Federally Recognized Indians, Descendants, Wannabees and Exploiters

[Paul123]

Oh well let me toss in some citations anyway,,,

The typical definition of Indian tribe is 25 U.S.C. § 450b(e):
The term "Indian tribe" means any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community, including an Alaska Native Village Corporation or Regional Corporation (as defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act), which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians.


The "Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981," PL 97-35, August 13, 1981, introduced eligibility for community service block grants to state recognized tribes and tribal organizations. Section 674(c)(5) states:
The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" mean those tribes, bands, or other organized groups of Indians recognized in the State in which they reside or considered by the Secretary of the Interior to be an Indian tribe or an Indian organization for any purpose.


“express recognition” 45 C.F.R. § 96.44 (b) states:
The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" as used in the Reconciliation Act have the same meaning given such terms in section 4(b) and 4(c) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b). The terms also include organized groups of Indians that the State in which they reside has determined are Indian tribes. An organized group of Indians is eligible for direct funding based on State recognition if the State has expressly determined that the group is an Indian tribe. In addition, the statement of the State's chief executive officer verifying that a tribe is recognized by that State will also be sufficient to verify State recognition for the purpose of direct funding.

the Indian Arts and Crafts Act, 25 U.S.C. § 305e (d), introduced the term “state recognized tribe” into federal law.


So, like it or not,,, one can point out all of the things about culture that they want but the law is the law.

[Rattlebone]

RB said:
" Maybe when you engage in this conversation next time, you will have researched the separation of powers in the United States government and realized that federal power is above state power."

True the Fed does have power is above state power, but they legislate recognition of State Tribes in some of their policies. You can't say that they don't. (or would you like some citations?) And in as much as they do that, then the Fed is recognizing that there are State Tribes. True,  they give different benefits but that has nothing to do with it.

 I have already gone over this with you. In some capacity the feds do recognize state tribes or even those tribes with no recognition because the federal government realizes they are indeed native.

 Do you mean to tell me that you think that some blond haired, blue eyed person who only claims to be NDN because of some ggggggggg grandmother story is just as much as some NDN as some state recognized NDN from a real tribe, who knows their culture and experiences racism for being NDN and having dark skin?

 The difference between a real state recognized tribe and a faux one like the Echota is this.

 The real one has always been a tribe, and unlike the Echota people, the members of the real tribe can't pick and chose when they want to be NDN or not. They are NDN 24/7, and go through the hardships and racism for being NDN.

[Paul123]

Why do you keep bringing up the Echotas into this? I have not said one word about them in this thread. ( or any other Tribe,, well I did mention the Cherokee nation) And you still keep confusing law with culture. I was only talking about law when I tossed out the quote in my post #111.
If one doesn't like the cultural aspects of some State Tribes then Change the Laws.  

"Do you mean to tell me that you think that some blond haired, blue eyed person who only claims to be NDN because of some ggggggggg grandmother....."

The Cherokee Nation is full of people just like that.
Do you mean to tell me that being NDN is based on ones looks?

[Rattlebone]

Why do you keep bringing up the Echotas into this? I have not said one word about them in this thread. ( or any other Tribe,, well I did mention the Cherokee nation) And you still keep confusing law with culture. I was only talking about law when I tossed out the quote in my post #111.
If one doesn't like the cultural aspects of some State Tribes then Change the Laws.  

 Because it is a perfect example of frauds trying to get state recognition in order to find loop holes in  getting recognized falsely as NDN, and then take the food right out of the bellies of NDN children by leaching off of funding earmarked for NDN people.


 It seems to me that you support such things since you are arguing in the defense of such organizations.

  

[Paul123]

Why do you keep bringing up the Echotas into this? I have not said one word about them in this thread. ( or any other Tribe,, well I did mention the Cherokee nation) And you still keep confusing law with culture. I was only talking about law when I tossed out the quote in my post #111.
If one doesn't like the cultural aspects of some State Tribes then Change the Laws.  

 Because it is a perfect example of frauds trying to get state recognition in order to find loop holes in  getting recognized falsely as NDN, and then take the food right out of the bellies of NDN children by leaching off of funding earmarked for NDN people.


 It seems to me that you support such things since you are arguing in the defense of such organizations.

Ahhhh haaaa haaaa,,
take the food right out of the bellies of NDN children...
Now that was funny, I love your humor.

And The Echotas already have state recognition.
So yea, I support their rights as the law defines it.

[Rattlebone]

Why do you keep bringing up the Echotas into this? I have not said one word about them in this thread. ( or any other Tribe,, well I did mention the Cherokee nation) And you still keep confusing law with culture. I was only talking about law when I tossed out the quote in my post #111.
If one doesn't like the cultural aspects of some State Tribes then Change the Laws.  

 Because it is a perfect example of frauds trying to get state recognition in order to find loop holes in  getting recognized falsely as NDN, and then take the food right out of the bellies of NDN children by leaching off of funding earmarked for NDN people.


 It seems to me that you support such things since you are arguing in the defense of such organizations.

Ahhhh haaaa haaaa,,
take the food right out of the bellies of NDN children...
Now that was funny, I love your humor.

And The Echotas already have state recognition.
So yea, I support their rights as the law defines it.

 That is exactly what it does.

 I know cases of Lakota women on Pine Ridge with over 5 children getting what amounts to $80 a month from the federal government. This is in an area where there are no jobs.

 I did read your arguement about funding, and felt it was rather pompous of you.

Why should somebody who little to no proof of being NDN get one red cent, when real NDN people are in such dire conditions?

 Are you so self absorbed and heartless in your claim to be seen as NDN, and those like you being seeing as NDN that you would put your "identity" over feeding children?

[BlackWolf]

“express recognition” 45 C.F.R. § 96.44 (b) states:
The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" as used in the Reconciliation Act have the same meaning given such terms in section 4(b) and 4(c) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b). The terms also include organized groups of Indians that the State in which they reside has determined are Indian tribes. An organized group of Indians is eligible for direct funding based on State recognition if the State has expressly determined that the group is an Indian tribe. In addition, the statement of the State's chief executive officer verifying that a tribe is recognized by that State will also be sufficient to verify State recognition for the purpose of direct funding.

So a simple statement from a governor opens the door to funding and Indian artist status. Honorary resolutions that have no state financial impact are often on a consent agenda or otherwise fly through the legislative process without scrutiny. Given this wide latitude and the possibility of extra federal money directed to the state, states have been generous in doling out recognition. And federal agencies have been generous in giving funding not based on historic treaty obligations but simply a recent state resolution or executive proclamation.

[Paul123]

 That is exactly what it does.

 I know cases of Lakota women on Pine Ridge with over 5 children getting what amounts to $80 a month from the federal government. This is in an area where there are no jobs.

Well I'm sure sorry for the people on the wrong side of their Tribes allotments but,site one example of a State tribe taking one cent that would have went to a Fed Tribe,,, You can't.

As for the "self absorbed and heartless" thingy
 well I won't even reply to posts that digress to name calling. Sure we have had a rather charged debate and so far it has been civil. We can disagree but be respectful to each other.
If you care to rephrase, I will reply (with respect to you).   


 

[Paul123]

“express recognition” 45 C.F.R. § 96.44 (b) states:
The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" as used in the Reconciliation Act have the same meaning given such terms in section 4(b) and 4(c) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b). The terms also include organized groups of Indians that the State in which they reside has determined are Indian tribes. An organized group of Indians is eligible for direct funding based on State recognition if the State has expressly determined that the group is an Indian tribe. In addition, the statement of the State's chief executive officer verifying that a tribe is recognized by that State will also be sufficient to verify State recognition for the purpose of direct funding.

So a simple statement from a governor opens the door to funding and Indian artist status. Honorary resolutions that have no state financial impact are often on a consent agenda or otherwise fly through the legislative process without scrutiny. Given this wide latitude and the possibility of extra federal money directed to the state, states have been generous in doling out recognition. And federal agencies have been generous in giving funding not based on historic treaty obligations but simply a recent state resolution or executive proclamation.

Yea, that just about sums it up and then it becomes LAW.

[BlackWolf]

Yea, that just about sums it up and then it becomes LAW.

Well States are breaking the law then, because only Congress has power over Indian Affairs. 

[Paul123]

Yea, that just about sums it up and then it becomes LAW.

Well States are breaking the law then, because only Congress has power over Indian Affairs.  

Sure Congress has that power, but at the same time they have legislated a form of recognition to the State Tribes. And then that becomes law. So the States are not breaking the law. It was Congress that legislated it. I guess it comes down to Congress knowing that there are a lot of NDNs that aren't citizens of Fed. Tribes.

[BlackWolf]

I'd also like to clarify something.  Although, I'm againts "State Recognized Tribes", I'm not againts Legitimite Historic Tribes that lost Federal Recognition, from having State Recognition.  Sometimes, its the only way for these Tribes to receive any Federal Money and better themselves.  

If for example, lets say, the Creek Nation lost Federal Recognition, due to a termination bill, and they had the oppurtunity to later be recognized by the state of Oklahoma, I would support that, because under the circumstances, they don't have any other alternative,and they should take what ever they can in order to better their tribe.  

I am however in principle againts the "State Recognition" of Tribes because REAL Indian Tribes are goverment entities that require a "Goverment to Goveremtn" relationship with the Federal Goverment.  

[Paul123]

I'd also like to clarify something.  Although, I'm againts "State Recognized Tribes", I'm not againts Legitimite Historic Tribes that lost Federal Recognition, from having State Recognition.  Sometimes, its the only way for these Tribes to receive any Federal Money and better themselves.  

If for example, lets say, the Creek Nation lost Federal Recognition, due to a termination bill, and they had the oppurtunity to later be recognized by the state of Oklahoma, I would support that, because under the circumstances, they don't have any other alternative,and they should take what ever they can in order to better their tribe.  

I am however in principle againts the "State Recognition" of Tribes because REAL Indian Tribes are goverment entities that require a "Goverment to Goveremtn" relationship with the Federal Goverment.  

Agreed...
There are termination bills out there as we speak. And there are cracks in the floor over at the BIA that are big enough to toss an NDN through. We all know this. I thought that this thread was discussing these such things, not the Echotas.

I'm against tossing every apple into the bad apple barrel without a true investigation as to what their claims are.  

I revived this thread to discuss the legal aspects of State Tribes and to point out that they do have some quasi form of recognition. It is the law as we have it now. I'm not defending a Tribe I'm defending the laws. And like them or not,,, it is what it is,,,

[critter - a white non-ndn person]

Interesting read.  Law.  Well, there are laws, but doesn' t mean they are good laws.  I'd be careful in saying something like "So yea, I support their rights as the law defines it."

Slavery was law, fortunately, more people came NOT to support the rights of slave owners.

Not making comparisons, just making statement on supporting a groups 'rights' based on a 'law' since some laws are very faulty.

Also, in reading all this, I'm getting the idea that the states and possibly the fed sort of pass the fake tribes and whatnots so as not to have to actually 'deal' with the issue of Indians in America.  It's almost like .. someone pops up claiming to be a tribe.. and the states settle with them right away like 'hush' money or something.  So, you may be right Paul in that the money going to the fake tribes would not be going to the recognized tribes anyway..  but..  if the fed has money to give to states for their 'fake' tribes, then the fed has that same money they could allocate to recognized tribes.. some how they don't have it.. until a fake tribe clammors in and the state wants money to shut them up.

That's sort of my take on this ease of states granting tribes funds. 

I do believe these laws need to be changed.  Also seems to me, since the fed recognizes the sovereignty of the Indian nation, then the Indian nation(s) have a right to demand a stop to the giving of funds to non recognized or fake tribes.  As 'nation to nation'.  The USA has no real right to claim a tribe as part of the Indian 'nation'.  Or am I thinking wrong in some way..   

[Paul123]

Sure some of the more accepted State Tribes got some stimulus money this year.  an example may be that a State Tribe got a few thousand dollars while at the same time the Cherokee Nation got 50 million dollars. Keep in mind that this is stimulus money and won't go to the poor lady that only gets the 80 bucks mentioned in past posts here but, it is still money that the Fed tribe would not have gotten or else they would have.

Sure the laws need to be changed. The BIA needs an overhaul. I do think that this is in process.
 
I don't think that any state (well perhaps not Georgia) just passes out recognition. Alabama has some of the most stringent laws around regarding this. Sure there are some here that make light of them but please read their requirements before believing some of the stuff posted about their handing out recognition. LOM posted a link to their requirements in another thread and I won't clog up this thread by re-posting them here. One of the things is that the Tribe has to have been around for 200 years. I think that is way longer that the BIA requires.