HOPE WARRIOR

Archive for 2008

Obama: A full partnership with Indian country

In Politics on October 26, 2008 at 3:18 am

http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/opinion/33211544.html

By Barack Obama
Story Published: Oct 24, 2008
For 20 months now, I’ve traveled this country, often talking about how the needs of the American people are going unmet by Washington. And the truth is, few have been ignored by Washington for as long as American Indians. Too often, Washington pays lip service to working with tribes while taking a one-size-fits-all approach with tribal communities across the nation.

That will change if I am honored to serve as president of the United States.

My American Indian policy begins with creating a bond between an Obama administration and the tribal nations all across this country. We need more than just a government-to-government relationship; we need a nation-to-nation relationship, and I will make sure that tribal nations have a voice in the White House.

I’ll appoint an American Indian policy adviser to my senior White House staff to work with tribes, and host an annual summit at the White House with tribal leaders to come up with an agenda that works for tribal communities. That’s how we’ll make sure you have a seat at the table when important decisions are being made about your lives, about your nations and about your people. That’ll be a priority when I am president.

Here’s what else we’re going to do. We’re going to end nearly a century of mismanagement of the Indian trusts. We’re going to work together to settle unresolved cases, figure out how the trusts ought to operate and make sure that they’re being managed responsibly – today, tomorrow and always.

Now, I understand the tragic history between the United States and tribal nations. Our government hasn’t always been honest and truthful in our dealings. And we’ve got to acknowledge that if we’re going to move forward in a fair and honest way.

Indian nations have never asked much of the United States – only for what was promised by the treaty obligations made to their forebears. So let me be absolutely clear – I believe treaty commitments are paramount law, and I will fulfill those commitments as president of the United States.

That means working with tribal governments to ensure that all American Indians receive affordable, accessible health care services. That’s why I’ve cosponsored the Indian Health Care Improvement Act in the U.S. Senate, and that’s why I’ve fought to ensure full funding of the IHS so that it has the resources it needs.

It also means guaranteeing a world-class education for all our children. I’ll work with tribal nations to reform No Child Left Behind and create opportunities for tribal citizens to become teachers so you can be free to educate your children the way you know best. We’ll increase funding for tribal colleges. And I will make Native language preservation and education a priority.

To give families in our tribal communities every chance to succeed in a 21st century economy, I will cut taxes for 95 percent of all workers, invest in job training and small business development, and put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads, schools and bridges.

And I will never forget the service and sacrifice that generations of American Indians have given to this country. We have to keep our sacred trust with Indian veterans by making sure that no veteran falls into homelessness, and that all our veterans get the benefits and support they have earned.

Let me just close by saying this. I was born to a teenage mother. My father left when I was 2 years old, so I never knew him well. I was raised in Hawaii by a single mother and my grandparents, and we didn’t have a lot of money – we even turned to food stamps at one point just to get by.

Where I grew up, there weren’t many black families. So I know what it feels like to be viewed as an outsider. I know what it’s like to not always have been respected or to have been ignored. I know what it’s like to struggle.

Every president is shaped by his own experience. These have been mine. And so I want you to know that I will never forget you. The American Indians I have met across this country will be on my mind each day that I am in the White House. You deserve a president who is committed to being a full partner with you; to respecting you, honoring you and working with you every day. That is the commitment I will make to you as president of the United States.

Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois is the Democratic candidate for president.

Democratic ticket wins Navajo endorsement

In Native Americans for Obama, Natives for Obama, Politics on October 1, 2008 at 12:46 am

Farmington Daily Times – Staff Writer
Article Launched: 09/30/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT
FARMINGTON — Democrats Barack Obama, Tom Udall and Ben Ray Lujan have won the endorsement of the Northern Navajo Agency Council. Councilors voted to support Obama for president, Lujan for U.S. House and Udall for U.S. Senate.
Councilors voted 54 to 0 on a resolution to endorse the Democratic candidates because the leaders support the Navajo Nation’s need for better health care, economic development, education and benefits for Navajo veterans, according to the resolution.
“These leaders are committed to address the needs of Navajo veterans and all Native Americans who served in the Armed Forces,” it stated.
–The Farmington N.M. Daily Times

Another Alaska Native Speaks Out Against Palin

In Alaska Natives Against Palin, Alaska Natives for Obama, BHO, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Natives Against Palin on September 26, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Story Published: Sep 26, 2008
Story Updated: Sep 25, 2008
http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/opinion/letters/29766074.html
Unlike Mr. [Ben Nighthorse] Campbell, who remarks that he is Northern Cheyenne, a former senator, and a leader in the McCain campaign, I am an Athabascan Indian, I have lived in Alaska all my life, and I actually know firsthand what Gov. Sarah Palin has done.

Contrary to the former senator’s remarks, Alaska subsistence hunting and fishing issues are not complicated. As the former senator concedes, however, they are deeply “political.” My point exactly: consistently, Sarah Palin has politicized subsistence and sought to advantage urban hunters and fishers over the rural people who actually live a subsistence way of life. It is a stunning hostility, given that subsistence fishing, as one example, consumes a mere 2 percent of all consumptive uses of fish in our state.

Nor are Alaska Native people “divided” on this issue. To the contrary, in the late 1990s Alaska Natives held a special statewide convention in Alaska and overwhelmingly reaffirmed their support for rural subsistence.

Palin cannot dodge her responsibility for continuing lawsuits that her predecessor began. She is against federal agency protection for subsistence. She is against subsistence fishing in many navigable waters that are critical to Native people. She is against subsistence hunting in many areas our Native people depend upon for their survival. She is against subsistence rights that prefer rural users as the federal law favored by Alaska Natives demands over urban users.

It is true that Alaska is disabled by its own constitution from extending rural subsistence rights to state lands and waters. But a governor committed to Alaska Native people would press the federal government to do everything in its power to protect those subsistence rights as broadly as possible on federal lands and waters. Instead, Palin has chosen to attack those rights with lawsuits – and “attack” is indeed the fair word here. How else to characterize Palin’s lawsuit brought to defeat subsistence? And how else to explain Alaska Natives’ overwhelming support for the Obama/Biden ticket?

Sarah Palin has built a solid record opposing subsistence and tribal sovereignty in Alaska. That truth may be inconvenient to the former senator, but that does not change it.

Navajo Nation President and More Than 100 Tribal Leaders Endorse Obama

In Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, First Americans for Obama, Native Americans for Obama, Natives Against McCain, Natives for Obama, Navajo, Sen. Obama, Senator Barack Obama, Uncategorized on September 26, 2008 at 6:12 pm

Chicago, IL  –  Today, the Obama campaign announced that Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr., and more than 100 Tribal Leaders have endorsed Barack Obama for President.  These endorsements come from tribes across the political spectrum and from all corners of the country.  The Navajo Nation is the largest North American Indian Tribe, comprised of approximately 300,000 members located around Southeastern Utah, Northeastern Arizona and Northwestern New Mexico.
Senator Obama said, “I am honored to have the support of President Shirley and so many of our tribal leaders.  Their commitment to public service is something that every American should be proud of.  Indian tribes in our country face a special set of challenges – from issues of sovereignty to access to affordable healthcare.  I look forward to working with Joe and all of our Tribal Leaders to ensure that we meet these challenges in an Obama-Biden administration.”
“For eight years, we have lived with Federal policies that erode our culture and language and, therefore, attack our very identity as Native people,” said President Shirley.  “It is time for change: a real change!  It is time for the United States of America to truly honor its obligations to its Native peoples.  Senator Obama understands the uniqueness of Native nations and Native peoples – that is why I support Barack Obama to be the next president of the United States.”
In addition to the individual tribal leaders, Senator Obama has received the endorsement of at least seven tribal councils, including the Crow, Rocky Boy and Fort Peck nations and the All Indian Pueblo Council.  He has also been endorsed by the Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association.  Earlier this year, Senator Obama became an honorary member of the Crow Nation.
Tribal leaders that have endorsed Senator Obama are:
     

  • Tribal Leaders 
    Chief J. Allan, Chairman, Coeur d’Alene Tribe
    Dave Archambault, Jr., Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    Floyd Azure, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Dorothy Barber-Redhorse, Vice-President, Sanostee Chapter, Navajo Nation
    David Z. Bean, Councilman, Puyallup Tribe of Indians
    Harriett Becenti, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
    Lorenzo Bedonie, Council Delegate representing Hardrock/ Pinon Chapters (Arizona), Navajo Nation
    Elmer Begay, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
    Garrett Big Leggins, Vice- Chairman, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Richard Bird, Jr., Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    Cedric Black Eagle, Vice-Chairman, Crow Nation
    Rodney Bordeaux, President, Rosebud Sioux Tribe
    William “Shorty” Brewer, Vice-President Oglala Sioux Tribe
    Theresa Bridges, Chairwoman, Franks’ Landing Indian Community
    Joe Brings Plenty, Chairman, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
    Donna Buckles-Whitmer, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Diana Buckner, Chairwoman, Ely Shoshone Tribe
    Rodney Butler, Treasurer and Council Member, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
    Ronald Charles, Chair, Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe
    Abe Chopper, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Thomas Christian, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    M. Brian Cladoosby, Chairman, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community
    Marjorie Colebut-Jackson, Tribal Council Member, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
    Robert Cournoyer, Chairman Yankton Sioux Tribe
    Gene Culbertson, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Gerald L. Danforth, Former Chairman, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin
    Herman Dillon Sr., Chairman Puyallup Tribe of Indians
    Ron Duke, Tribal Council Representative, Oglala Sioux Tribe
    Peter Dupree, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Andy Ebona, Councilman Douglas Village, Tlingit Tribe, Alaska
    Ian Erlich (Native Village of Kotzebue) – Vice Chairman, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council
    Ingrid Firemoon, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Leonard Forsman, Chairman Suquamish Tribe
    Jerry Freddie, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
    Marlin Fryberg Jr., Secretary, Tulalip Tribes of Washington.
    Margaret Gates, Councilwoman Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    Shawna Gavin, Secretary, General Council of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
    Alison Gottfriedson, Councilmember, Franks’ Landing Indian Community
    Arlyn Headdress, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Rick Hill, Chairman, Chairman, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin
    Ron His Horse Is Thunder, Chairman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    Wesley “Chuck” Jacobs, Tribal Council Representative, Oglala Sioux Tribe
    Michael Jandreau, Chair, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe
    Michael R. Johnson, Chair, General Council of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
    Richard Kirn, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Ronald “Smiley” Kittsen, Councilman, Blackfeet Nation
    Shelly Luger, Vice Chairwoman, Spirit Lake Tribe
    Cynthia Lyall, Chairwoman, Nisqually Indian Tribe
    Michael Marchand, Former Chairman, Conf. Tribes of the Colville Reservation
    Robert McGhee, Councilman, Poarch Band of Creek Indians
    Jesse McLaughlin, Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    Joseph McNeil, Jr., Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    Christopher Mercier, Councilman and former Chairman, Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde
    Kenneth Meshigaud, Tribal Chairperson, Hannahville Potawatomi
    James V. Miles, Councilman Puyallup Tribe of Indians
    Elmer L. Milford, Council Delegate representing Ft. Defiance Chapter (Arizona), Navajo Nation
    John Miller, Chairman, Pokagon Band of Pottawatomi
    Antone Minthorn, Chair, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
    Armand Minthorn, Council Member, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
    Jeff Mitchell, Council Member, Klamath Tribes 
    Robert Moore, Councilman, Rosebud Sioux
    Wayne A. Newell, Passamaquoddy Indian Township Tribal Council Member, Passamaquoddy Tribe
    Ned Norris, Chairman, Tohono O’odham Nation
    Benjamin H. Nuvamsa, Chairman, Hopi Tribe
    Darrin Old Coyote, Vice-Secretary, Crow Nation
    Stuart Paisano, Governor, Pueblo of Sandia
    Brian Pearson, Secretary-Treasurer, Spirit Lake Tribe
    Myra Pearson, Chairperson, Spirit Lake Tribe
    Louis Peterson, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Rick Phillips-Doyle, Sakom/Chief, Passamaquoddy Tribe, Pleasant Point Reservation
    Matthew Pilcher, Chairman, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska
    Jennifer Porter, Chair, Kootenai Tribe of Idaho
    Gloria Ramirez, Councilwoman, Tohono O’odham Nation
    Darryl Red Eagle, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Kenny Reels, Vice-Chair, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
    Sarah Riggs, Vice-Chair, Dilkon Chapter, Navajo Nation
    George Rivera, Governor, Pueblo of Pojoaque
    Bobby Robbins, Council Delegate representing Naneez dizi/ Coalmine Canyon Chapters (Arizona), Navajo Nation
    Andrew Roybal, Tribal Council Member Piro/Manso/Tiwa Indian Tribe, Pueblo of San Juan de Guadalupe
    Scott Russell, Secretary, Crow Nation
    Brandon Sazue Sr., Chairman, Crow Creek Sioux Tribe
    Richard Sebastian, Tribal Council Member, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
    Maureen Sebastian, Tribal Council Member, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
    Michael Selvage, Chairman, Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate Tribe
    Melvin Sheldon Jr., Chairman, Tulalip Tribes of Washington;
    Joe Shirley, Jr., President, Navajo Nation
    Wink Soderberg, Council Member, Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde
    A.T. Stafne, Chairman, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    James H. Steele Jr., Chairman, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation 
    J.D. Stone, Speaker of the House, Crow Nation
    Aurolyn Stwyer, Vice-Chair, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs
    Ron Suppah, Chair, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs
    Larry Townsned, Tribal Veteran Service Officer, Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina
    Leonard Tsosie, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation 
    Lee Juan Tyler, Vice-Chairman, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes
    Carl Venne, Chairman, Crow Nation
    William Walksalong, Former President and Tribal Council member, Northern Cheyenne Tribe  
    John Warren, Councilman, Pokagon Band of Pottawatomi
    John Weeks, Sergeant at Arms, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Marcus Wells, Jr., Chairman, Three Affiliated Tribes
    Bill Whitehead, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
    Mike Williams, Tribal Council Member for the Akiak Native Community
    Jonathan Windy Boy, Business Committee Member, Chippewa Cree of the Rocky Boy Reservation
    Mervin Wright, Jr. Chairman, Pyramid Lake Paiute 
    John Yellowbird Steele, President Oglala Sioux Tribe
    Marie Zackuse, Vice Chairwoman, Tulalip Tribes of Washington
  • Tribe Endorsement List
    Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy’s Indian Reservation (MT)
    Crow Nation (MT)
    Jicarilla Apache Nation (NM)
    Mescalero Apache Tribe (NM)  
    Nisqually Indian Tribe (WA)  
    Northern Cheyenne Tribe (MT)  
    Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo (NM)  
    Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe (WA)  
    Pueblo of Acoma (NM)  
    Pueblo of Pojoaque (NM)  
    Pueblo of Sandia (NM)  
    Pueblo of Santa Clara (NM)  
    Puyallup Tribe (WA) 
    St. Croix Band of Superior Indians (WI)  
    Suquamish Tribe (WA)  
    Tule River Tribe (CA) 
     
    Tribal Organizations
     
    All Indian Pueblo Council
    The All Indian Pueblo Council is comprised of the following 19 Pueblos:
    Pueblo of Acoma
    Pueblo of Cochiti
    Pueblo of Isleta 
    Pueblo of Jemez 
    Pueblo of Laguna
    Pueblo of Nambe   
    Great Plains Tribal Chairmen’s Association
    The Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association is comprised of the following tribes:
     South Dakota:
    Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe
    Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
    Crow Creek Sioux Tribe
    Lower Brule Sioux Tribe
    Oglala Sioux Tribe
    Rosebud Sioux Tribe
    Yankton Sioux Tribe
    Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate
     
     
    North Dakota:
    Three Affiliated Tribes
    S pirit Lake Tribe
    Standing Rock Sioux Tribe 
    Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa
    Nebraska:
    Omaha Tribe 
     Santee Sioux Nation 
     Ponca Tribe 
     Winnebago Tribe*Note: Titles are for identification purposes only.

Largest Native American Tribe in U.S. Endorses Obama

In Native Americans, Native Americans for Obama, Natives Against McCain, Natives for Obama, Navajo, Politics, indians for obama on September 26, 2008 at 6:09 pm

Native Obama Supporters Lead Palin Backlash

In Uncategorized on September 26, 2008 at 6:04 pm

By Rob Capriccioso

Another Alasa Native Speaks Out Against Palin

In Alaska Natives Against Palin, Alaska Natives for Obama, BHO, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Native Americans, Native Americans for Obama, Natives Against McCain, Natives Against Palin, Politics, Sarah Palin, Senator Barack Obama on September 26, 2008 at 5:59 pm

More and more Native Alaskans are coming forward to tell about their direct experiences with Gov. Palin and her lack of regard for them.  Here is a letter I received today that speaks for itself…

An Alaska Native’s take on his Governor
By Matt Gilbert

Hello. My name is Matt Gilbert. I am originally from Arctic Village, Alaska. I am Alaska Native: Gwich’in Athabascan. I visited Sarah’s campaign office and spoke with her before she became Governor. We talked about the hunting & fishing rights of Alaska Natives. We didn’t get anywhere. She sided with sport & commercial interests, so I never spoke with her again. I knew we’d get no where. She didn’t want to listen. In general, I believe Sarah Palin is another version of Bush, just as inexperienced, but more impulsive. She is very dangerous and scary. People are continuing to support her because she’s beautiful, and this should be a Red Alert for the world. Her purposed policies is to include Georgia into NATO and that would mean all the European countries with all their armed forces will have to go to war with Russia. So she’s willing to ruffle the feathers of a country right next door to her home. Is this who you want as President? You know the scene in the movies when a car or stage coach is about to go over a cliff and you see yourself sliding over? Scary image isn’t it? That’s’ what I’m seeing if Palin gets elected Vice President. Wake up America! Send her back to Alaska. She has plenty of un-finished work here. She hasn’t even gotten funding to move the town of Shishmeraf. It’s falling into the ocean from an eroding coast due to Global Warming, which she wants to fuel more by encouraging more coal and oil development. She fuels the fire, and now they want her to do it on a national level.

Palin has done a lot of irrational things up here as Governor. In the summer of 07’, she Line Item Vetoed a lot of infrastructure projects in rural Alaska. The small town of Eagle spent years trying to get a community center built when they finally got funding, Palin shut it down by her Veto. Even Lawmakers are baffled by her Vetoes. They’ve had Bills well-debated on both sides of the aisle, yet she cuts, cuts, cuts. She supported $15 million to Anchorage’s University’s Sport Complex and cut $1.5 million to an expansion of the runaway teen center. How do you justify that? She supports drilling Off-Shore which would utterly destroy the livelihood of the Inupiaq people on the North Slope. They rely on Whale for subsistence and the development would detrimentally impact those whales. She supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. My people, the Gwich’in have kept this area closed from development for 30 years. No other American Indian tribe has ever accomplished such a feat. If she drills in the Arctic Refuge, it’ll be the end of my culture. We rely on the Porcupine Caribou Herd and if drilling takes place in the Arctic Refuge, our caribou goes and so does our culture. We Gwich’in Athabascans are the last American Indian Tribe in the US that hasn’t been majorly disturbed, heavily impacted, and assimilated. We are the last pure Native American tribe left. We are the last stand for Indian Country. We are the last chapter in American Indian/Anglo American relations. The prior chapters were bad, so make this last chapter a good one and vote for Obama.

Alaska Natives in general are the last group of Native Americans in the United States still depended on a hunting & fishing-based lifestyle where kids and grown-ups go out to fish and hunt to supplement their western diets. It’s crucial we have food off our land because the western foods, processed foods, give us diabetes if we eat them alone. The subsistence foods not only feed our bodies, but our culture, spirit, social lives, and minds. The Western World calls it Subsistence, but we call it our Way of Life. I’m using the word against my well. It gives our lives meaning and keeps us busy. With God’s help, hopefully everyone can understand. Our way of life off the land is everything to us. If we don’t have that we’re nobody, just another group living off the grid, consuming McDonalds, and buying Brand-Named items. We add diversity and richness to the world. Sarah Palin doesn’t care about this. She wouldn’t care if our culture eroded before her eyes. She’s like Nero, sitting in Juneau putting on lip-gloss as Alaskan villages suffer. We’re suffering from fuel costs. We’re suffering from strangulating Fish & wildlife regulations that keep us from surviving off the already scarce wildlife. She has done some things, but not enough. She can ease the Fish & wildlife regulations in order to improve food security in the villages. She can subsidize the villages with the rising fuel costs. The US Government has a Trust Responsibility with its First Americans, the TR requires the Federal/State Governments to ensure we, Alaska Natives, have everything we need to survive. Mrs. Palin has failed miserably at this task. She has a lot more work to do back home.

Her hometown Wasillia has been a hot-bed for racist and Anti-Native attitudes. Anchorage is bad too. Alaska Natives fight discrimination on a daily basis there. Palin isn’t there for them. I read in the Anchorage papers once that a homeless native man froze to death in downtown and some man called it in sounding all casual about it. It’s like the South before the 60s up here. It’s bad. This is the Alaska Sarah Palin maintains and waters for growth. She’s never bothered to change anything because she thinks nothing is broken. As Mayor, she didn’t think anything was wrong with an atmosphere where a native woman had beer bottles thrown at her as she walked down Wasillia. So you have to ask yourself, if she’s willing to ignore the plights and issues of an ethnic group within her town and state, than how much more horrible do you think it’s going to be when she ignores the issues of that same ethnic group or another on a national level?

I believe her popularity comes from her beauty. This society has got to shift itself away from a National Inquirer-based lifestyle to an NPR or New York Times-based lifestyle. Our very world may depend on it. Our hurricanes and disasters are getting worse due to Global Warming, our Stock Market is dangerously shaky, our healthcare is getting so bad it may cause a revolution soon, and the War in Iraq is draining our resources and working families to depression-levels. We need a Change! We need Barack Obama. Not somebody whose reputation is based mainly on image and charm. As an Alaska Native, I see that she doesn’t support our way of life, as a Gwich’in I see that she is willing to end my culture and people for only six more months of oil, and as a Global citizen I see that she is impulsive and inexperienced. Do you want someone like that in charge of a nuclear arsenal? It’s probably already going to take our lifetimes to recover from Bush, if you elect Palin, the consequence are too scary for me to even think about. Please vote for change. Vote for Obama. Vote for Obama.

Alaska Native Speaks Out About Palin

In Alaska Natives Against Palin, Alaska Natives for Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Evon Peter, Native Americans, Politics, Sarah Palin on September 26, 2008 at 5:49 pm

By Evon Peter
evonpeter@mac.com
9/8/2008

My name is Evon Peter; I am a former Chief of the Neetsaii Gwich’in tribe from Arctic Village, Alaska and the current Executive Director of Native Movement. My organization provides culturally based leadership development through offices in Alaska and Arizona. My wife, who is Navajo, and I have been based out of Flagstaff, Arizona for the past few years, although I travel home to Alaska in support of our initiatives there as well. It is interesting to me that my wife and I find ourselves as Indigenous people from the two states where McCain and Palin originate in their leadership.

I am writing this letter to raise awareness about the ongoing colonization and violation of human rights being carried out against Alaska Native peoples in the name of unsustainable progress, with a particular emphasis on the role of Sarah Palin and the Republican leadership. My hope is that it helps to elevate truth about the nature of Alaskan politics in relation to Alaska Native peoples and that it lays a framework for our path to justice.

Ever since the Russian claim to Alaska and the subsequent sale to the United States through the Treaty of Cession in 1867, the attitude and treatment towards Alaska Native peoples has been fairly consistent. We were initially referred to as less than human “uncivilized tribes”, so we were excluded from any dialogues and decisions regarding our lands, lives, and status. The dominating attitude within the Unites States at the time was called Manifest Destiny; that God had given Americans this great land to take from the Indians because they were non-Christian and incapable of self-government. Over the years since that time, this framework for relating to Alaska Native peoples has become entrenched in the United States legislative and legal systems in an ongoing direct violation of our human rights.

What does this mean? Allow me to share an analogy. If a group of people were to arrive in your city and tell you their people had made laws, among which were:

1. What were once your home and land now belong to them (although you could live in the garage or backyard)

2. Forced you to send your children to boarding schools to learn their language and be acculturated into their ways with leaders who touted “Kill the American, save the man” (based on the original statement made by US Captain Richard H. Pratt in regards to Native American education “Kill the Indian, save the man.”)

3. Supported missionaries and government agents to forcefully (for example, with poisons placed on the tongues of your children and withheld vaccines) convince you that your Jesus, Buddha, Torah, or Mohammed was actually an agent of evil and that salvation in the afterlife could only be found through believing otherwise

4. Made it illegal for you to continue to do your job to support your family, except under strict oversight and through extensive regulation

5. Made it illegal for you to own any land or run a business as an individual and did not allow you to participate in any form of their government, which controlled your life (voting or otherwise)

How would this make you feel? What if you also knew that if you were to retaliate, that you would be swiftly killed or incarcerated? How long do you think it would take for you to forget or would you be sure to share this history with your children with the hope that justice could one day prevail for your descendents? And most importantly to our conversation, how American does this sound to you?

To put this into perspective, my grandfather who helped to raise me in Arctic Village was born in 1904, just thirty-seven years after the United States laid claim to Alaska. If my grandfather had unjustly stolen your grandfathers home and I was still living in the house and watching you live outdoors, would you feel a change was in order? Congress unilaterally passed most of the major US legislation that affect our people in my grandfathers’ lifetime. There has never been a Treaty between Alaska Native Peoples and the United States over these injustices. Each time that Alaska Native people stand up for our rights, the US responds with token shifts in its laws and policies to appease the building discontent, yet avoiding the underlying injustice that I believe can be resolved if leadership in the United States would be willing to acknowledge the underlying injustice of its control over Alaska Native peoples, our lands, and our ways of life.

United States legal history in relation to Alaska Natives has been based on one major platform – minimize the potential for Alaska Native people to regain control of their lives, lands, and resources and maximize benefit to the Unites States government and its corporations. While the rest of the world, following World War II, was seeking to return African and European Nations to their rightful owners, the United States pushed in the opposite direction by pulling the then Territory of Alaska out of the United Nations dialogues and pushing for Statehood into the Union. Why is it that Alaska Native Nations are still perceived as being incapable of governing our own lands, lives, and resources differently than African, Asian, and European nations?

Let me get specific about what is at stake and how this relates to Palin and the Republican leadership in Alaska and across this country. To this day, Alaska Native peoples are among the only Indigenous peoples in all of North America whose Indigenous Hunting and Fishing Rights have been extinguished by federal legislation and yet we are the most dependent people on this way of life. Most of our villages have no roads that connect them to cities; many live with poverty level incomes, and all rely to varying degrees on traditional hunting, fishing, and harvesting for survival. This has become known as the debate on Alaska Native Subsistence.

As Alaska Governor, Palin has continued the path of her predecessor Frank Murkowski in challenging attempts by Alaska Native people to regain their human right to their traditional way of life through subsistence.

The same piece of unilateral federal legislation, known as the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971, that extinguished our hunting and fishing rights, also extinguished all federal Alaska Native land claims and my Tribe’s reservation status. In the continental United States, this sort of legislation is referred to as ‘termination legislation’ because it takes the rights of self-government away from Tribes. It is based in the same age-old idea that we are not capable of governing our people, lands, and resources. To justify these terminations, ANCSA also created Alaska Native led forprofit corporations (which were provided the remaining lands not taken by the government and a one time payment the equivalent of about 1/20th of the annual profits made by corporations in Alaska each year) with a mission of exploiting the land in partnership with the US government and outside corporations. It was a brilliant piece of legislation for the legal termination and cultural assimilation of Alaska Natives under the guise of progress.

Since the passage of ANCSA, political leaders in Alaska, with a few exceptions, have maintained that, as stated by indicted Senator Ted Stevens, “Tribes have never existed in Alaska.” They maintain this position out of fear that the real injustice being carried out upon Alaska Natives may break into mainstream awareness and lead to a re-opening of due treaty dialogues between Alaska Native leaders and the federal government. At the same time the federal government chose to list Alaska Native tribes in the list of federally recognized tribes in 1993. Governor Palin maintains that tribes were federally recognized but that they do not have the same rights as the tribes in the continental United States to sovereignty and self-governance, even to the extent of legally challenging our Tribes rights pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act. What good are governments that can’t make decisions concerning their own land and people?

The colonial mentality in and towards Alaska is to exploit the land and resources for profits and power, at the expense of Alaska Native people. Governor Palin reflects this attitude and perspective in her words and leadership. She comes from an area within Alaska that was settled by relocated agricultural families from the continental United States in the second half of the last century. It is striking that a leader from that particular area feels she has a right, considering all of the injustices to Alaska Native people, to offer Alaskan oil and resources in an attempt to solve the national energy crisis at the Republican Convention. Palin also chose not to mention the connection between oil development and global warming, which is wreaking havoc on Alaska Native villages, forcing some to begin the process of relocation at a cost sure to reach into the hundreds of millions.

Our tribes depend on healthy and abundant land and animals for our survival. For example, my people depend on the Porcupine Caribou herd, which migrates into the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge each spring to birth their young. Any disruption and contamination will directly impact the health and capacity for my people to continue to live in a homeland we have been blessed to live in for over 10,000 years.

This is the sacrifice Palin offered to the nation. The worst part of it is that there are viable alternatives to addressing the energy crisis in the United States, yet Palin chooses options that very well may result in the extinguishment of some of the last remaining intact ecosystems and original cultures in all of North America. Palin is also promoting off shore oil drilling and increased mining in sensitive areas of Alaska, all of which would have a lifespan of far fewer years than my grandfather walked on this earth and which would not even make a smidgen of an impact on national consumption rates or longer term sustainability. McCain was once a champion of protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and it is sad to see, that with Palin on board, he is no longer vocal and perhaps even giving up on what he believes in to satisfy Palin’s position.

While I have much more to say, this is my current offering to elevate the conversation about what is at stake in Alaska and for Alaska Native peoples. Please share this offering with others and help us to make this an election that brings out honest dialogue. We have an opportunity to bring lasting change, but only if we can be open to hearing the truth about our situations and facing the challenges that arise.

Many thanks to all those who are taking stands for a just and sustainable future for all of our future generations,

*This essay is a personal reflection and should not be attributed to my tribe or organization

Thanks, but No Thanks for that McCain-Palin Ticket to Nowhere!

In BHO, Barack Hussein Obama, Jack Abramhoff, Native Americans Against McCain, Native Americans Against Palin, Native Americans for Obama, Ralph Reed, Senator Barack Obama, Uncategorized on September 26, 2008 at 5:46 pm

FIRST AMERICANS TAKE A PASS ON THE MCCAIN- PALIN TICKET; TRIBAL LEADERS RESPOND TO ABRAMOFF CRONY FUNDRAISING FOR MCCAIN
Reed Fundraiser Today Follows Pattern of McCain Putting the Special Interests Ahead of the Native American Community
Chicago, IL– Today, leaders in tribal communities responded to Senator John McCain’s decision to accept fundraising help from Jack Abramoff crony Ralph Reed.  Later today, Ralph Reed, who has close ties to corrupt Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, is scheduled to host a fundraiser for Senator John McCain in Atlanta, GA.  Reed, on behalf of a firm, received more than $5 million from Abramoff, now serving a six-year prison term for his corrupt activities defrauding Indian tribes and others.  
“John McCain’s decision to cozy up to one of the central figures in the Republican culture of corruption shows how far he is willing to go to win,” said Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean. “Despite all of his rhetoric about reform, McCain’s willingness to accept money raised by tainted Abramoff cronies like Ralph Reed shows that McCain simply cannot be trusted to bring change to Washington politics.”
Many in the Native American community expressed dismay at McCain’s decision to work closely with Reed as well.  “I’m not sure how he justifies this in his own mind.  After all, McCain more than most understands that Reed profited and supported Abramoff’s defrauding activities which devastated numerous tribes – devastation that they are still reeling from. I think for a lot of Native people, this will send a loud and clear message that Senator McCain is not on our side,” said Suzan Harjo, President of the Morning Star Institute and former Executive Director of the National Congress of American Indians. 
Jonathan Windy Boy of the Chippewa-Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy Reservation in Montana said, “I think a lot of people in Indian Country, with increased frequency over the last couple of years have asked ‘who is this John McCain?’  It’s not the same guy we thought we knew.  Abramoff hurt all of Indian Country and because of the scandal, we were often locked out of the political process since. It doesn’t make sense to me that you can claim to be for tribes and associate yourself with those who defrauded us.”  
“It is profoundly disturbing and it adds insult to injury that McCain has refused to accept tribal contributions but has actively sought out contributions from those who lobby on behalf of tribes,” added Wizi Garriott, Obama campaign First Americans Director.  “Senator McCain has it 100% backwards.  The Abramoff scandal happened with the willing participation of men like Ralph Reed, and tribes were the victims.  Yet he locks out tribes from supporting him and at the same time actively seeks the support of Washington lobbyist and men like Reed.  Senator Obama doesn’t take a dime from Washington lobbyists.  This just further shows that the Obama campaign is about people at the grassroots – not the special interests.”
Garriott added:  “Senator Obama has a comprehensive plan to strengthen our tribal communities and make this campaign about bringing all people into the process.  Senator Obama understands that when we reject the old politics of lobbyist money and special interests running the show, we can bring positive change and break the cycle of partisan ideology.  American Indians are painfully aware of the need for change. Tribes have experienced firsthand the lack of progress under prior administrations, but together we can bring the kind of change we need in our tribal communities and across the country.”
See more about Obama’s Tribal Communities plan here: http://tribes.barackobama.com/page/content/firstamshome

The candidate I support is:
 
–The candidate who has been endorsed by both Principal Chief Chad Smith and Former Chief Wilma Mankiller.

–The only candidate whose campaign includes Native American advisers; specifically a Native American Outreach Coordinator and a 30-member Tribal Steering Committee comprised of tribal leaders from across the nation.
–The only candidate who has plans to include a Native American as part of the Presidential cabinet.
–The only candidate whose website has direct and obvious links to information and specific plans for the Native American community.
–The only candidate who consistently makes reference to and speaks directly to Native Americans during campaign speeches.
–The only candidate whose campaign with literature specifically for the Native American community.
–The only candidate whose autobiography expresses concern for the Native American community and tribal sovereignty.
–The candidate who met with leaders of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Nation in the infancy of his campaign, to listen to their concerns and discuss improvements to the community going forward.
–The candidate who is an original co-sponsor of specific amendments to the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, and who called for passage of the act that has been stalled in congress for 14-years.

I support Barack Obama.

Wilma Mankiller: Energized and Hopeful

In BHO, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Cherokee Nation, Cherokees for Obama, Native Americans, Native Americans for Obama, Natives for Obama, Obama, Politics, Sen. Obama, Senator Barack Obama, Wilma Mankiller on September 26, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Native Currents

by: Wilma Mankiller

© Indian Country Today August 22, 2008. All Rights Reserved

 

Energized and hopeful for Sen. Barack Obama

As a Native woman, it is tough not to feel distrustful of and cynical toward most politicians.  But on the crest of this election season, unlike any prior, I feel buoyed. I feel energized, engaged and excited. I feel something new: hope.

Yes, it’s a buzzword nowadays. ”Hope” has become synonymous with a candidate and emblematic of movement. The cynic in me wishes to dismiss it as superficially attractive yet ultimately insubstantial, but decades of experience in politics and public service won’t allow me to do that. I haven’t felt this hopeful in years.

It started in the primary. As Native people, we didn’t have just a single good candidate; we had several great ones from which to choose. It was a profound struggle choosing a candidate to endorse, but one I welcomed. What a wonderful surprise to have too many candidates listening to us and responding to our issues.

Now, as the campaign has narrowed to a general election, my hope for the future of this country and its policies toward tribal governments and individuals only grows. I know we have an advocate in Sen. Barack Obama, who unveiled his First Americans platform while the campaign was still in its infancy and has since been meeting with tribal leaders around the country. He is humble enough to respectfully listen, and empathetic enough to fully understand the challenges facing our communities today. I believe Sen. Obama when he says he feels ”a particular sense of outrage when I see the status of so many Native Americans, and there is a sense of kinship in terms of the struggles that have to be fought.” The other candidates simply cannot speak from the same place.

But he does more than talk the talk. Since entering the U.S. Senate, Obama supported the Indian Health Care Reauthorization Act and pushed for a billion-dollar increase in IHS funding. As a presidential candidate, he took that commitment to Indian health care further and called for full funding of IHS. In addition, one of Obama’s first initiatives as a candidate was to plan for a National Indian Policy Adviser as a senior staff member in the White House.

I’m inspired that this country chose him as a presidential candidate and I’m eager to be a part of history when we elect him in November. And make no mistake; we will be the ones electing him in November. Native people have an unprecedented degree of electoral power this season. We are a voting bloc that must be courted. Native populations are the most geographically dense in states likely to be up for grabs this election, meaning 1 – 2 percent of the vote in swing states could be the difference between an Obama victory on the one hand and four more years of Indian-hostile policies on the other. We can make that difference, but only if we vote.

Sen. Obama is a lifelong public servant who has shown sage judgment and sound politics. I trust him to nominate judges to the Supreme Court who will respect the inherent rights of tribal governments and the basic human rights of all people. I am impressed by the fact that he seeks and heeds wise counsel and solid policy advice on the issues I care most about – tribal sovereignty, foreign policy and health care.

Wilma Mankiller is the former principal chief of the Cherokee Nation.

Hello world!

In Uncategorized on September 26, 2008 at 5:38 pm

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

Another Alaska Native Speaks Out About Palin

In Politics on September 26, 2008 at 5:14 pm

Story Published: Sep 26, 2008
Story Updated: Sep 25, 2008
http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/opinion/letters/29766074.html
Unlike Mr. [Ben Nighthorse] Campbell, who remarks that he is Northern Cheyenne, a former senator, and a leader in the McCain campaign, I am an Athabascan Indian, I have lived in Alaska all my life, and I actually know firsthand what Gov. Sarah Palin has done.

Contrary to the former senator’s remarks, Alaska subsistence hunting and fishing issues are not complicated. As the former senator concedes, however, they are deeply “political.” My point exactly: consistently, Sarah Palin has politicized subsistence and sought to advantage urban hunters and fishers over the rural people who actually live a subsistence way of life. It is a stunning hostility, given that subsistence fishing, as one example, consumes a mere 2 percent of all consumptive uses of fish in our state.

Nor are Alaska Native people “divided” on this issue. To the contrary, in the late 1990s Alaska Natives held a special statewide convention in Alaska and overwhelmingly reaffirmed their support for rural subsistence.

Palin cannot dodge her responsibility for continuing lawsuits that her predecessor began. She is against federal agency protection for subsistence. She is against subsistence fishing in many navigable waters that are critical to Native people. She is against subsistence hunting in many areas our Native people depend upon for their survival. She is against subsistence rights that prefer rural users as the federal law favored by Alaska Natives demands over urban users.

It is true that Alaska is disabled by its own constitution from extending rural subsistence rights to state lands and waters. But a governor committed to Alaska Native people would press the federal government to do everything in its power to protect those subsistence rights as broadly as possible on federal lands and waters. Instead, Palin has chosen to attack those rights with lawsuits – and “attack” is indeed the fair word here. How else to characterize Palin’s lawsuit brought to defeat subsistence? And how else to explain Alaska Natives’ overwhelming support for the Obama/Biden ticket?

Sarah Palin has built a solid record opposing subsistence and tribal sovereignty in Alaska. That truth may be inconvenient to the former senator, but that does not change it.

Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr. and More Than 100 Tribal Leaders Endorse Barack Obama

In Uncategorized on September 20, 2008 at 6:47 pm

Chicago, IL  –  Today, the Obama campaign announced that Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr., and more than 100 Tribal Leaders have endorsed Barack Obama for President.  These endorsements come from tribes across the political spectrum and from all corners of the country.  The Navajo Nation is the largest North American Indian Tribe, comprised of approximately 300,000 members located around Southeastern Utah, Northeastern Arizona and Northwestern New Mexico.
Senator Obama said, “I am honored to have the support of President Shirley and so many of our tribal leaders.  Their commitment to public service is something that every American should be proud of.  Indian tribes in our country face a special set of challenges – from issues of sovereignty to access to affordable healthcare.  I look forward to working with Joe and all of our Tribal Leaders to ensure that we meet these challenges in an Obama-Biden administration.”
“For eight years, we have lived with Federal policies that erode our culture and language and, therefore, attack our very identity as Native people,” said President Shirley.  “It is time for change: a real change!  It is time for the United States of America to truly honor its obligations to its Native peoples.  Senator Obama understands the uniqueness of Native nations and Native peoples – that is why I support Barack Obama to be the next president of the United States.”
In addition to the individual tribal leaders, Senator Obama has received the endorsement of at least seven tribal councils, including the Crow, Rocky Boy and Fort Peck nations and the All Indian Pueblo Council.  He has also been endorsed by the Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association.  Earlier this year, Senator Obama became an honorary member of the Crow Nation.
Tribal leaders that have endorsed Senator Obama are:
·        Chief J. Allan, Chairman, Coeur d’Alene Tribe
·        Dave Archambault, Jr., Councilman, StandingRock Sioux Tribe
·        Floyd Azure, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Dorothy Barber-Redhorse, Vice-President, Sanostee Chapter, Navajo Nation
·        David Z. Bean, Councilman, Puyallup Tribe of Indians
·        Harriett Becenti, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
·        Lorenzo Bedonie, Council Delegate representing Hardrock/ Pinon Chapters (Arizona), Navajo Nation
·        Elmer Begay, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
·        Garrett Big Leggins, Vice- Chairman, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Richard Bird, Jr., Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
·        Cedric Black Eagle, Vice-Chairman, Crow Nation
·        Rodney Bordeaux, President, Rosebud Sioux Tribe
·        William “Shorty” Brewer, Vice-President Oglala Sioux Tribe
·        Theresa Bridges, Chairwoman, Franks’ Landing Indian Community
·        Joe Brings Plenty, Chairman, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
·        Donna Buckles-Whitmer, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck       Reservation
·        Diana Buckner, Chairwoman, Ely Shoshone Tribe
·        Ronald Charles, Chair, Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe
·        Abe Chopper, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Thomas Christian, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        M. Brian Cladoosby, Chairman, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community
·        Robert Cournoyer, Chairman Yankton Sioux Tribe
·        Gene Culbertson, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Gerald L. Danforth, Former Chairman, Oneida Nation of Wisconsin
·        Herman Dillon Sr., Chairman Puyallup Tribe of Indians
·        Ron Duke, Tribal Council Representative, Oglala Sioux Tribe
·        Peter Dupree, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Andy Ebona, Councilman Douglas Village, Tlingit Tribe, Alaska
·        Ian Erlich (Native Village of Kotzebue) – Vice Chairman, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council
·        Ingrid Firemoon, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Leonard Forsman, Chairman Suquamish Tribe
·        Jerry Freddie, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
·        Marlin Fryberg Jr., Secretary, Tulalip Tribes of Washington
·        Margaret Gates, Councilwoman Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
·        Shawna Gavin, Secretary, General Council of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
·        Alison Gottfriedson, Councilmember, Franks’ Landing Indian Community
·        Arlyn Headdress, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Ron His Horse Is Thunder, Chairman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
·        Wesley “Chuck” Jacobs, Tribal Council Representative, Oglala Sioux Tribe
·        Michael Jandreau, Chair, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe
·        Michael R. Johnson, Chair, General Council of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
·        Richard Kirn, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Ronald “Smiley” Kittsen, Councilman, Blackfeet Nation
·        Shelly Luger, Vice Chairwoman, Spirit Lake Tribe
·        Cynthia Lyall, Chairwoman, Nisqually Indian Tribe
·        Michael Marchand, Former Chairman, Conf. Tribes of the Colville Reservation
·        Robert McGhee, Councilman, Poarch Band of Creek Indians
·        Jesse McLaughlin, Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
·        Joseph McNeil, Jr., Councilman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
·        Christopher Mercier, Councilman and former Chairman, Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde
·        Kenneth Meshigaud, Tribal Chairperson, Hannahville Potawatomi
·        James V. Miles, Councilman Puyallup Tribe of Indians
·        Elmer L. Milford, Council Delegate representing Ft. Defiance Chapter (Arizona), Navajo Nation
·        John Miller, Chairman, Pokagon Band of Pottawatomi
·        Antone Minthorn, Chair, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
·        Armand Minthorn, Council Member, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
·        Jeff Mitchell, Council Member, Klamath Tribes
·        Robert Moore, Councilman, Rosebud Sioux
·        Wayne A. Newell, Passamaquoddy Indian Township Tribal Council Member, Passamaquoddy Tribe
·        Ned Norris, Chairman, Tohono O’odham Nation
·        Benjamin H. Nuvamsa, Chairman, Hopi Tribe
·        Darrin Old Coyote, Vice-Secretary, Crow Nation
·        Stuart Paisano, Governor, Pueblo of Sandia
·        Brian Pearson, Secretary-Treasurer, Spirit Lake Tribe
·        Myra Pearson, Chairperson, Spirit Lake Tribe
·        Louis Peterson, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Rick Phillips-Doyle, Sakom/Chief, Passamaquoddy Tribe, Pleasant Point Reservation
·        Matthew Pilcher, Chairman, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska
·        Jennifer Porter, Chair, Kootenai Tribe of Idaho
·        Gloria Ramirez, Councilwoman, Tohono O’odham Nation
·        Darryl Red Eagle, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Kenny Reels, Vice-Chair, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
·        Sarah Riggs, Vice-Chair, Dilkon Chapter, Navajo Nation
·        George Rivera, Governor, Pueblo of Pojoaque
·        Bobby Robbins, Council Delegate representing Naneez dizi/ Coalmine Canyon Chapters (Arizona), Navajo Nation
·        Andrew Roybal, Tribal Council Member Piro/Manso/Tiwa Indian Tribe, Pueblo of San Juan de Guadalupe
·        Scott Russell, Secretary, Crow Nation
·        Brandon Sazue Sr., Chairman, Crow Creek Sioux Tribe
·        Richard Sebastian, Tribal Councilor, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
·        Michael Selvage, Chairman, Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate Tribe
·        Melvin Sheldon Jr., Chairman, Tulalip Tribes of Washington
·        Wink Soderberg, Council Member, Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde
·        A.T. Stafne, Chairman, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        James H. Steele Jr., Chairman, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation
·        J.D. Stone, Speaker of the House, Crow Nation
·        Aurolyn Stwyer, Vice-Chair, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs
·        Ron Suppah, Chair, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs
·        Michael Thomas, Chairman, Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
·        Larry Townsned, Tribal Veteran Service Officer, Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina
·        Leonard Tsosie, Council Delegate, Navajo Nation
·        Lee Juan Tyler, Vice-Chairman, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes
·        Carl Venne, Chairman, Crow Nation
·        William Walksalong, Former President and Tribal Council member, Northern Cheyenne Tribe 
·        John Warren, Councilman, Pokagon Band of Pottawatomi
·        John Weeks, Sergeant at Arms, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Marcus Wells, Jr., Chairman, Three Affiliated Tribes
·        Bill Whitehead, Tribal Executive Board, Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation
·        Mike Williams, Tribal Council Member for the Akiak Native Community
·        Jonathan Windy Boy, Business Committee Member, Chippewa Cree of the Rocky Boy Reservation
·        Mervin Wright, Jr. Chairman, Pyramid Lake Paiute
·        John Yellowbird Steele, President Oglala Sioux Tribe
·        Marie Zackuse, Vice Chairwoman, Tulalip Tribes of Washington
*Note: Titles are for identification purposes only.

Navajo Nation president endorses Barack Obama

In Politics on September 19, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Native Obama Supporters Lead Palin Backlash

In Politics on September 19, 2008 at 2:29 pm

By Rob Capriccioso

WASHINGTON – Democratic Natives, some of whom have ties to Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign for president, are attacking Gov. Sarah Palin’s record on Indian issues. The charges come at a time of increasing concerns from Obama supporters and advisers that Sen. John McCain’s popular running mate could affect their candidate’s chances with Indian voters.

In an unsigned document widely circulating in Indian country, four main critiques have been levied against the first female Republican vice presidential candidate, including allegations that she has harmed Alaska Native subsistence fishing and hunting; been lukewarm in her support of tribal sovereignty; and that she hasn’t supported Alaska Native languages.

The document, titled “Sarah Palin’s Record on Alaska Native and Tribal Issues,” was partially written by Heather Kendall-Miller, an informal adviser to the Obama campaign in Alaska. She has personally known the senator from Illinois since their days attending Harvard Law School together. Her husband, lawyer Lloyd Miller, co-authored the report, which is based largely on many of the legal cases Kendall-Miller has argued against Palin and the Alaska state government.

“It’s really important to pop [Palin’s] balloon,” Kendall-Miller, a tribal member of the Native Village of Dillingham, told Indian Country Today.

She said she is “very concerned” that Natives who might have voted for Obama could now be swayed by Palin’s entrance into the race.

“That’s exactly why it was so important for us to get the document out. There was such an initial positive response [to Palin], even from Native people in Alaska.”

On the issue of subsistence fishing, the Millers note in the document that Palin has continued pursuing litigation that seeks to overturn “every subsistence fishing determination the federal government has ever made in Alaska.”

“The goal of Palin’s lawsuit is to invalidate all the subsistence fishing regulations the federal government has issued to date to protect Native fishing, and to force the courts instead to take over the roll of setting subsistence regulations,” according to the document. “Palin’s lawsuit seeks to diminish subsistence fishing rights in order to expand sport and commercial fishing.”

On subsistence hunting, the authors state Palin has “sought to invalidate critical determinations the Federal Subsistence Board has made regarding customary and traditional uses of game, specifically to take hunting opportunities away from Native subsistence villagers and thereby enhance sport hunting.”

Regarding tribal sovereignty, the document says Palin has argued that Alaska tribes have little authority to act as sovereign nations, especially in court cases involving the welfare of Native children.

Finally, the document indicates that Palin failed to respect Alaska Native languages and voters by refusing to provide language assistance to Yup’ik speaking Alaska Native voters – until ordered to do so by a federal court earlier this year.

Evon Peter, a former chief of the Neetsaii Gwich’in Tribe from Arctic Village, Alaska, has also made waves as a result of an essay he released on Sept. 8 slamming Palin’s record.

“As Alaska governor, Palin has continued the path of her predecessor [Republican Gov.] Frank Murkowski in challenging attempts by Alaska Native people to regain their human right to their traditional way of life through subsistence,” he wrote.

Peter has quickly become a prominent voice for Alaska Natives who have expressed concerns on Palin’s support for energy development, including drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He noted in his essay that there is a connection between oil development and global warming, “which is wreaking havoc on Alaska Native villages, forcing some to begin the process of relocation at a cost sure to reach into the hundreds of millions.”

Peter, who said he plans to vote for Obama, told ICT that he’s worried American Indians may not delve deeply enough into Palin’s record when it comes to making an informed decision on who to vote for this fall.

Before Palin became McCain’s running mate, many political observers had expected that Obama would do well with Indian voters, especially considering his strong outreach to tribes during the election thus far.

Some Republican Natives have been quick to point to the fact that the governor’s husband, Todd Palin, as well as their five children, are of Yup’ik descent; and they are hopeful that these family ties could encourage positive policy developments if the McCain-Palin ticket is elected.

Palin herself campaigned for governor partially on the Native heritage of her family, saying in a letter from 2006 that she “so very much appreciate[s] Alaska’s First People, their proud heritage and diverse cultures so abundant in the communities throughout our state.”

The governor also wrote in the letter that she supported tribal economic development and fishing subsistence issues and believes in teaching traditional culture and languages in schools.

But Peter believes that Palin’s record – and not her past pledges – should be the main focus.

“It’s unfortunate that across America, our communities don’t tend to dig deeper into the actual decisions that different leaders have made in their previous offices. … My hope is that Native American people will be inspired to look into all candidates’ track records on the tribal, state and national level.”

Kendall-Miller said she believes Todd Palin “does not consider himself an Alaska Native,” saying he “is much more akin to seeing himself as a sports hunter.”

“I think [Gov. Palin] is using her husband’s Alaska Native heritage the way she is using her developmentally disabled baby to try to draw people in.”

The exact blood quantum of Todd Palin has not been verified by the McCain campaign, but some reports have indicated he could be as much as one-quarter Yup’ik.

Another issue raising ire for some Natives is that fact that Todd Palin worked for the British Petroleum oil company.

Despite the many critiques centered on Todd Palin, his mother, Blanche Palin, is respected by many Alaska Natives, and once served as secretary of the Alaska Federation of Natives.

Palin’s gubernatorial and vice presidential spokespeople did not respond to requests for comment on issues being raised by Natives about her record and family.

Don Bremner, a Tlingit tribal member, is one of the many Alaska Natives who are concerned that Palin’s familial connections could lead some Indian voters who would have normally voted for Obama to vote for the McCain ticket.

“It’s f
ine to call yourself Alaska Native and say you support Alaska Native issues,” said Bremner, an Obama supporter. “But there are things that go along with being Alaska Native – meaning you support the culture, you support the language, you support our hunting and fishing ways of life.

“Her administration hasn’t done any of that.”

http://cherokees.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post-new.php

Native Americans Against Palin: Another Alaskan Native Speaks Out

In Politics on September 17, 2008 at 1:33 am

More and more Native Alaskans are coming forward to tell about their direct experiences with Gov. Palin and her lack of regard for them.  Here is a letter I received today that speaks for itself…

An Alaska Native’s take on his Governor
By Matt Gilbert

Hello. My name is Matt Gilbert. I am originally from Arctic Village, Alaska. I am Alaska Native: Gwich’in Athabascan. I visited Sarah’s campaign office and spoke with her before she became Governor. We talked about the hunting & fishing rights of Alaska Natives. We didn’t get anywhere. She sided with sport & commercial interests, so I never spoke with her again. I knew we’d get no where. She didn’t want to listen. In general, I believe Sarah Palin is another version of Bush, just as inexperienced, but more impulsive. She is very dangerous and scary. People are continuing to support her because she’s beautiful, and this should be a Red Alert for the world. Her purposed policies is to include Georgia into NATO and that would mean all the European countries with all their armed forces will have to go to war with Russia. So she’s willing to ruffle the feathers of a country right next door to her home. Is this who you want as President? You know the scene in the movies when a car or stage coach is about to go over a cliff and you see yourself sliding over? Scary image isn’t it? That’s’ what I’m seeing if Palin gets elected Vice President. Wake up America! Send her back to Alaska. She has plenty of un-finished work here. She hasn’t even gotten funding to move the town of Shishmeraf. It’s falling into the ocean from an eroding coast due to Global Warming, which she wants to fuel more by encouraging more coal and oil development. She fuels the fire, and now they want her to do it on a national level.

Palin has done a lot of irrational things up here as Governor. In the summer of 07’, she Line Item Vetoed a lot of infrastructure projects in rural Alaska. The small town of Eagle spent years trying to get a community center built when they finally got funding, Palin shut it down by her Veto. Even Lawmakers are baffled by her Vetoes. They’ve had Bills well-debated on both sides of the aisle, yet she cuts, cuts, cuts. She supported $15 million to Anchorage’s University’s Sport Complex and cut $1.5 million to an expansion of the runaway teen center. How do you justify that? She supports drilling Off-Shore which would utterly destroy the livelihood of the Inupiaq people on the North Slope. They rely on Whale for subsistence and the development would detrimentally impact those whales. She supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. My people, the Gwich’in have kept this area closed from development for 30 years. No other American Indian tribe has ever accomplished such a feat. If she drills in the Arctic Refuge, it’ll be the end of my culture. We rely on the Porcupine Caribou Herd and if drilling takes place in the Arctic Refuge, our caribou goes and so does our culture. We Gwich’in Athabascans are the last American Indian Tribe in the US that hasn’t been majorly disturbed, heavily impacted, and assimilated. We are the last pure Native American tribe left. We are the last stand for Indian Country. We are the last chapter in American Indian/Anglo American relations. The prior chapters were bad, so make this last chapter a good one and vote for Obama.

Alaska Natives in general are the last group of Native Americans in the United States still depended on a hunting & fishing-based lifestyle where kids and grown-ups go out to fish and hunt to supplement their western diets. It’s crucial we have food off our land because the western foods, processed foods, give us diabetes if we eat them alone. The subsistence foods not only feed our bodies, but our culture, spirit, social lives, and minds. The Western World calls it Subsistence, but we call it our Way of Life. I’m using the word against my well. It gives our lives meaning and keeps us busy. With God’s help, hopefully everyone can understand. Our way of life off the land is everything to us. If we don’t have that we’re nobody, just another group living off the grid, consuming McDonalds, and buying Brand-Named items. We add diversity and richness to the world. Sarah Palin doesn’t care about this. She wouldn’t care if our culture eroded before her eyes. She’s like Nero, sitting in Juneau putting on lip-gloss as Alaskan villages suffer. We’re suffering from fuel costs. We’re suffering from strangulating Fish & wildlife regulations that keep us from surviving off the already scarce wildlife. She has done some things, but not enough. She can ease the Fish & wildlife regulations in order to improve food security in the villages. She can subsidize the villages with the rising fuel costs. The US Government has a Trust Responsibility with its First Americans, the TR requires the Federal/State Governments to ensure we, Alaska Natives, have everything we need to survive. Mrs. Palin has failed miserably at this task. She has a lot more work to do back home.

Her hometown Wasillia has been a hot-bed for racist and Anti-Native attitudes. Anchorage is bad too. Alaska Natives fight discrimination on a daily basis there. Palin isn’t there for them. I read in the Anchorage papers once that a homeless native man froze to death in downtown and some man called it in sounding all casual about it. It’s like the South before the 60s up here. It’s bad. This is the Alaska Sarah Palin maintains and waters for growth. She’s never bothered to change anything because she thinks nothing is broken. As Mayor, she didn’t think anything was wrong with an atmosphere where a native woman had beer bottles thrown at her as she walked down Wasillia. So you have to ask yourself, if she’s willing to ignore the plights and issues of an ethnic group within her town and state, than how much more horrible do you think it’s going to be when she ignores the issues of that same ethnic group or another on a national level?

I believe her popularity comes from her beauty. This society has got to shift itself away from a National Inquirer-based lifestyle to an NPR or New York Times-based lifestyle. Our very world may depend on it. Our hurricanes and disasters are getting worse due to Global Warming, our Stock Market is dangerously shaky, our healthcare is getting so bad it may cause a revolution soon, and the War in Iraq is draining our resources and working families to depression-levels. We need a Change! We need Barack Obama. Not somebody whose reputation is based mainly on image and charm. As an Alaska Native, I see that she doesn’t support our way of life, as a Gwich’in I see that she is willing to end my culture and people for only six more months of oil, and as a Global citizen I see that she is impulsive and inexperienced. Do you want someone like that in charge of a nuclear arsenal? It’s probably already going to take our lifetimes to recover from Bush, if you elect Palin, the consequence are too scary for me to even think about. Please vote for change. Vote for Obama. Vote for Obama.

Alaskan Natives Speak Out Against Palin

In Politics on September 10, 2008 at 5:54 pm

By Evon Peter
evonpeter@mac.com
9/8/2008

My name is Evon Peter; I am a former Chief of the Neetsaii Gwich’in tribe from Arctic Village, Alaska and the current Executive Director of Native Movement. My organization provides culturally based leadership development through offices in Alaska and Arizona. My wife, who is Navajo, and I have been based out of Flagstaff, Arizona for the past few years, although I travel home to Alaska in support of our initiatives there as well. It is interesting to me that my wife and I find ourselves as Indigenous people from the two states where McCain and Palin originate in their leadership.

I am writing this letter to raise awareness about the ongoing colonization and violation of human rights being carried out against Alaska Native peoples in the name of unsustainable progress, with a particular emphasis on the role of Sarah Palin and the Republican leadership. My hope is that it helps to elevate truth about the nature of Alaskan politics in relation to Alaska Native peoples and that it lays a framework for our path to justice.

Ever since the Russian claim to Alaska and the subsequent sale to the United States through the Treaty of Cession in 1867, the attitude and treatment towards Alaska Native peoples has been fairly consistent. We were initially referred to as less than human “uncivilized tribes”, so we were excluded from any dialogues and decisions regarding our lands, lives, and status. The dominating attitude within the Unites States at the time was called Manifest Destiny; that God had given Americans this great land to take from the Indians because they were non-Christian and incapable of self-government. Over the years since that time, this framework for relating to Alaska Native peoples has become entrenched in the United States legislative and legal systems in an ongoing direct violation of our human rights.

What does this mean? Allow me to share an analogy. If a group of people were to arrive in your city and tell you their people had made laws, among which were:

1. What were once your home and land now belong to them (although you could live in the garage or backyard)

2. Forced you to send your children to boarding schools to learn their language and be acculturated into their ways with leaders who touted “Kill the American, save the man” (based on the original statement made by US Captain Richard H. Pratt in regards to Native American education “Kill the Indian, save the man.”)

3. Supported missionaries and government agents to forcefully (for example, with poisons placed on the tongues of your children and withheld vaccines) convince you that your Jesus, Buddha, Torah, or Mohammed was actually an agent of evil and that salvation in the afterlife could only be found through believing otherwise

4. Made it illegal for you to continue to do your job to support your family, except under strict oversight and through extensive regulation

5. Made it illegal for you to own any land or run a business as an individual and did not allow you to participate in any form of their government, which controlled your life (voting or otherwise)

How would this make you feel? What if you also knew that if you were to retaliate, that you would be swiftly killed or incarcerated? How long do you think it would take for you to forget or would you be sure to share this history with your children with the hope that justice could one day prevail for your descendents? And most importantly to our conversation, how American does this sound to you?

To put this into perspective, my grandfather who helped to raise me in Arctic Village was born in 1904, just thirty-seven years after the United States laid claim to Alaska. If my grandfather had unjustly stolen your grandfathers home and I was still living in the house and watching you live outdoors, would you feel a change was in order? Congress unilaterally passed most of the major US legislation that affect our people in my grandfathers’ lifetime. There has never been a Treaty between Alaska Native Peoples and the United States over these injustices. Each time that Alaska Native people stand up for our rights, the US responds with token shifts in its laws and policies to appease the building discontent, yet avoiding the underlying injustice that I believe can be resolved if leadership in the United States would be willing to acknowledge the underlying injustice of its control over Alaska Native peoples, our lands, and our ways of life.

United States legal history in relation to Alaska Natives has been based on one major platform – minimize the potential for Alaska Native people to regain control of their lives, lands, and resources and maximize benefit to the Unites States government and its corporations. While the rest of the world, following World War II, was seeking to return African and European Nations to their rightful owners, the United States pushed in the opposite direction by pulling the then Territory of Alaska out of the United Nations dialogues and pushing for Statehood into the Union. Why is it that Alaska Native Nations are still perceived as being incapable of governing our own lands, lives, and resources differently than African, Asian, and European nations?

Let me get specific about what is at stake and how this relates to Palin and the Republican leadership in Alaska and across this country. To this day, Alaska Native peoples are among the only Indigenous peoples in all of North America whose Indigenous Hunting and Fishing Rights have been extinguished by federal legislation and yet we are the most dependent people on this way of life. Most of our villages have no roads that connect them to cities; many live with poverty level incomes, and all rely to varying degrees on traditional hunting, fishing, and harvesting for survival. This has become known as the debate on Alaska Native Subsistence.

As Alaska Governor, Palin has continued the path of her predecessor Frank Murkowski in challenging attempts by Alaska Native people to regain their human right to their traditional way of life through subsistence.

The same piece of unilateral federal legislation, known as the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971, that extinguished our hunting and fishing rights, also extinguished all federal Alaska Native land claims and my Tribe’s reservation status. In the continental United States, this sort of legislation is referred to as ‘termination legislation’ because it takes the rights of self-government away from Tribes. It is based in the same age-old idea that we are not capable of governing our people, lands, and resources. To justify these terminations, ANCSA also created Alaska Native led forprofit corporations (which were provided the remaining lands not taken by the government and a one time payment the equivalent of about 1/20th of the annual profits made by corporations in Alaska each year) with a mission of exploiting the land in partnership with the US government and outside corporations. It was a brilliant piece of legislation for the legal termination and cultural assimilation of Alaska Natives under the guise of progress.

Since the passage of ANCSA, political leaders in Alaska, with a few exceptions, have maintained that, as stated by indicted Senator Ted Stevens, “Tribes have never existed in Alaska.” They maintain this position out of fear that the real injustice being carried out upon Alaska Natives may break into mainstream awareness and lead to a re-opening of due treaty dialogues between Alaska Native leaders and the federal government. At the same time the federal government chose to list Alaska Native tribes in the list of federally recognized tribes in 1993. Governor Palin maintains that tribes were federally recognized but that they do not have the same rights as the tribes in the continental United States to sovereignty and self-governance, even to the extent of legally challenging our Tribes rights pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act. What good are governments that can’t make decisions concerning their own land and people?

The colonial mentality in and towards Alaska is to exploit the land and resources for profits and power, at the expense of Alaska Native people. Governor Palin reflects this attitude and perspective in her words and leadership. She comes from an area within Alaska that was settled by relocated agricultural families from the continental United States in the second half of the last century. It is striking that a leader from that particular area feels she has a right, considering all of the injustices to Alaska Native people, to offer Alaskan oil and resources in an attempt to solve the national energy crisis at the Republican Convention. Palin also chose not to mention the connection between oil development and global warming, which is wreaking havoc on Alaska Native villages, forcing some to begin the process of relocation at a cost sure to reach into the hundreds of millions.

Our tribes depend on healthy and abundant land and animals for our survival. For example, my people depend on the Porcupine Caribou herd, which migrates into the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge each spring to birth their young. Any disruption and contamination will directly impact the health and capacity for my people to continue to live in a homeland we have been blessed to live in for over 10,000 years.

This is the sacrifice Palin offered to the nation. The worst part of it is that there are viable alternatives to addressing the energy crisis in the United States, yet Palin chooses options that very well may result in the extinguishment of some of the last remaining intact ecosystems and original cultures in all of North America. Palin is also promoting off shore oil drilling and increased mining in sensitive areas of Alaska, all of which would have a lifespan of far fewer years than my grandfather walked on this earth and which would not even make a smidgen of an impact on national consumption rates or longer term sustainability. McCain was once a champion of protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and it is sad to see, that with Palin on board, he is no longer vocal and perhaps even giving up on what he believes in to satisfy Palin’s position.

While I have much more to say, this is my current offering to elevate the conversation about what is at stake in Alaska and for Alaska Native peoples. Please share this offering with others and help us to make this an election that brings out honest dialogue. We have an opportunity to bring lasting change, but only if we can be open to hearing the truth about our situations and facing the challenges that arise.

Many thanks to all those who are taking stands for a just and sustainable future for all of our future generations,

*This essay is a personal reflection and should not be attributed to my tribe or organization

McCain-Palin? No, thank you!

In Uncategorized on September 5, 2008 at 2:38 pm

FIRST AMERICANS TAKE A PASS ON THE MCCAIN- PALIN TICKET; TRIBAL LEADERS RESPOND TO ABRAMOFF CRONY FUNDRAISING FOR MCCAIN
Reed Fundraiser Today Follows Pattern of McCain Putting the Special Interests Ahead of the Native American Community
Chicago, IL– Today, leaders in tribal communities responded to Senator John McCain’s decision to accept fundraising help from Jack Abramoff crony Ralph Reed.  Later today, Ralph Reed, who has close ties to corrupt Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, is scheduled to host a fundraiser for Senator John McCain in Atlanta, GA.  Reed, on behalf of a firm, received more than $5 million from Abramoff, now serving a six-year prison term for his corrupt activities defrauding Indian tribes and others.  
“John McCain’s decision to cozy up to one of the central figures in the Republican culture of corruption shows how far he is willing to go to win,” said Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean. “Despite all of his rhetoric about reform, McCain’s willingness to accept money raised by tainted Abramoff cronies like Ralph Reed shows that McCain simply cannot be trusted to bring change to Washington politics.”
Many in the Native American community expressed dismay at McCain’s decision to work closely with Reed as well.  “I’m not sure how he justifies this in his own mind.  After all, McCain more than most understands that Reed profited and supported Abramoff’s defrauding activities which devastated numerous tribes – devastation that they are still reeling from. I think for a lot of Native people, this will send a loud and clear message that Senator McCain is not on our side,” said Suzan Harjo, President of the Morning Star Institute and former Executive Director of the National Congress of American Indians. 
Jonathan Windy Boy of the Chippewa-Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy Reservation in Montana said, “I think a lot of people in Indian Country, with increased frequency over the last couple of years have asked ‘who is this John McCain?’  It’s not the same guy we thought we knew.  Abramoff hurt all of Indian Country and because of the scandal, we were often locked out of the political process since. It doesn’t make sense to me that you can claim to be for tribes and associate yourself with those who defrauded us.”  
“It is profoundly disturbing and it adds insult to injury that McCain has refused to accept tribal contributions but has actively sought out contributions from those who lobby on behalf of tribes,” added Wizi Garriott, Obama campaign First Americans Director.  “Senator McCain has it 100% backwards.  The Abramoff scandal happened with the willing participation of men like Ralph Reed, and tribes were the victims.  Yet he locks out tribes from supporting him and at the same time actively seeks the support of Washington lobbyist and men like Reed.  Senator Obama doesn’t take a dime from Washington lobbyists.  This just further shows that the Obama campaign is about people at the grassroots – not the special interests.”
Garriott added:  “Senator Obama has a comprehensive plan to strengthen our tribal communities and make this campaign about bringing all people into the process.  Senator Obama understands that when we reject the old politics of lobbyist money and special interests running the show, we can bring positive change and break the cycle of partisan ideology.  American Indians are painfully aware of the need for change. Tribes have experienced firsthand the lack of progress under prior administrations, but together we can bring the kind of change we need in our tribal communities and across the country.”
See more about Obama’s Tribal Communities plan here: http://tribes.barackobama.com/page/content/firstamshome

The candidate I support is:
 
–The candidate who has been endorsed by both Principal Chief Chad Smith and Former Chief Wilma Mankiller.

–The only candidate whose campaign includes Native American advisers; specifically a Native American Outreach Coordinator and a 30-member Tribal Steering Committee comprised of tribal leaders from across the nation.
–The only candidate who has plans to include a Native American as part of the Presidential cabinet.
–The only candidate whose website has direct and obvious links to information and specific plans for the Native American community.
–The only candidate who consistently makes reference to and speaks directly to Native Americans during campaign speeches.
–The only candidate whose campaign with literature specifically for the Native American community.
–The only candidate whose autobiography expresses concern for the Native American community and tribal sovereignty.
–The candidate who met with leaders of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Nation in the infancy of his campaign, to listen to their concerns and discuss improvements to the community going forward.
–The candidate who is an original co-sponsor of specific amendments to the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, and who called for passage of the act that has been stalled in congress for 14-years.

I support Barack Obama.

Former Cherokee Chief: Energized and Hopeful for Obama

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty, Politics on August 22, 2008 at 7:13 pm

Native Currents

by: Wilma Mankiller

© Indian Country Today August 22, 2008. All Rights Reserved

 

Energized and hopeful for Sen. Barack Obama

As a Native woman, it is tough not to feel distrustful of and cynical toward most politicians.  But on the crest of this election season, unlike any prior, I feel buoyed. I feel energized, engaged and excited. I feel something new: hope.

Yes, it’s a buzzword nowadays. ”Hope” has become synonymous with a candidate and emblematic of movement. The cynic in me wishes to dismiss it as superficially attractive yet ultimately insubstantial, but decades of experience in politics and public service won’t allow me to do that. I haven’t felt this hopeful in years.

It started in the primary. As Native people, we didn’t have just a single good candidate; we had several great ones from which to choose. It was a profound struggle choosing a candidate to endorse, but one I welcomed. What a wonderful surprise to have too many candidates listening to us and responding to our issues.

Now, as the campaign has narrowed to a general election, my hope for the future of this country and its policies toward tribal governments and individuals only grows. I know we have an advocate in Sen. Barack Obama, who unveiled his First Americans platform while the campaign was still in its infancy and has since been meeting with tribal leaders around the country. He is humble enough to respectfully listen, and empathetic enough to fully understand the challenges facing our communities today. I believe Sen. Obama when he says he feels ”a particular sense of outrage when I see the status of so many Native Americans, and there is a sense of kinship in terms of the struggles that have to be fought.” The other candidates simply cannot speak from the same place.

But he does more than talk the talk. Since entering the U.S. Senate, Obama supported the Indian Health Care Reauthorization Act and pushed for a billion-dollar increase in IHS funding. As a presidential candidate, he took that commitment to Indian health care further and called for full funding of IHS. In addition, one of Obama’s first initiatives as a candidate was to plan for a National Indian Policy Adviser as a senior staff member in the White House.

I’m inspired that this country chose him as a presidential candidate and I’m eager to be a part of history when we elect him in November. And make no mistake; we will be the ones electing him in November. Native people have an unprecedented degree of electoral power this season. We are a voting bloc that must be courted. Native populations are the most geographically dense in states likely to be up for grabs this election, meaning 1 – 2 percent of the vote in swing states could be the difference between an Obama victory on the one hand and four more years of Indian-hostile policies on the other. We can make that difference, but only if we vote.

Sen. Obama is a lifelong public servant who has shown sage judgment and sound politics. I trust him to nominate judges to the Supreme Court who will respect the inherent rights of tribal governments and the basic human rights of all people. I am impressed by the fact that he seeks and heeds wise counsel
and solid policy advice on the issues I care most about – tribal sovereignty, foreign policy and health care.

Wilma Mankiller is the former principal chief of the Cherokee Nation.

Freedmen Facts you Won’t Learn from the News

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty, Politics on August 6, 2008 at 12:37 am

If you read mainstream media news reports about the Cherokee Freedmen, you may be scratching your head by now and wondering why the Cherokees are so racist.  How could they just up and kick all the black people out of the tribe?  They aren’t racists and they haven’t kicked out the black people.  You need to read this information. 

Who are the Cherokee Freedmen?-As you read about this group in current articles, it is important to define who they are.  The Cherokee Freedmen currently fighting for citizenship are descendants of former slaves held by some Cherokee individuals.  The Cherokee Freedmen as mentioned in current news articles are sometimes referred to as non-Indian Freedmen because they are not blood descendants of an individual listed on the Dawes Rolls as a By Blood Cherokee, Delaware, or Shawnee. 

Are the Cherokee Freedmen the descendants of Cherokee Nation’s slaves? -The Cherokee Nation never had slaves.  Some Cherokee individuals who lived in the Cherokee Nation did, though. In 1863, the Cherokee Nation emancipated all slaves within its territorial jurisdiction.  In 1866, those Freedmen and their descendants were made citizens of the Cherokee Nation.  Many freed slaves from around the United States flocked to Indian Territory following the Civil War, but only those Freedmen who were living in Cherokee Nation during a specific time frame were granted citizenship into the Cherokee Nation. 

Is the Cherokee Nation breaking the Treaty of 1866? -This is the major claim of the Freedmen suing for citizenship, but the Cherokee Nation asserts that this claim is false.  Ongoing court cases will determine whether or not the Cherokee Nation has broken the Treaty of 1866, and the Cherokee Nation has stated that it will abide by the court’s ruling. 

Here are the major points of both sides of the debate: 

Article 9 of the Treaty of 1866 stated, “…all freedmen who have been liberated by voluntary act of their former owners or by law, as well as all free colored persons who were in the country at the commencement of the rebellion, and are now residents therein, or who may return within six months, and their descendants, shall have all the rights of native Cherokees.”  To the Freedmen, this means that they (as the descendants of former slaves and free colored persons) have the right to citizenship because of this article.

However, the Cherokee Nation argues that subsequent legislation reversed the terms of this Treaty.  One such reversal is seen in the Section 26 of the Congressional Act of 1902 which stated, “The names of all persons living on the first day of September, nine teen hundred and two, entitled to be enrolled as provided in section twenty-five hereof, shall be placed upon the roll made by said Commission, and no child born thereafter to a citizen, and no white person who has intermarried with a Cherokee citizen since the sixteenth day of December, eighteen hundred and ninety-five, shall be entitled to enrollment or to participate in the distribution of the tribal property of the Cherokee Nation.” 

Also, the Five Civilized Tribes Act of 1906 stated, “That after the approval of this Act no person shall be enrolled as a citizen or freedman of the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Cherokee, Creek, or Seminole tribes of Indians in the Indian Territory.”  According to this information, the Treaty of 1866 no longer held guarantees for the descendants for any citizens of the Cherokee Nation.  According to these acts, NO new citizens could be enrolled in the tribe:  Freedmen, Cherokee, or otherwise.  The next legislation that affected the citizenship status of descendants was the 1975 Cherokee Nation Constitution which set forth membership requirements for the tribe.  The Cherokee Nation Constitution was most recently updated in 2003 and can be accessed here.

Did the Dawes Commission put people on the Freedmen roll just because they looked black?- The short answer to this question is “No.”  Mainstream news media sometimes portray the Dawes Roll process like sorting socks… the white ones went on this list, the red ones went on this list, and the black ones went on this list.  This is a grossly false oversimplification of how the rolls were taken. 

In 1906 the Dawes Commission took a census of all citizens in the Cherokee Nation, dividing them into 5 major groups:  Cherokees by Blood, Adopted Shawnees by Blood, Adopted Delawares by Blood, Freedmen, and Intermarried Whites.  It is the descendants of those individuals listed on the Freedmen rolls that are currently suing for citizenship in the Cherokee Nation.

Individuals had to fill out applications and attend interviews in order to be placed on the rolls in any category.  According to the National Archives, two-thirds of Dawes Roll applicants were ultimately rejected.  Some rejections occurred because individuals could not provide sufficient proof of their ancestry or citizenship, others because their claims were obviously false. 

But currently the biggest complaints about the Dawes Rolls are in regards to the categories in which individuals were placed and the blood quantums that were recorded.  These “mistakes” occurred for the same reasons as the rejections did:  insufficient proof or false claims.  There were individuals who may have been part Cherokee but who ended up on the Freedmen or Intermarried Whites lists with no recorded blood quantum because they simply could not prove through required documentation that they had Cherokee ancestry.   There were individuals who provided to the Dawes Commission blood quanta that were lower than their actual blood quantum because they sought to protect themselves from having their assets controlled by the BIA (anyone with over 1/2 degree Cherokee blood was considered uncivilized and appointed an agent who took control of their financial affairs). 

There are undoubtedly individuals who were classified as Freedmen on the Final Rolls who did have Cherokee ancestry.  The same can be said for Intermarried Whites.  The Dawes Rolls were compiled based on what was proveable, not how people looked. 

How long had the Freedmen been members of the tribe? - The individuals who were affected by the 2007 vote had officially been members of the Cherokee Nation since the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court’s ruling in the 2006 Lucy Allen case.  According to the opinion of the court, the wording of the Cherokee Nation’s constitution was not specific enough to require an ancestor on the by blood rolls, and therefore any laws requiring such were unconstitutional.  This opinion repealed a 1980’s citizenship law that required a By Blood ancestor and the acquisition of a CDIB card. 

The court ordered that “if the Cherokee people wish to limit tribal citizenship, and such limitation would terminate the pre-existing citizenship of even one Cherokee citizen, then it must be done in the open.”   As a result of the ruling, about 2,800 Freedmen and 9 Intermarried Whites descendants enrolled and were extended citizenship in the Cherokee Nation.  These individuals still receive tribal benefits while courts are deciding whether or not the 2007 vote of the Cherokee people can stand.

Why were the Freedmen removed from the tribe?- First, not only the Freedmen but also the Intermarried Whites descendants were removed.  The 2006 court ruling indicated that “The Constitution could be amended to require that all tribal members possess Cherokee blood,” but ordered any change in citizenship requirements to be done in the open.  Following this decision, a ballot initiative for the May 2007 elections was added regarding amending citizenship requirements in the Cherokee Nation Constitution.  However, citizens of the Cherokee Nation created a petition to hold a special election to vote specifically on citizenship requirements.  The petition garnered the required number of signatures, so on March 3, 2007, registered Cherokee voters as well as the Freedmen voted on whether or not the citizenship requirements on the Cherokee Nation’s constitution should be amended. 

By a margin of 77% to 23%, the voters decided that “citizenship would be limited to those who are original enrollees or descendants of Cherokees by blood, Delawares by blood, or Shawnees by blood as listed on the Final Rolls of the Cherokee Nation commonly referred to as the Dawes Commission Rolls closed in 1906. This amendment would take away citizenship of current citizens and deny citizenship to future applicants who are solely descendants of those on either the Dawes Commission Intermarried Whites or Freedmen Rolls.”  As is clearly stated in the wording on the ballot, the vote did not effect all Freedmen descendants, nor did it effect all black people in the tribe.  It affected only those who were “non-Indian” as proveable by the Dawes Rolls.  The Cherokee Nation estimates that it still has 1,500 tribal members who are the descendants of freed slaves.  Their citizenship was not affected by the vote because they ALSO have a descendant on a By Blood roll.

Are the Cherokees racists?-No.  There are undoubtedly racist Cherokees just like there are racists in every other cultural group.  But applying the racist label to all Cherokees or to the Chief of our Nation is very hurtful and quite undeserved.  The Chief and the tribe believe that all people are equal, but they do not believe that all people are Cherokees.  The efforts to make our tribe a tribe of Indians is not discriminatory; it is an effort to preserve our shared link to an ancient people that inhabited this continent before Europeans ever knew it existed.  It is an effort to honor the unique sacrifice and struggle of an indigenous people whose language and culture have been nearly exterminated by malicious federal and state legislation.  We see our Nation as a nation of the descendants of a pre-historic people, not as a political nation with geographical boundaries.   I, personally, am an Irish Cherokee married to a Mexican-American and an aunt to beautiful African-American Cherokee nephews.  I love my Mexican-American husband and my sister loves her African-American one, but I do not believe that either of these men are Cherokees.  It should also be noted that the Cherokee Nation will only grant citizenship to the adopted children of even full-blooded Cherokees only if a biological ancestor was on the Dawes rolls.  These examples point to the fact that the Cherokee Nation as an entity is not racist, it is merely striving to preserve its cultural heritage and lineage of the Aniyunwiya- the original Cherokee people.

Aren’t all Cherokees automatically citizens of the Cherokee Nation?- Not all Cherokees are citizens of the Cherokee Nation.  There were many Cherokees who chose not to sign the Dawes Rolls in the early 1900’s, so their descendants today are not eligible for citizenship.  Further, there are 3 different federally recognized Cherokee tribes in the United States, each of which have different tribal governments and different citizenship requirements.  To be a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, one must apply for citizenship (also called tribal registration) via an application and submission of the required legal documents. 

Why hasn’t the news written about any of these things?  -Communication studies have shown that the reporting on this issue has been largely one-sided.  Reporters omit historical facts and details because they are hard to capture in just a few words.  This controversy has been referred to as a “judicial jungle” because of the numerous federal, state, and tribal legislation and rulings that have played a part over the past 140+ years.  There may be other factors at play, too, such as capturing an audience by augmenting the controversy. 

Where does the controversy stand now? -Just last week a Federal Court ruled that the Freedmen could not sue the Cherokee Nation as an entity but that they may be able to file suit against Cherokee Nation officials.  Additionally, some members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), including Rep. Diane Watson (D-California), have drafted legislation to cut federal funding to the Cherokee Nation and suspend their casino gaming operations unless the Freedmen are reinstated as citizens.  This bill would deny the Cherokee Nation an annual $300 million dollars from the United States government; this money currently comprises 64% of the annual budget for the Cherokee Nation. 

Doesn’t the CBC understand the facts behind the Freedmen controversy? -Diane Watson is the main informant of the CBC on the Freedmen issue, and she believes she understands the situation perfectly.  She has declined invitations to meet with the Cherokee Nation’s Chief Chad Smith and other tribal officials.  The Cherokee Nation tried to present information at a CBC forum, but their attempt at showing their  ”side” of the controversy failed. 

In addition to advocates who are Cherokee Freedmen, Watson uses two non-Freedmen Cherokees to promote the Freedmen issue, including Former Chief Joe Byrd who had suit brought upon him during his administration by the Cherokee Nation itself, and a Cherokee Nationalist who believes the Freedmen should be made citizens because the Cherokee Nation needs to “control their destiny.”  Neither of these men are  well-respected within the Cherokee community because of the devastation they have both brought upon the Cherokee people living in Oklahoma.

Can’t there just be a joint meeting or something for both sides to work out the issue?- There have been meetings attended by both the Cherokee Nation and the Freedmen but unfortunately they have not ended well. Both the Cherokees and the Freedmen activists are very emotional about their positions on the issue. Because the emotions run so high, little progress has been made in bridging the divide between the activists on both sides. 

The Cherokee Nation has tried to bring understanding to the issue through the use of two different websites:  www.meetthecherokee.org and www.cherokeenationfacts.org.  Also, an Oklahoma resident by the name of Heather Williams has appeared before Congress and in numerous publications on behalf of the Cherokee Nation.  She is the descendant of a Freedman but is a member of the Cherokee Nation because she ALSO descends from a Cherokee listed on the By Blood roll.  The Cherokee Nation has also offered free help to people who think they may be eligible for citizenship.

Who is affected while the courts decide?- The Freedmen and Intermarried Whites descendants who do not have an ancestor on the By Blood rolls cannot currently be granted citizenship.  However, those non-Indian individuals who enrolled after the 2006 court case are still extended benefits while the court cases are pending.   Any individual, regardless of race or other heritage, who can prove lineage to at least one ancestor on the By Blood Dawes Rolls can apply for citizenship in to the Cherokee Nation.

Where can I read more about this for myself?- It is difficult to find information that is not affiliated with activists on either side of the issue.  Reading newspaper articles merely scratch the surface, as has already been discussed.  But a good place to start is by trying to understand the Dawes Rolls.  Kent Carter, Director of the National Archives Fort-Worth Branch, has written an informative piece that can be found here.  You can also browse the Dawes Rolls and the application jackets for those who were placed on it (or rejected) by visiting the National Archives.  Next, you can read the 1866 Treaty which the Freedmen claim proves their legal right to citizenship.  The Cherokee Nation has also included a press kit with cited sources and timelines on their website.  When you look through information that comes up with Google sources, always keep in mind the author and the intended audience, as that always has a heavy impact on the message itself.  The Wikipedia page explaining the controversy, for example, was generated by the self-described activist against the Cherokee Nation and as a result the page is often biased in information. 

Good luck and please leave a comment!

Freedmen Descendants’ Lawsuit Against Cherokee Nation Dismissed

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty, Politics on July 30, 2008 at 12:07 am

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously rules that Cherokee Nation has sovereign immunity, Rejects Freedmen descendants’ theory
 
Opinion says tribal sovereign immunity existed since founding of U.S. and continues today

 WASHINGTON, DC. — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously dismissed a lawsuit against the Cherokee Nation brought by a handful of non-Indian Freedmen descendants.
            Judge Thomas Griffith, in his written opinion for the three members of the court, stated: “The Freedmen argue that our search for intent to abrogate is misguided because the Thirteenth Amendment and the 1866 Treaty predate the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity, such that the drafters of those texts could not have foreseen the interpretive rule requiring express and unequivocal abrogation … This argument misapprehends the nature of tribal sovereign immunity, which is not the product of any enactment but an inherent attribute of a tribe’s sovereignty.  Tribal sovereign immunity existed at the Founding, as surely as did tribal sovereignty, and our only concern is whether the Thirteenth Amendment or the 1866 Treaty later abrogated that immunity.  The unequivocal-abrogation rule reflects the belief, as true in the nineteenth century as it is today, that lawmakers do not lightly discard sovereign immunity.  We see no reason to depart from the established interpretive rule based on the vintage of the texts.  Because nothing in the Thirteenth Amendment or the 1866 Treaty amounts to an express and unequivocal abrogation of tribal sovereign immunity, the Cherokee Nation cannot be joined in the Freedmen’s federal court suit without the tribe’s consent.  We reverse the District Court’s determination to the contrary.”
“In the 1830s, the Cherokee Nation won court cases, but Congress and the President ignored the rulings and instead forcibly removed the Cherokee Nation from our eastern homelands on the Trail of Tears, killing more than a quarter of our tribe’s population,” said Chad Smith, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation.  “It remains to be seen whether Congress will treat the Cherokee Nation any differently 170 years later.   Today, the court held that the 1866 Treaty preserves the Nation’s sovereign immunity from these claims.  What Congress and the Nation agreed to in 1866, the Congress should not violate now.  The court has sent the case back to the District Court, and Congress should continue to let the courts decide.”
The appeals court remanded the case against tribal officials back to the District of Columbia District Court.  Griffith wrote: “The District Court must determine whether ‘in equity and good conscience’ the suit can proceed with the Cherokee Nation’s officers but without the Cherokee Nation itself.”
 “This decision is a strong affirmation for tribes across the country, who rely upon federal courts to uphold tribal sovereignty when it comes under attack,” said Chief Smith.  “The court once again acknowledged that tribes have inherent sovereignty that predates the founding of the United States, and that tribal sovereign immunity still exists today.”
            The full opinion is available at www.cherokeenationfacts.org and www.cherokee.org.

Black Cherokees–Still Part of the Tribe Before and After March 2007 Vote

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty, Politics on July 29, 2008 at 9:57 pm

UNITY
http://unitynews.org/2008/07/25/emotions-flare-during-naja-panel/#comment-112
What gathers people, nations, and cultures together-shared views, blended life experiences, or the desire to have an understanding of the other, insight…
Each of us could bring elements and ideas, adding definition of what unity means to them.
As the grandmother and mother of Afro-American and Cherokee by blood children, and citizens of Cherokee Nation, our families are defined by those relationships we build into our lives and communities. Tribal citizenship starts with blood-ties, then you build the culture.
The media and public has neglected to see and hear from those of us who are Black-Cherokee by blood citizens in Cherokee Nation. Thereby failing to recognize that we exhisted before and will continue to long after this ‘issue’ has settled.
Some will walk away and find another task to attach themselves to and wage war, again. But many of us will walk throughout our life time and our descendents’ in the footsteps of being a blended family of both Afro and Cherokee by blood.
I am not aware of our journalists of color seeking out the diverse communities within Cherokee Nation beyond a PR spin, yet are quick to proclaim what is happening within our neighborhoods, homes, governments, and thinking in regards to how we live. I’d like to see and acknowledge how the Black politicians (CBC), representatives, and speakers have come into our nation and homes, to spend time with our familes to see the exchange of relationships that better represent those portrayed as being “kicked out and purged” from the rolls and nation, in the mis-informed words of Congresswoman Diane Watson, who has refused multiples invitations to come visit our homelands and people.
We are still here as Black-Cherokee citizens before and after the March 3, 2007 vote, which defined and further embraced our rich cultures, diversity, and acknowledged the unity which can exist between people.
My children, and theirs, can return to the communtites of their ancestors in eastern Oklahoma and still be at home with their relatives. That’s unity! tp
Twila Pennington
Cherokee Nation citizen, Blue Clan

BIA Pressed on Freedmen Status

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty on July 7, 2008 at 8:07 pm

CRITICS OF CHEROKEES
U.S. Reps. Diane Watson: As part of the effort to build a record that could lead to a hearing, they have laid out a series of questions in a letter concerning the status of the freedmen and the tribe.

By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
7/6/2008
Last Modified: 7/6/2008 4:34 AM

A congressional hearing is apparently the goal.WASHINGTON — Congressional critics of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma continue to press a federal agency concerning the status of the descendants of the tribe’s freedmen.

One of their major goals apparently is to force the controversial issue before a congressional hearing.

The Cherokee Nation believes such a hearing should be viewed as “blatant interference” by lawmakers if it is scheduled before pending litigation is resolved.

As part of their effort to build a record that could lead to a hearing, U.S. Reps. Diane Watson, D-Calif., the most vocal critic of the Cherokee Nation in Congress, and John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, laid out a series of questions concerning the status of the freedmen and the tribe in a letter to George Skibine. Skibine is the acting head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Their questions range from the legal status of the freedmen and the processing of citizenship applications to the BIA’s actions to protect freedmen’s rights and the federal government’s take on the Cherokee constitution.

Noting a March meeting with Skibine’s predecessor, Carl Artman, the two lawmakers cite complaints they had passed on then that the BIA had failed to take action to protect rights of the freedmen, former slaves of Cherokees.

Watson and Conyers’ letter was dated June 3, but a copy was released several days ago.

It followed a May 22 letter from Artman to them and two other key lawmakers who also were at the meeting.

In his letter, Artman, who has since left office, told the lawmakers the BIA will not take further action on the long-running freedmen controversy until the litigation is resolved.

A group of freedmen filed the lawsuit challenging a vote by the Cherokee Nation to remove freedmen descendants from tribal rolls.

Watson, who believes the Cherokee Nation would be in violation of an 1866 treaty if it expels the freedmen, made it clear she was not satisfied with Artman’s response.

When asked about the letter to Skibine, Watson aide Bert Hammond said the lawmakers wanted more responses from the BIA in writing so a record could be established.

Hammond said that could lead to a congressional hearing.

The BIA did not respond to a request for a comment on the letter from Watson and Conyers.

In a written statement, the Cherokee Nation expressed opposition to scheduling a hearing before the litigation is resolved.

“With all due respect to the prerogatives of members of Congress, it is clear that a hearing would be a blatant interference by politicians in the litigation on these very issues currently in the federal and tribal courts,” tribe spokesman Mike Miller said.

“No matter what your opinion is on the merits, it would be inappropriate to have a hearing before the courts decide.”

Still, the tribe backed the effort to provide additional information to lawmakers.

“We think the more information that members of Congress have, the clearer it will be that the Cherokee Nation’s actions have been consistent with our treaty obligations, our constitution, and federal and tribal laws and court decisions,” Miller said.

He expressed hope that lawmakers also come to realize that Congress already has passed laws in 1902 and 1906 to remove freedmen descendants as citizens of the Cherokee Nation.

Miller said the tribe is now in the position of being forced into giving non-Indian freedmen something that Congress took away more than 100 years ago.

“We also hope they understand that cutting our federal funding will take away health care, housing and education assistance for thousands of low-income Indians and non-Indian freedmen descendants who have temporarily reinstated in the tribe,” he said.

Watson and others have pushed legislation designed to withhold federal funds as a way to force the tribe to drop its efforts on the freedmen.

A potential impasse on that issue may put at risk a housing bill supported by tribes across the country.

——————————————————————————–

Jim Myers (202) 484-1424
jim.myers@tulsaworld.com

Research Program Offers Cherokee Genealogy Help

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty on June 29, 2008 at 11:23 pm
By CLIFTON ADCOCK World Staff Writer
6/27/2008
Last Modified: 6/27/2008  2:48 AM

It gives a hand to those who think they might be eligible for tribal citizenship.

The Cherokee Nation and leaders from Tulsa’s African-American community plan to work together to provide genealogy research to people who think they are eligible for Cherokee citizenship.

The outreach program is open to individuals of all races and nationalities who think they have Cherokee ancestry and wish to apply for citizenship in the Cherokee Nation.

In partnership with the Area Council for Community Action, the Cherokee Nation will provide individuals with genealogy research and direction in gathering the documentation needed to become enrolled tribal citizens.

“We realize that the Cherokee Nation requires citizens to have an Indian ancestor on the Dawes Roll, but we also know there may be many African-Americans who are eligible for citizenship but have not enrolled, for whatever reason,” said Pleas Thompson, president of the Area Council for Community Action.

“This partnership will help eligible people of any race to find the documentation they need to show an Indian ancestor on the rolls and become a citizen of the Cherokee Nation.”

The tribe has been under fire by the Congressional Black Caucus since amending its constitution last year to limit tribal membership to those who can show a Cherokee blood quantum. The new amendment meant descendents of freedmen, who had only a year earlier been granted citizenship under a tribal court order, along with intermarried whites who could not meet the by-blood requirement, would not be tribal citizens.

The freedmen were former slaves of Cherokees and were adopted into the tribe after emancipation.

A federal lawsuit by freedmen descendents is challenging the constitutional amendment that created the by-blood requirement, and members of the Congressional Black Caucus amended an Indian housing bill to cut funding to the Cherokee Nation unless it accepts the freedmen descendents as citizens.

The Cherokee Nation offers some genealogical services through the Cherokee Heritage Center in Tahlequah, but this is the first time such services will be offered on a regular basis in the Tulsa area.

“The Cherokee Nation is taking the lead in reaching out to the community, to make sure that people of Indian ancestry have every opportunity to be enrolled as citizens,” Thompson said. “A partnership like this can be something that helps the entire community.”

“The need for this kind of service is very real,” said Heather Williams, a Cherokee citizen who also has African-American ancestry. “When my family was trying to locate our ancestors on the Dawes Rolls, it took quite some time to gather the information. Having a service available like this would help tremendously.”

Cherokee principal Chief Chad Smith, said, “We know that for some people, the process of tracing your family tree back more than 100 years can be difficult, and there are roadblocks that can be discouraging.

“This partnership will make it easier for people in the Tulsa area to get through the enrollment process a little easier. (The Area Council for Community Action) has a long history of helping the community and will be a great partner in this outreach effort.”

Genealogical assistance will be available from 9 a.m. to noon at 205 E. Pine St., Suite 3, in the North Pointe Business Complex, as well as at other events and times as scheduled by the Area Council for Community Action.

For more information or to make an appointment, contact the council at 592-1339.


Clifton Adcock 581-8462
clifton.adcock@tulsaworld.com

King: Race, Affiliation, and Sovereignty ‘08

In Uncategorized on June 25, 2008 at 2:21 am
King: Race, affiliation and sovereignty ‘08       
Posted: June 24, 2008
by: Keegan King
Race has been and will continue to be an issue in this year’s national elections. But now it seems that tribal affiliation can be added to the list of candidate policy positions. It was recently reported that Sen. Barack Obama attempted to clarify his position on the rights and affiliation of Cherokee freedmen. Freedmen, the descendants of mixed Indian and freed African people, have filed an injunction to prohibit the Cherokee tribe from ousting them from tribal rolls.Sen. Obama made it clear that in the dispute between the Cherokee Nation and Cherokee freedmen, he supports the tribe’s right to determine tribal affiliation. He also said that he did not agree with the decision, but ”tribal sovereignty must mean that the place to resolve intertribal disputes is the tribe itself.” This is just the latest iteration of a storied battle for tribal self-determination within the Cherokee Nation. The conflict resulted from the Congressional Black Caucus attempting to get presumptive Democratic nominee Obama to support their efforts to prohibit the Cherokee Nation from disenrolling freedmen by withholding treaty obligations.

House Bill 2824, a bill that seeks to ‘’sever United States’ government relations with the Cherokee Nation” until full tribal citizenship is restored to Cherokee freedmen, was introduced in 2007. Supported by 35 members of the CBC, H.R. 2824 was a reaction to Cherokee freedmen’s appeals to U.S. lawmakers to weigh in on their removal from the Cherokee tribal roll. This new conflict over tribal sovereignty and what it means to be part of a tribe finds its roots in the relocation and allotment policies of the 19th century.

During the mid-1800s, the Cherokee people were forcibly removed from their homelands in the Southeastern U.S. in what is known as the Trail of Tears. Their expulsion to reservation territory in Oklahoma was a policy implemented to make land available in the East for European settlers. During the removal, the Civil War was raging and several tribes had sided with either Confederate or Union forces. New treaties were forged between the U.S. government and newly relocated tribes during Reconstruction. And tribes that had kept African slaves up until then were forced to free them. With the freeing of slaves, who had been deeply involved in the culture of traditional Cherokee life and who spoke the language, there were many marital unions formed between Cherokees and blacks.

As it had been for hundreds of years, the Cherokee accepted these new in-laws and children of mixed heritage as full members of the tribe regardless of the foreign concept of ”race.” Formalized through treaty documents, the self-determination of tribes in matters of enrollment were left to the tribal governments. During this time, Cherokee ”freedmen” became prominent business owners and leaders within the tribe. The age-old system of adoption and cultural inclusion was successful and functioned as it always had.

But as Indian policy morphed from removal to assimilation, the U.S. government introduced a new paradigm – blood quantum. Quantum was an attempt to influence tribal self-determination. By and large, the tribes had been fairly homogeneous; and in cases like that of the freedmen, the Cherokee Nation had accepted outsiders that had already been initiated into tribal culture. But by introducing this new concept of race, a system based solely upon ancestry, the U.S. government had devised a way to whittle down the tribes and their subsequent obligations to them over time.

Faced with what appeared to be an arbitrary requirement, the tribes adopted blood quantum requirements. And at the time, many tribes required that individuals have one-quarter or one-half ”Indian blood” to be a tribal member. In this way, the criteria for tribal enrollment came to be based solely on ancestry.

The fallacy of blood quantum has had tremendous repercussions over the last century. In many ways, it has divided tribes and created a class system where a person’s degree of ”Indian blood” is what determines their status in a community. Before quantum, tribal members were accepted based on their willingness to sacrifice for and support the tribe and leaders were chosen because of their values and character rather than racial purity.

Due in no small part to the assimilation policy of blood quantum, the Cherokee Nation first started discussing whether Cherokee freedmen should have rights as citizens in the early 1980s. The combination of a forced paradigm shift, off-reservation populations that weren’t as connected to the cultural aspect of the tribe, and a century of racist federal policy targeting blacks and dwindling resources culminated in the 1990s with the first real attempts to oust Cherokee freedmen from the rolls. And in 2007, the Cherokee Nation, through an election fraught with voter disenfranchisement, passed a referendum that prohibited Cherokees designated as freedmen from being enrolled members.

The CBC and other lawmakers have attempted to make the case that this is a treaty issue and not one of sovereignty. They believe that because freedmen were ”granted” the same rights as Cherokees in treaty documents, this should carry through to their descendants today. I find it humorous that the same government that has implemented these policies is now trying to find fault with them.

I agree with Sen. Obama in that the Cherokee freedmen should continue to be recognized by the tribe but that the decision should come from the Cherokee Nation. He put it this way: ”Our nation has learned with tragic results that federal intervention in internal matters of Indian tribes is rarely productive – failed policies such as allotment and termination grew out of efforts to second-guess Native communities. That is not a legacy we want to continue.”

As our world becomes smaller, tribal nations will find that we have tribal members with African, European, American and even Asian descent. Tribal sovereignty must be respected and, as Sen. Obama has said, the tribes must not be interfered with in their process of determining membership. But the termination policies of the past, including blood quantum, must be abolished or they will continue to divide and conquer our communities, family by family.

It is time for us to make a change. It is time to for our tribal nations to evolve, back.

Keegan King, Acoma Pueblo, is the director of New Mexico Youth Organized, an organization that gets young people involved in politics in the state. He can be reached at keegank@gmail.com.

Media Analysis: Cherokee and Freedmen Dispute

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty on June 24, 2008 at 6:50 pm

4/20/2007 1:27:31 PM (CST)

Media analysis

How journalists reported the Cherokee-Freedmen story

BUFFALO, N.Y. – A recent study looked at journalistic coverage of the Cherokee Nation March 3 vote on an amendment to its constitution that ended tribal citizenship for descendants of the Freedmen, not otherwise connected with Cherokee lineage.

The research analyzed mainstream news media presentation of the story, specifically how they dealt with sometimes competing issues such as the CN’s sovereignty and citizenship issues of the Freedmen. It also looked at the news sources cited or quoted in the reports and the balance between sources on either side of the issue.

“In general, this was reported as a classic clash between oppressor and victim,” Ron Smith, communication professor and the study’s principal, said. “Missing were nuance, historical perspective and a context within which to understand the contemporary significance of the story.”

The study, released March 22, was conducted by the American Indian Policy and Media Initiative at Buffalo State College. It reported the following additional findings:

* Spokespeople on both sides of the issue had their say in the news stories, but the Freedmen opponents to the amendment generally were quoted before news sources associated with the Cherokee Nation.

* Both issues of racism and self-determination were discussed, but the racism theme figured more prominently (sooner) in the story than the tribal governance or sovereignty theme.
* Few reports gave details or context to the vote itself, either the voting numbers or the voter turnout.

* Nearly two-thirds of the reports raised the money issue, generally without supporting information, as a factor motivating the vote.

* Most of the articles highlighted the slave-owning history of the Cherokees, but fewer explained the incorporation of former slaves into the tribe or the confusion created by the Dawes Commission.

The research reviewed published news reports and broadcast transcripts between Feb. 27 and March 10. It focused on headlines, leads, quoted news sources, statistical information about the vote and presentation of information about money and about the historical context. It also looked at the use of terms such as “racist” and “sovereign.”

“Overall, this is another instance of mainstream media failing to understand the complexity of an issue involving American Indians and their oversimplification of an intricate situation,” Smith said, who has conducted other research on media presentation of news focused on Native American topics. “We look at how the media ‘frames’ the story, whose version gets top billing, what themes are presented.”

Smith said the media coverage, because it lacked a historical context, covered the story as an example of an Indian nation versus African Americans.

“Some of the reports used terms such as ‘kick out’ and ‘disown.’ Several headlines screamed ‘racism,’ such as one that read: ‘Cherokees Accused of Racist Plot as Sons of Slaves Are Cast Out,’” he said.

By a ratio of 5-to-1, Freedmen sources were the first quoted in the reports. Most of the reports used the term “racism,” with two-third of those in the lead or opening paragraphs. By contrast, while three-quarters of the articles implied the concept of sovereignty, only 12 percent used the term “sovereignty.”

Few published reports noted the legal relationship of the Cherokees in particular or Native tribes and nations in general. Half of the articles mentioned the Dawes Commission that loomed large in the history of the controversy, but most of those without explanation.

A full text of the research report is available online at www.buffalostate.edu/communication (American Indian Initiative).

– Buffalo State College Communications

 

 

BIA: Wait Until the Courts Decide

In Cherokee Nation Sovereignty, Politics on June 21, 2008 at 9:41 pm

BIA Tells Congress It Will Wait for Courts To Decide Non-Indian Citizenship Issue

WASHINGTON,  D.C. – The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has told several U.S. House of Representatives Members that it will wait until federal courts have decided whether non-Indians have treaty rights to citizenship before deciding whether to take any action regarding non-Indian Freedmen descendants and the Cherokee Nation.

Signed by former U.S. Department of Interior Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Carl Artman, the letter was sent to U.S. Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.), U.S. Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC), U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), and U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) in response to a meeting they had with Artman in March. 

“The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has before it a case that will help determine the status and the rights of the Freemen[sic].  The Department will await the final outcome of this case prior to taking any further action with regards to the Freedmen,” Artman wrote.

“Since the Cherokee Nation has fully complied with the Treaty of 1866, it’s the right thing to do,” said Chad Smith, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation.

The BIA letter is consistent with the historic practice of the BIA acknowledging the Cherokee Nation’s right to require that citizens have an Indian ancestor on the Dawes Rolls of the Cherokee Nation, a federal census that concluded in 1906. 

The letter is also consistent with congressional and federal court precedent.  In 1902 and 1906, Congress passed laws that clearly removed non-Indians, including Freedmen descendants, as citizens in the Cherokee Nation.  Subsequent federal court decisions, including by the U.S. Supreme Court, confirmed that Congress changed the meaning of treaty rights for Freedmen descendants.  In spite of these historical facts, some Members of Congress want to punish the Cherokee Nation through scorched-earth legislation to force it into giving tribal rights to non-Indian Freedmen descendants that Congress itself removed more than 100 years ago.

Artman’s letter also answered questions raised by the Members of Congress, assuring them that: disenrolled non-Indian Freedmen descendants have been temporarily reinstated as citizens of the Cherokee Nation pending the outcome of litigation; they are eligible for and are receiving health, education, housing, and other social services; and they may register to vote in tribal elections. 

            “We hope Congress follows the BIA’s example of waiting for the courts to decide before taking premature punitive action against the Cherokee Nation that will cut nearly $300 million in federal funding for elderly, young, infirm and low-income Indians,” Smith said.

Cherokee Chief Chad Smith Supports Obama

In Politics on June 21, 2008 at 5:16 am

http://www.cherokeephoenix.org/Opinion/Opinion.aspx?StoryID=2886

By Principal Chief Chad Smith

Recently, presidential candidate and U.S. Senator Barack Obama was asked to reconcile his open support for tribal sovereignty with his membership in the Congressional Black Caucus. A handful of members of that organization are actively attempting to terminate the Cherokee Nation’s federal recognition and funding, which would eliminate more than 6,500 jobs, strand more than 126,000 people without healthcare, cut off meals to more than 700 elders per week and leave thousands of tribal citizens without housing. In response, his campaign issued the following statement that I would like to share here:
 
“Barack Obama has reiterated his support for tribal sovereignty. Senator Obama said, ‘Tribal sovereignty must mean that the place to resolve intertribal disputes is the tribe itself. Our nation has learned with tragic results that federal intervention in internal matters of Indian tribes is rarely productive – failed policies such as Allotment and Termination grew out of efforts to second-guess Native communities.  That is not a legacy we want to continue.’
 
With respect to the Cherokee Freedman issue, Senator Obama said that while he is opposed to unwarranted tribal disenrollment, congressional interference was not warranted at this point. ‘Discrimination anywhere is intolerable, but the Cherokee are dealing with this issue in both tribal and federal courts. As it stands, the rights of the Cherokee Freedmen are not being abrogated because there is an injunction in place that ensures the Freedmen’s rights to programs during the pendency of the litigation. I do not support efforts to undermine these legal processes and impose a congressional solution. Tribes have a right to be self governing and we need to respect that, even if we disagree, which I do in this case. We must have restraint in asserting federal power in such circumstances.’
 
Obama also reiterated his support for fulfilling the treaty obligations to tribes. ‘The Cherokee Freedmen issue highlights the larger issue of the unfulfilled treaty promises made by the federal government to tribes. It is these promises that Barack is most concerned with as the future president. Barack understands that the federal government owes a legal and moral obligation to tribes to provide health care, education and other essential services to tribes. This is not a handout, but compensation for millions of acres of land relinquished by tribes.’”
 
Senator Obama is right. As an indigenous nation, our sovereignty is inherent and the U.S. government has a legal obligation to recognize our sovereignty.  Treaties are the historical record of that recognition, and show clear proof of an ongoing government to government relationship. 
 
It’s called “federal recognition,” not “federal permission to exist.” We already have a right guaranteed by tribal, federal and international law to exist as a distinct people.
 
And I am also glad that Senator Obama differentiates in his statement between a “handout” and “compensation” for our historical losses as a people. California Congresswoman Diane Watson, who is leading the charge in the CBC to disenfranchise our Nation, seems to want to “stop payment” on compensation owed to us by the U.S. government because she doesn’t approve of a citizenship decision our people had every legal right to make. In the real world, her actions would be considered a violation of the first obligation of the United States in our first treaty in 1785, a government to government relationship. The fact is, Watson refuses to recognize that Congress itself closed the rolls to Freedmen descendants one hundred years ago, and now she wants to coerce Cherokees into granting those descendants today what Congress took away.
 
Reading Obama’s statement makes me hopeful. It is good to know that others can thoughtfully analyze this complex situation and come to the same simple conclusions that we have: Tribes have the inherent right to self-governance, congressional interference is not an appropriate answer, and the place to resolve tribal disputes is the tribe itself.
 
In contrast, much of Watson’s and the CBC’s unwarranted attempts to intervene in our government stem from misinformation. To that end, we have tried to make as much information as possible available so that our citizens and others can read, analyze and make informed decisions based on facts, not emotion. Besides the Cherokee citizenship information that has always been and continues to be updated regularly on www.cherokee.org we have also created two new Web sites intended to provide facts about the issue: www.cherokeenationfacts.org and www.meetthecherokee.org.
 
On these sites, you will find a historical timeline, legal documents, videos, opinions from citizens and links to take action to ask Congress to cease any further legislation that will hurt our Nation and our people. I hope you will visit, read the facts and make the decision to support our inherent, legal rights.

Obama Upholds Tribal Sovereignty

In Politics on May 3, 2008 at 4:54 am

Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) has stated his opposition to H.R. 2824, an attempt by his fellow Congressional Black Caucus member Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA) to sever government-to-government relations with the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma because of an on-going dispute between the tribe and the “Cherokee Freedmen.”

In a March 13, 2008 Letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, members of the Congressional Black Caucus stated that “members of the CBC will not support, and will actively oppose passage of NAHASDA” unless the bill contains a “provision that would prevent the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma from receiving any benefits or funding” until they extended tribal membership to the Freedmen. The letter contained the signatures of 35 CBC members, but not the signature of White House hopeful Senator Barack Obama. 

Still, the Native American community began raising questions about an Obama Presidency that could potentially support CBC efforts to undermine the rights of tribal governments to determine their own membership.  Asked to clearly state his position on H.R. 2824, Obama’s campaign issued the following statement: 

“Tribal sovereignty must mean that the place to resolve intertribal disputes is the tribe itself,” Obama said. “Our nation has learned with tragic results that federal intervention in internal matters of Indian tribes is rarely productive – failed policies such as Allotment and Termination grew out of efforts to second-guess Native communities.  That is not a legacy we want to continue.”

 With respect to the Cherokee Freedman issue, Senator Obama said that while he is opposed to unwarranted tribal disenrollment, congressional interference was not warranted at this point. “Discrimination anywhere is intolerable, but the Cherokee are dealing with this issue in both tribal and federal courts. As it stands, the rights of the Cherokee Freedmen are not being abrogated because there is an injunction in place that ensures the Freedman’s rights to programs during the pendency of the litigation. I do not support efforts to undermine these legal processes and impose a congressional solution. Tribes have a right to be self governing and we need to respect that, even if we disagree, which I do in this case. We must have restraint in asserting federal power in such circumstances.”

Regarding Sen. Obama also reiterated his support for fulfilling the government’s treaty obligations to tribes. “The Cherokee Freedmen issue highlights the larger issue of the unfulfilled treaty promises made by the federal government to tribes.”  It is these promises that the Senator is most concerned with as the future president.  Sen. Obama understands that the federal government owes a legal and moral obligation to tribes to provide health care, education and other essential services to tribes.  “This is not a handout, but compensation for millions of acres of land relinquished by tribes,” he said.

Those are the words of Senator Barack Obama, but what about his actions?  Native Americans still concerned about an Obama presidency should research the websites of Clinton, Obama, and McCain for an indication of each candidate’s interest in their community.  Clinton and McCain websites have no specific links or information for Native American peoples or issues, while Senator Obama’s campaign has a main page link directly to his website for “First Americans,” at www.tribes.barackobama.com.  Further, a look at all three candidates’ campaign teams reveal that Senator Obama has a Native American Community Outreach Coordinator and a 30-member Tribal Steering Committee.  If Clinton and McCain have a Native American presence on their campaign teams, it is well hidden.

Sen. Obama’s opposition to Diane Watson’s legislation will undoubtedly be met with unrest by those of his fellow members of the CBC that side with the Cherokee Freedmen, but Obama appears to be no stranger to the CBC’s disaffections.  Last year, online political publication TheHill.com reported on the CBC’s anger with Obama about rejecting an invitation to debate on Fox News, and added that “Obama has irked fellow CBC members by failing to respond to a request made early last year that he host a fundraiser for the Black Caucus’s political action committee (PAC). [Senator Hillary] Clinton received a similar invitation and quickly followed through by headlining a CBC PAC fundraiser in March of 2006.”  Perhaps this is why the CBC recruited Hillary Clinton and not Barack Obama to be the Guest Speaker at their 37th Annual Legislative Conference, prompting the Washington Times to speculate that the CBC was quietly trying to endorse her bid for the presidency.

Hopefully to the Native American community it is obvious that Obama and the CBC do not have mutual and unequivocal support for one another. He clearly opposes H.R.2824 that was introduced by Diane Watson, who –incidentally- endorsed his rival Senator Hillary Clinton and now serves as an advisor to the Clinton campaign.