<Begin Segment 16>
SY: So you really joined forces with the young people pretty much?
PS: Yeah and NCRR don't get as much credit as they deserve. They really... they had community meetings. They would have people have fundraisers, charge ten dollars a head or something as a fundraiser. To give you an idea as to the kind of people we were appealing to, West L.A. JACL had wine tasting parties. We're talking about two classes of people.
SY: Right, so there were different approaches to this thing.
PS: Yeah, different approaches, you're appealing to different people, and so I give a lot of credit to NCRR people, really dedicated people, really idealistic people and largely educators. So I felt very good about that too.
SY: But for some reason you didn't join forces with NCRR. You decided at the time --
PS: Yeah, we went our separate ways. NCRR did a lot more work in preparing their people for the hearings. They had workshops and they told them how to answer the questions and so forth. I was involved with Harry Kawahara with the district.
SY: JACL.
PS: We got people together. One of the main people was Mary Oda, Dr. Mary Oda, she gave a very moving testimony, so we did the best we could getting people together but we didn't give the crash course in how to testify that NCRR did.
SY: But as far as the redress legislation, the formation of the things you were asking for, there were differing groups on that issue, right? I mean you said that most people wanted individual payments but other than that there was the idea of going to commission or --
PS: Yeah, well, Paul and I were at first involved with going to San Francisco and meeting with the redress group. The main group was from Seattle and they had done a lot of work ahead of time. The main person was -- can't think of his name now -- but he was an engineer, there were about two or three engineers and they were typically engineers. They were number crunchers so they had this very detailed plan, you got x amount of money for every day you spent in camp and they had different categories. If you were born in camp you got so much, it was too involved. We wanted something simpler and so that was one thing. But they were not very happy with us. In fact, early on when they heard our EO9066 was organized they contacted Paul, they said, "We'd like to talk with you." So Paul said yeah so they had this van, this camper, they drove down clear from Seattle in there. We met over here at a restaurant in J-town, it's no longer there now right on the corner of Central, rather San Pedro and first street, Horikawa. But anyways, we met there and we had a good meeting so they told us what they had in mind and we listened but didn't say, "Oh, yeah, that's a great idea we'll support you." But they went home and they somehow got the impression that we were going to support them with what they proposed. So when Paul and I met with them up there, up in San Francisco to talk about redress, they were really angry at us because they thought we had changed our minds, they thought we had turned our backs on them. So that didn't go too well but then John Tateishi who was director, redress director, very capable guy, I was really amazed. But anyways, he got the committee going, Paul wasn't on the committee. I was on the committee with different people from, basically from Seattle. And there was one guy from Moses Lake, Oregon, they had a slightly different plan going.
SY: And this was a JACL, strictly JACL?
PS: Yeah, this was a JACL.
SY: And that was --
PS: Clifford Uyeda called us together back in the late '70s.
SY: And Paul decided not to get involved on this committee.
PS: Well, I don't know if it was his decision or John Tateishi's decision not to include him, but in any case I was on the committee.
SY: And it was to take an official stand on --
PS: Yeah, because Dan Inouye was the one who got together with Matsunaga and Mineta and they said, "No we need to have a commission, that's the only way to do it." So that would be the only way they would support us. So we had a conference call and went down the line one by one, yes or no. And it was a five to four vote I think to go ahead with the commission. And of course the Seattle people didn't want to touch it, didn't want to go that way. In a way you couldn't blame them they put a lot of time and effort into it and they did a lot of work and so they had investment. For us we didn't have... well, we did have some investment because we were involved in EO9066 but that's the way it went.
SY: So you were in fact or all of you were pivotal people, did you realize that when you voted?
PS: No, and I didn't realize until later that it was a one vote margin.
SY: So you didn't vote over the phone, you took votes after.
PS: It had to be done over the phone it was very critical.
SY: And you stated your position and you were clear at the time.
PS: Oh, yeah, no, John says, "How do you vote, yea or nay?" And went over the phone and I don't know if he followed it up with anything written but I remember the initial thing was over the phone.
<End Segment 16> - Copyright © 2011 Densho. All Rights Reserved.