Content area
Full Text
I. INTRODUCTION
A glossy brochure touting Hawaiian vacations tempts would-be tourists with "traditional luaus" and "old-world" hospitality. On a shimmering beach at sunset, a smiling Hawaiian woman extends a flower lei to the brochure's owner-a photograph that the tourist industry in Hawaii hopes will bring even more travelers to this Pacific paradise.
Hawaii's economy relies heavily on a tourist industry1 that trades upon the culture of the native Hawaiian people. Many "mainlanders" come to Hawaii for the carefree, barefoot Hawaiian life portrayed in a wide array of advertisements. Yet, beneath the slick brochures, many native Hawaiians do not smile. Many struggle-with their shoes on-to get jobs and to gain access to Hawaii's expanding economy.2 Native Hawaiians, after all, live at the bottom of the island's socioeconomic scale3-a fact that, despite the idyllic representations in advertisements, many Hawaiians hope to change.
Native Hawaiians, who call themselves "Kanaka Maoli,"4 inhabited Hawaii long before Europe discovered the eight small islands in 1778.(5) Many of these native Hawaiians, defined in the state's constitution as blood descendants of those inhabiting the island before 1778,(6) struggle to shake off the tourist's objectification while still preserving their culture. While Hawaiians battle to become modern against the grain of Hawaiian postcards, the brochures nonetheless lay bare a pivotal question for Hawaii and the United States. Are native Hawaiians as far removed from mainland Americans as the tourist industry portrays? What are the implications of the line drawn by the state constitution between the "Kanaka Maoli" and the rest of the Hawaiian residents?
Before 2000, this line had significant political meaning in Hawaii. In 1978, the state, by constitutional amendment, established the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA).7 This office manages $300 million of Hawaii's assets8 and holds significant power. Many describe it as the fourth branch of the Hawaiian government.9 Until recently, Hawaii mandated that only native Hawaiians could vote in OHA elections.10 In defense of exclusive suffrage, state courts had considered the OHA as independent from the Hawaiian government. In 1989, the Supreme Court of Hawaii described the OHA as a "selfgoverning corporate body."11 The OHA seemed to capitalize on this autonomy; that same year, the OHA began officially and publicly portraying itself as a sovereign body independent from the United States.12...