Indigenous rights poll #2: Tribal sovereignty

[Iktomiwicasa]

Poll question: Indigenous rights poll #2: Tribal sovereignty

This is the second in a series of polls I am running to learn about DUers attitudes and conceptions of Native rights issues.

The foundation of the U.S. government's dealings with recognized tribes is ostensibly that of nation to nation. However, the government mandates that each tribe adopt an "american" form of government via elected tribal councils. These in many cases, especially in areas that have the attention of energy corporations interested in plundering natural resources, are merely puppet governments that do the bidding of the feds in contrast to the interests of the people they are supposed to govern. As a fully sovereign nation, I feel that my nation has the inalienable right to choose our own traditional form of government. We are not children who are incapable of governing ourselves...we have had effective and balanced leadership for thousands of years. With this in mind, the poll is as follows.

Thanks for looking and answering....

[knitter4democracy]

1. They're called nations for a reason.

They should be able to govern themselves. Period.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. If the hereditary chief decided that HIS nation should be home to...

... a nuclear waste repository, would you still agree? If the Chief of the Makah tribe decided unilaterally to hunt dozens of whales for international trade, would you still agree?

The reservations are democratically governed because they were meant to belong to the people of the native american nation, not their king.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs has a $2.3 billion budget. Even this large amount is inadequate to the need, but the reality remains that if the US government is going to spend this money, we need to exercise some control to assure that it's spent serving the needs of the people, and not an unelected government.

[knitter4democracy]

11. It's up to the individual tribe/nation.

Most tribes traditionally have had some sort of checks-and-balance system. The chief couldn't overrule everyone and do something no one else agreed with. If they use that system, there's a good chance it'll turn out okay.

[Iktomiwicasa]

14. I can only speak for my people specifically

but the fact is we (I am Oglala Lakota...Western "Sioux") never had "kings" who could make decisions against the will of the people. We had councils of chiefs (and still do, who are listened to by us traditionals) who are chiefs by consensus of the people, with no hereditary titles. If a chief makes bad decisions, he is no longer a chief :)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

28. I would.

Provided there were no issues of ground water spreading nuclear waste into adjacent non-Native areas, in that example.

And I do support the Makah whale hunt.

In fact, I don't see why you think it should be anybody else's business but theirs.

[countryjake]

30. Not to mention, one sanctioned whale hunt in seventy yrs...

does not equate to "hunt dozens of whales for international trade". I doubt there are any people in this entire country who respect, relate to, and actually live with the whales, more than the Makah people.

[Iktomiwicasa]

31. The whale is the Makah people's buffalo.

And they should have their annual tribal hunts.

[countryjake]

32. Did you know about this...

YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK CAPTURES 53 OF AMERICA'S LAST WILD BISON to eat
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2843050&mesg_id=2843050


Seems the USA is rather picky about what it considers sacred or protected, eh?

[Iktomiwicasa]

33. Yeah

We've fought to protect those buffs, but the PTB won't listen to us.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. don't forget to explain what a "reservation" is

As I understand it, a reservation is lands of a tribe that they have reserved to themselves rather than cede to the US government. In other words, the reservation land has never technically been a part of the United States. It is on this basis that I chose the option that gives tribes full sovereignty, without oversight from the US government.

[Warpy]

7. It's also less than they need to sustain them

and that's why they get Federal food allotments and other subsidies. However you feel about gambling, the casinos they've opened because they're not subject to state gambling laws have been a godsend to the tribes and to the community. The money those casinos take in is recirculated as long needed public works projects are done on the rez.

Around here, some casinos also offer help for gambling addicts they spot. They want to make money, but not to the point of destroying people.

Mostly, they're self governing. They have lawyers versed in both tribal and western law who handle disputes between tribal members and the larger society.

The only time the Feds interfere with their legal system is in murder cases. Property, marriage, inheritance, and other law is handled internally.

You can always tell when some state bureaucrat has thrown his weight around a little too much. A tribe will set up a roadblock on a state road going through its land and start collecting tolls. The bureaucrat always backs off.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

21. I know the Choctaw Nation has benefitted greatly

by the casinos, and more power to them. A friend of mine whose path is the Red Road is an engineer, and he's gone down to the rez and helped with building low cost housing. Funds came from casinos. When we last came through OK, we stopped at the Cherokee Nation's fueling stop near the casino. What I liked was that they also had a museum there so that people could become a little more aware of Cherokee culture if they were so inclined. Only wish my husband's grandmother had had papers, but it wasn't cool to be Cherokee in 1900, and so she passed as "Black Dutch".

[InkAddict]

18. Don't feel educated well enough to vote here, but...

I was under the impression that the USA claimed eminent domain over all land and reservations were 'ceded back to the tribal nations by treaty. It was also my impression that these lands were possibly the most geographically unliveable areas in the US, partially due to the Native American need to be "apart" from mainstream American political/governmental culture and practice, and partly due to educational/occupational discrimination and exploitation by American political/governmental culture and practice.

Not being up on this, sometimes, I get the impression that the long-suffering Native Americans are very like the neo-suffering Palestinians, underground funding not withstanding. Then, I go back and consider just who has been suffering longest, which grudge-matches have stood the tests of time, and whether, in terms of "sovereignity," the analogy of peoples governing themselves in ways that seem best to them can even be applied cooperatively and without exploitations, comfortable or not, for very long.

[Vincardog]

3. What part of sovereign government don't ya get?

[Iktomiwicasa]

15. Huh?

I am an advocate of full tribal sovereignty. I don't understand your post.

[Vincardog]

17. My point is how does the USA dare to dictate to sovereign nations what form of governance to have?

[Iktomiwicasa]

19. Ok

got it. Thanks.

[Greyhound]

4. I think option 1 is the obvious choice and the fact that we have denied

you the choice by reneging on every deal we made is criminal.

[Blue_In_AK]

5. I would vote for #1 with one caveat...

Are you proposing to do away with such federal agencies as the Indian Health Service? I could see this as being potentially disastrous for at least Alaska's Natives who otherwise would have very little access to medical care out in the villages. If you are going to eliminate all federal oversight and involvement, you might be throwing out the baby with the bathwater as the saying goes.

[Iktomiwicasa]

6. Your question leads to my next poll

which I will post tomorrow.

[Blue_In_AK]

9. Oh, good.

I'm glad these things are being discussed. Native issues are a big deal up here, probably not so much down in the Lower 48.

Incidentally, are you aware of one of Alaska's Democratic candidates for U.S. House, Diane Benson? She is Tlingit and if elected will be (as far as I know) the first American Indian woman in the House. We supported her in 2006 when she ran a 100% grassroots campaign (with no help from the national party, by the way) and still got 40% of the votes against Don Young - a 32-year incumbent with millions in his campaign warchest.
Check her out here -- she is a very impressive candidate.

http://www.bensonforcongress.com/

ed. By the way, if you go to her site and click on the link about the open house at her campaign headquarters, I myself took the big, beautiful photograph that appears there. :)

[Blue State Bandit]

8. Considering the fact that America's governing structure borrowed...

heavily from the traditional Tribal Council structure (Nation/State hence United States), there should be no problem with tribes forming their own style of governance. Furthermore, any such federal oversight should be passive in nature, with jurisdiction ONLY in times of dire national security situations such as foreign invasions or natural disasters.

And an apology from the wasechews for the Carlisle school would be nice.

[uppityperson]

12. "American" gvt borrowed from Tribal Council, now is forcing this on tribes?

"However, the government mandates that each tribe adopt an "american" form of government via elected tribal councils."
I am confused.

[Iktomiwicasa]

13. Your confusion

is a result of me not being clear. In the case of my people specifically, we have a system of traditional chiefs who are chiefs by consensus of the people. They carry no power to compel anyone to do anything they do not want to do, yet are followed because of respect for their wisdom and experience. They are not set in a position "over" the people, rather, they are right in with all the people. If a chief gives poor advice or acts in an unwise manner, he is no longer a chief...the people will listen to someone else. These are the true leaders of the traditional people on my reservation, yet they are unable to affect tribal policy because they aren't part of the mandated political system of tribal councils (corrupt politicians who sell out their own people at the bidding of the government). We have been trying for years to re-institute our traditional chiefs as the leaders of our people, but the government says we can't, for the very simple reason they cannot control our chiefs.

[RuleOfNah]

20. I went with 1.

1. Tribes should be able to govern themselves without interference from Federal, State, or Local governments

However, without interference is a pipe dream. Everything influences everything.

Are we talking honoring treaties? I think they should be honored. I'm not naive enough to think they will be and yet remain compelled to remind others of their history.

[Orsino]

16. I want everyone to live with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

I would hope to have the courage to fight anyone who would take them away from me in the name of sovereignty. Or in the name of anything else.

A nation, however, that did a better job than mine at guaranteeing those liberties could win my loyalty.

(So I had to choose "some oversight," not being too thrilled these days by my federal government.)

[puerco-bellies]

22. Tribes should have the Government of their own making.

But that Government should not have the right to sell the tribes land/rights/assets. A puppet government could sell out the tribe. There is more here then a simplistic answer.

[countryjake]

23. kick

[Iktomiwicasa]

24. bump for the weekday crowd: nt

[countryjake]

25. and bumping again! Funny how this poll has gotten so few responders...

compared to your first poll. Strange.

[Iktomiwicasa]

26. No mystery

to me :)

[countryjake]

27. Well ya, not to me either...

but you'd think that those 150 or so from the first who expressed concern might feel obligated to vote here, too.

It does pretty much exemplify why Indians have never had a chance dealing with the USA, I guess.

[Arctic Dave]

29. you are asking great questions

I would have liked to see to see an option of working together. History tells that the Federal Government has never had a problem with screwing over the indigenous peoples. However if the two could ally themselves I believe ot could definitely help the tribal peoples. Alaska has somewhat proved this by the native corporations rise of political and financial power. Which I say, good for them.

[Book Lover]

34. Another kick

Because I am very interested in seeing what further polls Iktomiwicasa has for us.

[Iktomiwicasa]

36. I'll have another one up late this afternoon, eom

[RuleOfNah]

44. Third poll.

Did I miss it?

[Iktomiwicasa]

50. Sorry, no...

...I haven't put it up yet. I've been pretty busy and should have it this evening.

[Kurovski]

35. Kick. (nt)

[Freddie Stubbs]

37. Should Tribes be free to ignore federal labor laws?

NLRB hearing on Foxwoods union election ends; ruling due in March

January 29, 2008

HARTFORD, Conn. --After several days of testimony, a National Labor Relations Board hearing over a union vote at Foxwoods Casino has wrapped up.

The casino owners, the Mashantucket Pequots, filed complaints with the NLRB after dealers voted 1,289 to 852 in favor of a union represented by the United Auto Workers. The tribe challenged the validity of the election on several fronts.

The tribe claimed the UAW intimidated workers as it sought to unionize them. The union has denied those claims.

The NLRB oversaw the Nov. 24 election and the Pequots also contended ballots and election notices were not printed in the Chinese spoken by about 700 of the dealers. The Pequots also tried to argue that federal rule does not apply to tribal sovereignty and the tribe's gambling business.

more: http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2008/01/29/nlrb_hearing_on_foxwoods_union_election_ends_ruling_due_in_march/

[Iktomiwicasa]

38. The question you are asking is really

"Why isn't the mainstream dominant culture allowed to rule a sovereign indian nation?"

Give us some credit, we DO have the ability to work things out for ourselves.

[Chovexani]

46. Oh don't you know

Those silly red children need the white man to give them labor laws. :eyes:

Man I've never seen so much White Man's Burden BS in my life.

[Iktomiwicasa]

51. That part of the problem

Many people still view us as half witted children.

[Book Lover]

47. Wouldn't a better question be

why is the auto workers union organizing casino workers?

[TCJ70]

39. I voted #1

I was talking with a friend of mine the other day and she said, like she couldn't believe it, "Did you know that people who live in reservations don't get to vote?"

I said, "Why would they? I don't think the reservations are really US territory. They're set apart for the tribes and they govern themselves."

After a lot of arguing, she still wouldn't believe me. As long as that land is set apart, they should be able to govern themselves.

[ceile]

40. kick n/t

[ismnotwasm]

41. Govern themselves

Native Americans CAN'T be fully "paid back" for what they've lost, for what was stolen, for what was sold. The Federal government, whereever possible, should follow treaty law. (I've read a few original treaties. Interesting stuff, don't you think?) The Federal government should provide funds as owed by law, for whatever was used, stolen, brokered, arranged, bargained, bought, or sold. They need to pay. I want "my tax dollars" (my favorite knee jerk phrase)to go toward this payment, absoulutely.

The Federal government should mind it's own business when it comes to Nations and their own governance.

[EFerrari]

42. Too late to rec but can kick

[BeHereNow]

43. Kick

BHN

[Chovexani]

45. Full and complete sovereignty

Nothing more and nothing less.

[conspirator]

48. Who are the fascists who didn't vote for option #1? n/t

[NuttyFluffers]

49. kickity kick

:kick: