The American Bar Association is currently lobbying in favor of the Akaka Bill, having sent a letter this week to every US Senator in favor of its passage. This is much less impressive than it sounds.  Much like The Simpsons or David Lee Roth, the ABA is a shadow of its former self, living off the credibility of a name that too few have realized no longer carries any guarantee of quality or professionalism.
So when did the ABA jump the shark? It’s hard to say . . . it’s really one of those incremental things. Until one day you wake up and they’re applying purely political considerations to their evaluation of judicial nominees. Among those people who follow such things, it’s common knowledge that the ABA no longer has any credibility as a neutral arbiter of constitutional interpretation or judicial ability. Now, it functions more like a mouthpiece for the left wing of the Democratic party. Take the aforementioned letter to the US Senate on the Akaka Bill. One might imagine that the American Bar Association would present a neutral evaluation of the constitutionality and possible objections to the bill. Don’t make me laugh. In essence, it’s little more than a distillation of the same arguments presented by the pro-Akaka Lobby. In fact, it bears such a similarity to an OHA column that one hopes the ABA didn’t spend too much money to produce such a propagandist rehash.
Of course, that’s how the game is played nowadays . . . bias disguised as neutral analysis is par for the course in modern politics. It’s just a shame that such politics-as-usual methods are preventing a true debate on the merits of the bill and its possible impact on Hawaii.
What Do You Djou?
Oct 31
Posted by Malia Hill in Commentary | Comments off
If we were handing out political courage awards, we wouldn’t exactly break out backs trying to carry the ones needed for Hawaii’s political class. Especially on the Akaka Bill. Heck, a three-year-old child could probably handle the load on that one. Hawaii’s Democrats are rather remarkably in lockstep agreement on a fairly controversial issue–which pretty much indicates that the Party has declared its approval and will brook no dissent. Hawaii’s Republican Party (such as it is) thankfully lacks the inflexible message of the Democrats, but makes up for it with party leaders who take a half-measures approach that consists mainly of offering weak disapproval and then caving-in after a few showy are largely meaningless “compromises.” (Yes, there are exceptions. There always are. But not enough of them.) Thus we have Linda Lingle’s shift on the Akaka Bill and Charles Djou’s rather bewildering variations.
Djou, in particular, is an interesting case. Prior to getting elected, he gave some the impression that even if he wasn’t a vocal opponent of the Bill, neither did he plan to promote it. But consider the statement he made in a recent radio interview: “Should the Akaka bill come back to the U.S. House, I’m confident that I’d be able to garner far more Republican support for the Akaka bill — make it bipartisan, make it less controversial, and make its passage far smoother.” It’s hard not to see this as full support for the Bill’s passage.
Then, perhaps sensing that his position on Akaka was gaining him no friends among the Republicans and Independents that he needs in order to win, Djou decided to add a little nuance to his stance on the Bill. Now, he says that he supports public hearings on the Bill and a non-binding vote from the Hawaii people. Needless to say, those who are concerned about the impact of the Akaka Bill feel that the voice of the people of Hawaii on the issue should be a binding one–the current suggestion raises the strange possibility that hearings and a vote could show significant opposition to the Bill only to have it overridden by Congress. Still, Djou’s latest position demonstrates some understanding that the most radical political questions since statehood deserves a public voice. And of course Djou’s opponent, Colleen Hanabusa (a Democrat) is an unreserved supporter of the Akaka Bill (she has mentioned some support for public hearings, but not for a public vote). Clearly, election day this year may have a real effect on what happens next in the effort to pass the Akaka Bill.
Tags: Akaka bill