DOCUMENT: RECOGNIZ.TXT N A T I O N A L C O N G R E S S O F A M E R I C A N I N D I A N S INDIAN RECOGNITION ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The absence of clear federal policy and procedures pertaining to the recognition of certain tribes for purposes of eligibility for federal services, federal programs, federal funds, and federal trust protection has plagued Indian affairs for some time. According to Bureau of Indian Affairs records, seventy groups have petitioned or have expressed interest in petitioning for federal recognition. The petition of one group dates back to 1916. The Select Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate estimates that 110 groups would eventually merit consideration for federal recognition. In its final report to Congress, the American Indian Policy Review Commission recommended that "procedures be established so that all tribes will be guaranteed their unique relationship with the United States." The report then recommends specific criteria for recognition. In the Summer of 1977, the Bureau of Indian Affairs published in the Federal Register proposed procedures and criteria for recognition. Response was considerable from both federally-recognized and non- recognized tribes and reflected both favorable and unfavorable positions. After incorporating recommended changes to the proposed procedures, the Bureau has decided to republish them for further review and comment. This is expected to be done in early March. Through legislation or through Administrative action, recognition of heretofore unrecognized groups is upon us, and threatens to erupt into political chaos if not handled properly. A STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Indian Recognition is an issue of impending crisis among Indian leadership throughout the country. The problem is not limited to the racial or traditional considerations involved, although racial and traditional concerns are widely expressed. A principal concern is in the legal and policy considerations of providing unique services and funds from"Indians only"federal coffers to a wider and wider beneficiary group. Few Indian leaders will openly question a person of Aryan countenance who claims that his or her grandmother was an"Indian princess." Examples are abundant of persons of questionable Indian ancestry rising to high-paying and powerful positions in Indian affairs on the tolerance of Indian leaders who choose not to challenge genetic credentials of others. Often Indian leaders will "play along"with persons in powerful and influential positions who claim to be Indian, feeling perhaps that such tolerance is A fair price for the advocacy of that person. But such tolerance has its drawbacks: at least twice the leadership circle of the American Indian Movement was infiltrated by the FBI using non-Indians to pose as Indians. Nevertheless, leaders associated with federally-recognized tribes are increasingly expressing objection to what they see as greater and greater dispersement of federal funds, appropriated by Congress for Indians, going to questionably-Indian groups, programs and individuals. Equally important, many Indian leaders see the diminution of the significance of tribal sovereignty in the proliferation of groups claiming to be "tribes," and the funding of questionable groups by the federal government (which, many claim, means to diminish the integrity of tribal claims to sovereignty anyway). The first real manifestation of a schism between the tribes and nonfederally-recognized groups appears to have been resultant from open displays of activism by Indians in the late 1960's. The NCAI conventions of 1969, 1971, and 1973 were disrupted and damage was done to the facilities accommodating the conventions. In all instances, the disruptions were attributed to "urban Indians." The recognition of urban Indian centers as eligible for funds from the Office of Economic Opportunity in the late 1960's caused ripples of objection from tribal leadership. The OEO Indian Desk, later to become the Office of Native American Programs in DHEW, has continued to set the trend of funding groups and programs not associated with official federal recognition. In 1973, in the implementation of the Indian Education Act, the Office of Indian Education in DHEW made no distinction of federal recognition in awarding grants. The relatively high proportion of Title IV funds going to nonfederally-recognized groups continues to cause an outcry among tribal leaders who charge that the Washington- based OIE and other related offices are dominated by nonfederally- recognized interests. The funding of nonfederally-recognized groups from Indian set- aside monies in the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) continues to cause objection among some tribal leaders, as well. In 1972, the Ruiz v. Morton decision determined that "on or near" provisions of BIA regulations require that the Bureau provide services to Indians who live near their reservations because Congressional appropriations are made on that basis. That decision extends the federal services outside the boundaries of reservations, causing some tribal leaders concern regarding sovereign powers of tribal governments. To many tribal leaders, the restoration of the Menominee tribe heralded the end to dreaded termination policy of Congress and the rejection of the hated HCR 108. But, the Menominee restoration also encouraged many terminated tribes to seek restoration -- a trend that some tribal leaders look upon as yet another factor to spread federal recognition and the federal Indian budget thin. In 1973, the Native American Legal Defense and Education Fund (NALDEF) sponsored a meeting of leaders of nonfederally-recognized tribes and groups on the Eastern Seaboard. From that meeting emerged the Coalition of Eastern Native Americans (CENA), the principal purpose of which is to secure federal recognition and eligibility for federal services and programs for those heretofore unrecognized tribes. CENA's astronomic growth, aided by federal and foundation funds, and their high-profile and vocal leadership, caused great concern and objection among many leaders of federally-recognized tribes in the West. The "Lumbee movement" -- the campaign by the Lumbee people of North Carolina to secure federal recognition through legislation, has caused the most controversy, Legislation was introduced in the 93rd Congress for Lumbee recognition, and a delegation of Lumbees attended the 31st annual convention of NCAI to seek support, via convention resolution, for the legislation. After considerable debate, often harsh, the General Assembly of NCAI instead adopted a resolution opposing the legislation. The rejection of the Lumbee legislation has caused the greatest furor in nonfederally-recognized circles, and has made NCAI the target of a massive publication attack led by Indian author Vine Deloria, Jr. The force of critics of NCAI and the federally-recognized tribal leadership attempt to paint the tribal leaders as pawns of the federal establishment who refuse to share abundant federal resources with less fortunate Indian brothers in the cities and in off-reservation rural communities. On the other hand, expressed feelings on the part of leadership of federally-recognized tribes and their organizations can be summarized as follows: o Concern that the federal government is not likely to expand the Indian budget in proportion to the expansion of federal recognition, which would mean slicing the "federal funding and service pie" too thin among beneficiary groups. o Fear that spreading the federal responsibility thin would mean the diminishment of the significance of federal recognition, leading to termination. o Racial considerations, including opposition to black, white, or hispanic predominance in tribal groups aspiring for recognition as tribes, o Traditional considerations, including opposition to what some ascribe to loss of traditions, language, and heritage (most notably those on the Eastern Seaboard). o Historical considerations, including the feeling of some tribal leaders that the leadership of some of the terminated tribes chose termination and were paid for termination, in which cases they chose to give up their heritage and sold their rights as Indian tribes. o Concern that massive and indiscriminate recognition of groups as "Indian tribes" would diminish the significance of tribal claims to sovereign rights. o Concern that attempts by newly-recognized tribal groups to assert sovereign governmental rights in states and urban areas where they now exist would lead to greater and greater opposition to tribal sovereignty in general, and would result in support for legislation to abrogate treaties and dissolve present tribal governments. There exists in the national Indian community a "selective recognition moderatism," however, that is probably best exemplified by the National Congress of American Indians which has over the years supported the recognition of a number of nonfederally-recognized tribal groups, and the restoration of many terminated tribes. In addition, membership criteria in the NCAI Constitution provides for full participating membership for nonfederally-recognized tribes, of which approximately twenty are now members. The issue of Indian Recognition has been smoldering in Indian political circles for some years now, and with the pending legislation before Congress now, and the publication of proposed procedures and criteria by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, could erupt into the single most controversial issue in Indian affairs. The damage to both federally-recognized and non-recognized groups could be devastating. Ill-conceived opposition by leadership of federally-recognized tribes in either the legislative or administrative process could reflect racism or greed which, in either case, would cause a backlash among some of the tribes' staunchest liberal supporters in Congress. On the other hand, attempts by the federally-recognized tribes to assure the greatest safeguards in the process must not be looked upon as greed or racism. It appears obvious that a majority of the leadership of the federally-recognized tribes want justice for less-fortunate brothers in the non-recognized Indian community. The resolution in the 34th NCAI convention, although it called for tabling consideration for a recognition position to a later date, clearly stated that it is the intent of NCAI to secure the process of recognition for non-recognized Indian tribes. What is needed is the enhancement of communications and understanding WITHIN THE INDIAN COMMUNITY (federally-recognized and non-recognized) to arrive at a process that is wise and just and orderly. The National Congress of American Indians herein proposes such a process. THE PROPOSAL ~~~~~~~~~~~~ The purpose of this proposed effort is to secure an enlightened consensus position among the leadership of the national Indian community, regarding the issue of federal recognition of heretofore non-recognized groups for purposes of participation in federal Indian programs and services. To achieve such a consensus position, the leadership of the recognized tribes must have the greatest understanding of the situation, an understanding of the impact of recognition on their status, on the federal budget, and on the delivery of federal services. They must also have communication with the non-recognized tribes, their aspirations and their expectations, The National Congress of American Indians herein proposes the preparation and conduct of a NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDIAN RECOGNITION, calling together the leadership of the federally- recognized tribes for presentations and discussions on the following major considerations and for communications with the leadership of non-recognized Indian groups: o The State of Affairs in Indian Recognition. o An Historical Perspective on the Issue of Federal Recognition. o The Proposed Administrative Procedures and Criteria (BIA) o The Proposed Indian Recognition Legislation. o The Impact of Indian Recognition. o A National Indian Position on the Issue of Indian Recognition. THE PROCESS ~~~~~~~~~~~ The NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDIAN RECOGNITION will be held during the last week in March 1978. The United Southeastern Tribes (USET) organization has agreed to co-host the meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, to provide greater access to the meeting to the non- recognized tribes on the Eastern Seaboard, most of which have little or no financial resources for travel. PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES The existing NCAI staff will be utilized to do much of the preparatory work for the National Conference. This will include research and preparation of some of the necessary documents, reproduction and collating of necessary documents, coordinating work commissioned to other Indian organizations, and general logistic planning and implementation. Other Indian organizations (i.e, National Tribal Chairmen's Association, Institute for the Development of Indian Law, American Indian Law Center, and the Native American Rights Fund) will be invited to participate fully in the preparation and conduct of the National Conference. In addition, these organizations will be invited to prepare and deliver, on a commission basis, the necessary presentations and the accompanying documents at the National Conference. Travel will be needed for representatives of these organizations to make the delivery of the presentations at the National Conference. Regional Indian organizations will be invited to organize meetings, within their regions,of non-recognized tribes. The purpose of the regional meetings is to acquaint the non-recognized tribes with the National Conference, and, since it is unlikely that all non- recognized tribes can send delegations, to assure that the unrecognized tribes within their regions are somehow represented at the National Conference. A cursory study was made by NCAI, and the groups aspiring for federal recognition generally fall within the areas of the following regional organizations: THE UNITED SOUTHEASTERN TRIBES (USET): USET will co- host the conference and (possibly in cooperation with CENA) will be requested to convene a preparatory meeting with the non-recognized tribes of the Southeast, of which there are many. THE NORTHEAST: Contact has been made with Mr. Greg Buesing of the New England Federal Regional Council Task Force on Indian Affairs, and he has agreed to sponsor a meeting of the New England non-recognized tribes. THE SMALL TRIBES ORGANIZATION OF WESTERN WASHINGTON: Mr. Rudy Ryser, Director of STOWW has agreed to sponsor a preparatory meeting of the non-recognized tribes in the Northwest. THE INTERTRIBAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA: ITCC will be requested to sponsor a meeting of the non-recognized tribes of California, although most, if not all, such tribes in California are terminated rather than tribes that have never been recognized. The restoration issue will be addressed at a later time. NCAI staff travel will be needed to assist in the conduct of some regional meetings. The regional organizations will be requested to assume the costs of the regional meetings, and no budget is requested for such meetings in this proposal. THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE Approximately 200 people are expected to attend the National Conference. These will include representatives from federally- recognized tribes, non-federally recognized tribes and their organizations, representatives of other Indian organizations, representatives from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and other federal agencies, and representatives from Congressional staffs. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: -= THE FOURTH WORLD DOCUMENTATION PROJECT =- :: :: A service provided by :: :: The Center For World Indigenous Studies :: :: www.cwis.org :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Originating at the Center for World Indigenous Studies, Olympia, Washington USA www.cwis.org © 1999 Center for World Indigenous Studies (All Rights Reserved. References up to 500 words must be referenced to the Center for World Indigenous Studies and/or the Author Copyright Policy Material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive is accepted on the basis that the material is the original, unoccupied work of the author or authors. Authors agree to indemnify the Center for World Indigenous Studies, and DayKeeper Press for all damages, fines and costs associated with a finding of copyright infringement by the author or by the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive in disseminating the author(s) material. In almost all cases material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive will attract copyright protection under the laws of the United States of America and the laws of countries which are member states of the Berne Convention, Universal Copyright Convention or have bi-lateral copyright agreements with the United States of America. Ownership of such copyright will vest by operation of law in the authors and/or The Center for World Indigenous Studies, Fourth World Journal or DayKeeper Press. The Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and its authors grant a license to those accessing the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive to render copyright materials on their computer screens and to print out a single copy for their personal non-commercial use subject to proper attribution of the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and/or the authors. Questions may be referred to: Director of Research Center for World Indigenous Studies PMB 214 1001 Cooper Point RD SW Suite 140 Olympia, Washington 98502-1107 USA 360-754-1990 www.cwis.org usaoffice@cwis.org OCR Software provided by Caere Corporation