, a lawyer's can change that opinion. Will he? I think he's probably going to go in that direction, but I think that that has given us a general push to say, all right, Mr. Bush, if that's true, then, well, we can solve that problem by forming a nation. And then we'll come under that constitutional exception. That's the kind of thing that I think Ka La Hui and its leaders, Mililani Trask and others, are looking for. In fact, on June 5th, the Sovereignty Advisory Council, established by the State Legislature, and I, I also happen to be the chairman of that, uh, sponsored a a symposium on economic issues for Hawaiian sovereignty and and in fact, this station broadcast, uh, the proceedings, um, broadcast the proceedings where Mililani Trask did make a presentation on behalf of Ka La Hui Hawaii, indicating ticking off all kinds of different advantages that tribal governments have been able to receive on the continent.

[00:21:44] H. Bruss Keppeler: That's the kind of advantage that doesn't take away from people here.

[00:22:25] Randall Roth: But it comes from the federal government rather than coming from the State of Hawaii or the the citizens of Hawaii.

[00:22:31] H. Bruss Keppeler: One of the examples that was posed, as a matter of fact, by a one of the members of the audience, I happen to know him, I mean, John Kanikaua, was that he knew of uh of an Alaskan tribe that had a quite an extensive fisheries area and the potential fisheries industry, but had no way to get that fish to market. They were able to get federal surplus airplanes at dirt cheap in order to create their own transportation system because they were a native nation.

[00:23:04] Randall Roth: So it opens doors.

[00:23:05] H. Bruss Keppeler: It opens all kinds of doors.

[00:23:07] Randall Roth: Bruce, we've only got about a minute and a half left. I know that OHA is involved in this process, and there's a lot of talk about a a constitutional convention. Uh, the process that, uh, sovereignty will will go through is anything but certain. What do you expect to happen over the next few years and, um, where will it eventually lead us?

[00:23:28] H. Bruss Keppeler: Well, you know, we haven't put much emphasis on another, there are two other groups really. We've talked about Ka La Hui, and we've talked about State Council of Hawaiian Homesteads. And those are both nation within a nation advocates. There is, of course, also a strong group, the series of groups, number of groups that are interested in separating the United States, all the way from completely from the United States of America. The Institute for Advancement of Hawaiian Affairs headed by Pokai Lani Nui, who is also known as Hayden Burgess, headed by Kekuni Blaisdell, Dr. Kekuni Blaisdell, and Ohana Council, headed by Bumpie Kanahele, and whose spokesman is often Kavehi Kanui are talking about a separation. They don't talk seated, I mean secession, because they say you can't can't secede from something that you never voluntarily joined in the first place.

[00:23:50] H. Bruss Keppeler: Uh, their their approach is very simple. That you just, everything that's here now, just suddenly becomes, uh, once again, separate Hawaiian nation. There's also a huge group, I think, that wants things to stay exactly as they are now, except to do something, damn it, about these programs that have been scandals, that have been failures and not change anything about the political. So, really, to understand where we're going to go from here, we have to think in terms of all of those options, nation within a nation, separate nation rejoining the international community of nations, and those who want us to stay status quo, but to finally fund the Hawaiian Homes program properly, work the ceded lands program properly, get those benefits out there doing what they're supposed to have been doing for the last 75 years.

[00:24:44] H. Bruss Keppeler: To predict is something that, um, and I do believe I have some kahuna in my ancestry, but, Randy, I'm not ready to predict today where we're going to go. I I really believe that there's going to be an awful lot of serious thought about all of this. I think Hawaiians will act as they usually do in a culturally correct manner. I think that the whole process will be, uh, proceed with with great Aloha. There's just like any human organization or human group, there will be lots of arguing. Hawaiians have been noted as orators and uh they do discuss things thoroughly, and I think a lot of that's going to happen in the upcoming Hawaiian convention that will be convened, I believe, so long as that question, which will be asked in a referendum is I, the Hawaiian word for yes, do you want a Hawaiian convention to establish or to draft organic documents for a new nation?

[00:25:44] H. Bruss Keppeler: It will happen.

[00:26:15] Randall Roth: Thank you, Bruce. We've been talking to Bruce Kepler. This is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth. Thank you very much.