Twenty years after Congress apologized on behalf of the United States for the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom, reconciliation between the federal government and Native Hawaiians seems more distant than ever.

The "apology resolution," U.S. Public Law 103-150, was considered a significant milestone when it was approved by Congress and signed by then-President Bill Clinton on Nov. 23, 1993, to acknowledge with regret the 100th anniversary of the overthrow, which occurred on Jan. 17, 1893.

The resolution refers to the vibrant and sovereign history of Hawaii’s indigenous people and documents the role of the U.S. government in usurping their last monarch, Queen Liliuokalani.

The overthrow ultimately resulted in Hawaii being annexed to the United States in 1898.

The resolution acknowledges that the Native Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands and recognizes that Native Hawaiians "are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territory and their cultural identity in accordance with their own spiritual and traditional beliefs, customs, practices, language and social institutions."

The resolution explicitly expresses a commitment to acknowledging the ramifications of the overthrow "in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people."

Sadly, concrete action tied to this stated commitment has been sorely lacking for the past two decades.

This lack of commitment is most evident in the repeated defeat of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, commonly known as the Akaka Bill, a federal measure that would have conferred a form of self-government on Native Hawaiians, similar to the status of American Indian tribes or Alaska Natives.

Such federal recognition, or nation-within-a-nation status, is decried by those Native Hawaiians who seek nothing less than total independence — some want the restoration of the monarchy. But it is hailed by the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs and many other Native Hawaiian groups and individuals who rightly consider it a legitimate way to achieve a valid form of self-rule and the resources and governance that come with it.

Although the Akaka Bill passed in the U.S. House, it never survived in the U.S. Senate, despite the ardent support of its namesake, Daniel Akaka, and the venerable Daniel Inouye, two Hawaii Democrats who long served in that chamber and led numerous foiled attempts to get it approved.

With Inouye’s death and Akaka’s retirement in December 2012, prospects for future passage seem grim.

Yet the historic justification for its passage remains, as do the modern needs of the Native Hawaiian community. The state’s current congressional delegation must remain resolute in advancing the cause of Native Hawaiian sovereignty with their colleagues in the House and Senate, many of whom may be unaware of Hawaii’s complex history or even of the apology resolution itself.

Federal funding for Native Hawaiian education, health and social programs remains vital to improving people’s lives in the islands and to the incremental progress toward the overall goal so eloquently stated in the apology resolution, and so quickly dismissed once the ink was dry.

A "proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people" may elude us still, but it cannot elude us forever.