. . .. . . ============================================================== Start of Phil Konstantin’s September 2005 Newsletter – Part 1 ============================================================== Greetings, I hope things are going well with all of you. Thanks to all of you who sent congratulatory messages to my son for his college graduation. It was a big day for all of us. My daughter Sarah will be participating in the annual walk for Arthritis. Sarah has had arthritis for many years. If you would like to help her raise some money, you can visit this website. https://www.kintera.org/faf/donorReg/donorPledge.asp?ievent=99055&supId=76660529 Early Monday morning, I will be having a procedure to rectify a herniated disc. That is the nice way to say I am having spine surgery. The operation should last a little over an hour and I'll be in recovery for about five hours. While I am aware of the overwhelming number of people who undergo general anesthesia with no ill-effects, I have never liked the idea. The operation does not worry me (too much), it is just the waking up afterward. This particular procedure involves my C4 & C5 discs. They have to come in through the front of my neck to reach the right spot. Fortunately, I have a wrinkle in my neck, already. The 2 inch scar should fit inside the wrinkle. Hey, who said wrinkles can't be your friend? ~~|:-) The doctor told me to take 10 days off from work. I don't know if I should be concerned, but he gave me 3 bottles of pain medicine & an icepack. My daughters (Heidi & Sarah) will be looking after me while I recover. It might be a while before I can reply to any e-mails. I was going to say something about it having been an honor to have so many people subscribing to my newsletters just in case something goes wrong during the surgury. But, that would just scare my parents & kids who read this newsletter. So, that's just between us, OK? Truthfully, I do not expect any significant problems other than getting bored & withdrawl symptoms from lack of computer access. There is lots of material in this newsletter. Enjoy, Phil ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== The "Link of the Month" for September 2005 is "The University of Virginia Library Etext Center." While the website has LOTS of material on many subjects, it has an interesting offering of older texts related to American Indian subjects. It features essays by Henry Dawes (as in the commission of the same name), Charles Alexander Eastman (Ohiyesa), Grant Foreman, George Bird Grinnell, General O.O. Howard, John G. Neihardt, Zitkala-Sa and even Calamity Jane. You will find transcriptions of their original works. The material makes for some interesting reading. It might help you in some reasearch or getting a feeling for the time. http://etext.virginia.edu/subjects/Native-American.html ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== The Treaty of the month is the AGREEMENT WITH THE SENECA, 1797. Sept. 15, 1797. | 7 Stat., 601. It was a "Contract between Robert Morris and the Senecas. Robert Morris to vest $100,000 in bank stock for use of the Senecas, etc. Boundary of the lands sold to Robert Morris. Reservations to the Senecas." See a transcript here: http://digital.library.okstate.edu/kappler/Vol2/treaties/sen1027.htm ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== In my last newsletter, I passed along a question from a non-Indian friend who was curious as to how Indians felt about non-Indians writing stories with Indian characters. I received a few replies, all of which seemed to say that honesty and integrity were more important than a person’s ancestry. I thought I would post one of the replies: Hi Phil, Tell your friend to look up Tony Hillerman on the Internet. I believe he has a site, as he is very popular non-native author who wrote several Navajo reservation based novels that have been made into movies. "Skins" was one of them and featured Adam Beach, Michael Greyeyes, and Wes Studi. The Navajo nation has honored Hillerman with a special award for honoring them realistically in his writings. Hillerman, like your friend, has done careful research and does his best to honor respected traditions of the Navajos and their culture in a modern setting. I thought the movies were great, and the bookstores here in Albuquerque, NM are filled with his novels. People love his stuff around here. I work at the Pueblo Cultural Museum, which is run by the 19 pueblo tribes in the Rio Grande Valley and they carry all his novels in a lard selection. Hope this helps, as I think you said it all when you remarked that your friend has her spirit in the right spot. That counts for a lot in my opinion. Warm Regards, Linda DuMoulin Tlinglet/Choctaw,/Pueblo ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Many of you may have heard about the NCAA’s decision to not allow teams with American Indian mascots to participate in post season playoffs. Here are some details of that ruling. NCAA Executive Committee Issues Guidelines for Use of Native American Mascots at Championship Events http://www2.ncaa.org/media_and_events/press_room/2005/august/20050805_exec_comm_rls.html NCAI Applauds NCAA Decision to Ban Use of Indian Mascots in Postseason Activities http://188.8.131.52/ncai/index.jsp ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== News stories: Leupp Navajos protest C-aquifer water slurry deal http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096411289 Tribes lobby to end land dispute http://www.daily-times.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=159&num=19446 Study looks at historic site protocol http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096411102 The good, the bad, and the ugly; Opportunities and pitfalls of military base realignments http://www.kumeyaay.com/news/news_detail.html?id=3199 This isn't rocket science 08/25/2005 - INDIAN COUNTRYby: Suzan Shown Harjo http://www.kumeyaay.com/news/news_detail.html?id=3201 The Hualapai Nation Unveils All-New Destination Experience at Grand Canyon West http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/hualapai/22562/ Natives must educate America, or perish http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6505026&&CM=EmailThis The next major leader to come from Tahlequah? http://mytwobeadsworth.com/Tahlequahleader705.html ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== An excerpt from a book by Bill Linde (firstname.lastname@example.org): Opothle Yoholo From: "History of the Indian Tribes of North America" By: McKenny & Hall, Philadelphia 1854 (Commencing on Page 281 and concluding on Page 294) The last homes of the Creek Indians, on the eastern side of the Mississippi, was in Georgia and Alabama, from which, in conformity with the provisions of a treaty with the United States, made in 1832, they emigrated in 1836-7. They were divided into what were called the Upper and Lower towns, the former of which were situated upon the banks, and among the tributaries of the Tallapossa and Coosa rivers. Over these towns the Big Warrior was chief, under whom Opothle Yoholo held the rank of principal councilor, or speaker of the councils, over which presided with great dignity. His influence was so great that the questions submitted to the council were generally decided according to his will, for the Indians, considering him as the organ of their chief, supposed he only spoke as he was directed. The great council-house of the Upper towns was at Tuckabatchee, where the Big Warrior resided, and near which was the residence of Opothle Yoholo. We have, in the biography of McIntosh, pointed out the singularly embarrassing circumstances in which the Creeks were placed at this time. The United States, by a compact made with Georgia, when the limits of that state comprehended the territory which afterwards was formed into the state of Alabama, became bound to remove all the Indians within the boundaries of Georgia, whenever it could be done peaceably. To comply with this engagement, and to fulfil a benevolent policy, having for it object the civilization of the Indians, and the securing to them a permanent home, the United States set apart a fertile and extensive tract of wilderness, beyond the Mississippi, upon which they proposed to settle the several remnants of tribes that still lingered within the states, and were becoming demoralized and destroyed by contact with a race with whom they could not amalgamate. Unhappily, some of the tribes were not willing to emigrate, an among them the Creeks. The pledge of the government to remove them, although qualified by the condition, "when it could be peaceably effected," was yet to be at some time redeemed; and while the Creeks were, on the one hand, averse to the removal, the more intelligent among them saw, upon the other, that the existence of such a compact doomed them to an exile, which, although it might be delayed, could not be avoided. Year after year the government, to redeem its promise to Georgia, sent commissioners to purchase from the Creeks their lands, who as often returned unsuccessful, or succeeded only in part, while the inhabitants of Georgia and Alabama discovered a disposition to resort to more urgent measures, and frequent collisions between the white people and the Indians were the unhappy consequence. The Creeks themselves became divided; McIntosh, the head chief of the Lower towns, advocating the removal, and the Big Warrior, who ruled the Upper towns, opposing that measure. The Little Prince, an aged chief, who ruled the whole nation, was willing to leave the question to those whom it immediately concerned. In 1824, Messrs. Campbell and Merriwether were sent by the government to effect this long-desired purchase, and held an ineffectual treaty at a place called the Broken Arrow, where they found a few of the chiefs willing to yield to their views, but others so decidedly opposed, that, forgetting the grave and decorous courtesy which usually prevails in their solemn councils, they would give no other answer than a sullen, but emphatic "No." The deputy of the Big Warrior said, that he would not take a house-full of money for his interest in the land, and that this was his final answer. Failing in their object, the commissioners called another council, to meet at the Indian Springs, in February, 1825. Pervious to this period, little is known of the character of Opothle Yoholo, except that he was considered, in early life, a youth of promise. The first public service in which he distinguished himself, was at the council at the Indian Springs, to which he was sent to counteract the influence of McIntosh, and to remonstrate with him against selling any part of the Creek country. It is said that he executed this mission with great fidelity; he pursued his object with unyielding firmness, and his remonstrances were marked with energy and eloquence. The substance of his address to the commissioners was as follows: "We met you at the Broken Arrow, and then told you we had no land to sell. I heard then of no claim against our nation, nor have I heard of any since. We have met you here upon a very short notice, and I do not think the chiefs present have any authority to treat. General McIntosh knows that we are bound by our laws, and that what is not done in public council, is not binding. Can the council be public if all the chiefs have not had notice, and many of them are absent? I am, therefore, under the necessity of repeating what I told you at the Broken Arrow, that we have no lands to sell. No part of our lands can be sold except in full council, and be consent of the whole nation. This not a full council; there are but few here from the Upper towns, and of the chiefs of the Lower towns many are absent. From what you told us yesterday, I am inclined to think it would be best for us to remove; but we must have time to think of it, and to consult our people. Should the chiefs now here undertake to sell our country, it would cause dissension and ill blood among ourselves, for there are many who do not know that we have been invited here for that purpose, and many who would not consent it, if they were here. I have received a message from my head chief; the Big Warrior, directing me to listen to what the commissioners have to say--to meet and part with them in peace--but not to sell any land. I am also instructed to invite you to meet us at the Broken Arrow three months hence, when a treaty may be finally made. I gave you but one speech at the Broken Arrow, and I give you but one here. Tomorrow I return home. I have delivered the message of my head chief, and have no more to say. I shall listen to whatever you may think proper to communicate, but shall make no further answer." This speech was delivered with the calmness and dignity becoming the occasion; respectful to the commissioners, yet decisive in tone and language, it was the refusal of a little band of untutored men, confident of right, to the demand of a powerful nation. All that was fiery and alarming was reserved for McIntosh, who was supposed to have already promised to accede to the proposed transfer. Turning to that ill-fated chief, with an eye full of meaning, he extended his arm towards him, and in the low, bitter tone of prophetic menace, he added, "I have told you your fate if you sign that paper. I once more say, beware!" On the following morning, he left the Indian Springs, and returned to Tuckabatchee. McIntosh persisted in his determination to sell the country, signed the treaty, and, as we have narrated in another place, paid the penalty with his life. Arrangements were soon after made to send a deputation of chiefs to Washington, to protest, in the name of the Creek nation, against the execution of the treaty of the Indian Springs, and to conclude one which should be more acceptable. Opothleyoholo was placed at the head of this deputation, and proceeded with his colleagues to the seat of government. In all the negotiations connected with that exciting occasion, he conducted himself with great dignity and firmness, and displayed talents of a superior order. He was cool, cautious, and sagacious; and with a tact which would have done credit to a more refined diplomatist, refused to enter into any negotiation until the offensive treaty of the Indian Springs should be annulled. The executive being satisfied that the treaty had not been made with the consent of the nation. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== E-mails from subscribers: Hello My name is Christine, I am French. I need some information about an Apache man, a Chiricahua. I don’t know his full name (may be Louis or Luis), he ‘s around 60 years old, and he made the Vietnam War. He was leaving around TUCSON, with an apache community, (around 100 persons in 1970) , the language he talks is Athapasque. He is connected to an other man called Gethro Grible (Sky eyes a horse breaker) who did in 1970 (who fought too in Vietnam). His sister still leaving, her name is SONSEEAHRAY Grible (and her mother TESALBESTINAY). The man I am looking for still in contact with SKY (Gethro Grible) family. If you have any information, telephone number, address, about these persons, thanks to contact me email@example.com or 184.108.40.206.04.46 I’ll call you back to take the cost of the phone call in my charge. The reason I need to reach this man: I’ll go to visit him in October to talk about SKY. Thanks a lot for your help Christine Farrougia ------------- Aboriginal Planning, Compensation and Negotiation Issues
The purpose of this brief note is to share some innovations in applied research and analysis from experience in Alberta, Canada. As in the States and elsewhere around the world, one of the key aboriginal issues regarding land use (internally, with other levels of government, private sector development) is the issue of aboriginal values, and incorporating these values into negotiation discussions affecting land use and compensation. Values in general, especially in terms of compensation, are too often referred to in only market terms. Or, on the contrary, aboriginal values never make it past the stories and narrative descriptions provided by aboriginal elders. However, changes or losses of non-market values experienced by aboriginal peoples, due to economic development or other adverse impacts on their land or resource, is recognized as important and worthy of thoughtful integration. What we have found is that, unfortunately, the standard methods of economic valuation as a basis for determining compensation, or for structuring negotiations, are not always suited to addressing the diverse values of aboriginal people. In an upcoming paper to be published in Ecological Economics “Resource compensation and negotiation support in an aboriginal context”, myself and Dr. McDaniels explore how an approach to valuation that employs concepts and methods of decision analysis, informed by behavioral decision research, in an applied context can be used to provide key insight (and often specific dollar values) to these types of discussions. In practice, we have successfully used this participatory, community-based, multi-attribute value assessment as a foundation for characterizing the relative significance of changes to resources (i.e., damages) that affect deeply held, complex, intangible values of aboriginal groups. We have developed an approach that allows for the oral histories and oral evidence of aboriginal groups (particularly from elders) to be combined with contemporary modeling techniques. The goal is to clarify values for the purpose of compensation, mitigation and negotiation. It encourages community members to reflect on what is important to them and open creative pathways of discussion. For losses already incurred, it assists communities with recognizing what they have gained and lost in order to determine net compensation. For future negotiations, it serves as a way to help communities to recognize what they have, what they want, and how to get it. For more information or to find out how to get a copy of the paper contact: William Trousdale, MAP, AICP, MCIP President EPI EcoPlan International, Inc. 208-131 Water Street Vancouver BC V6B 4M3 Phone: 604-228-1855 Fax: 604-228-1892 e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org web: www.ecoplanintl.com --------------------- Hi Phil, I have been to your web-site before and find it very interesting and enjoy it. I am writing to get some attention on a growing injustice against American Indians across the country, especially in California. My name is Carla Foreman-Masln and I am also American Indian. I am of the Achumawi band of Pit River and have been involved with my tribe which is the Redding Rancheria since it was re-recognized in 1983. This is a tribe of made up of the Wintu, Yana and Pit River Indians who resided on the 30 acres of land in Redding, California. My father was the first Tribal Chairman elected due to the fact he has helped bring healthcare to the Indian community in the early 1970's when no Indians were able to receive care. Some had never been to a dentist. After California tribes were allowed to have gaming on their land and became self sufficient, some of these tribes started removing their members claiming that they did not belong because of any reason, you name it. And there is no recourse for the removed members, because they are "sovereign nations". 76 members of my family and I were removed from our tribal rolls last year and the courts are not getting involved. We have numerous articles written on our situation and we have formed a coalition with others who have been abandoned and deserted by their tribes due to greed and corruption. We are holding a Rally on California Indian Day, September 23, 2005, 11:00 - 3:00. We need more people to get this story out as this is affecting so many Indian people, including elders and children. It is too much for any human being to bear. When we hear these stories in other countries we make it news, but we minimize the issues regarding our first nation's people. We are trying to get people to cover this event as this is becoming rampant. It is the new genocide. We have a flyer and press release I will email you and we are selling "Stop Tribal Disenrollment" T-shirts for $10.00 a piece and all proceeds go towards the cause. Amnesty International is going to help us out. IPlease respond to this email and I can get you more information as we are searching for hope. Thank you. Carla Foreman-Maslin, Disenrolled Member of the Redding Rancheria Tribe email@example.com EarthLink Revolves Around You. --------------------- hi yes, it is very nice mellow music, the lady writes performs everyhting herself and also does the arrang,ents for it, very talented. her name is cherokee rose and she is cherokee/irish/african american. she came over to englamd for the world music festival were she performed to enthousiastic crowds. i have a lot of her Cds as she left them with me in lieu of payment. i can sell them cheap. let me know what you think i am very grateful for your recation. i work with a radio station over here, radio caroline, have a look, you can hear it on the net too> www.radiocaroline.co.uk thanks elija --------------------- Hello: I am seeking a small group (4-5) Native American re-enactors to set up a teepee and participate in friendly interaction with families on a Mormon Family Handcart Trek re-enactment in Ventura County, Southern California. Thank you, Donna DCuilfirstname.lastname@example.org --------------------- I looked at your fascinating site. Just wanted to inform you of a new book that will be out in October - Buffalo Calf Road Woman. It based on the true story of the Cheyenne warrior woman for whom the Indians named the Battle of the Rosebud - The Battle Where the Girl Saved Her Brother. She also fought Custer at the Little Bighorn. In about a week, our website with information will be available: BuffaloCalfRoadWoman.com. Do you do book reviews in your news letter? Thanks, Rosemary Agonito co-author Buffalo Calf Road Woman --------------------- From Ruth: PLEASE CONSIDER VOTING on the NCAA's decision to ban Indian names and mascots during the postseason. Please send to all of your contacts and encourage them to vote 'yes'. The 'Nos' are leading by a huge percentage!!! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8838667/ Also from Kispoko: Go to NBC website and consider voting for JIM THORPE AS GREATEST AMERICAN ATHLETE!!! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8620193/ ----------------------- From N.A.S.A. (student group) You are invited to a Robert J. Conley Book signing with Arigon Starr performing her songs. Robert J. Conely, (Cherokee), author & past Cherokee Nation Historian and Arigon Starr (Kickapoo/Creek) Songstress WHEN & WHERE!!! October 8th, 2005, from 1 to 5 pm at the Orange Unified School District Board Room, 1401 N. Handy St., Orange 92867 Northeast corner of Handy St. & Katella Ave. reference map, http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?addr=1401+N.+Handy+St&csz=92867&country=us&new=1&name=&qty= Robert Conley will have his two latest releases with him: Cherokee Medicine Man ~ The Life and Work of a Modern Day Healer, published by University of Oklahoma Press, and Cherokee Nation: A History, published by the University of New Mexico Press Cherokee Nation; A history is the only Cherokee history book that has been endorsed by the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. Arigon Starr will sing her newest songs. --------------------- From Ruth: Inhalant abuse http://www.snopes.com/toxins/dustoff.asp This is a valuable true story that might help you recognize potential, deadly abuse. Please pass it on. --------------------- The National Indian Health Board (NIHB) is seeking nominations for the NIHB Annual Awards to be presented during the 22nd Annual Consumer Conference in Phoenix, AZ on October 16-19, 2005. Each year NIHB recognizes individuals and organizations that have made a significant contribution to promoting the health needs of American Indian and Alaska Native people. http://www.nihb.org/staticpages/index.php?page=200403301344379533 --------------------- Pathways 2006: Cultural Intersections in Native North America The Yale Group for the Study of Native America invites submissions for an upcoming conference- Pathways 2006: Cultural Intersections in Native North America to be held April 7-9, 2006 in New Haven, CT. The goals of this conference are: to provide a comfortable forum for graduate students working at the intersection of American Indian or Alaska Native Studies and other Ethnic and Area Studies, such as African American Studies, Asian American Studies, and Latin American Studies, to share their work, and to foster student-to-student and student-to-professional relationships by encouraging networking and community-building for those working across traditional disciplinary boundaries. Areas of study may include but are not limited to: History, Literature and Theatre Studies, Anthropology, Law and Policy, and the Arts. Papers may present a portion of the student's original research, demonstrate emergent theoretical and methodological approaches, or advance pedagogical strategies for reaching students across departmental divides. Individual papers rather than panels are preferred. We are especially desirous of papers that demonstrate and discuss emergent approaches in the study of Native North America, and/or those that demonstrate an active involvement with Native communities. In order to foster a regionally diverse community of graduate student presenters, travel expenses will be paid for students whose papers are selected. CVs and abstracts of *no more than one page* should be submitted by October 15, 2005 to: email@example.com or Pathways 2006 c/o Rosalinda Garcia Yale College Dean's Office P.O. Box 208241 New Haven, CT 06520-8241 For more information, please visit our website: www.yale.edu/ygsna/pathways --------------------- From my cousin Wauhilau a worthy historical cause...... http://www.thebeckmill.org/index.html ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Here is a transcript of a bill to establish a “Wounded Knee National Tribal Park.” Becasue fo the way it is written, there may be several gaps in the letters, 104th CONGRESS 1st Session To establish a Wounded Knee National Tribal Park, and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES February 9 (legislative day, January 30), 1995 Mr. Daschle (for himself, Mr. Pressler, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Simon, Mr. Pell, and Mr. Dorgan) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs A BILL To establish a Wounded Knee National Tribal Park, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Wounded Knee National Tribal Park Establishment Act of 1995'. SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. (a) Findings: The Congress finds that-- (1) in December of 1890, approximately 350 to 375 Sioux men, women, and children under the leadership of Chief Big foot journeyed from the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation at the invitation of Chief Red Cloud to help make peace between the non-Indians and Indians; (2) the journey of Chief Big Foot and his band of Minneconjou Sioux occurred during the Ghost Dance Religion period when extreme hostility existed between Sioux Indians and non-Indians residing near the Sioux reservations, and the United States Army assumed control of the Sioux reservations; (3) Chief Big Foot and his band were intercepted on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation at Porcupine Butte by Major Whitside, surrendered unconditionally under a white flag of truce, and were escorted to Wounded Knee Creek, where Colonel Forsyth assumed command; (4) on December 29, 1890, an incident occurred in which soldiers under the command of General Forsyth killed and wounded over 300 members of the band of Chief Big Foot, most all of whom were unarmed and entitled to protection of their rights to property, person, and life under Federal law; (5) the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre is a historically significant event because the event marks the last military encounter of the Indian wars period of the 19th century; (6) in S. Con. Res. 153 (101st Cong., 2d Sess.), Congress apologized to the Sioux people for the 1890 Massacre; (7)(A) paragraph (2) of such concurrent resolution provides that Congress `expresses its support for the establishment of a suitable and appropriate Memorial to those who were so tragically slain at Wounded Knee which could inform the American public of the historic significance of the events at Wounded Knee and accurately portray the heroic and courageous campaign waged by the Sioux people to preserve and protect their lands and their way of life during this period'; and (B) paragraph (3) of such concurrent resolution provides that Congress `expresses its commitment to acknowledge and learn from our history, including the Wounded Knee Massacre, in order to provide a proper foundation for building an ever more humane, enlightened, and just society for the future'; (8) the Wounded Knee Massacre site, and sites relating to the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre and Ghost Dance Religion on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation and Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, are nationally significant cultural and historic sites that must be protected through the designation of the sites as a national tribal park; and (9) the Wounded Knee Massacre is a nationally significant event that must be memorialized by establishing suitable and appropriate memorials to the Indian victims of the Massacre, located on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation and Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. (b) Purposes: The purposes of this Act are to-- (1) establish the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park consisting of-- (A) sites relating to the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre and Ghost Dance Religion located on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation; and (B) the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre Site and sites relating to the Massacre and Ghost Dance Religion located on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation; (2) establish suitable and appropriate national monuments within both units of the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park to memorialize the Indian victims of the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre; and (3) authorize feasibility studies to-- (A) establish the route of Chief Big Foot from the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation to Wounded Knee as a national historic trail; and (B) establish a visitor information and orientation center on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation. SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Act: (1) Commission: The term `Commission' means the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park Advisory Commission established under section 8(a). (2) North unit: The term `North Unit' means the area of the Park comprised of the sites referred to in section 2(b)(1)(A). (3) Park: The term `Park' means the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park established under section 4. (4) Real property: For the purposes of this Act, the term `real property' includes lands, and all mineral rights, water rights, easements, permanent structures, and fixtures on such lands. (5) Secretary: The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Interior. (6) South unit: The term `South Unit' means the area of the Park comprised of the sites referred to in section 2(b)(1)(B). SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF WOUNDED KNEE NATIONAL TRIBAL PARK. (a) Establishment: (1) In general: The Secretary shall establish a national tribal park to be known as the `Wounded Knee National Tribal Park', as generally described in the third alternative of the report completed by the National Park Service entitled `Draft Study of Alternatives, Environmental Assessment, Wounded Knee, South Dakota,' and dated January 1993, and as more particularly described in this Act. (2) Area included in park: The Wounded Knee National Tribal Park shall consist of-- (A) a North Unit that may include-- (i) such sites relating to the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre and Ghost Dance Religion, including the campsite of Chief Big Foot at Deep Creek, as the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, in consultation with the Director of the National Park Service, considers necessary to include in such unit; (ii) a cultural center and museum complex; (iii) projects described in section 9(b)(2); and (iv) a suitable and appropriate national monument to memorialize Chief Big Foot and his band of Minneconjou Sioux; and (B) a South Unit that may include-- (i) the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre site, as generally described in the 1990 boundaries studies authorized by the National Park Service, and such other sites relating to the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre and Ghost Dance Religion as the Oglala Sioux Tribe, in consultation with the Director of the National Park Service, considers necessary to include in such Unit; (ii) a cultural center and museum complex at or near the Wounded Knee Massacre site; (iii) projects described in section 9(b)(2); and (iv) a suitable and appropriate national monument to memorialize the Sioux Indians involved in the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre. (b) Cooperative Agreements: (1) In general: The Secretary shall enter into a cooperative agreement with each of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe with respect to the North Unity, and Oglala Sioux Tribe with respect to the South Unit to carry out planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and replacement activities, as appropriate, for the units. (2) Requirements for cooperative agreements: A cooperative agreement entered into under paragraph (1) shall set forth, in a manner acceptable to the Secretary-- (A)(i) the responsibilities of the parties referred to in paragraph (1) with respect to the North Unit and the South Unit; and (ii) the manner in which contracts to carry out such activities will be administered; (B) the procedures and requirements for the approval and acceptance of the design of, and construction of the North Unit and South Unit; (C) such Federal management policies described in the publication entitled `Management Policies, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1988' as the Secretary considers necessary to qualify both units of the Park for affiliation; (D) a general management plan for each unit of the Park that shall include plans-- (i) to protect and preserve the religious sanctity of the Wounded Knee Massacre site and other religious sites located within each unit; (ii) to restore the Wounded Knee Massacre site, and other important historic sites located within the units, to the original condition of the sites at the time of the Massacre, including the removal of all buildings and structures that have no historical significance; (iii) for the enactment of tribal zoning ordinances to protect areas surrounding each unit from commercial development and exploitation; (iv) for the implementation of a continuing program of public involvement, interpretation, and visitor education concerning Lakota Sioux history and culture within each unit; (v) to protect, interpret, and preserve important archaological and paleontological sites within each unit; (vi) for visitor use facilities, and the training and employing of tribal members within each unit, as provided in subsection (e); and (vii) to waive or require entrance fees at the Wounded Knee Massacre site; and (E) the role and responsibilities of the Advisory Commission established under section 8(a) in relation to both units. (c) Title: (1) Property acquired for the north unit: Title to all real property acquired for the North Unit of the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park shall be held in trust by the United States for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. (2) Property acquired for the south unit: Title to all real property acquired in the South Unit of the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park shall be held in trust by the United States for the Oglala Sioux Tribe. (d) Technical Assistance: (1) In general: The Secretary may provide technical assistance to the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Oglala Sioux Tribe for carrying out the activities described in subsection (b)(1). (2) Training: In addition to providing the assistance described in paragraph (1), the Secretary may train and employ members of the tribes concerning the operation and maintenance of both units, including training in-- (A) the provision of public services, management of visitor use facilities, interpretation and visitor education on Sioux history and culture, and artifact curation at both units; and (B) the interpretation, management, protection, and preservation of other historical and natural properties at both units. (e) Application of the Indian Self-Determination Act: Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the activities described in subsection (b)(1) shall be subject to the Indian Self-Determination Act (25 U.S.C. 450f et seq.). SEC. 5. ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR WOUNDED KNEE NATIONAL TRIBAL PARK. (a) In General: The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Oglala Sioux Tribe may acquire by purchase from a willing seller, by gift or devise, by exchange, or in other manner-- (1) surface and subsurface rights to any tract of fee-patented or trust land; or (2) easements that cover such lands, that those tribes, in consultation with the Secretary, consider necessary for inclusion in the North Unit or the South Unit of the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park. (b) Financial Assistance: The Secretary may provide financial assistance to the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Oglala Sioux Tribe to acquire land and any interest in land or other real property that is necessary for a unit of the Park. SEC. 6. MANAGEMENT. (a) Management of North Unit: (1) In general: The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, or designated agency or authority of that tribe, shall operate, maintain, and manage the North Unit pursuant to the terms and conditions contained in a cooperative agreement between the Secretary and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe entered into by the Secretary and the tribe pursuant to section 4(b). (2) Exclusion: The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe shall have no jurisdiction or authority over the South Unit. (b) Management of South Unit: (1) In general: The Oglala Sioux Tribe, or a designated agency or authority of such tribe, shall operate, maintain, and manage the South Unit pursuant to the terms and conditions contained in a cooperative agreement between the Secretary and the Oglala Sioux Tribe entered into by the Secretary and the tribe pursuant to section 4(b). (2) Exclusion: The Oglala Sioux Tribe shall have no jurisdiction or authority over the North Unit. SEC. 7. PLANNING AND DESIGN OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS; FEASIBILITY STUDIES. (a) Monuments: (1) In general: Except as provided in paragraph (2), the national monuments on the North Unit and South Unit authorized by subparagraphs (A)(iv) and (B)(iv) of section 4(a)(2) shall be planned, designed, and constructed by the Secretary, after consultation with an advisory committee that the Secretary shall appoint in consultation with-- (A) the Wounded Knee Survivors Association of the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation; (B) the Wounded Knee Survivors Association of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation; and (C) direct descendants of the band of Minneconjou Sioux of Chief Big Foot. (2) Authority of the cheyenne river sioux tribal council and the oglala sioux tribal council: (A) The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Council and the Oglala Sioux Tribal Council shall have no authority to plan and design the monuments referred to in paragraph (1). (B) The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Council and the Oglala Sioux Tribal Council shall have the authority to enter into contracts for the construction, operation, maintenance, and replacement of the monuments under the Indian Self-Determination Act (25 U.S.C. 450f et seq.). (b) Feasibility Studies: (1) In general: The Secretary shall complete feasibility studies to-- (A) establish and mark the route taken by Chief Big Foot and his band from the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation to Wounded Knee as a national historic trail; and (B) establish a visitor information and orientation center on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation. (2) Report: Not later than 1 year after funds are initially made available to the Secretary for a feasibility study conducted under this subsection, the Secretary shall complete the study and submit a report that contains the findings of the study to Congress. SEC. 8. WOUNDED KNEE NATIONAL TRIBAL PARK ADVISORY COMMISSION. (a) In General: There is established within the Department of the Interior the Wounded Knee National Tribal Park Advisory Commission. The Commission shall advise regularly the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Oglala Sioux Tribe, or any designated agency or authority of either tribe, concerning the management and administration of the North Unit and South Unit. (b) Role and Responsibilities: The role and responsibilities of the Commission shall be defined in the cooperative agreements that the Secretary shall enter into with the Cheyenne Sioux Tribe and Oglala Sioux Tribe under section 4(b). The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Oglala Sioux Tribe, or any designated agency or authority of either such tribe, shall consult with the Commission not less frequently than 4 times each year. (c) Period of Operation: The Commission shall exist for such time as either the North Unit or the South Unit is in existence. (d) Membership: The Secretary shall appoint 17 members of the Commission. In addition, the Director of the National Park Service or a designee of the Director shall serve as an ex-officio member of the Commission. The Secretary shall appoint the members of the Commission after consulting with, and soliciting a recommendation from each of the following: (1) The Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. (2) The President of the Oglala Sioux Tribe. (3) The Chairman of the Wounded Knee Community Council on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. (4) The Chairman of the Wounded Knee Subcommunity Council on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. (5) The Chairman of the White Clay Community Council on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. (6) The Chairman of District No. 3 on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation. (7) The Chairman of Red Scaffold Community on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation. (8) The Chairman of Cherry Creek Community on the Cheyenne River Reservation. (9) The Chairman of Bridger Community on the Cheyenne River Reservation. (10) The Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Oglala Sioux Parks and Recreation Authority. (11) The President of the Wounded Knee Survivors Association of the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation. (12) The President of the Wounded Knee Survivors Association of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. (13) The Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. (14)(i) The Governor of the State of South Dakota and the historic preservation officer of such State. (ii) The Governor of the State of Nebraska and the historic preservation officer of such State. (e) Chair: The offices of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Commission shall be rotated between the Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe (or a designated representative of the Chairman) and the President of the Oglala Sioux Tribe (or a designated representative of the President) on a year-to-year basis. If both the Chairman and Vice Chairman are absent from any meeting, the members of the Commission who are present at the meeting shall select a member who is present to serve in the place of the Chairman for the meeting. (f) Meetings: The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairman or a majority of its members. In a manner consistent with the public meeting requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), the Commission shall from time to time meet with persons concerned with Park issues relating to the North Unit or South Unit. The Commission shall record all minutes and resolutions of the Commission and make such records available to the public upon request. (g) Administrative Director: (1) In general: The Secretary, in consultation with the Commission, shall employ an Administrative Director for the Commission and define the duties of the Administrative Director. The Administrative Director shall be paid at a rate not to exceed the annual rate of basic pay payable for grade GS-12 of the General Schedule under subchapter IV of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to-- (A) the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive service; and (B) the provisions of chapter 51, and subchapter III of chapter 52 of that title relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates. (2) Office: The office and staff of the Administrative Director shall be located at such location as the Secretary considers appropriate. (h) Support Services: The Administrator of General Services shall provide to the Commission, on a nonreimbursable basis, such administrative support services as the Commission, in consultation with the Secretary, may request. (i) Expenses: Members of the Commission who are not otherwise employed by the Federal Government, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission, shall be allowed travel and all other related expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Government service are allowed expenses under section 5703 of title 5, United States Code. (j) Applicability of Federal Advisory Act: Except with respect to any requirement for reissuance of a charter, and except as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall apply to the Commission established under this Act. SEC. 9. FUNDRAISER AGREEMENTS WITH NONPROFIT CORPORATIONS. (a) In General: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Oglala Sioux Tribe, or a designated agency or authority of either tribe, may, with the approval of the Secretary, enter into an agreement with a nonprofit corporation to raise funds from private sources to be used in lieu of, or supplement, any Federal funds made available by appropriations pursuant to the authorization under section 11. (b) New Projects: The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Oglala Sioux Tribe, or a designated agency or authority of either tribe, shall have the power and authority to enter into a separate agreement with a nonprofit corporation to-- (1) raise funds from private sources to pay for all obligations, costs, and fees for professional service contracted, incurred, or assumed by the tribe, or a designated agency or authority of the tribe, that are related, directly or indirectly, to the development or establishment of the Park; and (2) raise funds from private sources to plan, design, construct, operate, maintain, and replace-- (A) an international amphitheater dedicated to the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas to be located at or near the Wounded Knee Massacre site, which, if constructed, shall become the permanent home of the Francis Jansen sculpture; and (B) any other project that the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe or the Oglala Sioux Tribe may, in consultation with the Secretary, choose to include within the North Unit or South Unit. SEC. 10. DUTIES OF OTHER FEDERAL ENTITIES. The appropriate official of any Federal entity that conducts or supports activities that directly affect the Park shall consult with the Secretary and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Oglala Sioux Tribe with respect to such activities to minimize any adverse effects on the Park. SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act. SEC. 12. RULE OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION. Nothing contained in this Act is intended to abrogate, modify, or impair any rights or claims of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe or Oglala Sioux Tribe, that are based on any treaty, Executive order, agreement, Act of Congress, or other legal basis. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Editorials Christians don't have a monopoly on prophecies that tell of an ''end of times'' or an end of an ''era.'' Many tribal nations, significantly the Hopi and the Haudenosaunee, but including many others such as Cree and Lakota in the North and Maya, Lokono and Maquiritari in the South, have prophecies within their spiritual traditions that describe an ''end of times,'' an era very similar to our present times and depicting or describing prophetic signs apparent to those who watch for such things. The signs, according to each culture and prophecy, reveal that major changes are afoot. The Christian tradition is compelling in that it dictates a clear scenario for believers that accepts, on faith, the belief in the resurrection of Jesus' physical body from death itself. The resurrection myth propels to an end-tale with the return of the living Jesus. This ''Second Coming'' is to gather those who had believed in him as the only way to salvation. These would, in fact, be resurrected and ascended into heaven to live in eternal grace with their Lord. Everyone else, unfortunately, ends up in hell for torture and pain throughout eternity. There are those who say that the Second Coming, which is also described as ''the Rapture,'' is already guiding American foreign policy. Certainly, it appears that the true believers within the present circle of U.S. policy makers and of many media outlets are steering toward connecting the worldly events in their various fields and departments to the sign of the coming Rapture. No doubt, many fully expect to be among those who board the celestial ship to life eternal. These analysts, mostly but not exclusively on Christian radio and television shows, conjecture for millions of Americans that propelling Israel as a major super military power in the Middle East and invading and occupying a whole country - Iraq - at the ''cradle of civilization,'' portends the acceleration of the struggle between ''good and evil,'' expectedly toward Armageddon, the final mother of all battles, after which comes the return of the living body of Jesus Christ. Perhaps this is so, or perhaps it overstates the Christian case; but no one can deny we live in the age of terrific religious fervor, when more and more of humanity attaches itself to essential or elemental stories that are the basis of whole religions, whose dictates and strictures can often clash and expand into dangerous areas - including that of self-fulfilling prophecy. We are also in an era when the resources of the Earth that have fueled and supported industrial lifestyles are quickly diminishing. This is where some of the Indian prophecies come in. John Mohawk, Seneca historian and Indian Country Today columnist, recalled not long ago the mutual visits by Hopi and Haudenosaunee traditionalists as early as 1948, where a prophetic tradition, popularly referred to as ''the purification,'' was exchanged. This was way before the ecology movement, before ''New Age'' and even before the ''energy crisis.'' The elder Indian spiritualists from the Hopi of that time not only had prophecies of meeting ''Indians from the East,'' they actually fulfilled their own tradition and traveled east to meet and tell the Haudenosaunee about it. The sincere exchange of views that followed saw these and other Native peoples review and renew their prophetic traditions and this dialogue, largely unrecorded, has gone on for more than a half a century after the 1948 visit. Unlike the faith-based Christian liturgy, what the Hopi tradition warned about involved patterns of human activity on Mother Earth that had profound and predictable consequences. They expressed, as have most Indian traditionalists to this day, that the greed for material possessions and technological gadgetry had the potential to severely affect the systems of the earth and that this was in fact happening within Western civilization, which they were witnessing, and that they had been told they should warn all peoples about the impending changes and disasters. No one listened then and too few are listening now, as the ancient Indian warning is diluted by modern economic and political concerns, but the message does resonate with observers of our current energy crisis who tell us of major and very difficult changes ahead for most of humanity. The American ''way of life'' predicated on the wanton consumption of cheap oil is in its last throes. Quantitative reality points to severe developing problems with industrial civilization and its dependent systems. We are entering what a well-researched book recently excerpted in Rolling Stone magazine terms the ''end of the cheap-fossil-fuel era.'' (''The Long Emergency'' by James Howard Kunstler, Rolling Stone, March 24, 2005.) The term ''global oil-production peak'' is very important in this context. This is the ''turning point,'' when global production will generate ''the most oil it will ever produce in a given year,'' after which annual production can only decline. U.S. oil production peaked in 1970 at 11 million barrels per day. Currently some 20 million barrels a day are consumed just in the United States, which produces 5 million and imports the rest. There is now developing consensus that the global oil-production peak, expected by 2010, is happening now - in 2005. The remaining half of the world's oil deposits is in large measure unextractable; that which is extractable is increasingly difficult and costly to extract, of poorer quality and located mostly in places hostile to the United States. The industrial world's principal source of energy, which underwrites everything about the international and particularly the industrial economies - from transportation to heat to food to the hugely integrated range of most other production - is drying up fast. The new energy crisis is permanent. The cheap energy, cheap food and cheap living produced by cheap oil has no detectable replacement that can sustain the current industrial lifestyle. And not only oil, but natural gas is also declining (by five percent a year), with steeper declines expected. Most power plants built after 1980 and half the homes in America run on gas. Nuclear energy, touted by some once again, comes from plants such as Three Mile Island and has many serious unsolved problems, in long-term radioactivity control and waste storage, which generate intense opposition in the population. It gets worse: clean water is also diminishing fast. Already, globally, more than a billion people don't have safe drinking water. About 15 million children under the age of 5 die miserably each year from drinking polluted water. (See: ''With a Push From the U.N., Water Reveals Its Secrets,'' William J. Broad, The New York Times, July 26, 2005.) The news on declining oil and water, and on costly extreme weather disasters, is sobering. The convergence of forces now seen as permanent reveals trends that will severely change life as we know it, limiting Western technological society and altering the familiar economics and social planning of the 20th century. Large-scale social change could help. But while these threats compound, the American media and major news channels grow shrill while losing the ability to tell schlock from substantive and useful information. Socially asleep at the wheel and led by the easy profits of ''reality'' shows, infotainment of bizarre cases and celebrity gawking, most basic reporting is replaced by hackneyed pundits repeating their spin on channel after channel. Public trust and doctrines of fairness are now hostage to profit incentives. No major idea or power in the current society is likely to be challenged, investigated and analyzed for fear of losing its corporate or governmental support. Breaking through this wall of disregard for natural reality was the intent of the elders who came out of their remote communities to tell their prophecies and perceptions in the mid-20th century. Because they did not call for miracles over life and death, because they did not request we ''act on faith,'' their admonitions merit attention more than ever today: they said that the new way of using up the earth will have dire consequences; indeed, the new reality is of a world where the promise of industrial progress is much reduced. The elder Indians spoke of food self-sufficiency and of fighting tenaciously for your lands as the basis of tribal survival. They urged the younger generation to stay close to the earth, aware of the sources of good water and land for growing useful plants and animals as the ''real economy.'' They spoke of staying physically active and the people striving to work together in harmony. Even back then, they warned the leaders to prepare for a future of great uncertainty. ''Prepare from the ground up,'' they said. ''Community by community and family by family, learn to do these things for yourselves.'' Given the callous disregard for these life-threatening issues by America's current political and media leadership, the elders' advice - to do for ourselves and to prepare to meet all conditions - might be as good as we are likely to get. ----------------- by: Suzan Shown Harjo / Indian Country Today The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs is fighting an uphill battle to defend its 1990 national repatriation law and to clean up the mess created by activist judges who overrode congressional intent in 2004 and wrote their own law. The committee is attempting to fix the problem by making a small change to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act's definition of ''Native American.'' First proposed in the committee's public hearing on July 14, 2004, the amendment would add ''or was'' to the definition, so the term ''Native American'' would mean of, or relating to, a tribe, people, or culture that is or was indigenous to any geographic area that is now located within U.S. boundaries. Federal and federally funded scientists have held up the amendment for over a year. These are the same scientists, including plaintiffs in the ''Kennewick Man'' case, who fought to keep repatriation agreements from being enacted and have been trying to dismantle them since NAGPRA was signed into law. Their present goal is to play for time to get Interior Department regulations that would extend the Kennewick decision beyond the Ancient One, who was the only person at issue in the litigation, and would lock up hundreds of thousands of Native human remains indefinitely for unspecified ''studies.'' The problem arose when judges in the ''Kennewick Man'' case simply declared that the Ancient One could not be buried by his cultural descendants because he was not a ''Native American'' under NAGPRA. By declaring that he did not meet the NAGPRA definition, the judges were able to sidestep the very law that Congress wrote to protect the Native dead, known and unknown, and their relatives. Their decision meant that federal and federally funded scientists could drill more holes in the Ancient One, but this is an elaborate charade in the name of scientific discovery about who populated this hemisphere when. In fact, the tests were concluded many years ago, demonstrating that the Ancient One is related to Native people here and is not from France or other foreign places, as the scientists have suggested to judges, bureaucrats, congressional staffers and reporters. Interior is bowing to the ''Kennewick'' decision as the law of the land, even though none of the other judicial circuits have misread repatriation law in the same way. This paves the way for regulations that the scientists want to protect their ''studies'' on the myriad dead Indians they view as their property. The Indian committee held another oversight hearing July 28. Interior opposed the amendment because it ''would broaden the scope of what remains would be covered under NAGPRA from the Court's decision ... that the remains must have a significant relationship to a presently existing tribe, people, or culture in order to be considered 'Native American.''' Interior's views on this important Native American human rights law were presented by a deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks, Paul Hoffman, who testified: ''We believe that NAGPRA should protect the sensibilities of currently existing tribes, cultures, and people while balancing the need to learn about past cultures and customs. In the situation where remains are not significantly related to any existing tribe, people, or culture they should be available for appropriate scientific analysis. The proposed legislation would shift away from this balance.'' The balance to which the Interior official referred was a balance struck by Congress in developing public policy on this issue. Congress considered the human, civil and religious rights of Native Americans, living and dead, and the scurrilous ways - most of them in the name of science, art and ''civilization'' - that hundreds of thousands of Native people and property ended up in public institutions and collections, and the nightmares modern Native people encounter when interacting with those entities. Congress also considered the interests of museums, scientists, researchers, art marketers and traffickers in human remains in using dead Native people and living sacred and cultural items for their ''studies,'' displays and profits. The repatriation laws were the result of Native American negotiations with various entities and congressional considerations of the views. Congress struck a balance in the public interest. Now, a tiny, elite and exclusive group wants to own and control greater and greater numbers of dead Indians and does not mind overturning and discarding public policy, American Indian rights and federal laws in order to get their way. Organizations representing scientists who were part of the agreements reached and balances struck in NAGPRA presented careful testimony for the July 28 hearing about supporting the amendment, but opposing the process and wanting more time. One, representing the physical scientists who opposed any recognition of Native American human rights in NAGPRA, bluntly stated that Congress should not act until Interior has published its regulations. A statement supporting the amendment was offered for the hearing record by Armand Minthorn, who is a relative of the Ancient One, chair of the cultural resources committee and a trustee of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation in Oregon. Minthorn testified that the Umatilla Tribes support the amendment ''so that all tribal ancestors are protected under the law, not merely those determined by agencies, museums and scientists to be related to existing tribes.'' He stated that they lost their nine-year ''painful battle to return these ancestral remains to the ground'' on a ''technicality [which] creates a loop-hole that eclipses the law and must be corrected.'' Minthorn also decried Interior's decision to pay ''Kennewick'' case attorneys' fees out of NAGPRA grant monies: ''Adding final insult to injury, to take the money away from tribes and museums who implement NAGPRA to pay the attorneys fees to those who sought to and succeeded in eviscerating the law is beyond the pale. Tribes and museums need those grants to pursue repatriations of ancestors long-denied their rightful home in the earth.'' The positions of Interior and the scientists in this matter are reminiscent of the days when the United States would make treaties, then break their promises because they wanted even more land. Interior once cleared Indian title and territory for westward expansion. Today, as public and private developers want more Indian lands for gold mines, oil pumps, border fences and shopping malls, Interior is in the business of clearing Indian claims to burial grounds by declaring that the people buried there are not Native Americans. No amount of bodies or acres will satisfy the feds or scientists who are opposing the NAGPRA recalibration. It is time for Congress to stop this sacrilege and indecency, and to let Native people rest in peace. Suzan Shown Harjo, Cheyenne and Hodulgee Muscogee, is president of the Morning Star Institute in Washington, D.C. and a columnist for Indian Country Today. ------------- Fundamental justice shaken in Iroquois land cases It sure seems a recurrent theme these days that America is returning to its worst practices when it comes to Indian relations. The fundamental justice once envisioned on the New York state Indian land claims now clouds over in America's recurring amnesia about its legitimate debts to Native peoples, whose real property was stolen. Particularly since 1974, when the Oneida land claims case opened the doors for tribes to finally gain standing in court to sue New York state over fraudulent transactions, a very substantial load of cases has been heard and adjudicated, while political deals have been struck and broken too many times to count. One reality is that New York state, despite that fateful 1974 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court (and a subsequent companion decision in 1985), has stalled, threatened, cajoled and tried to buy out tribal leadership from among the various governments and communities involved in New York, Oklahoma, Wisconsin and Ontario - the Oneida, Cayuga, Seneca, Seneca-Cayuga, Stockbridge-Munsee and Mohawk. Divide and conquer has been the name of the game. As the land claims cases have dragged out, anyone peeved by Indians, racist against Indians, or who has in any way - economically or psychologically - been adversely affected by the tribal assertion of self-governmental jurisdiction has come after Indians with a passion. In central New York, the anti-Indian organization Upstate Citizens for Equality, coalesced with non-Native convenience store operators, has led a willing press into making a huge ruckus about the supposed tax revenue losses to the state and about the ''social disruption'' of tax-protected Indian jurisdictions in their region. These organized groups talk and influence media regularly and become visible far beyond their numbers. Thus, their issues are the ones that get discussed as primary in media and by policymakers. Thus, their points of view are most likely to resonate with high judges and their clerks as well. A second reality is that the collective leadership of each and every Native nation in New York has failed miserably at strengthening its collective hand versus the state, choosing mostly to go it alone, to pursue self-interest primarily, to fight each other constantly for positioning and turf and to decimate each other's political moves and personal reputations at every opportunity. Indian disunity in New York is presently so pervasive that even the bitter enemies of Indian sovereignty are perplexed by it all. The Supreme Court led the way recently by making political decisions on these important Indian law cases, rather than sustain principles by which justice, at last, appeared to be revealed on the horizon of tribal futures. The court's trail of decisions on Indian self-government and tribal rights to land needs serious academic and international scrutiny. It went out of its way recently in the case of City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York, and denied an Indian nation's right to even buy back its historical and illegally taken (stolen) reservation lands. The doctrine invoked was ''laches,'' which dictates that cases can be disallowed if victims take too long to bring their case to court. The Eastern Indian land cases nearly all hark back to the pre- and post-Revolutionary War years, give or take a decade or two. Laches had not been an issue in the case. The high court picked it out of references in earlier cases and applied it, reasoning that: 1. The crime occurred so long ago, and the tribes had waited too long to bring the matter to court; and 2. The remedy would be too ''disruptive'' to the majority, mostly non-Indian population, so the Indians must think of something else. Four months after the Sherrill reversal, and quickly based on its logic, came a second damaging decision - this one by the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals - to deny the previously decided $248 million award to the Cayuga Nation of New York. The reasoning in this opinion (written by a judge who lives near a land claims area) also follows the high court's Sherrill doctrine of laches - again, blaming the Indians for taking too long to get their case to court. This is, of course, a rather corrupt and disingenuous rendering of history. The state places huge burdens upon those Indian peoples who were fortunate enough to survive the Revolutionary War and its aftermath. Reduced to poverty and the daily struggle to survive, Indian lands are taken without federal approval. Finally, once the Indian nations gain the resources and capacities to pursue justice, the courts say Sorry, you've waited too long. This isn't justice: it's a cynical excuse. Judge Jose A. Cabranes penned the 2nd Circuit decision against the Cayuga. He cited the Sherrill decision as backup to reverse Northern District of New York Judge Neil P. McCurn, who after many years of study had found that treaties signed in 1795 and 1807 between the Cayuga Nation and the state were invalid under the Trade and Intercourse Act, 25 U.S.C. ?177. Consequently, Cayugas were awarded their $248 million settlement. But Cabranes claimed Sherrill ''has dramatically altered the legal landscape against which we consider plaintiffs' claims.'' In his decision, Cabranes interpreted Sherrill to say ''doctrines, such as laches, acquiescence, and impossibility, can, in appropriate circumstances, be applied to Indian land claims, even when such a claim is legally viable and within the statute of limitations.'' A key argument was that ''these equitable defenses apply to 'disruptive' Indian land claims more generally.'' The 2 - 1 ruling by the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals June 28 throws ''out 25 years of litigation, a jury trial verdict and a District Court judge's award of nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in favor of the Cayugas,'' wrote Indian Country Today Associate Editor Jim Adams. Both decisions were completely outside normal legal precedents. The judges in both cases relied on overarching theories applied at random and by collective but personal fiat upon highly complex cases that cry out for justice and not to be shut out again after 30 years of hope that truth would prevail in the American system. Thus the wall of injustice grows. To cite the doctrine of laches in these cases is a farce. Either an injustice, based on greed and crime, was committed, or it was not. The courts have said that such a crime was indeed committed; and furthermore, they have established that these tribal entities, governments and communities are direct descendents of the owners of the real properties whose theft was approved by the state. Substantial documentation and tribal memory of the loss of the lands remains in the Indian communities and in the record of these cases. It took until 1974 - after 200 years of public, if not ''court recognized,'' complaints - for the Haudenosaunee nations to gain standing to sue the culprits of their dispossession. If rendering justice was the intent, rather than making new policy the high court judges would recognize that the Indian nations did not ''take too long'' to bring their cases to court: the courts themselves denied and thus delayed the Indian nations' efforts to have their cases heard properly and fairly. The Indian nations have consistently complained about these fraudulent land losses. Seneca historian Dr. John Mohawk (Native Americas Journal, Spring 2000) traced some of the trajectory of continuous complaints, the earliest being by Iroquois fighters and refugees from the Revolutionary War who returned to their villages and farms in the Mohawk Valley to find them given over ''legally'' and taken over physically by decommissioned colonial soldiers and others being repaid by the early American government. The nations, clans and families of these complainants, many of whom fought for the American side of the Revolution, still exist. Over generations they tried to take their cases to court and petitioned the legislatures, but were denied access as non-citizens. ''Indians were not permitted to bring suit or even to give testimony against an Englishman,'' wrote Mohawk. Many are the interventions and complaints by Indians through several decades, requesting from Albany and Washington ''a way to expel squatters and other intruders without resorting to violence or war.'' As early as 1790, it was only after an Iroquois delegation complained bitterly to President George Washington about fraudulent land thefts approved by New York state that Congress passed the 1790 Trade and Intercourse Act, which barred the states from such transactions and upon which so many of the Iroquois cases are based. As we go to press, a decision by federal District Court Judge David Hurd has granted the Oneida Nation a preliminary injunction, requesting that Madison County stop foreclosure proceedings against the tribe based on the Sherrill case. Hurd, who has studied these cases longer than most people, pointed out the complexity of the long-standing dispute and reiterated that the property tax case should proceed slowly so every important federal issue can be resolved. We applaud Hurd's wise intervention which, at least temporarily and, we hope in the final analysis, more permanently, will bring just closure to the case. As the federal courts have begun their push of the tribes down the slippery slope to judicial termination, there is a pressing need to elaborate the legal, historical and cultural basis of American Indian rights. Economically powerful tribes and alert American foundations must pay serious attention to the support of productive and effective materials, both legal and media articles, that can be generated and widely circulated. It is completely crucial that Native peoples take their most intelligent and compelling case to the American public and to their own people. Only substantial and proliferous trenches of allies and concerned members of the public will provide anchor against the swift avalanche of lies, slander and negativity that now threatens to wipe away tribal freedoms. --------------- Supreme Court leaves ray of hope after Sherrill disaster (6/17/2005) ONEIDA NATION HOMELANDS, N.Y. - The U.S. Supreme Court blew it in 1857, too. The infamous decision of that year centered on a slave, Dred Scott, who had been taken to free territory and then sold back into a slave state. Scott sued for his freedom, but the court ruled that as a slave and a member of a race the Constitution writers considered ''inferior,'' he had no rights of citizenship to go to federal court. He must remain a slave. Indian country's equivalent of the Dred Scott v. Sanford case is the court's March 29 decision in City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. The 8 - 1 ruling, written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, struck at the heart of one tribe's economic and political revival. The Oneida Indian Nation of New York (OIN) could not ''unilaterally'' re-establish sovereignty over former reservation lands that it repurchased on the free market. The ruling dealt a blow to the Oneida's efforts to rebuild its nation. Following a June 10 BIA letter saying most Oneida-owned lands were taxable and subject to foreclosure, Oneida County officials sent out final notices on 59 parcels. They said that if the OIN failed to pay the $5 million in back taxes, they would put the lands up for auction in September. But all of Indian country is on the line. The decision, said one leading practitioner of Indian law, was based not on legal principle or on the facts of the case but on fear. The justices bought into the lurid claims of town and county politicians, and of local anti-Indian groups, that chaos would result if tribes could reassert their sovereignty over lands once stolen from them but now repurchased with the profits from a casino's cash flow. The court tried to forestall this assertion of self-determination and return the tribes to a form of economic slavery. But Sherrill showed one major difference from Dred Scott. Where Chief Justice Roger Taney in 1857 argued at length from legal principle, Ginsburg gave a series of ad hoc rationalizations. Comments on her reasoning range from the rude to the diplomatic statement of a BIA official, ''It seemed like a decision in equity.'' The very fact that Sherrill was not a principled decision might have insulated the principle of sovereignty from permanent damage. The anti-Indian groups which have been openly rejoicing over the ruling might find that their cause for celebration is more limited than they think. ''Even though it is an incredibly crappy opinion,'' said Douglas J. Luckerman, a Massachusetts lawyer specializing in New England sovereignty cases, ''there is a little kernel of hope.'' The kernel, he said, came at the end of Ginsburg's opinion, when she offered the federal land into trust process as ''the proper avenue for the OIN to re-establish sovereign authority over territory last held by the Oneidas 200 years ago.'' This gesture was lukewarm comfort to the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy) nations within New York, who hold their reservations through original title, not as federal trust lands. But it could be tremendously helpful to other tribes fighting to re-establish sovereignty. Inadvertently or not, said Luckerman, Ginsburg held that sovereignty could be restored over territory, even after a lapse of 200 years, if it were done through the land into trust procedure. This is a major boon for New England tribes. In Rhode Island, a fight over the status of new Narragansett trust land has led Gov. Donald Carcieri to sue Secretary of Interior Gale Norton, claiming that her trust power is unconstitutional. A three-judge panel of the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals recently demolished the case, but the Circuit Court is currently considering whether to rehear it before its full panoply of judges. The rest of Ginsburg's opinion might be of primary interest to partisans of Critical Legal Studies. This controversial academic movement charges that under a veneer of logic and concern for justice, legal principles serve mainly to oppress those outside of the dominant culture. Ginsburg's argument in Sherrill should make her the pin-up girl for this movement. Although the Oneida's assertion of sovereignty was endorsed by the U.S. District and Circuit courts and the U.S. Solicitor General, Ginsburg and the seven other justices on her opinion rejected it because it was inconvenient for the non-Indian settlers in the region. (The decision affirmed the Oneidas' right to seek redress in federal court for the loss of their lands, upholding Supreme Court rulings from 1974 and 1985. This case is still pending, and the parties have been engaged in tangled negotiations for years over an out-of-court settlement.) The court accepted the claim that the ''unilateral'' sovereignty would bring ''administrative chaos,'' destroy the tax base and even forestall ''local zoning and other regulatory controls.'' It ignored protests from tribes across the nation in friend-of-the-court briefs that other regions had learned to deal smoothly with ''checkerboarding.'' Violating a cardinal Supreme Court principle, Ginsburg was stampeded into ruling on hypotheticals rather than on facts presented in trial. Her double standard flared into view when she invoked what she called the ''impossibility'' standard. Quoting an 1892 case involving Omaha, she expressed ''pragmatic concerns'' about restoring Indian control over land that had been bought and developed by private settlers. ''[T]hat which was wild land thirty years ago is now intersected by streets, subdivided into lots'' and so forth. She ignored the fact that it is the OIN that made improvements on the land in question, including a $340 million investment in the Turning Stone Resort and Casino. As a result of her ruling, vengeful local and state officials are threatening to shutter these improvements and the 4,200 jobs they have created (largely for non-Indians). The court is ignoring and threatening to reverse the recent success of Indian sovereignty, which has brought prosperity to regions the dominant economy left stagnant. The aftermath of the ruling underscores the court's one-sided concern for ''disruptive practical consequences.'' They are bad if they pose a hypothetical threat to non-Indian interests, but not if they create immediate damage to Indian investments. The threat of tax foreclosures and public auctions of Indian land has a long history in New York state. After fraudulent treaties with drunken chiefs passed out of fashion, local officials tried to seize tribal land by imposing taxes the Indians couldn't pay and then foreclosing on the delinquencies. In the past this tactic shocked the conscience of the federal courts. The Supreme Court in 1867 firmly repulsed antebellum New York state efforts to seize Seneca land. The U.S. v. Boylan case in 1920 returned an Oneida family to land from which Oneida County officials had evicted them, laying the basis for the original 32-acre reservation. The Sherrill case crystallizes the concern of many in Indian country that an anti-Indian bias controls the court. When in the absence of a federal government interest, tribal concerns conflict with local and state governments, the court will side with state and local officials. Perhaps the history of the Dred Scott case offers a grim consolation. When the Taney court came down so heavily for the slave-holding interest, it galvanized the conscience of the rest of the nation. The North rejected the moral authority of the court, Lincoln came into office and within five years slavery was dead. The ultimate ray of hope in Sherrill is that it will shock Indian country into an adamant defense of sovereignty, in spite of the many pressures to whittle it down. --------------- NAJA Requests Cultural Sensitivity Training for Wall Street Journal and New York Post VERMILLION, SD - July 6, 2005 - The Native American Journalists Association is asking the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post to become more culturally sensitive after recently publishing articles that carelessly stereotyped Native people. Above a June 30 Wall Street Journal article by Brett Duval Fromson about the Shinnecock tribe's recent claim to 3,600 acres on Long Island, the Journal used the demeaning headline, "Hamptonites on the Warpath." "For years, The Associated Press Stylebook has specifically cautioned against the careless use of certain words that - when used out of context - can be offensive. 'Warpath' is on that list. It's not a word journalists should bandy about in order to get a laugh out of a reader," said NAJA president Dan Lewerenz (Iowa Tribe of Kansas & Nebraska). "It's hard to imagine the Journal would characterize an aggressive move by a German country as a Blitzkrieg, or would invoke 'The Art of War' every time China makes a bold business move. But somehow these cultural stereotypes are OK when it comes to Indian people." The Post's offense was far more grievous. In a July 1 column, writer Ralph Peters compared the Taliban to Apache Indians in the following passage: "Apache raiders would strike in our southwest, then flee across the border to Mexico - just as the Taliban flees into Pakistan. The Apaches remained a local problem for decades, but they never threatened our government's survival. And the Taliban won't return to rule in Kabul. But the Taliban have an ally the Apaches never dreamed of - the media." "Peters and the Post should apologize for drawing such a preposterous and offensive analogy," Lewerenz said. "The Taliban supported, then helped to hide, a terrorist organization that reached halfway across the world to kill thousands of innocent civilians. The Apaches were defending their homeland - a homeland, I might add, that at times the U.S. government was treaty-bound to protect." With 600 members, the Native American Journalists Association is dedicated to recruiting Native people to journalism careers; supporting and promoting Native people in both tribal and mainstream journalism; and ensuring that Native people are covered accurately in the media. --------------- Appreciation of a grandmother: Beatrice Weasel Bear Lakota, Mohawk and allies - in ceremonies correspondent to World Peace Prayer Day and as signaled by Arvol Looking Horse, Keeper of the Sacred White Buffalo Calf Woman Pipe - rose up at twilight of the Summer Solstice on June 21 for songs of spiritual renewal, offerings of thanksgiving and appreciation to the women. The day and cycle of creation opened and closed in its moment. A Sun Dance pipe, loaded along with the original pipe at Green Grass, was smoked by elders and Sun dancers in the Black Hills while Looking Horse gathered many other circles of people in the Plains, at Piedmont, S.D. Other years, he has prayed in Japan and the Middle East. A ceremony of the Oyate (the people) led by the men's societies, the Sun Dance of the Plains - and in particular this one, hosted by Oglala-Lakota tiospayes once again this year in the Black Hills - often flows from the authority and the certain knowledge of the grandmothers. In the Black Hills this June, the matriarch of a group of Oglala families - tiospayes of the Afraid Of Bear, American Horse and Red Cloud lineages of chiefs - called her sons and daughters, nephews, nieces, in-laws and all her relatives to pray and dance. Beatrice Weasel Bear, 79, danced again in the grueling sacrifice under the open sky, even though she had meant to retire from active dancing this year. In her moment of prayer, in a season of much close grief, she, too, intoned for world peace, for peace in the mind and hearts of men. Among her honors, Beatrice is a member of the International Council of 13 Indigenous Grandmothers, which gathers annually to make prayers for the earth. Midwife, public health nurse, traditional herbalist and healer, ceremonial leader and grandmother of many great-grandchildren, Beatrice led the women in the four days of rounds of many hours of dancing under a searing, generous sun. Beatrice's Sun Dance intercessor, Oglala elder Basil Brave Heart, aided by dance leaders and helpers, officiated the week-long event and its intense four-day ceremony. It is the season of the Sun Dance in the northern and southern Plains. Many extended families, bands and villages will hold ceremonies of thanksgiving and appreciation this summer. Many will dance with the sun and hear the ancient songs of praise for the cosmic family of Sun and Earth and Moon, and all the circle of life, all the relations and the healing: peace and hope and good prayers so needed by the people in these violent times. We assert this reality - and it is worth asserting the reality of American Indian tribal spiritual contemplation because it is visible to relatively few people in North America, yet it must be respected and recognized along with all the real and pressing traditions of spiritual observance among Native peoples. The summer Sun Dance is a major expression in the cycle of many such American indigenous expressions: respectful of creation and clearly imbued with all the values of good behavior and good will for human beings on the Earth, as enumerated by all major religious traditions. On the summer solstice, in the Black Hills of the Northern Great Plains, on a plateau high above the Cheyenne River, across from Hell's Canyon - a place where prayers have been made for hundreds and thousands of years - a ceremony was held by Indians, for Indians and their allies. Beatrice and the Oglala elders leading the Sun Dance upheld the vision of her brothers and brothers in law - Larue Afraid Of Bear most prominently among them - who had persisted over decades that Sun dancing again in the Black Hills was the proper way to re-secure their sacred lands into the Lakota spiritual fold. Larue and several of his brothers, including Ernest Afraid Of Bear, and also elders and leaders among the American Horse and Red Cloud clan, pondered Larue's vision and backed him as he searched the hills for the desired place to hold their tiospaye Sun Dance. Larue found his place 12 years ago, in a canyon and wild horse sanctuary saved from rapacious developers by an old cowboy author, Dayton Hyde, who immediately connected with the Indian request and opened the land and sites to the families. After four years of cleansing and hundreds of sweat lodge ceremonies, the annual cycle of dances began eight years ago. The first two four-year cycles closed with this summer's dance. The Slim Buttes people of this westernmost area of the Pine Ridge Reservation put up singers, cooks, dancers, peace guardians and other assistance for the eighth year of Beatrice's families' annual dance. Relatives and friends from the four directions, as always, came to share the prayers; families provided fire-keepers, cedar-men and runners. Indian veterans' organizations from several posts put up flags for four ancestor veterans killed in action. Empty chairs draped in star quilts with photos of the honored warriors were set up at the base of each pole. Dozens of Lakota relatives and allies put up two whole camps: the dancers' camp and the ''downstairs'' or relatives' camp. As always, the arbor was rebuilt, and cooking and feeding tents were put up. Tipis and campers situated here and there inside and outside the perimeter were erected and secured. For four and more days, a regimen is followed. Many individual prayers are made for healing and for the protection of family and other loved ones. But the active search for peace, in the heart and the mind, is the consciousness carried most in common by participants who each endure their own measure of pain to uphold the ancient call to ceremony made by the sponsoring families. ''No more war,'' says the prayer, ''no more war.'' Like the pope in Rome, the high priest in Jerusalem or Billy Graham in Washington, D.C., these prayers, held here and there in Indian country, have serious intent. The high content and grassroots - thus genuine - Indian spiritual traditions of the sacred pipe of the Lakota, presently articulated by Looking Horse and many elders of these ways - including the much appreciated grandmother, Beatrice and her united tiospayes (which proudly planted 492 family gardens this spring) - deserve great respect. The efforts of such elders merit all the upholding that the Indian peoples can possibly give. In this case they are allied with Billy Mills' program of Running Strong for American Indian Youth. The independent, distinctive and profoundly natural American Indian spiritual traditions are one major foundation of Indian identity - a center post and pillar of tribal sovereignty. Honor always the elders and their ideas, for how else can these ancient ways be regenerated for the healthy re-empowerment of all the people? ----------------- The NCAA is learning what it's like to be Indian by Suzan Shown Harjo The NCAA is learning what it's like to be mocked, cartooned, lampooned and vilified - in short, what it's like to be Indian in the world of sports. After only days of this treatment, the NCAA should appreciate even more keenly the importance of their decision to the health, safety and emotional well-being of Native and non-Native students, who are and should be their first concern. The NCAA decided that their teams can represent themselves as they will at home, but they need to be on their best behavior in public. It's a mature decision that provides an instruction about what is and is not appropriate, fitting and proper for good sports and champions. It's the rough equivalent of the civil rights movement sending the message that the N-word is not acceptable in polite society. Is this PC? Yes, as someone said long ago, it's Plain Courtesy. Some NCAA schools had the decency to voluntarily drop their ''Indian'' references before the decision was forced on them. Others are squealing like stuck pigs and calling the NCAA decision-makers every name in every book, and then some. Schools that have appropriated specific tribal names and symbols are pushing their Indians out front to say how proud they are to be mascots and how well their schools treat them, and to accuse the NCAA of making an anti-Indian decision. Actually, the decision is pro-Indian - the human being, not the mascot - but a lot of folks just can't tell the difference. Most of the commentators on this issue lump ''Indian'' sports references in with the bears, tigers, banana slugs, geoducks and leprechauns. They don't seem to notice that they are species hopping from humans to creatures and mythical beings, and that only the ''Indians'' are based on living people. A few of the pundits feel they have to point out that the ''Indian'' sports references aren't real, as if the NCAA and Native people thought they were. And, they come up with the ever-popular question: don't you have more important things to do for American Indians? No one who's ever asked that question is doing anything to help Native people. Here's my question to everyone who's in a dither about the NCAA's decision: don't you have anything better to do than hang on to these toys of racism? Some Native people are cutting deals with schools that haven't given them more than a handful of scholarships in decades and haven't bothered to ask before now if it's OK to use their names, heroes and symbols. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign would likely try to bargain with the local Native nations, if there were any left in the state. The excuse from the Native deal-makers in Florida, Michigan, Oklahoma and Utah is this: if we give them what they want for sports, they'll leave our casinos and land alone. Non-Native deal-makers are turning this into a states' rights issue, daring the NCAA to come into their state schools and upset their fine Indian citizens. (Any Native people who object to being mascotted or tokenized are subjected to the standard anti-Indian name-calling and slurs.) Florida State University and the state politicians are so desperate for tribal political cover that the Seminoles should demand that the school change its name to Florida Seminole University. It wouldn't even have to change its initials. While they're at it, FSU could call its team the ''Floridians'' and use St. Augustine as its mascot. There is dignity and respect in a school's name, but a mascot is not dignified or respected. It is shameful that the mighty Osceola is portrayed as a mascot. He is represented with fakey ''war paint,'' which he never wore; on an Appaloosa horse, which he never rode; with a Plains Indian war lance, which he never used; acting the fool, which he never was; and performing for non-Indians - which he never, ever did. FSU may well get its way. They've twisted arms and gained support from the Florida and Oklahoma Seminole governmental leaders, who now have the hard job of explaining to the Seminole people why their nationhood is to be diminished and their children to be raised as mascots. You can bet that FSU would not dare to approach other countries or people of other races to be their new team name or mascot. Imagine the reaction to renaming the team ''Cuba'' or ''Cubans.'' Would the Utah ''Mormons'' be embraced warmly by the actual Mormon people? Happily, there is a growing consensus about most of the ''Indian'' names - ''Redskins,'' ''Savages'' and other slurs have to go. The generic names are no longer acceptable if they have a ''Native'' context. Former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell called the NCAA's decision ''a major step forward'' and ''a positive, important decision.'' Campbell, who is Cheyenne, said, ''A lot of people need help understanding that it's wrong to use any derogatory name for a sports team. When I explain to African-Americans that it would be like a team called the 'Washington Darkies,' they understand. When I ask Hispanics how they would feel about a team called the 'Spics,' they understand.'' Campbell served in the House from 1987 to 1993 and then in the Senate until this year. ''One way I explained this problem to colleagues in Congress was through legislation,'' he said. ''I introduced a bill that would have prevented the 'Washington Redskins' from using federal property [the RFK Stadium in Washington, D.C.]. So Jack Kent Cooke [the team's owner] picked up and moved to Virginia before we could get it passed.'' Campbell's bill had solid co-sponsors, including civil rights luminary Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., and employed the same approach and stadium that were used by the Kennedy Administration in 1962, when it forced desegregation by withholding approval of the federal lease renewal. The Washington football club was the last in the NFL to allow African-Americans to play on its team. ''The NCAA decision, coupled with the recent decision in the case about the Washington team's name, is very significant,'' said Walter R. Echo-Hawk, who is an attorney for the Indian friends of the court in the lawsuit, Harjo et al. v. Pro Football, Inc. (This writer is, ahem, that Harjo.) Echo-Hawk, who is Pawnee and a senior attorney with the Native American Rights Fund, represents the National Congress of American Indians, National Indian Education Association, National Indian Youth Council and the Tulsa Indian Coalition Against Racism in the case. ''These two decisions,'' said Echo-Hawk, ''could mark a turning point in this longstanding campaign to end this form of racism.'' The NCAA can take comfort in knowing that the major national Native organizations applaud their decision. Unfortunately, the NCAA also knows how it is to be booed and hissed by loud, mean fanatics. Welcome to our world, where courage is not only prized, but essential in order to maintain a position of honor. ----------------- New Indian Career Web Site Launched SANTA YNEZ, Calif. - Clearly Indian country is coming into its own when a startup dot-com devotes itself to matching Native employers with Native and non-Native job seekers. Patterned after monster.com and careerbuilder.com, nativecountrycareers.com brings Indians across the continent together with just a mouse click. So, if you're a hopeful on either side of the employment fence, consider yourself moments from a database designed to link professionals and positions. ''We are a unique Web site that offers this type of service,'' said company president and San Ynez Band of Chumash Indians member Nakia Lent. ''My feeling, since my tribe is in a remote area two hours from Los Angeles, is that when we're looking for talent to fill our positions within our home communities, sometimes a local search only goes so far.'' In 1991 Lent was tapped as special assistant to the manager of her tribe's new casino, and for the past three years she has served as recruitment manager. ''Since I've been working to fill positions at the casino, I've really become aware of the need for a Web site for Native American recruitment. ''Our Web site mainly attracts the experienced, educated job seeker, so we give nationwide exposure to Indian businesses trying to fill professional positions,'' Lent continued. ''Mainly who we're targeting are the professionals in Indian country. People with bachelor's and master's degrees in a range of fields - not just casino management.'' Lent said one of the benefits of managing a national clearinghouse site is that she can spot employment trends that could be helpful to college students trying to decide on a major. ''Right now I'm seeing that there's a big need for social services and, of course, Indian gaming. But in social services it's around TANF - temporary assistance for needy families. Tribes are now running their own TANF programs so there's a big need for social workers and others associated with that profession.'' In the heady world of gaming, most any business degree is a boon, according to Lent, who added that CPAs and people with marketing degrees are always in demand. She also noted that ''tribal museums have positions. It has to do with repatriation. Now that Indian gaming is offering more financial stability, the tribes are hiring cultural development people - curators, linguists, historians.'' The Web site has been up only three months, but already praise has come Lent's way. ''One person told us our Web site is clean and very professional,'' she said, ''and 'straightforward and businesslike' was the feedback someone else gave us. We really appreciate that, since we've tried to be user-friendly. Our resume builder has a template that guides people through, and they can go ahead and cut and paste if they have a resume already done in Microsoft Word.'' The same ease applies to Indian businesses, Lent noted. ''Since we're catering to Native American companies that have Native American hiring preferences, job seekers can mark off a box that asks them if they are Native American. Employers, in turn, can search our database for applicants on that basis - so our search capability helps tribal business wanting to find Native Americans for their positions.'' It's early in the game, of course, so Lent's focus has been on advertising. So far, she's swapped Web links with American Indian news providers and is making a lot of cold calls. ''We've had a lot of different tribes interested, but this is a whole new Web site, and the Indian community just isn't used to a service like this. So I call people and get them online with me and take them through to show what we have to offer.'' Lent will also be going to major trade shows coming up in Indian country - the American Indian Chamber of Commerce meeting in Palm Springs in August; the National Congress of American Indians in Tulsa this fall; and, next spring, the National Association of Indian Gaming in Albuquerque. In that way, the family partnership - with Lent's brother Desi Zavalla as CEO and her mother, Antonia Flores helping out with the startup cash - is poised to get off the ground. ''My brother started as a bingo cashier 11 years ago and worked himself all the way up to director of human resources at our tribe's casino. And my mother started out in the bingo hall way back when as a pull-tab seller. Now she's helping us with her per capita payments she gets from her tribe's gaming. Honestly, I wouldn't be where I'm at if it weren't for Indian gaming. We're kind of evolving to the next level: taking our experience and revenues from this type of economic activity and parlaying it into a new venture.'' Exciting stuff? Lent clearly thinks so, and her enthusiasm is contagious. ''The thing is, Native American companies do not need to sell themselves. We are like our own Native American Fortune 500 companies. We have built our own large businesses, and they deserve to attract top talent,'' Lent said. ''That's where nativecountrycareers.com comes in. We want to be the service that helps them.'' ----------------- In fighting an Indian tribe’s recognition, Connecticut politicians apparently used a high powered lobbying firm as their proxy with officials in Washington D.C., even after a judge forbid them from talking to the feds, according to documents obtained by ctnewsjunkie.com. Information gleaned from recent depositions may provide the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation with a smoking gun proving Connecticut’s elected officials may have violated a federal court order by using a private citizens group and its lobbyists as proxies to exert political influence on the U.S. Department of the Interior to overturn the tribe’s federal acknowledgment. Attorneys for the tribe have drawn a picture of a closely knit relationship among local and state elected officials, a citizens group called Town Action to Save Kent (TASK) and its high-powered Washington, D.C. lobbying firm Barbour, Griffith & Rogers (BGR). All of these groups worked together to coordinate efforts to rescind the Schaghticokes’ federal status, according to testimony and documents obtained during depositions conducted in July and included in a brief filed in U.S. District Court Aug. 16. U.S. District Court Judge Peter Dorsey prohibited contact between the Interior Department and the Bureau of Indian Affairs and all parties involved in the Schaghticoke petition, including town and state officials, according to a court order issued in 2001 that was amended last year. However, an affidavit and lobbyist registration documents confirm BGR's lobbyists contacted the Interior Department and BIA officials directly, in an effort to influence the federal government's decision making against the tribe. The tribe’s attorney maintain TASK’s lobbyists were acting indirectly to support the town and state appeals of tribe’s recognition. The BIA acknowledged the tribe in January 2004. A reconsidered final determination is due Oct. 12. “What the depositions aimed to do is find out whether in fact TASK and its lobbyists have been making contact with officials that the officials themselves acknowledge they cannot make. From what we have discovered so far, in our view, there is no doubt that TASK and its lobbyists have been acting as surrogates for these elected officials and parties to the recognition process,” Schaghticoke Attorney David Reif said Wednesday. State Sen. Andrew Roraback (R-Goshen), who arranged meetings for TASK and BGR with the governor and the attorney general, said his conscience is clear. “From my perspective as an elected official I’ve done what elected officials are elected to do, which is to facilitate communication between their constituents and state government,” Roraback said. Kent First Selectwoman Dolores Schiesel, who attended a lobbying session at the White House with BGR staff, denied TASK and its lobbyists acted as a proxy for the town. “I think it’s a lot of hoopla. I don’t think there was anything that wasn’t okay by law and even that perception doesn’t bother me,” Schiesel said. The coordination of efforts to overturn the BIA’s decision included meetings with elected officials, TASK and BGR lobbyists at the White House, Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s office, and with Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, according to documents and testimony. Emails among the three groups discuss plans about scheduling and preparations for meetings, revisions of documents, talking points, strategy sessions, and a summary from BGR of its proposed meeting objectives with Gov. Rell. “The purpose of the meeting(s) from our point of view is to refine the political strategies and to ensure tight coordination of the implementation of such strategies among the Governor, the Congressional delegations and local officials,” wrote Loren L. Monroe, Chief Operating Officer of BGR lobbying firm, in an email to TASK cofounders Jim Perkins and Ken Cooper, along with Schiesel and Roraback in January 2005. Wrote Monroe: “Importantly, the political efforts must also be coordinated with the legal strategy being led by the Attorney General and Perkins Coie [a Washington law and lobbyist firm contracted by the state to help oppose the federal recognition of the Schaghticokes and Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation], which we are working to make sure occurs in Washington. With the start of 2005, there are a number of opportunities in the near term to further our strategy of surrounding the Department of the Interior with regards to the BIA.” “Can you use as is, or refashion?” Perkins wrote to Roraback in another correspondence. “It (the summary) points up the value that BGR brings not only to Kent and TASK, but to the State of Connecticut.” In an email attachment on Nov. 22, 2004 to Schiesel, Perkins wrote, “This week the Governor has an appointment call with Gale Norton, Secretary of the Interior. TASK placed two items on the Governor’s talking agenda.” If the governor did in fact have such a conversation with Norton, it would have come after Dorsey’s order prohibiting contact with the department without notifying the other parties first. A call to the governor’s office seeking comment was not returned. The judge issued a revised order in June 2004 after chastising Blumenthal for a private meeting with Interior Secretary Gale Norton at which the attorney general handed her a letter criticizing the BIA’s decision to grant federal recognition to the Schaghticokes. Blumenthal notified the parties days after the meeting with Norton. Notice to the parties of a meeting, Dorsey said, "must be given prior to its occurrence….Without any party to this matter being present, Blumenthal affirmatively contacted and met with Secretary Norton, the head of the agency currently hearing an appeal in which Blumenthal has an interest about the very subject matter of the appeal. Such conduct, at the very least, appears improper and thus threatens to subvert the integrity of the appeal process itself,” Dorsey wrote in his June 14, 2004 revised order. An investigation last year by the Interior Department's Inspector General exonerated the Schaghticoke and the BIA of all wrong doing, following unsubstantiated allegations of illegal lobbying corruption and undue political influence from U.S. Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-5th) and Blumenthal. On Aug. 16 Reif filed a motion in U.S. District Court opposing an effort by TASK, Cooper and Perkins to avoid being deposed. A similar brief was filed recently in Washington, D.C. by the firm of Hobbs, Strauss, Dean and Walker, opposing BGR’s efforts to avoid being deposed. “It is clear from material already obtained in discovery that BGR has made contacts with the BIA, although the scope of those contacts cannot be determined without further inquiry,” Reif wrote. Certain Kent residents formed TASK in 2004 to raise $1.5 million and overturn the Schaghticokes acknowledgment. The Schaghticokes are a Kent-based tribe with 300 members and a 400-acre reservation. The colonial government first set aside tribal lands in 1736. Last May, Dorsey ruled that the tribal nation could conduct depositions of officials and residents who took park in a closed door meeting last winter at the Fife & Drum Restaurant in Kent, hosted by TASK to introduce state and local officials to the BGR lobbyists. Since that meeting, Congresswoman Johnson- who recommended BGR to TASK- filed a bill in Congress to terminate the tribe. The state’s congressional delegation and governor testified against the tribe at a Senate hearing, and the Interior Board of Indian Appeals voided the BIA’s decisions recognizing the Schaghticokes and another Connecticut tribe- the Eastern Pequots- sending them back to the bureau for reconsideration. --------------- Veteran TV News Reporter Publishes Online Native Youth Magazine Phoenix, AZ--June 27,2005--Mary Kim Titla, veteran Arizona TV news reporter and Native American Journalists Association member, has created an online magazine for Native youth. Native Youth Magazine.com will target young people between the ages of 12 and 25 and feature articles, poetry, photos and profiles of young Native people across the United States and Canada. "More than half of the Native American population is under the age of 25. There is a need for an online magazine showcasing their talents, ideas and general lifestyle," said Titla, a San Carlos Apache member. "This Website will become what Native youth want it to be. The goal is to show the world what our Native youth are capable of doing. Through their own stories, they’ll be able to touch others and encourage their peers to become positive role models." Native Youth Magazine.com will officially launch its Website July 1. Titla is working with a select group of students to create the site, and plans to continue working with Native youth in focus groups to help determine what topics and issues they would like to see on the Website. Titla recently debuted a sample of the Website during the Native American Basketball Invitational in Phoenix during the past weekend. Native Youth Magazine.com will also promote its new online publication at the National UNITY (United National Indian Tribal Youth) conference July 7-11 in San Diego. The online magazine is seeking items, such as poetry, profiles, articles about school or community events and illustrations, to place on the Website from youth ages 12-25. Native Youth Magazine.com is also looking for a logo and young artists are encouraged to submit a design. The winner of the national logo contest will receive $250. All stories must be 500 words and be sent to: firstname.lastname@example.org For more information, contact Mary Titla at: email@example.com. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Interesting websites: How Long Do You Think You Will Live? http://www.nmfn.com/tn/learnctr--lifeevents--longevity Cherokee National Holiday, Celebrating the State of Sequoyah - Labor Day Weekend, September 2, 3, & 4 http://www.cherokee.org/extras/holiday/53/ ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== A scholarly thesis: VOTING RIGHTS IN INDIAN COUNTRY By Janine B. Pease, D. Ed. for the “Lessons From the Past, Prospects for the Future: Honoring the Fortieth Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.” April 2005 Yale University, Center for the Study of American Politics Introduction. Voting rights in Indian Country pertains to the participation of American Indians or Native Americans, in the federal, state and local election process. American Indian voting rights are complicated by legal, historical and cultural structures that pose formidable barriers to their full participation in the civic life of the country. The Voting Rights Acts has added complexity to the situation. American Indians have struggled to maintain a separate existence as tribal nations, while other American minorities worked to achieve integration into American society. Over the past twenty years, however, Indian Country has been the scene of extensive litigation over voting rights, at the school board, city, county and legislative district levels. American Indians make up 1.4% of the nation’s population, but are 1% to 6% of the voters in twelve western states. Heightened American Indian voter participation and highly contested elections have made Indian Country a battleground for American voting rights. This study poses six questions, to sort through the maze of voting rights in Indian Country: 1. What historical events form American Indian voting rights? 2. Are there barriers to American Indian voter participation? 3. How does the Voting Rights Act work to protect American Indian voters? 4. Which voting rights cases frame Indian Country voting rights? 5. What is the status of voting rights in Indian Country today (2000 – 2005)? 6. What are the future prospects for the Indian country voting rights? Sources for this research are standard works in American Indian history, U. S. Department of Justice publications, the American Indian Law Review, Indian Country news sources (Indian Country Today, NCAI News, Native American News, The Missoulian, The Great Falls Tribune, and Billings Gazette). Further, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Montana, and ACLU of the Dakotas provide a rich archive on American Indian voting rights. An emphasis was placed on the story of American Indian voting rights, with the voices of plaintiffs, actions with consequences, both good and bad. An Introduction to Indian Country. American Indian people reside in urban and rural reservation communities, and make up 1.4 percent of the United States population (Census 2000). American Indians are those who reported being “all or part” American Indian or Alaska Native. The ten U.S. states with the largest American Indian population (in order) are California, Oklahoma, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, New York, Washington, North Carolina, Michigan and Alaska. The largest percentage, 43%, live in the West, while 31 % reside in the South, 17% in the Midwest and 9% in the Northeast. There are twenty-eight counties in the country with a majority Indian population, The federal government currently recognizes over five hundred tribal nations, and fifty are state recognized (in California and New York, for example). American Indians are among the nation’s poor. In Montana, families living below the poverty line range from 40% to 75% on the seven reservations; and urban Indian families reflect a similar socio-economic status. The median American Indian family income (family of four) is $21,000/year, compared to $31,000/year for White Montanans. The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research assess educational achievement in the United States, and found the high school completion rate of 54% among American Indian youth (compared to 76% among White youth, 49% among African American youth and 48% among Hispanic American youth), and that only 14% of the American Indian high school graduates were ready to enter college (by standardized test scores) The American Indian age profile is youthful. According to the U.S. Census 2000, 33% of all American Indians are younger than 18 years of age, compared to the American population with 25.6% younger than 18 years of age. American Indians are young and seriously undereducated. What historical events impact American Indian voting rights? In 1879, in Nebraska, Standing Bear was found to be human by Judge Dundy, who declared that “Indians were people within the meaning of the laws, and that they had the rights associated with a writ of habeas corpus.” No mention was made of citizenship, however. The Congress of the United States granted citizenship to American Indians in 1924, with the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act. Citizenship was not extended to all American Indians with this Congressional action, for seven States persisted in restrictions against Indian suffrage until 1938. The change of federal law regarding Indian citizenship did little to rectify the racial attitudes these requirements had perpetrated during the years of their enforcement. The right to vote has been declared by the United States Supreme Court as fundamental, since “it is preservative of other basic civil and political rights.” But, for American Indians, there is no one defining moment when the right to vote was secured. Rather, the struggle for that right has been “an extraordinarily prolonged, complex and piecemeal process that has yet to be fully resolved.” The states set the requirements for voter eligibility, in local, state and national elections. Western states imposed severe restrictions on American Indian voting, that pertain to residence, competence, civilization, tax status (meaning property owners), or in various combinations of these restrictions. STATES HISTORIC RESTRICTIVE APPROACHES TO AMERICAN INDIAN VOTING Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, Oregon, South Dakota and Wyoming. Required that voters be citizens, and Indians were not citizens until 1924. South Dakota officially excluded Indians from voting and holding office until 1940. California, Minnesota, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Wisconsin Required that voters be “civilized,” meaning that a civilized person of the Indian descent shall have severed their tribal relations (North Dakota constitution). Idaho, Montana, New Mexico and Washington Disqualified Indians from the polls “Indians not taxed.” Arizona, Montana, Nevada and Utah Required citizenship, residency and tax roll listees. Indians were considered under government “guardianship,” therefore persons of disability.” Utah Disenfranchised Indians by declaring Indian residents of reservations were not state residents. While the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 ended most of the state restrictions, seven states persisted in these restrictions until 1938. South Dakota maintained restrictions until 1940, and Utah persisted until 1956. The Montana Territory denied voting rights to American Indians under the “guardianship” of the government category of restriction, and in the Enabling Act of 1889 (statehood), Montana restricted voting to citizens without regard to race or color, with the exception of Indians not taxed. By 1900, Montana enacted two additional voting qualifications: tax payers and persons listed on the city/county tax rolls. Again, American Indians were disenfranchised. In 1911, the Montana legislature declared that “anyone living on an Indian or military reservation who had not previously acquired residency in a Montana county before moving to a reservation would not be regarded as a Montana resident 2. Are there barriers to American Indian voter participation? The states’ voting restrictions had implications and meaning to American Indians, that negatively impacted American Indians from participation in the voting process, long after the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. The restrictions and their implications for American Indian voters are delineated below. State Restriction Implications of the Restriction Citizenship citizens American Indian were not qualified to be citizens if they resided on the reservation. Civilized Indian people and their lifeways were “uncivilized, inferior,” to be civilized was to disavow relationships with their families and tribes, and to move off the reservation. Taxed/Property Owner Tax roll status required American Indians to move their lands out of trust status into the fee patent or state taxable status Under Federal Guardianship Federal “wards” are incompetent, incapable of conducting business on their own behalf, disabled and requiring the care of a white “guardian.” Non-Residents Reservations and their American Indian residents are “out of the state” For American Indians, the voter restrictions created long lasting negative associations with voting and voting procedures, with implications that dissuade American Indian voter participation. The U.S. system of Indian reservations has added to a separation of Indian people from the non-Indian people. The voting restrictions are indicators of the distance and separation, between American Indians and their (mostly) White neighbors. Legal and political patterns of separation promoted a mind-set and acceptance of these approaches. At its extreme, Indians were set apart and thought of as inferior. Registering to vote is also an action and a requirement that harkens back to signing up. Under the early reservation system, household censuses were taken. Indian families were “registered” or “enrolled” and subsequently assigned to specific reservation districts, or residence. The reservation system did not allow American Indians mobility among communities, except with permission from the government agent. Requiring an Indian to “sign-here” is reminiscent of a land leases or sales, or even the forced removal of Indian children from their families to far away Indian boarding schools. Registering and signing in have serious and negative associations for American Indian people. Since the 1950’s, many counties limited access to voter registration. In the recent past, Montana counties required “in person voter registration” at the county clerk or auditor’s office in the county court house, located in a non-Indian border town. South Dakota has three “unorganized counties” that prohibited Indians from voting in elections as late as 1975 and from holding office as late as 1980. Hyper-technical registration was also common, that required the applicant to know the section, township and range of their residence. Many rural counties and Indian reservations lack an addressing system, making an exact location difficult to complete. Registering to vote was not a matter of addresses, or post office box, but by section, township and range. Registration form errors were cause for rejection by county officials. Registration deadlines prior to primary and general elections, and purging systems also contribute to this list of barriers to voting and voter registration. Voter dissuasion has happened at the polls. Rural polling places may be at a considerable distance from an American Indian voter’s home, in rural reservation locations. Impoverished American Indian voters may lack transportation to and from the polling places. Rural reservation road conditions in June and November can be muddy or snow-packed, keeping voters home on election day. Once at the polls, the election judges may not speak the tribal language, which for older American Indian voters may be a necessity. How does the Voting Rights Act work to protect American Indian voters? The United States Congress enacted the Indian Civil Rights Act in 1968, to extend to tribes and tribal members the constitutional standards of the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment. However, Indian civil rights emanate from a nearly opposite direction, from other American minorities. Indian tribes have struggled to maintain separate political entities with their own institutions and beliefs. Through treaties and federal legislation, the tribes have sought to prevent the dismantling of their own systems. In the formative era of American Civil Rights, American Indian tribes were completely enveloped in civil rights struggles of their own, even more basic – their very existence as Indian nations. The House Concurrent Resolution 108, passed during the Eisenhower administration, unilaterally terminated the special relationship between the federal government and a specific set of Indian tribes. Massive relocation efforts moved American Indian young people from reservations to urban centers. These American Indian civil rights issues have no application to other minority groups in this country, since American Indians have a unique political and legal status, under treaty law. From The Native Americans, by Spencer and Jennings, the governmental policy is described: During the 1950’s there was an unfortunate reversal in governmental proposals and policies for the Indians. It now became the official aim to accelerate the liquidation of the government’s responsibility to the Indians as speedily as possible. The idea was to ret rid of the Indians by dispersing them and relieving the government of all responsibility for their specific problems. The new aim was to “get the government out of the Indian business” . . . by a policy of termination of governmental services to the Indians, by transferring federal jurisdiction of law and order on Indian lands to the states, and by the relocation of as many Indians as possible off the reservations, in order to hasten, once again, their assimilation an to alleviate the pressure of increasing population upon the inadequate resources of the reservation. Tribes banned together in opposition to these federal policies and through intensive effort, with seminal leadership from the National Congress of American Indians, and managed to obtain their reversal. The tribes terminated in 1953 took twenty years to restore their federal recognition. Relocation, however, continued to remove American Indian youth from reservations until 1978. The American Indian tribes and their leadership were entirely consumed with this federal policy reversal, essentially eclipsing their contributions or participation in the civil rights movement in the 1950’s and 1960’s. The Voting Rights Act and amendments do provide protections for American Indian and Alaska Natives. American Indians and Alaska Natives are protected from discrimination and intimidation in exercising the right to vote and in becoming candidates for serving in federal, state and local elected offices. Ten years after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, in 1975, amendments included American Indians, with the expansion of the geographic reach of the special pre-clearance provision of Section 2, and the requirement of certain jurisdictions to provide bilingual election materials to language minorities. Federal observers may be placed in polling places to make sure minority voters are permitted to vote without discrimination. After the amendment of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, in 1982, incorporated a discriminatory “results” standard, that was a prohibition on the use of voting practices or procedures that “deny or abridge” the right to vote on the basis of race or color. Since 1982, voting rights actions have been brought by American Indians in Arizona, Wisconsin, Nevada, South Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and New Mexico. Which voting rights cases frame Indian Country voting rights? Several voting rights cases build a framework for Indian Country voting rights. Members of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe brought the first case, under the amended Section 2, in South Dakota in 1984. Buckanaga v. Sisseton School District of 1985 challenged its school district’s voting system, claiming that the at-large election system dilutes Indian voting strength. The federal district court dismissed the complaint, but the Court of appeals for the Eight Circuit reversed, and on remand, a cumulative voting system was adopted on settlement, giving voters the option of casting their allotted votes in any combination. In Sanchez v. King in 1982, the New Mexico federal court found the state’s reapportionment plan violated the one-person, one-vote rule and ordered the state to redraw the districts. In Windy Boy v. Big Horn County of 1986, Northern Cheyenne and Crow Indians of Montana charged that the Big Horn County and Hardin Schools 17H and 1 at-large election schemes violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The lead plaintiff was Janine Pease-Windy Boy (this author), a Crow Indian. The federal district court of Montana ruled a violation and ordered the reorganization of the county and school district into single-member districts or zones, with Indian majorities in one commissioner district (of three) and two school board districts or zones (of five). These cases establish critical precedents in voting systems and state legislative reapportionment plans that violate the American Indian Voting Rights Act in Indian Country. What is the status of voting rights in Indian Country, today (2000 – 2005)? Voting rights activities are outlined here, for three states, South Dakota, Minnesota and Montana. This summary will give an overview of the protections sought by American Indian people, and the federal courts’ rulings. These illustrate the importance of the Voting Rights Act, Section 2 and 501, in particular. In South Dakota, seven voting rights lawsuits have impacted American Indian voters and their rights. The Dakota and Lakota Indian voters have complained to the federal courts about VRA violations in American Indian voter dilution in at-large election schemes at the city, school district and county levels, reapportionment and redistricting actions, and abject neglect of election procedures that impact protected minorities. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of the Dakotas have been instrumental in the development of these cases: • The South Dakota legislative redistricting committee proposed the demise of a special Indian majority legislative district with Indian voters from Cheyenne River and Standing Rock reservations in 2001. Tribal members Steven Emery, Rocky Le Compte, and James Picotte filed suit in 2000, challenging the state’s 1996 interim legislative redistricting plan. In December 2001, in Emery v. Brown, the district court invalidated the state’s 2001 legislative plan as diluting Indian voting strength, and “on the totality of circumstances analysis required by Section 2, the court found there was substantial evidence that South Dakota officially excluded Indians from voting and holding office.” • The South Dakota legislative redistricting committee formed legislative district 27 by packing Lakota Indian people from the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Oglala Sioux Tribe in Shannon and Todd Counties, making a supermajority district. The district had 90% American Indian population. South Dakota is one of 16 states whose political districts are subject to federal review due to a history of discrimination against minority people. In Bone Shirt v. Nelson, Judge Sheier, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and found that the South Dakota legislature violated Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and ordered the state to propose a plan. It was found that South Dakota sought preclearance only ten times in thirty years. Jennifer Ring, of ACLU of The Dakota, observed that South Dakota adopted a renegade position and openly flouted compliance with this important law (VRA). The plaintiffs in the Bone Shirt case are Alfred Bone Shirt, Belva Black Lance, Bonni High Bull and Germaine Moves Camp. The district lines had not been redrawn by the Legislative Executive Committee even as late as October 2004, due to what the state called “lack of data and authority to redraw lines.” • Indian plaintiffs challenged the Wagner Community School District in Charles Mix County in March 2002, for voting rights Section 2 violation. Under a consent decree in March 2003, a method of elections using cumulative voting replaced the previous at-large system. The Weddell V. Wagner Community School District, resulted in the election of John Sully, an Indian, to the school board. • In Martin, South Dakota, a town of 1000 people total, there are three city wards. For 90 years, the boundaries have stayed the same. The city has 44% American Indian population, and following the decennial census, the city redrew the ward boundaries with 33% American Indian population in each of the three wards. Bryan Sells of the ACLU told the federal court that Martin boundary lines deny minority voters the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. • In Buffalo County, 1500 of the county population of 2000 was packed into one county commissioner district, all being members of the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe. Whites, 17% of the county, controlled the other two commissioners districts. With representation by the ACLU, the tribal members brought suit in 2003, alleging the districting plan was mis-apportioned, with a total deviation of 218%. Settled by consent decree, the county admitted the plan was discriminatory and submitted to federal supervision of future plans. • The city boundaries in Lake Andes, South Dakota, were moved in 2004. Mostly American Indian voters received a letter informing them they were no longer within the Lake Andes city limits. Dakota tribal members are challenging the districting process. • Yankton Sioux tribal members filed a lawsuit in Pierre charging that Charles Mix County is violating Native American voting rights by using election districts that are unequal in population and divide the Native American community. The total deviation of existing districts in the county is 19 percent, almost twice the legal limit. Located in south central South Dakota, Charles Mix County is rural and is governed by a three-member county commission, in single member districts. American Indians are one-third of the county population. Lead plaintiff Evelyn Blackmoon said, “We have been without a voice in the commission for too long. This is an effort to change that.” Blackmoon v Charles Mix County was filed in January 2005. In Minnesota, the voting rights activity pertains to the Minnesota legislatures new voter ID requirements, following the federal “Help America Vote Act.” • The ACLU of Minnesota, the National Congress of American Indians and three Minnesota American Indian voters complained that the State of Minnesota established voting requirements more restrictive that the federal Help America Vote Act, that unfairly targets American Indian voters. The Minnesota law prohibited the use of a valid federally recognized tribal ID, for election-day registration. District Court Judge Rosenbaum issued the order to allow the use of tribal ID cards, with or without addresses as valid identification for the 2004 general election, and ordered the Minnesota Secretary of State to notify the county auditors of the decision. The plaintiffs were Bonnie Door-Charwood of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, and Richard Smith, a member of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. In Montana, the voting rights litigation in the years 2000 to 2005 spans issues of at-large elections in school districts and counties, and the redistricting of legislative districts. • Tribal members from the Northern Cheyenne Tribe and the Salish and Kootenai Conferated Tribes filed two lawsuits in the U. S. District Court in Missoula, Montana in 1999, charging that county and school district election practices diluted their voting strength, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. At issue was the election method of the Rosebud County Commission and the Ronan – Pablo School Board. Alden v. Board of County Commissioners of Rosebud County, Montana and Matt v. Ronan School District 30 were taken to trial in 2000, and in May of 2000, Federal District Court Judge Molloy ordered local officials to create new boundaries for the 2000 Rosebud County Commissioner elections, an order that cancelled a primary election and provided for a special general election for the commission race. The Ronan School District drew new boundaries in a separate settlement agreement, and in early May 2000, two Native Americans were elected to the Ronan School Board. • In 2002, Blackfeet and Salish - Kootenai tribal members, represented by the ACLU of Montana, filed a complaint in federal district court, charging that the 1993 Montana Redistricting Plan diluted Indian voting strength, when it failed to organize Indian majority districts on the Blackfeet and Salish/Kootenai reservations. US District Court Judge Hatfield found the district did not dilute the voting strength of Indian voters, because the percentage of majority Indian districts in Montana is roughly proportional to the number of Indian voters in the State and that white bloc voting was not significant. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected both of these contentions and remanded the case back to District court. On remand, U. S. District Court Judge Pro of Nevada ruled that the 1992 redistricting plan did not dilute Indian voters ability to elect candidates in Glacier and Lake counties, upholding the original District court decision. Shortly thereafter, the 2003 Montana legislative redistricting plan was adopted, that created additional majority Indian districts on the two reservations. This was the original relief sought by the plaintiffs in Old Person v. Brown. The plaintiffs in this case were Earl Old Person, Carol Juneau, Joe McDonald and Jeannine Padilla. • The Assiniboine and Gros Ventre tribal members Delores Plumage and Bill Stiff Arm, represented by the U.S. Department of Justice, filed a lawsuit in federal district court asking for the Blaine County Commissioner districts to be redrawn. In September of 2000, the Montana Association of Counties and the Mountain States Legal Foundation came to the support of the Blaine County Commissioners. Blaine County is 40% American Indian in population - the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre Tribes. Fort Belknap tribal leaders issued a strongly worded news release condemning the Blaine county commissioners for being unwilling to settle the redistricting issue. The trial was in October of 2001, and expert witness Theodore Arrington of the University of North Carolina – Charlotte testified about the racially polarized voting in Blaine County. In June of 2001, the district court ruled that the at-large voting system violated the Voting Rights Act. American Indian Blaine County residents drew the redistricting plan accepted by the court, but the Blaine County Commissioners appealed the district court ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the District court decision in April 2002. Delores Plumage was elected to the Blaine County Commission, in the first election under the new plan. • The Montana Legislature, leaders of the majority and minority, appoint the members of the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission. In 1999, each leader appointed two members, and the four members convened to elect a presiding officer. No candidate acquired a majority vote, and in this stalemate, the Montana Supreme Court, delegated to appoint the presiding officer by the Montana Constitution, appointed Janine Pease-Pretty On Top (this author) by unanimous vote. The Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission, a citizen’s commission, convenes for three years, in organizational meetings and public hearings. Here are key points of Montana’s redistricting: ? Montana has an American Indian and Alaska Native population of 7.32%, an increase of 39.1% over 1990. ? The Commission began redistricting in north central Montana, the area under litigation in the Old Person v. Brown case, and held hearings in Browning and in Great Falls. ? Criteria #3 of four was the protection of minority voting rights and compliance with the Voting Rights Act. Criteria #4 was – Race cannot be the predominant factor to which the traditional discretionary criteria are subordinated (based on Shaw v. Reno 1993). ? The Commission declined to become a part to the Old Person v. Brown litigation, but adopted Resolution #1, that commended the parties in the case for attempting to settle, and resolved to create an additional Indian majority House District and Indian majority Senate District in the region of Montana, the Blackfeet and Flathead Reservation areas. ? Based on the 2000 census data, the commission maintained the existing number of districts, although the districts reflected the required equitable population in each district. The 2003 plan contains six Indian majority House Districts and three Indian majority Senate Districts. House Districts 1 (new majority district) and 2 (existing majority district) combine into Senate District 1 (new majority district) and include parts of the Flathead Indian reservation and the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. House District 18 (existing majority district) includes the Rocky Boy Indian reservation of the Chippewa Cree Tribe and the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation. HD 18 combined with House District 22 (existing majority district) into Senate District 9 (new majority district). House District 22 has a portion of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, which include the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes. House District 29 includes the Northern Cheyenne and Crow Tribes and Reservation and is combined with the House District 30 which includes the Crow Tribe and Reservation, for Senate District 12. (All three districts are existing Indian majority districts.) American Indians in South Dakota, Minnesota and Montana are actively involved in the protection of their right to vote, and have sought protection under the Voting Rights Act, Sections 2 and 501. American Indian disenfranchisement is a reality throughout Indian Country, and these tribal groups and individual plaintiffs have challenged their schools, cities, counties and states election systems and voting procedures. What are the future prospects for Indian country voting rights The U. S. Census indicated a 38% growth in the American Indian population from 1990. The converse is true of the non-Indian population adjacent or contiguous to many Indian reservations; due to low birth rates, an aging population, and rural population losses. In some instances, this contrasting demographic dynamic exacerbates local issues and the “us and them” characterization referred to in the Martin, South Dakota litigation over city wards. The American Indian population growth has meant an expansion of the potential and real American Indian voter bloc. The elections of 2000, 2002 and 2004 demonstrated election results that can be inordinately influenced by 1% to 5% of the votes cast. The 1996 Pat Williams Congressional race in Montana, the 2002 Slade Gorton Senatorial defeat in Washington State and the 2002 Tim Johnson Senatorial victory in South Dakota are all cases where the Indian vote was essentially the percentage difference in votes cast. Indians voters that were 1% to 6% of theses states’ electorate, voted as a bloc, and determined the outcome of these elections: Williams’s won in Montana, Gorton was defeated in Washington and Johnson was elected in South Dakota. Political competition for the Indian vote, and attempts to control, manage or suppress the Indian vote have been and will be heavier where elections are close. Redistricting will be a cyclical concern, and for American Indians, a matter of constant attention. The American Indian vote has been recognized as a swing vote in close races at many levels. The swing vote has been especially influential when the particular state is not clearly “red” or “blue.” The American Indian percentages in Western states can make a definitive difference for wins or losses, and in the current state and national political environment, this potential places American Indian voters under increased scrutiny. Candidates will be “courting the Indian vote” and when there is competition, election monitors will probably be required. & The Montana voting rights litigation in the Blaine County Commissioner redistricting indicated the support of the Mountain States Legal Foundation AND the Montana Association of Counties. The activity and presence of Montanans Opposed to Discrimination and the Civil Rights Organization in Bighorn and Lake Counties show that White rights organizations and associations do support election schemes that dilute the American Indian vote, despite federal Court decisions to follow the Voting Rights Act and its protections. The western media often express empathy for the cities, counties and states in the region. Further, the National Congress of American Indians with the Minnesota American Indians and the American Civil Liberties Union clearly demonstrates the allies in Indian Country voting issues. These alliances place American Indian voting squarely in the public arena, into the Courts, and particularly with regional and national importance. The press writers illustrate a huge variation in discussion of voting rights cases, both in Montana and South Dakota. When Blaine County commissioners met the Department of Justice attorneys in federal court, the Great Falls Tribune writer Eric Greene said, “In a lopsided showdown reminiscent of David and Goliath, Blaine County is battling the US Department of Justice over the voting rights of Native Americans.” The implication is that Blaine County is the “little county” and the Justice Department is the “big government” beating up on the little county. Blaine County associated with the Mountain States Foundation, for financial support and expertise. The real inquiry here must be, where are the American Indians in this scenario, so much furniture? The American Indian voter projects and voting rights initiatives are overlooked, in the greater scenario of “big government beating up on the little guy county.” The federal courts have created a “legal paradox.” The protection of minority voters, language minorities is required by the VRA, but recent court decisions have required the redistricting can not be done on the basis of race alone. Karen Humphrey of the Indian Country Today, points out, “the redistricting issue created a paradox for lawmakers because while the federal law demands the voting rights of racial and ethnic minorities must be protected, the courts ruled in the last decade that race cannot be a primary factor when drawing a given district.” Orlen Svingen, historian and author of “Jim Crow, Indian Style,” poses what he calls “ponderables,” from his study of the Windy Boy case: The anti-Indian sentiment is strong and defiant, the anti-Indian organizations were intent on countering Indian voter participation in local and state elections and in criminal prosecution of leading activists, and the official obstruction of American Indian voting. The historical roots of anti-Indian sentiment are deep in the towns on/near the reservations in Indian Country. The anti-Indian attitudes were shown to be widespread, among county officials, among White ranchers, to the extent of formal and secret organization. In Montana, the statewide organizations of like-minded non-Indians have affected American Indian voting rights in Big Horn, Blaine, Rosebud and Lake Counties. The prospect for the future is that this anti-Indian sentiment will build as a correlate with the growth of Indian population and levels of voting participation in Indian Country. Conclusion. A complex series of historical events contribute to American Indian voting rights, including the restrictions by states that barred American Indians from voting and holding office for reasons of non-citizenship, residence, civilization, non taxpayer status, and wardship. The American Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 ended most states’ restriction, although some persisted until the 1950’s. Historic restrictions have dissuaded American Indian voters from the voting process. Barriers to American Indian voter participation do exist. The conditions of rurality, poverty and socio- political separation of American Indians from whites, in the western states, pose formidable barriers to American Indian voter participation. Recent voting rights cases brought by American Indian plaintiffs have shown voter registration systems and election schemes are further barriers met by American Indian voters. The Voting Rights Act does protect American Indian voters, particularly Section 501 and Section 2. American Indians were brought under the Voting Rights Act protections with amendments in 1975 and 1982. The isolation of Indian Country, conditions of poverty, and the lasting impact of historic states’ restrictions kept American Indian voters from the benefits of the Act until the 1980’s. Several voting rights cases frame Indian Country voting rights. Buckanaga v. Sisseton Independent School District in South Dakota, Windy Boy v. Big Horn County in Montana, and Sanchez v. King in New Mexico set precedents regarding school board and county commissioner election systems and legislative districts that dilute American Indian voting strength. Since 2000, in just the last five years, voting rights in Indian Country has become an especially contested field. Election schemes that dilute American Indian voting strength at the city, school board, county and legislative districts levels are under scrutiny and before the federal courts in Montana and South Dakota, on behalf of American Indian people. Voting procedures and voter identification has been contested in Minnesota. Tribal nations and their members involved in these suits come from the Dakota, Lakota, Assiniboine, Gros Ventre, Salish and Kootenai, Blackfeet, Ute, Omaha and Winnebago, Ojibway, and Hochunk. Court ordered election scheme reorganization of school boards, county commissions and legislative districts have resulted in the election of American Indian people to public office. American Indian people are exerting their voting rights, and participating in stronger percentages in the election process. The prospects for Indian country voting rights is rife with contests, for the states, counties and cities in the western states where American Indian voters pose a formidable voter bloc. The contentious elections of Congressman Pat Williams in Montana, Senator Tim Johnson in South Dakota and Senator Slade Gorton in Washington State illustrate the power of the American Indian voters and their influence. Election officials and political parties will vie for American Indian voters, making voting processes and election schemes subject to scrutiny and challenge. A growing American Indian population and increasing American Indian voter participation will bring both positive and negative attention to American Indian voting rights with every election year, at all levels. The prospect for American Indian voter participation and the election of American Indian public officers is increasingly strong, and long overdue. Bibliography Adams, Jim. “An Indian country election scorecard.” Indian Country Today. November 01, 2002. Pp. 1-2. Adams, Jim. “NCAI Conference has case of jitters.” Indian Country Today. June 28, 2004. Pp. 1-2. Adams, Nicole. “Getting the Vote Out in Indian Country.” Winds of Change. Summer 2004. Pp. 1-6. American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU and Indian Rights Group Seek to Secure Voting Rights for Montana’s Native Americans.” July 7, 1999. Pp. 1-2. American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU Appeals Court Ruling on Indian Vote Dilution in Montana.” February 4, 2002. Pp. 1-2. American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU Charges South Dakota County Blocking Native Americans From Holding Office.” January 27, 2005. P. 1. American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU Secures Major Victory in Landmark Redistricting Case: Federal Court Rules South Dakota Violated Voting Rights of Native Americans.” September 15, 2004. P. 1. American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU Victorious in Securing Voting Rights for Native Americans in Montana.” May 18, 2000. P. 1. American Civil Liberties Union. “Court Rules Voters May Use Tribal ID Cards on Election Day.” October 29, 2004. Pp. 1-2. American Civil Liberties Union. “Minnesota’s Restrictive Voter Identification Rules Violate Federal Election Law, ACLU and Native American Groups Charge.” October 27, 2004. P. 1. ACLU of Montana. “U.S. v. Blaine County, et al. The Right of Suffrage and Equal Protection of the Laws. February 2001 and June 2001. ACLU of Montana. “Old Person, et al. v. Brown – The Right of Suffrage and Equal Protection of the Laws.” December 2002. Center for Community Change. “Community Voter Project of the Center for community Change: A Status Report.” A publication of the Center for Community Change. April 11, 2005. Pp. 1-5. Evans, Suzanne E. (University of California at Berkeley). “Voting.” Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Houghton Mifflin, College Division: (on-line). Pp. 1-2. Greene, Eric J. “Blaine County resists federal effort to build Indian representation.” Great Falls Tribune. February 20, 2000 Greene, Eric J. “Counties band together to fight Indian districts.” Great Falls Tribune. September 27, 2000. Greene, Eric J. “Federal efforts have heated up debate over fairness of state’s at-large elections.” Great Falls Tribune. February 20, 2000. Greene, Eric J. “Feds threaten suits over voting districts.” Great Falls Tribune. July 28, 1999. Greene, Eric J. “Majority-Indian district ordered – now.” Great Falls Tribune. May 20, 2000. Henderson, Wade. “The Voting Rights Act of 1965: 40 Years after “Bloody Sunday,” A Promise Still Unfulfilled.” A publication of civilrights.org. March 2, 2005. Pp. 1-3. Humphrey, Kay. “Sole Native American district remains.” Indian Country Today.” October 12, 2001. Pp. 1-2. Humphrey, Kay. “ACLU closely watching South Dakota redistricting.” Indian Country Today. October 9, 2001. Pp. 1-2. Ivanova, Karen. “ACLU asks to join Indian voting rights suit.” Great Falls Tribune. April 9, 2001. Pp. 1. Ivanova, Karen. “Redistricting debate coming to Hi-Line towns.” Great Falls Tribune. January 14, 2002. Johnson, Peter. “Trial focuses on strength of county’s Indian vote.” Great Falls Tribune. October 10, 2001. Pp. 1. Ivanova, Karen. “Tribal leaders condemn Blaine’s persistence.” Great Falls Tribune. Komp, Catherine. “Native Americans win Minnesota voting rights challenge.” The News Standard. A Project of PeoplesNetWorks. November 02, 2004. McDonald, Laughlin. “Voting Rights Act in Indian Country.” American Indian Law Review. Vol. 29, No. 1. Pp. 43-74. McCarty, Jason. “Hearing Scheduled in Voting Rights Lawsuit Filed by National Congress of American Indians and Minnesota ACLU.” NCAI News. October 29, 2004. McFarlane, Jane. “ACLU fights to join federal lawsuit.” Great Falls Tribune. June 19, 2001. Melmer, David. “ACLU files another suit in South Dakota.” Indian Country Today. October 29, 2004. pp. 1-2. Melmer, David. “Illegal voter districts to stand.” Indian Country Today. October 29, 2004. Pp. 1-2. Melmer, David. “Indian voters ousted from city in Couth Dakota.” Indian Country Today. September 10, 2004. Pp. 1-2. Melmer, David. “Largest voter lawsuit filed against South Dakota.” Indian Country Today. August 9, 2002. Melmer, David. “South Dakota redistricting draws lawsuit.” Indian Country Today. January 15, 2002. Pp. 1-2. Melmer, David. “South Dakota reprieve in voting rights violation.” Indian Country Today. Pp. 1-2. Melmer, David. “Voting rights violation argued (Part One).” Indian Country Today. July 12, 2004. Pp. 1-3. Melmer, David. “Voting rights violation argued.” Indian Country Today. July 16, 2004. Pp. 1-2. Pierpoint, Mary. “Haskell students exercised voting rights.” Indian Country Today. November 22, 2000. Pp. 1-2. Selden, Ron. “Montana leaders explore lawsuits, federal funding, legislative concerns.” Indian Country Today. January 03, 2001. Pp. 1-2. Senate Democratic Policy Committee. “The American Indian Vote: Celebrating 80 years of U.S. Citizenship.” Pp. 1-4. Svingen, Orlan J. “Jim Crow, Indian Style.” American Indian Quarterly. Vol. 11 (Fall 1987), pp. 275-286. United States Commission on Civil Rights. Indian Tribes: A Continuing Quest for Survival. A Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Pp. 31 – 41. United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. The Voting Rights Act of 1965.” Pp. 1-3. http://www.usdoj.gov/. United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Voting Section. “Introduction to Federal Voting Rights Laws.” Pp. 1-2. http://www.usdoj.gov/ United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. Voting Section. :Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act.” Pp. 1-3. University of Nebraska Native American Studies. “Native American Citizenship.” Pp. 1-2. United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. “Nondiscrimination Laws Enforced by the Civil Rights Division.” USDOJ: Washington D.C. Pp. 1-5. Wanamaker, Tom. “Census names top 10 tribes.” Indian Country Today. February 15, 2002. P. 1. Biography of Dr. Janine Pease. June 2005 Dr. Pease is the Vice President for American Indian Affairs. She joined the Rocky Mountain College administration in July of 2003. Dr. Pease heads the Division of American Indian Affairs, with four major objectives: the development of 100 American Indian degree graduates by 2008, the expansion of the educational partnership with five tribal colleges in Montana, the development of educational opportunities for American Indian people in the greater Yellowstone Region and in the northern Rockies; and the research and study of higher education among Indigenous peoples world-wide. She is also the Director of Native American Studies at Rocky. Professional Experience. From February 2001 to June 2003, she owned her own consulting firm, specializing in tribal colleges and universities program development and strategic planning. From 1982 to 2000, Dr. Pease served as president of Little Big Horn College, the two year college of the Crow Tribe. From 1975 to 79, Janine headed the Adult and Higher Education Programs of the Crow Central Education Commission. Prior to 1975, Dr. Pease held positions at Big Bend Community College in Washington and Navajo Community College is Arizona. Education. At Central Washington University (Ellensburg), Dr. Pease earned two bachelor’s degrees, one each in sociology and anthropology, in 1970. Her masters (1987) and doctorate (1994) are both in higher education from Montana State University – Bozeman. Research and Publications. Dr. Pease published works on Native American and Indigenous language immersion, including the indigenous peoples, Native Hawaiians and the Maori of New Zealand. The Tribal College Journal featured her articles “New Voices Ancient Words,” in Spring 2004, and “Bringing Thunder,” in Fall 2002. Her dissertation is entitled: “The Tribally Controlled Community Colleges Act of 1978: An Expansion of Federal Indian Trust Responsibility.” The American Indian Education Journal published Dr. Pease’s article “Events Leading to the Passage of the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act of 1978,” in the Spring 2004 issue. Tribal Membership. An enrolled member of the Crow Tribe, Janine is from the Valley of the Chiefs --- Lodge Grass District. She is a member of the Big Lodge/New Lodge Clan and of the Nighthawks Dance Society. Janine is also part Hidatsa Indian, English and German. Awards and Honors. Pease was awarded The National Indian Education Association National Indian Educator of the Year in 1990; the MacArthur Fellowship of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, in 1994 (an award sometimes called the “genius award”) and the Montana ACLU Jeanette Rankin Peace Award in 1991. Dr. Pease served on the White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities Advisory Council (1996 – 98), the National Advisory Council on Indian Education in 1994 – 98). the Indian Nations At-Risk Task Force (1989 – 1991). Community Service. Dr. Pease presented a keynote, “Voting Rights in Indian Country” at the 40th Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act Conference – Lessons from the Past, Prospects for the Future,” held at theYale University Center for the Study of American Politics, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, in April 2005. American Indian voting rights have concerned Dr. Pease since the 1980’s. She was the lead plaintiff in the historic and precedent setting voting rights litigation, Windy Boy v. Big Horn County, et. al. The Billings federal district court ruled for the plaintiffs, and ordered the redesign of school board and county commissioner districts; providing Indian majority districts based on population. In 1999, the Montana Supreme Court unanimously appointed Dr. Pease to a four-year term as Presiding Officer of the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission. In this role, Dr. Pease lent leadership to the redistricting of the Montana legislative districts. From 1983 - 1988, Janine served as chairman of the Big Horn County Democratic Central Committee, and was elected Lodge Grass Precinct #9 Democratic Committee woman for eight years. She assisted in the campaigns for former State Senator Bill Yellowtail, former State Legislator Angela Russell, current County Commissioners Doyle and Pretty on Top, and many School Board campaigns in Hardin and Lodge Grass. Most recently, Dr. Pease served on a city/county wide coordinating committee for the “Now In Our Town,” a community based dialog series on racism and race relations in Billings and Yellowstone County, 2004-05. Family. Dr. Pease resides with her granddaughter Tillie in Billings, Montana. She is the mother of two, Roses Holds Enemy (a law office manager) and Buddy Windy Boy (engineering student at MSU-B and Men’s Basketball player on the Yellowjackets), and the grandmother of three, Tillie (6), Kayden (3) and Tanner (8 months). Her parents are Ben and Margery Pease of Lockwood (near Billings). Dr. Janine B. Pease, Vice President for American Indian Affairs Rocky Mountain College, 1511 Poly Drive, Billings MT 59102 406-657-1133 ph 406-657-1169 fax firstname.lastname@example.org ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Humorous or interesting non-Indian material: From my Mother: This actually happened in Ft. Smith on Friday.. Our cousin Sally sent it to her... Two men went into a building with a gun and tried to rob a man who was ON THE AIR doing a live t.v. auction. When he saw the man with the gun, he announced it over his microphone for someone to call the police which they did. He then told the man the police were on the way and they were on live t.v, so the man asked a woman there for her car keys. She told the man she had locked them in her car and they believed her. DUH! So they ran off, but of course police were on their way, so they got caught. Now this is under the category of "world's dumbest criminals". They had pictures of the men in the paper. Have a nice weekend! Sally -------------- From my niece Marsha: THE YEAR 1905 One hundred years ago. What a difference a century makes! Here are some of the U.S. statistics for the Year 1905: The average life expectancy in the U.S. was 47 years. Only 14 percent of the homes in the U.S. had a bathtub. Only 8 percent of the homes had a telephone. A three-minute call from Denver to New York City cost eleven dollars. There were only 8,000 cars in the U.S., and only 144 miles of paved roads. The maximum speed limit in most cities was 10 mph. Alabama, Mississippi, Iowa, and Tennessee were each more heavily populated than California. With a mere 1.4 million people, California was only the 21st most populous state in the Union. The tallest structure in the world was the Eiffel Tower! The average wage in the U.S. was 22 cents per hour. The average U.S. worker made between $200 and $400 per year. A competent accountant could expect to earn $2000 per year, a dentist $2,500 per year, a veterinarian between $1,500 and $4,000 per year, and a mechanical engineer about $5,000 per year. More than 95 percent of all births in the U.S. took place at home. Ninety percent of all U.S. doctors had no college education. Instead, they attended so-called medical schools, many of which were condemned in the press and by the government as "substandard." Sugar cost four cents a pound. Eggs were fourteen cents a dozen. Coffee was fifteen cents a pound. Most women only washed their hair once a month, and used borax or egg yolks for shampoo. Canada passed a law that prohibited poor people from entering into their country for any reason. Five leading causes of death in the U.S. were: 1. Pneumonia and influenza 2. Tuberculosis 3. Diarrhea 4. Heart disease 5. Stroke The American flag had 45 stars. Arizona, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Alaska hadn't been admitted to the Union yet. The population of Las Vegas, Nevada, was only 30!!! Crossword puzzles, canned beer, and ice tea hadn't been invented yet. There was no Mother's Day or Father's Day. Two out of every 10 U.S. adults couldn't read or write. Only 6 percent of all Americans had graduated from high school. Marijuana, heroin, and morphine were all available over the counter at the local corner drugstores. Back then pharmacist said, "Heroin clears the complexion, gives buoyancy to the mind, regulates the stomach and bowels, and is, in fact, a perfect guardian of health." (Shocking!) Eighteen percent of households in the U.S. had at least one full-time servant or domestic help. There were about 230 reported murders in the entire U.S. And I forwarded this from someone else without typing it myself, and sent it to you in a matter of seconds! Try to imagine what it may be like in another 100 years. -------------- From Louie: Helpful Things---who knew?? =========================================== Sealed envelope - Put in the freezer for a few hours, then slide a knife under the flap. The envelope can then be resealed.. (hmmmmmm...) ============================================ Use Empty toilet paper roll to store appliance cords. It keeps them neat and you can write on the roll what appliance it belongs to. ============================================ For icy door steps in freezing temperatures: get warm water and put Dawn dishwashing liquid in it. Pour it all over the steps. They won't refreeze. ================================================== Crayon marks on walls? This worked wonderfully! A damp rag, dipped in baking soda. Comes off with little effort (elbow grease that is!). ============================================ Permanent marker on appliances/counter tops (like store receipt BLUE!) rubbing alcohol on paper towel. ================================================== Whenever I purchase a box of S.O.S Pads, I immediately take a pair of scissors and cut each pad into halves. After years of having to throw away rusted and unused and smelly pads, I finally decided that this would be much more economical. And now a box of S.O.S pads last me indefinitely! In fact, I have noticed that the scissors get sharpened this way! ============================================ Blood stains on clothes? Not to worry! Just pour a little hydrogen peroxide on a cloth and proceed to wipe off every drop of blood. Works every time! Now, where to put the body? ======================== ======================== Use vertical strokes when washing windows outside and horizontal for inside windows. This way you can tell which side has the streaks. Straight vinegar will get outside windows really clean. Don't wash windows on a sunny day. They will dry too quickly and will probably streak. ================================================ Spray a bit of perfume on the lightbulb in any room to create a lovely light scent in each room when the light is turned on. ================================================ Place fabric softener sheets in dresser drawers and your clothes will Smell freshly washed for weeks to come. You can also do this with towels and linen. ================================================ Candles will last a lot longer if placed in the freezer for at least 3 hours prior to burning. ================================================ To clean artificial flowers, pour some salt into a paper bag and add the flowers. Shake vigorously as the salt will absorb all the dust and dirt and leave your artificial flowers looking like new! Works like a charm! ================================================= To easily remove burnt on food from your skillet, simply add a drop or two of dish soap and enough water to cover bottom of pan, and bring to a boil on stovetop. ================================================ Spray your TUPPERWARE with nonstick cooking spray before pouring in tomato based sauces and there won't be any stains. ================================================ Wrap celery in aluminum foil when putting in the refrigerator and it Will keep for weeks. ================================================ When boiling corn on the cob, add a pinch of sugar to help bring out the corn's natural sweetness. ================================================ Cure for headaches: Take a lime, cut it in half and rub it on your forehead. The thro bbing will go away. ================================================ Don't throw out all that leftover wine: Freeze into ice cubes for future use in casseroles and sauces. Left over wine? What's that?! :) ================================================ To get rid of itch from mosquito bites, try applying soap on the area And you will experience instant relief. ================================================ Ants, ants, ants everywhere ... Well, they are said to never cross a chalk line. So get your chalk out and draw a line on the floor or wherever ants tend to march. See for yourself. ========================== ====================== Use air-freshener to clean mirrors. It does a good job and better still, leaves a lovely smell to the shine. ================================================ When you get a splinter, reach for the scotch tape before resorting to tweezers or a needle. Simply put the scotch tape over the splinter, then pull it off. Scotch tape removes most splinters painlessly and easily. ================================================ Now look what you can do with Alka Seltzer. Clean a toilet. Drop in two Alka Seltzer tablets,wait twenty minutes, brush and flush. The citric acid and effervescent action clean vitreous China. ================================================ Clean a vase. To remove a stain from the bottom of a glass vase or cruet, fill with water and drop in two Alka Seltzer tablets. ================================================ Polish jewelry. Drop two Alka Seltzer tablets into a glass of water and immerse the jewelry for two minutes. ================================================= Clean a thermos bottle. Fill the bottle with water, drop in four Alka Seltzer tabl ets, and let soak for an hour (or longer, if necessary). ================================================ Unclog a drain. Clear the sink drain by dropping three Alka Seltzer Tablets down the drain followed by a cup of Heinz White Vinegar. Wait a few minutes, then run the hot water. =============================================== Do your friends a favor. Pass this timely (and some not-so-timely) information on to a friend! I just did. Makes you wonder about ingesting Alka Seltzer, doesn't it? --------------- A female friend sent me these stories WOMEN'S REVENGE "Cash, check or charge?" I asked, after folding items the woman wished to purchase. As she fumbled for her wallet I noticed a remote control for a television set in her purse. "So, do you always carry your TV remote?" I asked. "No," she replied, " but my husband refused to come shopping with me, and I figured this was the most evil thing I could do to him legally." UNDERSTANDING WOMEN (A MAN'S PERSPECTIVE) I know I'm not going to understand women. I'll never understand how you can take boiling hot wax, pour it onto your upper thigh, rip the hair out by the root, and still be afraid of a spider. MARRIAGE SEMINAR While attending a Marriage Seminar dealing with communication, Tom and his wife Grace listened to the instructor, "It is essential that husbands and wives know each other's likes and dislikes." He addressed the man, "Can you name your wife's favorite flower?" Tom leaned over, touched his wife's arm gently and whispered, "It's Pillsbury, isn't it? WIFE VS. HUSBAND A couple drove down a country road for several miles, not saying a word. An earlier discussion had led to an argument and neither of them wanted to concede their position. As they passed a barnyard of mules, goats, and pigs, the husband asked sarcastically, "Relatives of yours?" "Yep," the wife replied, "in-laws." W O R D S A husband read an article to his wife about how many words women use a day...30,000 to a man's 15,000. The wife replied, "The reason has to be because we have to repeat everything to men... The husband then turned to his wife and asked, "What?" The Silent Treatment A man and his wife were having some problems at home and were giving each other the silent treatment. Suddenly, the man realized that the next day, he would need his wife to wake him at 5:00 AM for an early morning business flight. Not wanting to be the first to break the silence (and LOSE), he wrote on a piece of paper, "Please wake me at 5:00 AM." He left it where he knew she would find it. The next morning, the man woke up, only to discover it was 9:00 AM and he had missed his flight. Furious, he was about to go and see why his wife hadn't wakened him, when he noticed a piece of paper by the bed. The paper said, "It is 5:00 AM. Wake up." Men are not equipped for these kinds of contests. God may have created man before woman, but there is always a rough draft before the masterpiece. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Cultural Tidbits from the Cherokee Nation newsletter: Origin of Disease and Medicine The old ones tell us that at one time, the animals, fish, insects and plants could all talk. Together with the people, they were at peace and had a great friendship. As time went on, the numbers of people grew so much that their settlements spread over the whole earth, and the animals found themselves cramped for space. To make things worse, the people invented bows, knives, blowguns, spears, and hooks, and they began to hunt and kill the larger animals, birds and fish only for their hides. The smaller creatures, like the frogs and worms, were stepped upon and crushed without thought, out of carelessness, and sometimes even contempt. The animals decided to meet in a council to agree on measures for their safety. The bears were the first ones to meet in a council, at Mulberry Place, or Kuwahi mountain. The old White Bear Chief led the council. After each one had his turn of complaining about the way people killed their friends, ate their flesh, and used their skins for his own purposes, they decided to begin a war at once against man. One of the bears asked what kind of weapons the people used to destroy them. “Bows and arrows!” exclaimed all the Bears together. “What are they made of?” was the next question. “The bow is made of wood, and the string is made of our entrails,” replied one of the Bears. They then decided they would make a bow and see if they could use the same type of weapon the people were using. One of the Bears got a nice piece of locust wood, and another bear sacrificed himself for the good and betterment of his brothers of sisters. He offered to let his entrails be used for the string of the bow. When everything was ready, a Bear found that in letting the arrow fly after drawing the string, his long claws got in the way and his shot was ruined. He was very frustrated, but someone suggested they clip his claws. After this, it was found that the arrow went straight to the mark. But, the Chief White Bear objected, saying they must not trim their claws as they needed them to climb trees. “One of us already gave his life, and if we cut off our claws, then we must all starve together. I think we should trust and use the teeth and claws the Creator gave us, and it is plain that the people’s weapons were not made for us.” They could not think of a better plan, so the chief White Bear dismissed council and the Bears dispersed throughout the woods without having come up with a way to protect themselves. Had they come up with such a way, we would not be at war with the Bears, but the way it is today, the hunter does not even ask the Bear’s pardon when he kills one. The Deer held the next council, under their Chief Little Deer. They decided they would send arthritis to every hunter who kills one of them, unless he made sure to ask their pardon for the offense. They sent out a notice of their decision to the nearest settlement of Cherokees and told them how they could avoid this. Now, whenever a hunter shoots a Deer, Little Deer, who is swift as the wind and cannot be harmed, goes quickly to the spot and asks the spirit of the Deer if it has heard the prayer of the hunter, asking for pardon. If the spirit replies yes, everything is in balance. If the reply is no, Little Deer follows the trail of the hunter, and when resting in his home, Little Deer enters invisibly and strikes the hunter with arthritis. No hunter who regards his own health ever fails to ask pardon of the Deer for killing it. Next, the Fish and Reptiles held their own council. They decided to make their victims dream of snakes climbing about them, and blowing stinky breath in their faces. They also dream of decaying fish, so that they would lose their appetites and die of hunger. Finally, the Birds, Insects and smaller animals came together for their own council. The Grubworm was the Chief of the council. They decided that each should give his opinion, and then they would vote as to whether or not the people were guilty. Seven votes would be enough for a guilty verdict. One after another, they complained about man’s cruelty and disrespect. The Frog spoke first, saying, “We must do something to slow down how fast they are multiplying! Otherwise, we will disappear from the face of the earth through extinction!” The Frog continued, “They have kicked me about because they say I am ugly and now my back is covered with sores.” He showed them the spots on his back. Next, the Bird condemned people because, “They burn off my feet in the barbecue!” Others followed with their own complaints. The Groundsquirrel was the only one to say something in the people’s defense, because he was so small he did not endure the hunting and disrespect. The others became so angry at him, the swooped on him and tore him with their claws. The stripes are on his back until this day. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== Here are some randomly picked historical events for the month of September: September 1, 1845: Tired of the continuing feud between the "Old Settlers" and the "New Emigrants" factions of the CHEROKEE Nation, 54 CHEROKEE families will leave the Indian Territory reservation to join relatives in Texas. September 2, 1877: Victorio flees the San Carlos Reservation September 3, 1719: Today, Frenchman Bernard de la Harpe, discovers an Indian village on the Arkansas River, near Muskogee. La Harpe had traveled up the Red river, then went overland across Oklahoma. He will describe the land as fertile, and the people (probably a CADDOAN tribe) as friendly, and hard working. La Harpe will claim the land for France. September 4, 1886: Geronimo surrenders to General Nelson Miles at Skelton Canyon south of Apache Pass. September 5, 1814: Today will see the start of the two day battle of Credit Island, near present day Davenport, Iowa. Major Zackary Taylor, and 334 American soldiers are making their way up the Mississippi River attacking British positions with considerable success. Today they will encounter a force of 1000 Indians and British. The allied army will force Taylor to withdraw to safety in Saint Louis. September 6, 1839: Today, a conference is held by both the "old settlers" and the "new emigrant" CHEROKEEs in Tahlequah, Indian Territory (Oklahoma). John Ross will be elected Principal Chief of the newly rejoined CHEROKEE Nation. David Vann will be elected Second Chief. A new constitution will be adopted. The convention will continue until October 10, 1839. Many "old settlers" wil disavow any actions taken by this convention. They believe that the old settler government is still in power. (NOTE: If you visit my Cherokee photos page from my recent trip, you will see this date on the Cherokee Flag and seal.) September 7, 1957: An Act of Congress gives the CHILKAT Indians mineral rights to their lands near Klukwan. They will be one of only a very small number of Alaskans with this provision. September 8, 1865: Today, a grand council of the formerly pro-Union, and pro-Confederacy Indians is held at Fort Smith, Kansas. The newly appointed Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Dennis N.Cooley, will chair the meeting. Most of the Indians are told that they have forfeited their lands, and annuities by their traitorous support of the south. Each tribe would have to plead its case for mercy. September 9, 1891: Two KICKAPOO Chiefs, chosen to accompany Americans to the Capitol to obtain some money owed to them, are forced, in their words, to sign an "agreement" by Secretary of the Interior John W.Noble. This agreement would sell the United States, the KICKAPOO's "surplus lands" at thirty cents an acre. Many forgeries, and the signatures of dead Indians, and signatures of fictitious Indians were added to the agreement. Congress would approve the agreement on March 30, 1893. September 10, 1782: Today, a force of 40 British Rangers and 250 Indians will attack the fort built in Wheeling, Virginia (now West Virginia). None of the soldiers will be killed on either side. A few Indians will die in the fighting. Some historians feel that this is be the last battle of the American Revolutionary war. September 11, 1858: Col.Miles, with 5 companies of soldiers,and 50 Mexicans, enter the Canyon de Chelly, in north eastern Arizona. The NAVAJOs have not produced the Fort Defiance murderer of July 12, 1858. In fact, the NAVAJOs have tried to pass off a killed Mexican prisoner as the sought for NAVAJO. The soldiers will kill a few NAVAJOs in the canyon. The soldiers will camp in the canyon that night. The NAVAJOs launch an ineffectual attack from the canyon walls. A captured NAVAJO convinces the other NAVAJOs to stop the attack. September 12, 1878: Lt.H.S.Bishop, with 30 troopers, and a few SHOSHONE scouts, attack a band of BANNOCK Indians on the Dry Fork of the Snake River, southwest of Yellowstone Lake, in Wyoming. One Indian is killed, and 7 are captured during the fighting. The captive say they are from the Boise Reservation, and had escaped from the fight on September 4, 1878 on Clark's Fork with Col.Miles. While the Army had reported 11 Indians killed, the captives said the correct figure was 28. This will be the last significant battle of the BANNOCK War. According to an official government report, 40 whites, and 78 Indians will be killed during the war. September 13, 1878: Dull Knife, and his Northern CHEYENNE followers, have left their reservation in Indian Territory. They are head back to their old homelands. Today, they will cross the Cimarron River, 150 miles north of Fort Reno, in central Indian Territory, and establish a camp in some canyons. A group of ARAPAHOs, will talk with Dull Knife, and tell him the nearby soldiers want them to return to the reservation. Dull Knife refuses, and the soldiers attack. The Indians have the best strategic positions, and they will pin down the soldiers. After making their escape, the CHEYENNEs will be pursued along their entire northward journey. September 14, 1777: Spanish Governor Galvez issues an act today, in New Orleans. He orders the military, and Spanish subjects to "respect the rights of these Indians in the lands they occupy and to protect them in the possession thereof." September 15, 1797: On this date, the SENECA sign a treaty with Robert Morris, and Jeremiah Wadsworth, on the Genesee River, in Ontario County, New York, to get a two square mile piece of the TUSCARORA Reservation. September 16, 1850: Today in a letter to the President of the United States, Senator John Fremont states that Spanish law gave Indians rights to their lands. He feels the United States will have to enact some laws to revoke the Indians' rights. Under the treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo, the United States agreed to recognize Spanish land titles in the newly acquired California. September 17, 1778: The first DELAWARE treaty: DELAWARE Principal Chief Koquethagechton (White Eyes) is appointed as a Colonel at the treaty signing today. He will work to see the DELAWARE Nation become the 14th American State. The treaty will be signed in Pittsburgh, by three Chiefs: White Eyes, The Pipe, and John Killbuck, & Andrew and Thomas Lewis. September 18, 1813: After the "massacre" at Fort Mims, Alabama, by the "Red Stick" CREEKs, the word of the CREEK uprising spreads. Today in Nashville, Tennessee, Governor William Blount will call on the State Legislature to "teach these barbarous sons of the woods their inferiority." The cry for vengence will ring throughout the area. In a few weeks, Andrew Jackson will begin his campaign against the CREEK. September 19, 1737: Today is the start of the walking for the "Walking Purchase" from the DELAWARE. The walkers would be Solomon Jennings, Edward Marshall, and James Yates. The "walkers would barely stay below a run. By the next day at noon, Edward Marshall had covered 65 miles. Yates, who passed out from the exertion, would die three days later. Jennings gave up the first day and was sickly for the rest of his life. Many Indians complained than the "walk" did not live up to the spirit of the agreement. September 20, 1822: Red cloud is born today. September 21, 1904: Chief Joseph (Hinmaton-yalatkit or Hein-mot too-ya-la-kekt) dies today. September 22, 1711: The TUSCARORA Indians, under Chief Hencock, join the COREE, PAMLICO, MACHAPUNGA, and BEAR RIVER Indians in an attack on the white settlements on the Trent and Pamlico Rivers in North Carolina. Almost 130 white adults, and half that many children will be killed. The war will spring from whites settling in Indian lands, and Indian retaliations. A Swiss promoter, Baron Christoph von Graffenried had ordered the Indians removed, when he had discovered them on lands he had obtained from the Crown, at New Bern, in western North Carolina. September 23, 1875: As the Black Hills conference is reconvened, Red Cloud is now present. None of the Indians are interested in parting with their sacred "Paha Sopa", the Black Hills. Before Red Cloud can speak, a band of 300 of Crazy Horse's warriors rush in on horseback. Crazy Horse's representative, Little Big Man exclaims he will kill any Chief who agrees to give away the Black Hills. While the SIOUX police will move Little Big Man away from the commissioners, the commissioners realize that most of those present agree that the Black Hills will not be given away. The commissioners decide to return to Fort Robinson, in northwestern Nebraska. September 24, 1858: Qualchan, son of YAKAMA Chief Owhi, rides into Colonel George Wright's camp today. Qualchan is wanted for what the settlers consider as murder for his part in the recent fighting. Qualchan will be taken into custody and hanged later today. September 25, 1975: First Indian prayer in the United States Senate. September 26, 1675: Virginia Col.John Washington, and Maryland Major Thomas Trueman, troops surround the main base of the SUSQUEHANNOCK Indians. They are there to discover if the Indians are responsible for attacking colonial settlements. Trueman calls out the SUSQUEHANNOCK for a conference under a flag of truce. Five Chiefs come out of their fortified position to talk. They deny being involved in the attacks. Trueman has them led away and killed. Trueman would get off with a minor fine from the Maryland Assembly for this act. September 27, 1827: According to some historians, today marks the end of the "WINNEBAGO Expedition." After the "Red Bird War", which started on June 29, 1827, WINNEBAGO Chief Red Bird surrenders today, in response to the Army's threat to destroy the entire tribe. Red Bird will be found guilty of murdering several settlers and rivermen; but, he will die in prison before he is sentenced. September 28, 1874: Brevet Major General (Col.) Ranald Mackenzie, with approximately 600 soldiers, leads an attack on the Indians residing in the Palo Duro Canyon, in the Texas panhandle. Four Indians, and no soldiers are reported killed. However, much of the Indians provisions will be destroyed, including as many as 1400 Indian horses killed by the soldiers. It will be a major psychological blow for the few southern plains Indians still not living on reservations. September 29, 1973: The House Interior Committee votes to approve a bill which would re-establish federal recognition of the MENOMINEEs Indians today. September 30, 1809: William Henry Harrison, representing the United States, and the DELAWARE, MIAMI, POTAWATOMI & EEL RIVER Indians, will sign a treaty today at Fort Wayne. Three million acres in Indiana and Illinois will be trades larger annuities, and $5,200 in supplies. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== That’s all for now. Stay safe, Phil ========================================================= End of Phil Konstantin’s September Newsletter – Part 1 ========================================================= . . . . .. . ============================================================== Start of Phil Konstantin’s September 2005 Newsletter – Part 2 ============================================================== Greetings, I thought I would send out a brief update. My operation on Monday went well. I had an anterior cervical discectomy & fusion. They removed the herniated disk in my neck, added a synthetic piece of bone & a titanium brace. I get to remove the big bandage around my neck later today. The inside of my throat is still sore from being intubated for over an hour. The pain medication has not been very helpful for that. Overall, I am doing well. Thanks to those of you who sent along good thoughts. ------------ Carol Craig, Yakama tribal member, and Public Information Manager for the Yakama Nation Fisheries Resource Management Program is a newsletter subscriber. She was on KPFA radio on July 20th to talk about her anti-mascot letter addressed to the NCAA and her work with schools on changing their mascots. If you would like to listen to her conversation and parts of her letter, please go to this link: http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=9196&page=1&type= Her part of the program comes about 31 minutes into the program. ======================== X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X+X ======================== That’s all for now. Stay safe, Phil ========================================================= End of Phil Konstantin’s September Newsletter – Part 2 ========================================================= . . . .
Go To Newsletter Page
Go To Main Page
Go To Tribal Names Page
Go to Indian Moons & Calendar Stuff
Go to Awards & "Web Rings"
|My Website's Home Page||Links: (8,700 and counting)||Tribal Names|
|Indian Moons||Personal Photos||My Biography|
|Sleepy Driver||The Space Program||Ancient Ruins in Central America|
|Maya Ruins in Mexico||Whales||Awards & Webrings|
|Cherokee Holiday 2001||Cherokee Enrollment||My Newsletters|
|My Store||California Highway Patrol||Indian Era Forts|
|Articles I Wrote||Northwestern USA Indian Country||American Indian Museum in D.C. 2004|
|Movie & Book Reviews||KUSI TV, my other job||Mesa Verde and Utah in 2006|
|My Mortgage Loan Company||2006 SDSU Powwow|