Copyright © 1998 NLThomas
All Rights Reserved
By Jeff Boyd Morningstorm,
Copyright © 1998 Morningstorm
Documents the Abuse of U.S. Plenary Power and Proposes a Viable Option for the Future of all Native American Peoples; "An American Indian Commonwealth" A single Unified Nation made up of all the tribes of North America, co-equal with all the U.S. States and countries of the Western Hemisphere and the World.
Introduction
Part I ~*~ Part II
Part III ~*~ Part IV ~*~ Part V
References
INTRODUCTION The question of Plenary Power is of paramount importance when one seeks an understanding of American Indian Policy and Federal governmental affairs. To understand American Indian policy, one has to understand the significance of Congressional Plenary power. fro example, one must understand the significance of the Indian Removal Act of May 28th, 1830, which provide for an exchange of lands with those tribes living east of the Mississippi river. This was accomplished without the consent of any of the Indian Nations who were to be removed.
This paper will analyze the legislation Congress fabricated in order to impose its will upon the Indian tribes of this country. It is well known to the Tribes of this country that these fabricated stories are hidden in official government documents like the U.S. Statutes at Large and the Senate Miscellaneous Documents listed under Indian reference. Close scrutiny should be paid when following the readings of these official U.S. documents in this paper. If one reads carefully, one can see the biased fabrication in these official government documents. If time is taken to read carefully, one can see the lie unfolding in these official U.S. documents.
Indian Tribes were guaranteed the rights to their nations by a federal legal process called Indian Treaties. These treaties were authorized by Congress, individual congressional leaders, Presidents and Generals of the Army. In order to remove the Indians from their lands, Congress vested in itself the power to supersede all historical and existing Indian treaty legislation. this occurred when it refused to abide by its promise to guarantee Indian Treaty rights to their lands in 1830. the Congressional legislation to remove the Indians overrode all Indian Treaty legislation and is an example of Plenary authority. This vested power would become known as Plenary power.
Plenary power of Congress has been used many times on the Indian Tribes to force them into compliance with U.S. Congressional dictated, regardless of the wishes of the Indian Nations. Some examples of the abuse of Plenary power, in addition to the Indian Removal Act are, the forcing of Tribes onto Indian Reservations, which resulted in prolonged Indian Wars. In this regard, old Indian treaties were superseded by Congress and new treaties were written up, restricting the land holdings of the tribes. Eventually the tribes were forced onto small reservations as each instance of plenary power superseded older Indian treaties.
Another glaring example of Plenary power was the General Allotment Act, known as the Dawes Act, passed on February 8th, 1887. Every Indian reservation was to be divided up into farming homesteads of 160 acres a piece, with each family receiving their fair share or unfair share as it were. The surplus lands were then opened up for settlement by non Indians. Again this happened in complete disregard of the wishes of the Indian tribes all over the country. the wishes of the Tribes were simply, that their reservation lands be left intact for the sole use of the Tribe or Tribes residing there.
A modern example of the abuse of plenary power in the second half of the twentieth century was House Concurrent Resolution 108, better known as the Termination Act, passed on August 1, 1953. This act would abolish federal supervision over all the tribes as soon as possible. The idea was to subject the Indians to the same laws, privileges, and responsibilities as other citizens of the United States. The Tribes were again cut out of the decision making process. The argument was an old one, the Indian Nation's wanted their own sovereignty. This fact was guaranteed by a U.S. Congressional treaty better known as an Indian Treaty.
Plenary power would again be used in the attempt to steal the remaining home lands of the Indian Nations of this country. the Termination Act of 1953 was the last blatant use of Plenary power in the last attempt to grab all remaining Indian lands in this country. Other abuses of plenary power will be explained in detail in this study.
As a result of this Plenary abuse by the U. S Federal government, what can Indian Nations do to proclaim and protect their sovereign Indian rights. what we can do is, to explore the option of uniting into a single unified Indian Nation called a Commonwealth. An example of this type of nation is Puerto Rico, which governs its own internal affairs in true sovereignty, with limited federal and no state interference. The meaning and structure of a commonwealth will be explained in detail in the following pages.
Before we go on I would like to explain plenary power in these terms. U.S. Congressional plenary power is colonialism. The imposition of plenary power is imperialism. I say colonialism because, Indian lands were colonized (settled) over and over again until Indians were left with small reservations established by Congress. These reservations are a further indication of Colonialism since the U.S. Federal Government sent people to govern the Native peoples (Native Americans). These U.S. Colonial leaders were classified as Indian agents and Indian Commissioners. A Colonial Department was established to handle these Native affairs, known as the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The imposition of negative Indian legislation and doctrine is merely U.S. Imperialism. This negative U.S. Indian policy was imposed always with the perceived use force. It was imperial dictate that could only be obeyed or whole tribes were warred upon. an example of this was the Blackhawk War (listed under that title).
This imperialism continues rights up to these modern times in the perceived use of force in the Termination act era, and the raiding of Indian Casinos by the F.B.I., Federal Marshall and State Police for the sole purpose of shutting down Indian gaming operations on Indian lands. This by the way was in complete disregard of the sovereign right of the Indian Nations involved.
Indians don't have to worry about the Imperialism of the King of England, Indian Nations have to worry about the imperialism of the U.S. Federal Government in regards to Indian affairs. In 1903 U.S. Imperialism was given a legal definition, in Lonewolf vs. Hitchcock (187 U.S. Reports, 553,546-68) that definition was called Plenary power, U. S. Plenary power has always been Imperialism. In this study I will refer to the definition of Imperialism as U.S. Congressional plenary power or variation thereof.
ANTI INDIAN LEGISLATION
Pt. I of IV An American Indian Manifesto!
by J. Boyd MorningStorm
The first abuse of Plenary authority came with the imposition of the Indian Removal act of May 28th, 1830. The act initiated by the tyrant Andrew Jackson provided for an exchange for lands. For those tribes living east of the Mississippi River, for lands west of the Mississippi River.
After bitter debate in Congress and in the public press, congress passed and act authorizing the president to exchange lands in the west for those held by Indian Tribes in any state or territory and appropriated $500,000 for the purpose. this act enabled President Jackson to proceed with the removal policy and to negotiate removal treaties with the southern tribes' (Prucha, pg.52, 1975).
The Indian Removal Act reads in part: "Be it enacted, That it shall and may be lawful for the President of the United States to cause so much of any territory belonging to the United States, west of the river Mississippi, not included in any state or organized territory, and to which the Indian title has been extinguished, as he may judge necessary, to be divided into a suitable number of districts, for the reception of such tribes or nations of Indians as he may choose to exchange the lands where they now reside, and remove there."
Section II reads in part: "Be it further enacted, That it shall and may be lawful for the President to exchange any or all of such districts, within the bounds of any one or more of the states or territories, where the land claimed and occupied by the Indians, is owned by the United States, or the United States are bound to the state within which it lies to extinguish the Indian claim thereto".
Section III reads: "Be it further enacted, That in the making of any such exchange or exchanges, it shall and may be lawful for the President solemnly to assure the tribe or nations with which the exchange is made, that the United States will forever secure and guarantee to them, and their heirs or successors, the country so exchanged with them".
Section IV: "Be it further enacted, That the president shall cause improvements to be ascertained by appraisement or otherwise, and to cause such ascertained value to be paid to the person or persons rightfully claiming such improvements. Possession shall not afterwards be permitted to any of the same tribe". Section V reads in part: "That such aid and assistance as may be necessary for their removal to the country which they have exchanged; and for their support and substitence for the first year after removal."
Section VI: "Be it further enacted, That the President will cause such tribe or nation to be protected, at their new residence.
Section VII reads in part: "Be it further enacted, That this shall and may be lawful for the President to have the same superintendence and care over any tribe or nation in the country to which they may remove.
Section VIII: "And be it further enacted, That five hundred thousand dollars is hereby appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the treasury, not otherwise appropriated." (U.S. Statutes at large, Twenty First Congress, 1830)
THE INDIAN REMOVAL ACT
Pt. II of IV An American Indian Manifesto!
by J. Boyd MorningStorm
In my opinion: is no more than thievery of the highest order. All morality was thrown to the wind. The Jacksonian hierarchy made up its own morality to justify their greed and avarice for Indian lands. Especially, of the lands of the Five Civilized Tribes with their remarkable social achievements. All justifications for the Indian Removal Act are merely Racist Morality.
Thus the Nations and the civilizations of the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw and Seminole were destroyed. Their lands invaded by whites. Forced out of their homes at the point of a soldiers bayonet, only to watch their homes, farms, business, and Tribal government buildings taken over by the white rabble on the heels of the soldiers. The tragedy of the trail of tears is legendary.
S.L. Tyler writes, "The American Indian Removal Policy amounted to a reversal of administrative Indian policy. Representatives of the United States had previously at least recognized that the cause of the Indian against the frontiersman was just. Jacksonís action, in failing to support the decision of the Supreme Court, became a precedent that told the frontiersman that his case would be heard in high places to the detriment of the Indian. When the chips were down, the Indian must acquiesce or be destroyed. It was unfortunate that the immediate object of this change of policy had to be an Indian tribe that had accomplished as much as any other people, in the realization, by way of civilization and education, the goals that past policy-makers had set for the Indians"(Tyler, pg. 59, 1973).
U.S. Congressional legislative law was never meant for the protection of Indian rights. Indian Treaties were the device used to guarantee Indian rights. Whenever white pressure for more Indian land or restrictions on treaties grew strong enough, Congress merely passed a new Act or Indian treaty which negated those earlier treaty rights.
An example: The Cherokee Tobacco Case of December, 1870; Cherokees Elias C. Boudinot and Stand Watie refused to pay taxes required by the Internal Revenue Act of 1868 on tobacco manufactured in the Cherokee Nation, because they claimed the Cherokee treaty of 1866 exempted them from such taxation. The Supreme Court decided against them on the grounds that a law of Congress can supersede the provisions of a treaty (Prucha, pg 136, 1975). The Cherokee Tobacco Case reads: "The second section of the fourth article of the Constitution of the United States declares that this Constitution and laws of the United States, which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land."
It need hardly be said that a treaty cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if it be in violation of that instrument. This results from the nature and fundamental principals of our government. The effect of treaties and acts of Congress, when in conflict, is not settled by the Constitution. But the question is not involved in any doubt as to its proper solution. A treaty may supersede a prior act of Congress, and an act of Congress may supersede a prior treaty. In the cases referred to these principals were applied to treaties with foreign nations. Treaties with Indian nations within the jurisdiction of the United States, whatever considerations of humanity and good faith may be involved and require their faithful observance, cannot be more obligatory. They have no higher sanctity; no greater inviolability or immunity from legislative invasion can be claimed for them. The consequences in all such cases give rise to questions which must be met by the political department of the government. They are beyond the sphere of judicial cognizance. In the case under consideration the act of Congress must prevail as if the treaty were not an element to be considered. If a wrong has been done the power of redress is the Congress not with judiciary, and that body, upon being applied to, it is to be presumed, will promptly give the proper relief. (U.S. Statutes at large Cherokee Tobacco Case 1870)
One of the more bloody violations of Plenary abuse was when the tribes were forced onto smaller and smaller reservations. This in itself was in complete volition of treaties previously made with the various Indian Nations. These treaties guaranteed the Indian tribes ownership of vast portions of their original and ancestral homelands. Bloody Indian wars ensued though with thousands of casualties on both sides. The hostile tribes were forced to accept new revised treaties and smaller reservations, or face wars of extermination by the U.S. Army. In the end the tribes had no choice, either they fight and die or accept U.S. Governmental dictates and survive.
U.S. Congressional legislation superseded all previous Indian treaty guarantees, this type of legislation would become known as U.S. plenary power This type of legislation (The revised treaties) had the power to take Indian lands without Indian consent, by force if necessary. A fact the tribes knew was the U.S. government would sanction vicious wars to bring the Indian tribes to heel, such as the wars against the Cheyenne and Apache. Though the tribes fight courageously they were no match for the numbers and fire power of the U.S. Army.
In October 1883, General William Tecumseh Sherman submitted his final report as General of the Army. He wrote as follows: ěI now regard the Indians as substantially eliminated from the problem of the Army. There may be spasmodic and temporary alarms, but such Indian wars as have hitherto disturbed the public peace and tranquillity are not probable. The Army has been a large factor in producing this result, but it is not the only one. Immigration and the occupation by industrious farmers and miners of land vacated by aborigines have been largely instrumental to that end, but the railroad which used to follow in the rear now goes forward with the picket-line in the great battle of civilization with barbarism"(House Executive Document no.1 48th Congress 1st session, serial 2182 pg 45-46). re:Index for full text of Government document. Nowhere was it mentioned that the Indians had rights to possess and occupy their lands. These possessory rights were guaranteed by U.S. Treaties and should have been honored.
At this point in Indian Policy, it was now official. Congress had the right to supersede the provisions of any treaty made with any Indian tribe, regardless of the official guarantees made to the tribes at the treaty signing. In effect, all treaties could be broken with impunity. Most treaty guarantees were a lie, with the government able to dispense with any treaty provision it seemed so imposed to do.
Indian Treaties were only an expediency subject to change at any whim and fancy of the Federal legislative arm. Were not the Indian Treaties the guarantors of Indian rights and lands as long as the waters run and the grass grows! If these treaty rights and provisions could be so easily discarded without Indian consent, Indian Treaty-making constituted a gigantic government sham, used to mask its true intention; greed for more Indian land decree.
Another encroachment upon tribal autonomy was the Major Crimes Act of March 3rd, 1885. Congress declared that seven major crimes committed by Indians on the reservations would fall under the jurisdiction of the United States courts. This was clearly another imposition of what would become known as Congressional Plenary Power. The Power of Congress to impose its will over Indian Tribes regardless of treaty provisions and stipulations.
The Act stemmed from the murder case of Spotted Tail by Crow Dog. The murderer, Crow Dog, was freed because the federal courts had no jurisdiction over crimes committed between Indians within Indian Reservations. Congress moved to quickly to impose this jurisdiction, with the Major Crimes Act of March 1885. This then, was a major encroachment on traditional tribal autonomy.
A year previous to the Major Crimes act, there was a Conference on Indian affairs held at Lake Mohonk, New York in September 1884. This conference would have a profound and devastating impact on Indian policy for the next 50 years. Reformers met to discuss Indian matters and to make recommendations. These Lake Mohonk Conference Friends of the Indian had tremendous impact on the formulation of Federal Indian policy. What's interesting here, is that no Indian leaders were invited to participate in the formulation of Indian policy recommendations.
The motive of this Conference of friends of the Indian were twofold:"First. To inform the people of the United States as to the most direct practicable way in which the Indian question may be solved.
Second. To stimulate the thoughtful and right-minded citizens of the country to take immediate steps toward the solution of the problem.
It was felt by all those who took part in the work of the Conference that a calm, definite, earnest appeal be made to the conscience and intelligence of the country in behalf of a poor and helpless people. For also, the righting of a national wrong, be it uttered in vain.
WHAT IS NECESSARY TO SECURE INDIAN CITIZENSHIP
Pt. III of IV An American Indian Manifesto!
by J. Boyd MorningStorm
First. Resolved, "That the organization of the Indians in tribes is, and has been, one of the most serious hindrances to the advancement of the Indian toward civilization, and that every effort should be made to secure the disintegration of all tribal organizations; that to accomplish this result the Government should, except where it is clearly necessary either for the fulfillment of treaty stipulations or for some other binding reason, cease to recognize the Indians as political bodies or organized tribes.
Second. Resolved, That to all Indians who desire to hold their land in severalty allotments should be made without delay; and that to all other Indians like allotments should be made soon as practicable.
Third. Resolved, That lands allotted and granted in severalty to Indians should be made inalienable for a period of not less than ten or more than twenty-five years.
Fourth. Resolved, That all adult male Indians should be admitted to the full privileges of citizenship by a process analogous to naturalization, upon evidence presented before the proper court of record of adequate intellectual and moral qualifications. Fifth. Resolved, That we earnestly and heartily approve of the Senate Bill No. 48, generally known as the Coke Bill, (This would grow into the Dawes Act) as the best practicable measure yet brought before Congress for the preservation of the Indian from aggression, for the disintegration of the tribal organizations, and for the ultimate breaking up of the reservation system; that we tender our hearty thanks and of the constituency which we represent to those members of the Senate who have framed this bill and secures its passage. We respectfully urge upon the House of Representatives the early adoption of this bill, that its beneficent provisions for rendering the Indian self-supporting and his land productive may be carried out with the least possible delay.î(Philadelphia Indian Rights Association pg 3-4, 1884)
I will emphasize again; That Indian leaders across the nation had no part in the formulation of this new tragedy developing in the minds, hearts, and government halls of white do-gooders and government politicians. When the Indian tribes were presented with the coming allotment act, they were abhorred with the prospect of losing their homelands. The tribes united in defense of their lands to no avail. Their Nations were again going to be destroyed. The plain simple fact was, they could do nothing about it.
So the General Allotment Act (Dawes Act) was passed on February 8, 1887. For a number of years the Tribes of the Indian Territory held off the imposition of the Dawes Act. Because they held their land under patented titles and were exempt from its provisions. Political pressure though was growing for the implementation of the allotment system in the Indian Territory. Pressure from the surrounding States and Territories, whose white citizens knew surplus lands would be opened up for settlement. Presssure from the white citizens within Indian Territory, whose sole allegiance was to the U.S. Government who by no way even respected the Indian government or society. What was more important to the white in Indian Territory was that they were in the best position to stake a claim for a prime homestead in Indian country. Economic interests were also looking at very promising mineral developments in the Indian nations. The simple fact underlying all this white pressure for the Dawes Acts imposition was greed for as much Indian land as could be taken.
A commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, known as the Dawes Commission, was sent in March, 1893. Section 16. The President shall nominate and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint three commissioners to enter into negotiations with the Five Civilized Tribes, for the purpose of the extinguishment of the national or tribal title to any lands within that Territory now held by any and all of such nations or tribes either by cession of the same or some part thereof to the United States, or by the allotment and division of the same in severalty among the Indians of such nations or tribes. This upon the basis of justice and equality, as may, with the consent of such nations or tribes of Indians, so far as may be necessary, be requisite and suitable to enable the ultimate creation of a State or States of the Union which shall embrace the lands within said Indian Territory.
Neither the provisions of this section nor the negotiations or agreements which may be had or made thereunder shall be held in any way to waive or impair any right of sovereignty which the Government of the United States has over or respecting said Indian Territory or the people thereof, or any other right of the Government relating to said Territory, its lands, or the people thereof (U.S. Statutes at Large, 27: 465-46, 1893). With the Report of the Dawes Commission of November 20, 1894, came the whim and fancy interpretation of the treaties of the Five Civilized Tribes. With the Dawes Report the lie was hatching, to be born into the Curtis Act. But first the Dawes Report in part, in reference to the treaties of the Five Civilized Tribes.
"For quite a number of years after the institution of this project it seemed successful, and the Indians under it made favorable advance toward its realization. But within the last few years all the conditions under which it was inaugurated have undergone so complete a change that it has become no longer possible. It is hardly necessary to call attention to the contrast between the present conditions surrounding this Territory and those under which it was set apart. Large and populous States of the Union are now on all sides of it, and one-half of it has been constituted a Territory of the United States. These States and this marvelous rate. The resources of the Territory itself have been developed to such a degree and are of such immense and tempting value that they are attracting to it an irresistible pressure from enterprising citizens. The executory conditions contained in the treaties have become impossible of execution. It is no longer possible for the United States to keep its citizens out of the Territory. Nor is it now possible for the Indians to secure to each individual Indian his full enjoyment in common with other Indians of the common property of the Territory.
Justice has been utterly perverted in the hands of those who have thus laid hold of the forms of its administration in this. Territory and who have inflicted irreparable wrongs and outrages upon a helpless people for their own gain. The United States put the title to a domain of countless wealth and unmeasured resources in these several tribes or nationalities, but it was a conveyance in trust for specific uses, clearly indicated in the treaties themselves, and for no other purpose. It was for the use and enjoyment in common by each and every citizen of his tribe, of each and every part of the Territory , thus tersly expressed in one of the treaties: ěTo be held in common, so that each and every member of either tribe shall have an equal undivided interest in the whole." The tribes can make no other use of it. They have no power to grant it to anyone, or to grant to anyone an exclusive use of any portion of it. These tribal governments have wholly perverted their high trusts, and it is the plain duty of the United States to enforce the trust it has so created and recover for its original uses the domain and all the gains derived from the perversions of the trust or discharge the trustee.
The United States also granted to these tribes the power of self-government, not to conflict with the Constitution. They have demonstrated their incapacity to so govern themselves, and no higher duty can rest upon the Government that granted this authority than to revoke it when it has so lamentably failed" (Senate Miscellaneous Document, no. 24, 53rd Congress, November 20, 1894).
The Five Civilized Tribes gave little support to the Dawes Commission for the work amongst its people. The severe criticisms of the conditions in these Indian Nations mirrored the views and attitudes of those whites who wished to destroy the national existence of the Five Civilized Tribes. This sham of justice had been going on already with tribes all over the country. This shame of justice demoralized the Indian tribes all over the country like no other policy since the defeat in the Indian wars, and the forcing of the tribes onto the reservations.
Congress passed the Curtis Act on June 28, 1898 without the consent or participation of the Five Civilized Tribes. This being in complete disregard for their treaty right and or their nations landed Patents. This lie was legalized by the highest by the highest legislative body in the land.
With the passing of the Curtis Act, Congress accomplished by legislation what the Dawes Commission has been unable to do by negotiation. That being to effectively destroy the tribal governments in the Indian Territory. This long and detailed act provided for establishment and regulation of townsites, for management of leases of mineral rights. The Curtis Act also authorized the Dawes Commission to draw up rolls and allot the lands to Indian on the rolls, abolish the Indians were prohibited the enlarging of land holdings. Although Indians were prohibited from holding more than their allotted share this did not apply to whites who amassed huge land holdings under various guises.
The whole irony of the Curtis Act is that it was written for the protection of the people of the Indian Territory. What happened was a great rip-off began in full swing with many Indian allotees being swindled out of some of the richest real estate on the face of the earth. (Read Angie Deboís book "And Still The Waters Run.") In subsequent laws and rulings, restrictions on allotments were lifted. The allotees could now sell their lands. The result was a vast majority of those allotments falling into the hands of non-Indians. The impoverishment of many Indian families was the tragic result. This was U.S. Plenary power at work.
What the government needed was a clear definition of this type of government act. this brings us to Lone Wolf vs. Hitchcock, January 5, 1903. In the 1867 Medicine Lodge Treaty, Article 12 provided that no part of the Kiowa-Commanche Reservation could be ceded without the approval of three-fourths of the adult males. When Congress, after allotment of the reservation in severalty, approved the sale of excess tribal lands without the three-fourths approval of all the adult males of the tribes, action was taken to enjoin the implementation of the act. The Supreme Court then declared that Congress had plenary authority over Indian Relations and that it had power to pass laws abrogating treaty stipulations (Prucha, pg. 202, 1975).
In one of the cited cases it was clearly pointed out that Congress possessed a paramount power over the property of the Indians, by reason of its exercise of guardianship over their interest, and that such authority might be implied (U.S. Reports, pg. 187, 552, 564-68).
"Plenary authority over tribal relations of the Indians has been exercised by Congress from the beginning, and the power has always been deemed a political one, not subject to be controlled by the Judicial department of the government. But, as with treaties made with foreign nations, the legislative power might pass laws in conflict with treaties made with the Indians. The Power therefore exists to abrogate the provisions of the Indian treaty." (U.S. Reports, Pg. 187, #553, 564-68).
When therefore, treaties were entered into between the United States and a tribe of Indians it was never doubted that the power to abrogate existed in Congress, and that in a contingency such power might be availed of from considerations of governmental policy, particularly if consistent with perfect good faith toward the Indians (U.S. Reports, 187, 553, 564068). Looking back in 1948, the Indian Task Force of the Hoover Commission made this evaluation: "The practice of allotting land and issuing fee patenTs obviously did not make the Indians competent. It proved to be chiefly a way of getting Indian land into non-Indian ownership. And elsewhere it states: ěThe rationalization behind this policy is so obviously false that it could not have prevailed for so long a time if not supported by the avid demands of other for Indian lands. This was a way of getting them, usually at bargain prices" (Debo, pg. 331, 1970).
The Wheeler-Howard Act better known as the Indian Reorganization Act was passed on June 18, 1934. This act is worth mentioning because, led by John Collier, this important piece of legislation reversed the policy of allotment and encouraged tribal organization.
"An act to conserve and develop Indian lands and resources; to extend to Indians the right to form business and other organizations; to establish a credit system for Indians; to grant certain rights of home rule to Indians; to provide for vocational education for Indians; and for other purposes" (U.S. Statutes at Large, 48: 984-88). Some people would arguably say, that Collier used a measure of Plenary power, in forcing tribes to except a constitutional form of government. On the positive side though, many positive things happened in Indian country during his tenure.
House Concurrent Resolution 108 was passed on August 1, 1953. The Eighty-third Congress made a fundamental change in Indian Policy. It was now the policy of the United States to abolish federal supervision over the tribes as soon as possible and to subject the Indians to the same laws, privileges, and responsibilities as other citizens of the United States. This process became known as ěterminationî. This process aroused strong opposition from Indian tribes all over the United States.
The Act reads in part: Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate Concurring). Whereas it is the policy of Congress, as rapidly as possible, to make the Indians within the territorial limits of the United States subject to the same laws and entitled to the same privileges and responsibilities as are applicable to other citizens of the United States; to end their status as wards of the United States, and to grant them all of the rights and prerogatives pertaining to American citizenship; and whereas the Indians within the territorial limits of the United States should assume their full responsibilities as American citizens: Now, therefore, be it.
During the fifteen years of termination struggles, the responsibility of the federal government was to help Native Americans prepare for termination. The government however lacked an adequate program for successfully assisting Indian people through this troublesome process. Meanwhile, haphazard government efforts contributed to the socioeconomic plight of all tribes affected (Fixico, pg. 132, 1986).
Additional legislation and inadequate B.I.A. efforts to help Indian people fostered a growing criticism of the federal termination policy, at the state level as well. Undoubtedly, federal officials wanted what was best for Indians, but they lacked the ability to perceive the social and psychological consequences that termination created for Native Americans. The federal governments efforts to pass the buck to state governments, under P.L. 280, forced American Indians to form new relationships with state agencies. Learning the system of applying for state services while trying to assimilate into the mainstream society, especially when conflicts existed between local and tribal interests. This was too much to ask of a people who had learned to become dependent upon the federal government for over a century. Legislation put forth to help the assimilation effort often became a hindrance. Although Indians mingled with local white communities, the majority of rural white towns demonstrated a racist attitude toward them. In the years that followed, most members of terminated tribes would not become middle-class citizens and would have to settle for lower-class status in American society (Fixico, pg. 133, 1986).
From a personal point of view. My tribe, The Menominee were one of those tribes who were terminated. As I remember it, it was a time of despair and desperation. With the homeland (Nation) gone and the selling off of land to pay the bills, the tribe felt an irredeemable loss.
The economic situation was even worse. Things just went from bad to worse. What had started out as a relatively prosperous tribe, soon became an economic basket case. This happened because of the huge burden of state taxation of the extensive forest lands of the tribe.
On the individual level, people lost their jobs as well as enduring shrunken paychecks. I remember my dad bringing home a 29 dollar paycheck to feed a wife and seven kids. This type of situation impoverished our tribe until tribal members started to organize to stop the selling off of our lands and the restoration of our reservation.
They said it couldn't be done we simply proved them wrong. This also by the way was plenary power reversed. Reversed by people power, Indian people power. This can also apply to a unified Indian Commonwealth. A forming or uniting into a National Indian Government. Independent of State and local jurisdiction. A seceding from the different states the reservations are a part of completely independent of them! Forming into one Indian Nation. Semi-Independent of the U.S. Federal government. Thus the term Commonwealth. Already, there are people who say it can't be done.
If we Unite if we organize, take it from us Menominee, it can be done! For we got our beautiful homeland back. (Read the Menominee Restoration Act in the Congressional Record of 1972).This is how it can be done. First we inform our tribal populace of our right to form our own Nation. This following Declaration is our right.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable.
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shown, that ManKind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Tribes; these Indian Nations and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of Government" (The Declaration of Independence, In Congress, 1776).
TOWARD A UNIFIED INDIAN NATION
Pt. IV of IV An American Indian Manifesto!
by J. Boyd MorningStorm
This is our right as much as it is a right of any people. We also have a right to communicate this idea. We have the right to meet and discuss this idea; this vision. We have the right to unify. But first we have to start communicating.
One may ask at this point, what kind of structure or government can be formed? That answer is a commonwealth! I say commonwealth because, we should maintain that link with the Federal government. After all we are American Indians or Native Americans and the simple fact is that we are a part of the Greater (larger) American Nation. Somehow over the past 200 years, We Indians people have become Americans albeit with our own political entities. As a commonwealth, we keep the government at a distance by governing our own internal affairs, completely! External affairs would be left up to the Federal Government, but even here we should have some say. We should be able to deal with states of the Union as true equals not as disjointed tribes of 8,000 or even 200,000, but as a Nation of Two million people. As a unified Indian Nation we would be speaking from a position of strength, able to represent our Native people in local, state, national and world affairs. We would be able to represent our Native (Indian) Nation with true pride and dignity in our accomplishments.
The question at this time might be, How would an Indian Commonwealth government be structured? I would start by saying that there need not be a radical change of government at the tribal level. Tribal governments as already established can function the same as before, with the only differences being, that allegiance would transfer to a National Indian Government who would represent our interests at the Federal (U.S.) Government level. The National Indian government would speak for all tribes in support of our civil and national rights.
Tribes would elect representatives by population, to a National Assembly. Small tribes would be required to form into voting districts to achieve a population balance. The representative from such a district would be expected to perform his job with dignity and forthrightness toward all tribes in a voting district. The same would hold true for large tribal representatives as well. The President or Grand Chief would be elected to a 6 year term, with a 3 term maximum possible. The Idea being, that if a good leader is elected, to keep that leader and give him the time to lead without worry and expense of frequent election. One must put Tribal or regional issues aside and become a National leader, respecting the dignity of all our tribes, this means, no tribe is better than any other tribe. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, so be it! The structure of the Union is as follows: The large tribes would be likened to States of the Union divided up into voting districts. Tribal chairmen (as now stands) would become governors. With those large tribes who have a number of chairmen. A run off election would determine the governor. Again regional or tribal differences should be put aside. The better good of our Indian Nation should be concluded, this may be the most difficult challenge!
Medium size tribes could form into states or voting districts by population. Larger medium tribes would have the option of forming into states and or keeping there representation smaller into a separate entity called a district. At this level representatives would still be elected and sent to the National Assembly. It is at this level that medium and small tribes would be heard, in an Indian district legislature. To off set the influence of larger Indian States, their should be more districts, this only makeís for an interesting political environment. A little give and take should always be the norm in this arena.
The small tribes could form into their own county with there chairmen becoming county administrators. This should also be determined by population. Population determinators can be worked out at a later date. Counties can form with other Indian counties to form a district. Counties would elect representatives to a district legislature. It is here at this level, that smaller tribes should put aside any tribal difference and seek our brothers endeavor in political matters.
Now we come to the small Indian communities like the settlements, Colonies and Rancherias. many of these types of communities have small populations and are very isolated, Many are nor. In the small isolated communities. The communities would form into counties. A certain number of townships being an average, for example ten or twelve townships would make a county. Representatives would be elected to serve on county boards. Representatives can be elected or chosen by the board to represent them at the district level. The small isolated communities, would tend to be smaller in population so would be required to unite with another small community to form a township. It is at this level that we may be able to ask for land from the public domain for the use of tribes in that region. This of course would be for the economic development of those tribes in need. I say this because we Native peoples are a part of the public, and are entitled to use some of the public domain, this would only be fair.
The rancherias for example would tend to be larger in population then the isolated settlements (Indian colonies). In this case, two or more townships can be formed with more representation at the county level from that particular community. Let me again emphasize, our thinking should be Nationhood not tribal differences.
More needs to be said about the National Indian Government. The type of Central Government should be a strong Democratic central government. Lets no make the same mistake as the Great League of Peace or even the United States that led them up to the U.S. Civil War. They simply gave to much power to states rights. With the Iroquois the central governing body was only advisory in the end.
The last word in Indian Governmental affairs, would be and should be the (Indian) Commonwealth government. It would be backed up by the U.S. Federal Government only at the behest of the Indian Commonwealth government. This would only be in cases of extreme emergency.
The office of Grand Chief (President) would be a strong executive position. Tempered by a National Assembly with a 2/3 (two-third) override ruling. Also a judiciary or, if you will, an Indian Supreme Court. I need not say that the office of Grand Chief would uphold the highest principles expected of him, and his office.
Another question arises at this time, and that question is one of revenue. How would the national Indian government obtain revenue to operate? Not being an expert in internal revenue I would only have to rely on common sense and say taxes. American Indian people now do not pay state taxes if living on federal Indian lands. To be good citizen of any nation one is only expected to pay his fair share of taxes.
For half the Indian population living off their reservations, an Indian Tribal member should have the right to pay his state and federal taxes to his nation since many Indian people were forced to move to the cities to survive by the federal Indian relocation policy of the 1950s or just the plain prospect of economic survival. If this country wants to truly be fair with its native peoples, it must also realize that most of these Indian people are working in cities and towns that were once apart of their ancient homelands that were stolen from the respective Indian tribe by fraudulent treaty. So an Indian tribal member or decedent should be allowed to pay his taxes or a portion their off to his National Indian Commonwealth government.
Another source of revenue would be taxes on business of all kinds on federal Indian reservations. Businesses should only be expected to pay their fare share of taxes to the National government. The U.S. tax codes and state tax codes can be used as examples for our National Indian taxing agency. A major source of revenue can be casino operations and other gaming enterprises. What must be understood is that Indian gaming enterprises will be given the protection of a National Indian government and the assurance that it will be allowed to expand and prosper without local and state interference, thus benefiting the local tribal nation and the National Indian government.
Lastly in regard to revenue generation I would like to propose the idea of nationalization of these huge resource development corporations such as the mining firms the oil producing firms and timber industries operating on our federal Indian lands. In years past the B.I.A. has allowed these corporate industries a colonialists profit by only giving the tribes royalties of as low as 2 cents to 17 cents on the dollar for a given ton of lets say coal. Where else in the world can the colonial get a better deal. My argument is that these are our mineral resources, in our federal Indian lands we should be the oneís getting the bigger part of the dollar; minimum fair market value for our resources; B.I.A. mining royalties are a royal rip-off. This has the potential to be the major source of revenue for the National Indian government or Indian Commonwealth government. But lest us only remember, to take tender care of our Mother Earth.
Other particulars of this Indian Commonwealth Government can be worked out at another time. This outline of an Indian Commonwealth can be a reality. We only need to communicate and organize. The Creator knows, we deserve the right to govern ourselves without any plenary interference. This Indian Commonwealth Government can assure and guarantee our Civil rights, our Spiritual rights, our economic rights and political right. Thus our National Right!
In developing this report a number of questions were raised in difference to an Indian Commonwealth. In defense of my stance, I will bring these questions to light, as follows:
Question: Why not statehood, instead of any Indian Commonwealth? Because as a State of the Union, we would have to accept the constitution and the Bill of Rights as the Supreme law of the land. Our treaties would no longer be our lands as we do. The flood of non-Indians would only be expected. The Indians again becoming a minority in our own lands! We only need look, to the old Indian Territory and know the truth.
Question: Where would the funds come from to run the Commonwealth? Puerto Rico as a Commonwealth receives billions of more dollars than the Bureau of Indian Affairs. With only a half a million more people. With this kind of funding we can build an infrastructure to improve the Indian economic situation. Many non-Indian businesses and corporation now have free sway on our reservations. There only payments are a meager royalty payment to the tribe. Since Royalties are a Royal rip-off, we should seek ways to take the onus off the ten cent on the dollar payment and take the whole dollar. After all these mineral resources are Indian mineral resources. Another form of revenue would be taxation on all forms of business in Indian country. Everybody should be expected to pay their fair share. Barter in this regard can be an option.
Question: All the tribes have different cultures, would you impose a unified culture on the Commonwealth? The answer is No! The dignity of all Indian cultures would be respected.
Question: Are not Indian reservation lands really government lands? Wouldn't that make an Indian Commonwealth illegal? Putting the lie of Plenary power aside, these treaties say these lands are Indian lands, explicitly! Again legally this is our right to form a national Indian government!
Question: How long would it take to form such a government? It wouldn't be overnight. It would take about three to seven years, maybe a bit longer, but it can happen in that time frame.
Question: Where would the Capital of the Commonwealth be located? Preferably at a central location in the United States. This Capital would definitely be located on Indian land.
Question: What would happen to the Bureau of Indian Affairs? It would be disbanded as one of the last vestiges of Colonialism. Thereby giving way to true Sovereignty!
Question: Why not Independence? Because we are American to the core. Why else do they call us American Indian or Native American.
Question: What would be the Name of the Commonwealth? Native America! So be it!
Question: How would treaty issues be affected in the relationship between the tribe and the National Commonwealth? Indian treaties and treaty rights would be a basic part of Indian Commonwealth Law. Every precaution would be taken to safeguard the law of our Indian lands and Indian Nation.
Question: How would tribal status be affected with the Federal Government? Tribal status need not be affected any differently then it is now, the major change will be that the onus of tribal recognition and the onus of tribal status would now rest with the National Indian Government. All tribes currently recognized as American Indian/Native American Tribes/Nations would hold that status with the National Indian government. The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of the Interior will no longer determine who is or who is not an American Indian. That power will transfer to the National Indian Commonwealth.
Question: How will the concept of sovereignty be affected? The National Indian government (The Commonwealth) will be the guarantor of our sovereignty at all levels of association with other political entities. The only other allegiance we would have is an already proven allegiance to the U.S. Federal government, but even here we would now have our say!
Question: What about treaty issues and treaty rights? The National Indian government would incorporate treaty rights into the law of the land. All treaty issues and rights would have the full backing of the National Indian Government and seek full compliance with all other political entities who have a treaty issue in question. It should be now obvious that we are now a nation with full national rights! (These right would be within the context of an American Indian Commonwealth government.)
CONCLUSION
Pt. V of IV An American Indian Manifesto!
by J. Boyd MorningStorm
In conclusion; what are the choices for Indian people? Do Native peoples continue to accept the political arrangement with the U.S. Government or do Indian people reject this colonial arrangement and opt for true sovereignty!
If any further proof of Indian second class governmental status is needed, we need only look at the Indian Gaming issue, one sees a non-Indian negotiating our sovereign rights away. Interior secretary Babbit has given states the right to limit Indian Gaming on sovereign Indian lands. This chipping away of our Indian sovereignty will only continue, unless we learn from our Indian History and form into a singular Indian political unit. One can call this political unit what you may, but I will call it an American Indian Commonwealth. It will be a United Native American Nation co-equal with all other nations on the North American continent, so be it!
REFERENCES
- U.S. Statues at large, 4:411-12.
- U.S. Indian law, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 620-21.
- U.S. Statues at large, 23:385.
- U.S. Statues at large, 24: 388-91.
- Senate Miscellaneous Document, no. 24, 53rd Congress, 3rd session, serial 3281, pg. 8-12.
- U.S. Statues at large, 30: 497-98, 502-505.
- 187 U.S. Reports, 552, 564-68.
- U.S. Statues at Large, 67: B132.
- History of Indian Policy, S. Lyman Tyler, pgs. 59-60, 1973.
- History of the American Indian, Angie Debo, pg. 331, 1970, University of Oklahoma Press.
- Termination and Relocation, Donald Fixico, pg. 132-133, 1986, University of Oklahoma Press.