|
|
  |
|
Hawaiian statehood
All islands voted at least 93% in favor of Admission acts. Ballot(inset) and referendum results for the Admission Act of 1959.In March 1959, both houses of Congress passed the Admission Act and U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed it into law. (The act excluded Palmyra Atoll, part of the Kingdom and Territory of Hawai?i, from the new state.) On June 27 of that year, a plebiscite was held asking residents of Hawai?i to vote on accepting the statehood bill. Hawai?i voted 17 to 1 to accept. On August 21, church bells throughout Honolulu were rung upon the proclamation that Hawai?i was the 50th state of the Union.
After statehood, Hawai?i quickly became a modern state with a construction boom and rapidly growing economy. The Hawai?i Republican Party, which was strongly supported by the plantation owners, was voted out of office. In its place, the Democratic Party of Hawai?i dominated state politics for forty years.
In recent decades, the state government has implemented programs to promote Hawaiian culture. The Hawai?i State Constitutional Convention of 1978 incorporated as state constitutional law specific programs such as the creation of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to promote the indigenous Hawaiian language and culture.
Controversy has erupted within the last decade over the extent of the Hawaiian cultural programs creating a new political dialogue within the state. Pitting the strong emotions of both integrationists and separatists, high rhetoric has been employed by both groups including the use of propaganda materials of dubious provenance. A much criticized example includes the Hui Aloha ?Aina and Hui Kalai?aina petitions allegedly rediscovered in 1998. According to their proponents, the petitions are contemporaneous to the annexation of Hawai'i with one petition purportedly containing 22,000 signatures in opposition to the annexation while a second petition purportedly contains 17,000 signatures in favor of reinstating the monarchy. The validity of the petitions has been criticized by Lorrin Thurston in an analysis which indicates significant fraud.
|
|
|
