While it suits many people on the losing side of an issue to quickly blame individuals for failed agendas, ie, scapegoating, all too often they fail to stop and take a look at what really happened and at the issue itself.
The culture clubs of Tennessee didn't get legislative and executive recognition of themselves as tribes in 2010 for one big reason: they failed to convince the Native American Indian community in Tennessee that they were Indian. By lying about their origins and histories, by successfully advocating for the removal of members of federally-recognized tribes from the state Commission of Indian Affairs, by taking over the TN Native American Convention and making local caucuses and the state convention a one-sided political party, by thumbing their nose at the tribe to which most of them claim kinship, by promoting secrecy, pettiness and hate at their 2010 Commission meetings, they successfully alienated all indian community support for even the sanest of culture-club members.
Of course The Fake Tribes of Tennessee blame a White Republican female legislator for their downfall after their success with the top White Republican male lawmakers of the state. 'Blame Whitey' is still a curious regurgitated racial rant when it comes from the keyboards of white blondes themselves pretending to be Indian.
The new (2009) TNNAC and new (2010) TCIA itself killed the TN Commission of Indian Affairs. They followed the recipe for Commission murder to a 't' and have ended up with less than nothing: a reputation for historical fraud, identity theft, nastiness and partisanship that is now the legislators' collective memory for the coming decade.
They were given the death recipe 17 months ago:
Killing the Commission in 2009
------------------------------------------------
1. promote argument and dissension, esp. against individuals
2. maintain state recognition of tribes, organizations & individuals as a legislative and Commission issue
3. Commission focus on internal rules and resolutions
4. TNNAC elect not-tribally-recognized members/descendants as Commission nominees
... published 5 february 2009 right here (see below). Every single one of the 4 steps TNNAC and TCIA followed religiously, compulsively, right to the very end on 19 june 2010 with the passage of TCIA Standing Rule 14 and the illegal recognition of their six culture clubs as fake tribes.
This extended suicide isn't painless, and its ghost will haunt the six faux culture clubs and their koolaid-drinking supporters for a scary long time.
sábado, 10 de julio de 2010
jueves, 8 de julio de 2010
Candidate Needs to Take Responsibility
ref: 8 July 2010 USA TODAY: Battle grows bitter as TN recognizes new Indian tribes
Lieutenant Governor/Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey supported these fake Indian tribes and sponsored their legislation in 2009 and 2010:
• SB1733 grants state recognition to certain Indian tribes, bands, and groups
• SB1735 extends state Native American Indian recognition with full legal rights and protections to the Remnant Yuchi Nation
• SB1978 grants state recognition to certain Indian tribes, bands, and groups
"Team Ron Ramsey" ought to be taken to task for making Tennessee the laughingstock of Indian country and for disrespecting the historical 'removed' tribes of Tennessee.
sábado, 26 de junio de 2010
Denunciation of TCIA's 19 june 2010 actions
JUNE 24, 2010
TO: TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL
TENNESSEE SECRETARY OF STATE
RE: JUNE 19TH ACTIONS OF THE TN COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED FOUNDERS AND FORMER COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, denounce, repudiate and reject the actions of the current TENNESSEE COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS on June 19, 2010 to recognize six groups (often called culture clubs) as State Recognized Tribes. The action taken by the current TCIA is a gross violation of state administrative policies that safeguard the public interest through prior notice, open meetings and public hearings, all of which were violated by the six current commissioners who voted for this illegal action. It is also an egregious conflict of interest given that 4 of the TCIA’s 6 members (Vice Chair Christine Goddard, Secretary James Everett Meeks, Alice Gwin Henry and Charles Lawson) are members of these very groups. Such illegitimate tribal recognition is an intentional fraud perpetrated on Cherokee, Lenape and Yuchi people to steal their political identities. Groups pretending to be Indian when a majority of them have no cultural or family affiliation with the tribes they claim as kin is a deception played on all the citizens of the State of Tennessee.
We ask the state Attorney General and Secretary of State to review these violations of state administrative rules and to determine the legitimacy of these commissioners’ actions, and to fully and objectively prosecute all violations.
Given the complete lack of public review, we also ask that the state Attorney General, the Secretary of State, and the Department of Environment and Conservation that oversees the Commission of Indian Affairs, and the Senate and House Government Operations Committees obtain for public review the applications and documentation submitted by the groups to the state Commission of Indian Affairs and used by the Commission to determine these groups’ eligibility and approval by the Commission.
FORMER TN INDIAN AFFAIRS COMMISSIONERS
1. Ray Emanuel, Nashville 1989-1992
2. John Hedgecoth, Crossville 2003-2004
3. John Anderson, Chattanooga 2003-2005
4. Evangeline Lynch, Dyer 2003-2008
5. Doris Tate Trevino, Sewanee 2005-2006
6. Niles Aseret, Nashville 2005-2007
7. Jeanie Walkingstick King, Knoxville 2005-2010
8. David Teat, Nashville 2007-2008
9. tom kunesh, Chattanooga 2007-2010
10. Bill Wells, Nashville 2008-2010
Contact: Evangeline Lynch (731) 643-6655
TO: TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL
TENNESSEE SECRETARY OF STATE
RE: JUNE 19TH ACTIONS OF THE TN COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED FOUNDERS AND FORMER COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, denounce, repudiate and reject the actions of the current TENNESSEE COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS on June 19, 2010 to recognize six groups (often called culture clubs) as State Recognized Tribes. The action taken by the current TCIA is a gross violation of state administrative policies that safeguard the public interest through prior notice, open meetings and public hearings, all of which were violated by the six current commissioners who voted for this illegal action. It is also an egregious conflict of interest given that 4 of the TCIA’s 6 members (Vice Chair Christine Goddard, Secretary James Everett Meeks, Alice Gwin Henry and Charles Lawson) are members of these very groups. Such illegitimate tribal recognition is an intentional fraud perpetrated on Cherokee, Lenape and Yuchi people to steal their political identities. Groups pretending to be Indian when a majority of them have no cultural or family affiliation with the tribes they claim as kin is a deception played on all the citizens of the State of Tennessee.
We ask the state Attorney General and Secretary of State to review these violations of state administrative rules and to determine the legitimacy of these commissioners’ actions, and to fully and objectively prosecute all violations.
Given the complete lack of public review, we also ask that the state Attorney General, the Secretary of State, and the Department of Environment and Conservation that oversees the Commission of Indian Affairs, and the Senate and House Government Operations Committees obtain for public review the applications and documentation submitted by the groups to the state Commission of Indian Affairs and used by the Commission to determine these groups’ eligibility and approval by the Commission.
FORMER TN INDIAN AFFAIRS COMMISSIONERS
1. Ray Emanuel, Nashville 1989-1992
2. John Hedgecoth, Crossville 2003-2004
3. John Anderson, Chattanooga 2003-2005
4. Evangeline Lynch, Dyer 2003-2008
5. Doris Tate Trevino, Sewanee 2005-2006
6. Niles Aseret, Nashville 2005-2007
7. Jeanie Walkingstick King, Knoxville 2005-2010
8. David Teat, Nashville 2007-2008
9. tom kunesh, Chattanooga 2007-2010
10. Bill Wells, Nashville 2008-2010
Contact: Evangeline Lynch
viernes, 12 de febrero de 2010
“Historic Orchard Knob - Established 1835” ?
There are new signs stuck in the ground around the Orchard Knob area east of downtown Chattanooga that claim ‘Historic Orchard Knob - Established 1835’. Given that this area south of the river was Cherokee Nation up through 1838, and that the geographic feature was called ‘Indian Hill’, and that there is no publicly available information on the web about ‘Historic Orchard Knob’, - does anybody know where the idea of ‘Historic Orchard Knob’ being established in 1835 comes from?
martes, 2 de febrero de 2010
reminder to TNNAC
notes from the TNNAC meeting, 18 October 2008 - Saturday, 9.30am - Cumberland U -agenda
TNNAC chairman Doug Kirby said some good words at the start of the meeting ...
no reason for TNNAC to be an org without the Commission
without the Commission there will be no recognition
told if the Commission fails, there will be no recognition.
TNNAC needs to be at the center - open, transparent means of
getting commissioners, need to follow state guidelines, rules
if TCA says we need 5 recognized indians on the Commission,
it's our job to assure that it does happen
have to recommend that the balance be held as in the guidleines or
we're not doing our job, exposing ourselves to those organizations outside
the state that TNNAC & the Commission are not following the guidelines
TNNAC is not a political body
----
in spite of his words, there appears to be no further concern on the TNNAC board's part regarding the lack of guaranteed or preferred representation of members of federally- or state- recognized tribes on the state Commission of Indian Affairs, and the current lack of compliance with state law that states that 5 of the 7 members be given Indian Preference.
TNNAC chairman Doug Kirby said some good words at the start of the meeting ...
no reason for TNNAC to be an org without the Commission
without the Commission there will be no recognition
told if the Commission fails, there will be no recognition.
TNNAC needs to be at the center - open, transparent means of
getting commissioners, need to follow state guidelines, rules
if TCA says we need 5 recognized indians on the Commission,
it's our job to assure that it does happen
have to recommend that the balance be held as in the guidleines or
we're not doing our job, exposing ourselves to those organizations outside
the state that TNNAC & the Commission are not following the guidelines
TNNAC is not a political body
----
in spite of his words, there appears to be no further concern on the TNNAC board's part regarding the lack of guaranteed or preferred representation of members of federally- or state- recognized tribes on the state Commission of Indian Affairs, and the current lack of compliance with state law that states that 5 of the 7 members be given Indian Preference.
viernes, 6 de febrero de 2009
a dark & bloody ground
When the meetings of a state Commission of Indian Affairs are besieged with groups demanding that their culture clubs and they, the members themselves, be recognized by the State as Native American Indians, when members of federally-recognized Native American Indian tribes are denigrated in public by a commissioner of Indian Affairs as being less worthy of recognition in Tennessee than the in-state descendants of indians who died over a hundred years ago, when recognition of the state's historic tribes and Native American heroes is less important than trying to embarrass a public appointee at a Commission meeting, when a fullblood member of a federally-recognized tribe with years of service and statewide community respect is unseated from his/her position as elected chairperson of the Commission of Indian Affairs by the lobbying efforts of an election official who is a member of a state-recognized tribe not native to Tennessee on behalf of a person unknown outside his/her local community and with no proven tribal affiliation, then i think it's time to ask ourselves, Whose interest is the Commission of Indian Affairs serving -- Indians or their opponents?
As a critic of the last Commission, as a community organizer of this iteration of the Commission, as former chair of the Advisory Council and of TNNAC, i have a greater degree of investment in the success of the Commission and a better historical perspective than most people. Commitment to the Commission is a choice that is tested weekly by liars and haters and racists, and affirmed daily by the problems requiring attention and the prospects of projects that will create a better future. This year, 2009, brings the legal time limit of the Commission. If anybody wants it extended further into the future, the state legislature requires an argument be made that its current existence promises future success. It will be difficult to win such an argument with the legislature when the legislative officers appoint persons with no Indian Preference over the number-one choice of the community who is a member of a federally-recognized tribe. It would be stupid to try to win an argument with the state Government Operations Committee again this year with the Joe-Joe Show again present to attack and insult representatives of the state's historic tribes. It is wrong to defend a Commission with a decreasing number of members of federally- and state-recognized tribes and an increasing number of advocates of state recognition of culture clubs as tribes. How to defend a state agency in which the workers are demeaned and the posers entertain themselves with personal attacks?
Institutions have no natural life expectancy. They live as long as they are needed, and should be terminated when they lose their ability to contribute positively to society. That's why the state legislature created the law to periodically review all state agencies - to separate the vibrant from the static. The Commission of Indian Affairs is a state agency and should be doing good, for Indians and for the state. For the Commission to continue its relevance and existence, the community should be supporting it and extolling its virtues. I don't see the indian community supporting the Commission. It is, in fact, being damned with no praise.
For the Commission to be extended, it needs to be worthy of life. To be worthy of life, it should be composed of a majority of members of federally- and state-recognized tribes, have more than half a brain, have accomplished some of its goals, and have good plans for the future. Currently there is only one member of a federally-recognized tribe, no member of a state-recognized tribe, two persons with Indian Preference based on their family history, and four persons with no Indian Preference. The Commission will probably lose its only remaining member of a federally-recognized tribe in the TNNAC elections later this year, and there are no signs that her position or any other seat on the Commission will be replaced with a member of a federally-recognized tribe. ... which is the same situation that occurred with the last Commission: opposition to appointment of members of federally-recognized tribes. When such racism happens, the Commission is not worthy of further life.
A current bill, HB 239, introduced in the state legislature ten days ago by Representative Mumpower (R-Bristol), House Republican leader, would "appoint the Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes as the entity that will review and present for recognition any tribes, bands, or groups that seek recognition," and "recognize, for purposes of state Native American Indian recognition," the six culture clubs that compose the "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes". Three current commissioners (Meeks, Thigpen & Henry) are members of the "Confederation" and the only supporters of the bill on the Commission that i know of. The introduction of this bill increases the oppositional nature of the Commission's membership, and with such division within itself as well as within the legislature, it's difficult to see how the Commission can survive a doubly partisan review process.
TNNAC elections for nominations to the Commission are coming up right after this legislative session. the TNNAC board now has a majority membership of "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes" supporters. TNNAC has been informed that the appointments to the Commission have not followed the rule of state law in appointing five members with Indian Preference to the Commission (TCA 4-34-104.b.3). No comment from TNNAC. The Commission has been informed of the situation as well. No comment from the Commission. When lack of members of federally-recognized tribes on a state Commission of Indian Affairs fails to become a major concern of the election body and of the Commission itself, i think it's time to question the indian nature of the state agency.
The great debate within the Commission this past six years has been recognition. As i said in my comments at the last Commission meeting, 'recognition' is a third-rail issue: anybody touches it, we all die. In this case three Commissioners are grabbing ahold of the rail hard and fast after having just been told that to do so is certain death for the Commission. This extended suicide, and the political dumping they and we will experience in the legislature, will not be painless for them or the Commission.
At the last Commission meeting (17 january in Memphis) Ramona Reece of Tennessee Native Times asked, "I would like to know that if a commissioner feels like this Commission is not worthy to be extended, I ask you and I ask the public, can that commissioner that doesn't believe in this commission truly serve it adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?"
'Heart' is a metaphor for commitment. It isn't a question of how committed a commissioner is to serve on the Commission. It's a question of the obstacles before the Commission and the collective ability to overcome those obstacles. I don't see TNNAC advocating for more candidates, nominees and appointments who are members of federally- or state-recognized tribes, i don't see the Commission becoming more indian, i don't see "the Confederation" withdrawing its legislative proposal and supporting the Commission, i don't see the personal attacks on commissioners stopping, i don't see a bitterly divided legislature re-approving a bitterly divided Commission. Instead, i see the "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes" alienating more people from the true existing tribes, and the number of legislators who voted against the Commission last year increasing.
Fellow members of the Commission and i have proposed music, education and tourism projects, all approved by the Commission, but none garnering community support. ACTIA and i have proposed recognition of the state's historic tribes and state recognition criteria for groups who claim to be existing tribes. I have proposed revision of state laws regarding sale of burial items and a commission commitment to dialogue with the state's historic tribes. supported by an intelligent few, ignored by most because these proposals don't apply to the vocal majority's concern: State Recognition for Themselves as Indians.
The kind of self-recognition without historical proof or community support promoted in HB 239 and HB333 is contradictory to established tribal and US and state recognition rules. The self-promotion of these groups calling themselves tribes is wrong and embarrassing. Narcissism and personal gain were never motivations for creating or re-creating the Commission of Indian Affairs. This issue consumes the Commission, and devours it. Until it is resolved, there is no state Commission of Indian Affairs, just a Commission to Recognize Indian Culture Clubs and Descendants in Tennessee as Tribes and Quasi-Tribes.
Heart and brain may be the energy sources that commissioners draw upon to keep going, but it is not what will keep the Commission alive. What keeps any organization going is successful action. With the self-centered focus of these who will do anything for even a hint of legislation containing a possible promise of recognition, it's time this Commission experiment end, and with it, a corrupted election organization. Until indians, indian descendants, and legislators here in Tennessee adopt a standard for tribal recognition in the state, AND indian descendants begin to work _with_ the historic tribes of Tennessee in Oklahoma to find some positive medium of interaction and mutual validation, this state will remain 'a dark and bloody ground' of infighting and no Commission of Indian Affairs.
As a critic of the last Commission, as a community organizer of this iteration of the Commission, as former chair of the Advisory Council and of TNNAC, i have a greater degree of investment in the success of the Commission and a better historical perspective than most people. Commitment to the Commission is a choice that is tested weekly by liars and haters and racists, and affirmed daily by the problems requiring attention and the prospects of projects that will create a better future. This year, 2009, brings the legal time limit of the Commission. If anybody wants it extended further into the future, the state legislature requires an argument be made that its current existence promises future success. It will be difficult to win such an argument with the legislature when the legislative officers appoint persons with no Indian Preference over the number-one choice of the community who is a member of a federally-recognized tribe. It would be stupid to try to win an argument with the state Government Operations Committee again this year with the Joe-Joe Show again present to attack and insult representatives of the state's historic tribes. It is wrong to defend a Commission with a decreasing number of members of federally- and state-recognized tribes and an increasing number of advocates of state recognition of culture clubs as tribes. How to defend a state agency in which the workers are demeaned and the posers entertain themselves with personal attacks?
Institutions have no natural life expectancy. They live as long as they are needed, and should be terminated when they lose their ability to contribute positively to society. That's why the state legislature created the law to periodically review all state agencies - to separate the vibrant from the static. The Commission of Indian Affairs is a state agency and should be doing good, for Indians and for the state. For the Commission to continue its relevance and existence, the community should be supporting it and extolling its virtues. I don't see the indian community supporting the Commission. It is, in fact, being damned with no praise.
For the Commission to be extended, it needs to be worthy of life. To be worthy of life, it should be composed of a majority of members of federally- and state-recognized tribes, have more than half a brain, have accomplished some of its goals, and have good plans for the future. Currently there is only one member of a federally-recognized tribe, no member of a state-recognized tribe, two persons with Indian Preference based on their family history, and four persons with no Indian Preference. The Commission will probably lose its only remaining member of a federally-recognized tribe in the TNNAC elections later this year, and there are no signs that her position or any other seat on the Commission will be replaced with a member of a federally-recognized tribe. ... which is the same situation that occurred with the last Commission: opposition to appointment of members of federally-recognized tribes. When such racism happens, the Commission is not worthy of further life.
A current bill, HB 239, introduced in the state legislature ten days ago by Representative Mumpower (R-Bristol), House Republican leader, would "appoint the Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes as the entity that will review and present for recognition any tribes, bands, or groups that seek recognition," and "recognize, for purposes of state Native American Indian recognition," the six culture clubs that compose the "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes". Three current commissioners (Meeks, Thigpen & Henry) are members of the "Confederation" and the only supporters of the bill on the Commission that i know of. The introduction of this bill increases the oppositional nature of the Commission's membership, and with such division within itself as well as within the legislature, it's difficult to see how the Commission can survive a doubly partisan review process.
TNNAC elections for nominations to the Commission are coming up right after this legislative session. the TNNAC board now has a majority membership of "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes" supporters. TNNAC has been informed that the appointments to the Commission have not followed the rule of state law in appointing five members with Indian Preference to the Commission (TCA 4-34-104.b.3). No comment from TNNAC. The Commission has been informed of the situation as well. No comment from the Commission. When lack of members of federally-recognized tribes on a state Commission of Indian Affairs fails to become a major concern of the election body and of the Commission itself, i think it's time to question the indian nature of the state agency.
The great debate within the Commission this past six years has been recognition. As i said in my comments at the last Commission meeting, 'recognition' is a third-rail issue: anybody touches it, we all die. In this case three Commissioners are grabbing ahold of the rail hard and fast after having just been told that to do so is certain death for the Commission. This extended suicide, and the political dumping they and we will experience in the legislature, will not be painless for them or the Commission.
At the last Commission meeting (17 january in Memphis) Ramona Reece of Tennessee Native Times asked, "I would like to know that if a commissioner feels like this Commission is not worthy to be extended, I ask you and I ask the public, can that commissioner that doesn't believe in this commission truly serve it adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?"
'Heart' is a metaphor for commitment. It isn't a question of how committed a commissioner is to serve on the Commission. It's a question of the obstacles before the Commission and the collective ability to overcome those obstacles. I don't see TNNAC advocating for more candidates, nominees and appointments who are members of federally- or state-recognized tribes, i don't see the Commission becoming more indian, i don't see "the Confederation" withdrawing its legislative proposal and supporting the Commission, i don't see the personal attacks on commissioners stopping, i don't see a bitterly divided legislature re-approving a bitterly divided Commission. Instead, i see the "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes" alienating more people from the true existing tribes, and the number of legislators who voted against the Commission last year increasing.
Fellow members of the Commission and i have proposed music, education and tourism projects, all approved by the Commission, but none garnering community support. ACTIA and i have proposed recognition of the state's historic tribes and state recognition criteria for groups who claim to be existing tribes. I have proposed revision of state laws regarding sale of burial items and a commission commitment to dialogue with the state's historic tribes. supported by an intelligent few, ignored by most because these proposals don't apply to the vocal majority's concern: State Recognition for Themselves as Indians.
The kind of self-recognition without historical proof or community support promoted in HB 239 and HB333 is contradictory to established tribal and US and state recognition rules. The self-promotion of these groups calling themselves tribes is wrong and embarrassing. Narcissism and personal gain were never motivations for creating or re-creating the Commission of Indian Affairs. This issue consumes the Commission, and devours it. Until it is resolved, there is no state Commission of Indian Affairs, just a Commission to Recognize Indian Culture Clubs and Descendants in Tennessee as Tribes and Quasi-Tribes.
Heart and brain may be the energy sources that commissioners draw upon to keep going, but it is not what will keep the Commission alive. What keeps any organization going is successful action. With the self-centered focus of these who will do anything for even a hint of legislation containing a possible promise of recognition, it's time this Commission experiment end, and with it, a corrupted election organization. Until indians, indian descendants, and legislators here in Tennessee adopt a standard for tribal recognition in the state, AND indian descendants begin to work _with_ the historic tribes of Tennessee in Oklahoma to find some positive medium of interaction and mutual validation, this state will remain 'a dark and bloody ground' of infighting and no Commission of Indian Affairs.
some 'I would like to know's' that i would like to know ...
i would like to know, if a commissioner feels like this Commission of Indian Affairs is not worthy to determine recognition of Indians in Tennessee, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner who doesn't believe in his/her own Commission's ability to determine its own recognition criteria truly serve it adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
i would like to know, if a commissioner is not competent to propose some major policy initiatives, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner that doesn't initiate policy proposals truly serve the Commission adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
i would like to know, if a commissioner plots personal attacks on another commissioner during a public Commission meeting, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner whose goal is to eliminate other commissioners on the Commission truly serve the Commission adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
i would like to know, if a commissioner feels like this Commission is better composed of a minority of members of federally-recognized tribes, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner who doesn't believe in the indianess of existing tribes truly serve the Commission adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
i would like to know, if a commissioner is not competent to propose some major policy initiatives, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner that doesn't initiate policy proposals truly serve the Commission adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
i would like to know, if a commissioner plots personal attacks on another commissioner during a public Commission meeting, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner whose goal is to eliminate other commissioners on the Commission truly serve the Commission adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
i would like to know, if a commissioner feels like this Commission is better composed of a minority of members of federally-recognized tribes, i ask you and i ask the public, can that commissioner who doesn't believe in the indianess of existing tribes truly serve the Commission adequately? truly serve the people adequately? How you gonna serve with half a heart?
jueves, 5 de febrero de 2009
saving or killing the Commission
Getting the Commission to 2010
------------------------------------------
1. reduce Indian community in-fighting
2. eliminate state recognition (tribes, organizations, individuals) as an issue
3. initiate projects that will benefit the state
4. involve more federally- and state-recognized indians
Killing the Commission in 2009
------------------------------------------
1. promote argument and dissension, esp. against individuals
2. maintain state recognition of tribes, organizations & individuals as a legislative and Commission issue
3. Commission focus on interal rules and resolutions
4. TNNAC elect not-tribally-recognized members/descendants as Commission nominees
------------------------------------------
1. reduce Indian community in-fighting
2. eliminate state recognition (tribes, organizations, individuals) as an issue
3. initiate projects that will benefit the state
4. involve more federally- and state-recognized indians
Killing the Commission in 2009
------------------------------------------
1. promote argument and dissension, esp. against individuals
2. maintain state recognition of tribes, organizations & individuals as a legislative and Commission issue
3. Commission focus on interal rules and resolutions
4. TNNAC elect not-tribally-recognized members/descendants as Commission nominees
viernes, 30 de enero de 2009
"a year to get put on the notification list"
Ramona Reece commented at the last Commission meeting (17 January 2009 - Memphis) that "It took me over a year to get put on the notification list."
in the 1990s the Commission had an office in a state-owned building in downtown Nashville, a salaried executive director, a photocopier, a paper-envelope-USPSmail notification list, and a several thousand-dollar budget for items like paper, envelopes and stamps. they mailed meeting notices to organizations, not individuals.
in the 2000s the Commission has no budget. it has no office. no executive director. no photocopier. no paper. no envelopes. no stamps. anything and everything it has exists in cyberspace. since the Commission was refounded no Commission secretary sent out meeting notices by mail or email. all notices were provided on the Commission website and folks spread the word around by email. actual agendas with an accurate description of the peoposals to be discussed were unheard of. a Commission-directed email list was discussed in 2008, but no such capability was offered by the state.
in december 2008 the secretary of the Commission took it upon himself to create his own - not the Commission's - email notification list of Commission meetings.
Ms Reece's public comment that "It took me over a year to get put on the notification list" is not a complaint about the Commission's meeting notice not being available publicly online along with other state 'sunshine' notices but a whine that Ms Reece was not being properly serviced with direct email by the Commission. advance meeting notice can be and is distributed publicly and freely by any number of private service providers. Mr kunesh, acting without Commission authorization, took it upon himself to create an email notification list which includes Commission meetings.
personal interest in the Commission meets personal responsibility at www.state.tn.us/environment/tcia/ and www.state.tn.us/environment/news/ppo/sunshine.shtml#tcia. public notice can be automated by Google Alerts which alert subscribers by email to new information on the web (www.google.com/alerts). that any person feels entitled to personalized notification when s/he could be doing it him/herself and making a contribution to an unfunded state agency is a comment on the entitlement beliefs of a spoiled generation.
when form matters more than substance, when mode of communication is more important than content, when being catered to matters more than community service, substance and content become superfluous.
when substance and content become superfluous, so does the agency that is dedicated to their form and mode of communication.
in the 1990s the Commission had an office in a state-owned building in downtown Nashville, a salaried executive director, a photocopier, a paper-envelope-USPSmail notification list, and a several thousand-dollar budget for items like paper, envelopes and stamps. they mailed meeting notices to organizations, not individuals.
in the 2000s the Commission has no budget. it has no office. no executive director. no photocopier. no paper. no envelopes. no stamps. anything and everything it has exists in cyberspace. since the Commission was refounded no Commission secretary sent out meeting notices by mail or email. all notices were provided on the Commission website and folks spread the word around by email. actual agendas with an accurate description of the peoposals to be discussed were unheard of. a Commission-directed email list was discussed in 2008, but no such capability was offered by the state.
in december 2008 the secretary of the Commission took it upon himself to create his own - not the Commission's - email notification list of Commission meetings.
Ms Reece's public comment that "It took me over a year to get put on the notification list" is not a complaint about the Commission's meeting notice not being available publicly online along with other state 'sunshine' notices but a whine that Ms Reece was not being properly serviced with direct email by the Commission. advance meeting notice can be and is distributed publicly and freely by any number of private service providers. Mr kunesh, acting without Commission authorization, took it upon himself to create an email notification list which includes Commission meetings.
personal interest in the Commission meets personal responsibility at www.state.tn.us/environment/tcia/ and www.state.tn.us/environment/news/ppo/sunshine.shtml#tcia. public notice can be automated by Google Alerts which alert subscribers by email to new information on the web (www.google.com/alerts). that any person feels entitled to personalized notification when s/he could be doing it him/herself and making a contribution to an unfunded state agency is a comment on the entitlement beliefs of a spoiled generation.
when form matters more than substance, when mode of communication is more important than content, when being catered to matters more than community service, substance and content become superfluous.
when substance and content become superfluous, so does the agency that is dedicated to their form and mode of communication.
viernes, 7 de noviembre de 2008
it's been a while
... with the state as well as the national political landscape now in transition but in opposite directions (Chattanooga Times Free Press: "A Deeper Shade of Red" and "General Assembly landscape changes as GOP takes over" front page, 6nov08).
talked with several legislators who counseled ‘no action’ on the recognition issue if we wanted the Commission to survive, even if we came up with something most people could agree with because, even then, the controversy surrounding it -- as happened last year at the Commission's sunset review hearing -- would be enough to not only halt the recognition effort but also potentially derail the Commission. i'll heed their advice and back off the issue, while resting assured that any attempts by others to circumvent the Commission's recognition responsibilities will be met with advice to first obtain the Commission's support.
on that note, i think the Commission and the state should follow the recent recommendations of the National Congress of American Indians on at least two issues which could be easily amended to apply to the state commission, ie:
• The Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs (TNCIA) should strongly support the recognition of all historic tribes, and should acknowledge the fact that it has neither the academic qualifications nor the staff to properly investigate and make determinations on historical and genealogical questions; and that any plans to do so in the future will lead to organizational, intratribal and intertribal conflict.
In order to avoid those conflicts, TNCIA should support state recognition for tribes that are co-sponsored by an existing legislatively state-recognized or federally-recognized tribe, and present their request as a resolution to the TNCIA.
and
• TNCIA should call for qualified tribal citizens and descendants who are interested in serving in state positions from Commission of Indian Affairs to the State Textbook Commission to send their résumés to TNCIA for review.
talked with several legislators who counseled ‘no action’ on the recognition issue if we wanted the Commission to survive, even if we came up with something most people could agree with because, even then, the controversy surrounding it -- as happened last year at the Commission's sunset review hearing -- would be enough to not only halt the recognition effort but also potentially derail the Commission. i'll heed their advice and back off the issue, while resting assured that any attempts by others to circumvent the Commission's recognition responsibilities will be met with advice to first obtain the Commission's support.
on that note, i think the Commission and the state should follow the recent recommendations of the National Congress of American Indians on at least two issues which could be easily amended to apply to the state commission, ie:
• The Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs (TNCIA) should strongly support the recognition of all historic tribes, and should acknowledge the fact that it has neither the academic qualifications nor the staff to properly investigate and make determinations on historical and genealogical questions; and that any plans to do so in the future will lead to organizational, intratribal and intertribal conflict.
In order to avoid those conflicts, TNCIA should support state recognition for tribes that are co-sponsored by an existing legislatively state-recognized or federally-recognized tribe, and present their request as a resolution to the TNCIA.
and
• TNCIA should call for qualified tribal citizens and descendants who are interested in serving in state positions from Commission of Indian Affairs to the State Textbook Commission to send their résumés to TNCIA for review.
sábado, 14 de junio de 2008
Rule 0785-1, again
Today I am re-submitting Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs' Rule 0785-1 Recognition Criteria for Native American Indian Nations, Tribes or Communities in Tennessee as an agenda item for review and passage, once again, by the state Commission of Indian Affairs. In 2005 the Commission submitted the proposed Rule for community review, received its approval, and in March 2006 the Commission gave the Rule its final approval. In the summer of 2006 the Commission was advised that the Rule would not pass legislative committee review, and in hopes of extending the Commission's sunset date, the Commission voted to repeal the rule. Now, less than a year later, the Commission has its summer meeting in Knoxville where I hope the Commission will once again initiate the state rulemaking process for state tribal recognition criteria.
Actual Native American Indian communities that survived the racial cleansing of the 1800s should be recognized as this land's indigenous people. At the same time, the state needs objective and rigorous criteria by which to determine the validity of groups claiming to indigenous tribes. In the Rule's absence, opportunistic groups submitted their own self-serving legislative proposal which never made it out of committee. In their defense, it is the legal Power and Duty of the state Commission of Indian Affairs to "Establish appropriate procedures to provide for legal recognition by the state of presently unrecognized tribes, nations, groups, communities or individuals, and to provide for official state recognition by the commission of such" (TCA 4-34-103.6). If and when the state Commission of Indian Affairs fails to exercise its legal responsibility, however, it becomes the power and duty of the public to promote its own "recognition" agenda. Both the Commission and the groups seeking state tribal recognition failed to obtain rule or law. We need to keep trying with the same near-unanimous support with which we all approved Rule 0785 the first time.
The term of the state Commission of Indian Affairs has been extended another year. In this short time the Commission needs to educate the legislature and the public about the need and benefits of objective tribal recognition criteria based on accurate historical data and existing federal procedures for establishing that an American Indian group exists as an Indian tribe (25 CFR 83), approve the Rule 0785 again, and oversee its implementation. We did it before. We can do it again, smarter, better. I hope we'll again have your support.
RULES OF THE TENNESSEE COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
Chapter 0785-1 - Recognition Criteria for Native American Indians
TABLE OF CONTENTS
0785-1-.01 General
0785-1-.02 Recognition Criteria For Native American Indian Nations, Tribes or Communities
0785-1-.03 Procedures For Petitioning For Recognition
0785-1-.04 Changes In Membership
Administrative History
-----------------------------------------------
tom kunesh
member, Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs
11 june 2008 20:46
Actual Native American Indian communities that survived the racial cleansing of the 1800s should be recognized as this land's indigenous people. At the same time, the state needs objective and rigorous criteria by which to determine the validity of groups claiming to indigenous tribes. In the Rule's absence, opportunistic groups submitted their own self-serving legislative proposal which never made it out of committee. In their defense, it is the legal Power and Duty of the state Commission of Indian Affairs to "Establish appropriate procedures to provide for legal recognition by the state of presently unrecognized tribes, nations, groups, communities or individuals, and to provide for official state recognition by the commission of such" (TCA 4-34-103.6). If and when the state Commission of Indian Affairs fails to exercise its legal responsibility, however, it becomes the power and duty of the public to promote its own "recognition" agenda. Both the Commission and the groups seeking state tribal recognition failed to obtain rule or law. We need to keep trying with the same near-unanimous support with which we all approved Rule 0785 the first time.
The term of the state Commission of Indian Affairs has been extended another year. In this short time the Commission needs to educate the legislature and the public about the need and benefits of objective tribal recognition criteria based on accurate historical data and existing federal procedures for establishing that an American Indian group exists as an Indian tribe (25 CFR 83), approve the Rule 0785 again, and oversee its implementation. We did it before. We can do it again, smarter, better. I hope we'll again have your support.
RULES OF THE TENNESSEE COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
Chapter 0785-1 - Recognition Criteria for Native American Indians
TABLE OF CONTENTS
0785-1-.01 General
0785-1-.02 Recognition Criteria For Native American Indian Nations, Tribes or Communities
0785-1-.03 Procedures For Petitioning For Recognition
0785-1-.04 Changes In Membership
Administrative History
-----------------------------------------------
tom kunesh
member, Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs
11 june 2008 20:46
miércoles, 4 de junio de 2008
on tribal recognition status
Six groups - four of which were created in the 21st century - asked the non-Native-American-Indian Tennessee legislature earlier this year (2008) for the state's official validation as "recognized" Native American Indian tribes in Tennessee (HB3299/SB3123).
To date, none of these six groups - "Remnant Yuchi Nation", "Upper Cumberland Cherokee", "Chikamaka-Cherokee Band of the South Cumberland Plateau", "Central Band of Cherokee", "Cherokee Wolf Clan", "Tanasi Council of the Far Away Cherokee" - have provided even the slightest bit of public documentation of their group's history prior to the year 2000 (muchless since 1900), and none have provided records of their families' affiliation to their supposed historic tribes (five claim Cherokee affiliation). Without even the minimum prima facie evidence to support their claims of tribal status and affiliation, these claims must be summarily rejected.
There has been little public comment for or against state recognition of these groups, and the bill died quietly in legislative committee before coming up for general legislative discussion. No doubt the "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes" - as they currently style themselves - will resubmit their bid for recognition by non-indians in the next legislative session in january 2009. Recognition of historic indigenous communities is a positive goal for every state, and every real surviving tribe in Tennessee should be recognized by the State of Tennessee as such. At the same time, groups claiming historic status without providing public information are acting recklessly and irresponsibly. In the public interest, groups making false claims should be exposed as frauds. Before this year ends, this issue needs public disclosure of the historic record of these six groups, and of any other group seeking "recognition" as a surviving community of indigenous peoples in Tennessee.
It is the right of the Tennessee Native American Indian community to determine and recognize the existence of its own surviving historic Native American Indian communities. And it is the responsibility of the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs to "Establish appropriate procedures to provide for legal recognition by the state of presently unrecognized tribes, nations, groups, communities or individuals, and to provide for official state recognition by the commission of such" (TCA 4-34-103.(6)). To this end the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs needs to reevaluate its Rule 0785-1 on "Recognition Criteria For Native American Indian Nations, Tribes or Communities" (that it passed in 2006 and then repealed at legislative request in 2007), and work with the legislature in 2008 to reestablish it as a state Rule in 2009. Conversely, if the Commission does not resubmit Rule 0785-1 for implementation in 2008-2009, it should be understood as de facto abdication of its authority in the state tribal recognition issue, and clear the path for organizations to directly petition the state legislature in the future as some of these groups have been doing since 2004.
It is also the right and responsibility of every existing recognized Native American Indian tribe/nation/community to determine and recognize the existence of its own surviving historically-affiliated and family-related communities. The Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs should ask the Eastern Band of Cherokee, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee, the Yuchi Tribe of Oklahoma, and the several neighboring state-recognized Cherokee tribes in Alabama and Georgia, to consider the six Tennessee groups that currently claim cultural and genetic identification with them, and as relatives, provide the groups and the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs, and the state legislature, with some guidance on the validity of the groups' claims.
To date, none of these six groups - "Remnant Yuchi Nation", "Upper Cumberland Cherokee", "Chikamaka-Cherokee Band of the South Cumberland Plateau", "Central Band of Cherokee", "Cherokee Wolf Clan", "Tanasi Council of the Far Away Cherokee" - have provided even the slightest bit of public documentation of their group's history prior to the year 2000 (muchless since 1900), and none have provided records of their families' affiliation to their supposed historic tribes (five claim Cherokee affiliation). Without even the minimum prima facie evidence to support their claims of tribal status and affiliation, these claims must be summarily rejected.
There has been little public comment for or against state recognition of these groups, and the bill died quietly in legislative committee before coming up for general legislative discussion. No doubt the "Confederation of Tennessee Native Tribes" - as they currently style themselves - will resubmit their bid for recognition by non-indians in the next legislative session in january 2009. Recognition of historic indigenous communities is a positive goal for every state, and every real surviving tribe in Tennessee should be recognized by the State of Tennessee as such. At the same time, groups claiming historic status without providing public information are acting recklessly and irresponsibly. In the public interest, groups making false claims should be exposed as frauds. Before this year ends, this issue needs public disclosure of the historic record of these six groups, and of any other group seeking "recognition" as a surviving community of indigenous peoples in Tennessee.
It is the right of the Tennessee Native American Indian community to determine and recognize the existence of its own surviving historic Native American Indian communities. And it is the responsibility of the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs to "Establish appropriate procedures to provide for legal recognition by the state of presently unrecognized tribes, nations, groups, communities or individuals, and to provide for official state recognition by the commission of such" (TCA 4-34-103.(6)). To this end the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs needs to reevaluate its Rule 0785-1 on "Recognition Criteria For Native American Indian Nations, Tribes or Communities" (that it passed in 2006 and then repealed at legislative request in 2007), and work with the legislature in 2008 to reestablish it as a state Rule in 2009. Conversely, if the Commission does not resubmit Rule 0785-1 for implementation in 2008-2009, it should be understood as de facto abdication of its authority in the state tribal recognition issue, and clear the path for organizations to directly petition the state legislature in the future as some of these groups have been doing since 2004.
It is also the right and responsibility of every existing recognized Native American Indian tribe/nation/community to determine and recognize the existence of its own surviving historically-affiliated and family-related communities. The Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs should ask the Eastern Band of Cherokee, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee, the Yuchi Tribe of Oklahoma, and the several neighboring state-recognized Cherokee tribes in Alabama and Georgia, to consider the six Tennessee groups that currently claim cultural and genetic identification with them, and as relatives, provide the groups and the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs, and the state legislature, with some guidance on the validity of the groups' claims.
domingo, 18 de mayo de 2008
individual entitlement to indian identity
like Ron Paul i was listening to Coast to Coast on the radio this morning and heard this reading from the 1997 book, the Fourth Turning:
not long ago, a tribe was more than the sum of its parts. Now, it is less. now descendants long removed from their ancestors' culture want to be recognized as tribes themselves. Around World War II, we were proud as different peoples but modest as individuals. Fewer than one person in a hundred said yes when asked "Are you Indian?" Today, more than three in ten in Tennessee say yes. Where we once thought ourselves collectively strong as part of a tribe, we now regard ourselves as individually entitled to indian identity cards. where once a person was recognized by his/her fellow tribal members by their language, beliefs and family, now many in Tennessee believe themselves to be individually entitled to recognition as indian, with no tribal affiliation apart from probate records and dna.
this is not being indian. this is conflating genealogy, culture clubs and mutual ego-stroking to the point of fantasy.
Not long ago, America was more than the sum of its parts. Now, it is less. Around World War II, we were proud as a people but modest as individuals. Fewer than two people in ten said yes when asked “Are you a very important person?” Today, more than six in ten say yes. Where we once thought ourselves collectively strong, we now regard ourselves as individually entitled.... which got me thinking about this translation for persons interested in Tennessee indian affairs ...
not long ago, a tribe was more than the sum of its parts. Now, it is less. now descendants long removed from their ancestors' culture want to be recognized as tribes themselves. Around World War II, we were proud as different peoples but modest as individuals. Fewer than one person in a hundred said yes when asked "Are you Indian?" Today, more than three in ten in Tennessee say yes. Where we once thought ourselves collectively strong as part of a tribe, we now regard ourselves as individually entitled to indian identity cards. where once a person was recognized by his/her fellow tribal members by their language, beliefs and family, now many in Tennessee believe themselves to be individually entitled to recognition as indian, with no tribal affiliation apart from probate records and dna.
this is not being indian. this is conflating genealogy, culture clubs and mutual ego-stroking to the point of fantasy.
lunes, 21 de abril de 2008
False assumptions
- Names of historical tribes are free for the taking.
- Native American Indian cultural club should be recognized as tribes in Tennessee.
- Persons who are members of federally- or state-recognized tribes are not "Tennessee Indians".
- Claimed relatives in related tribes should have no say in whether or not the relational claim is true or not.
- The citizens of Tennessee should believe that every group that calls itself a "tribe" or "nation" in Tennessee is real.
- "Tennessee Indians" are only those Native American Indian descendants whose 19th-century ancestors were born in Tennessee.
- The claims of cultural affiliation to historic tribes made by culture clubs wanting to be recognized as tribes do not need to be proven.
- Being a descendant of a 19th-century Native American Indian born in Tennessee qualifies a person as a 21st century "Tennessee Indian".
- A group of Tennessee-born 21st-century Native American Indian descendants qualifies as an affiliate of a 21st century Tennessee Native American Indian tribe whose ancestors were 'removed' from Tennessee in the early 19th century.
miércoles, 16 de abril de 2008
culture clubs ≠ tribes
When cultural clubs refer to themselves as "tribes", few people take exception, seeing it as a kind of harmless exaggeration or idealism like the way the Boy Scouts do it. When newspapers refer to cultural clubs as tribes, however, the line between objective journalism and regional self-promotion has been crossed.
Readers have an expectation that the newspaper, engaged in the business of serious journalism, has checked the facts. In this case, the Kingsport Times-News has not checked the facts, leading to continued validation of false claims to tribal status of a local cultural club, the "Remnant Yuchi Nation". Lee Vest, founder of the organization just last year, acknowledges that he himself is not Yuchi, has never claimed to be Yuchi, and that the purpose of seeking tribal status is financial support for a 'living Indian village' which could become a major tourist attraction for Kingsport.
Taking the Yuchi name from the Yuchi tribe, currently living in forced exile in Oklahoma as part of the Muscogee/Creek Nation, without their permission is identity theft. Planning to re-create a Yuchi village with a stolen identity and misappropriated culture is cultural identity theft. Calling your local group of descendants a Native American Indian tribe is not only a bastardization of the meaning of the term but also an attack on the historical identity of the real Yuchi people.
The Commission of Indian Affairs created Tribal Recognition Criteria (Rule 0785-1) in 2006, and was then directed by legislators to repeal it in 2007, which it did. It is time for the Commission to re-assert its definition and process for state tribal recognition in order to make sure this vacuum of definitional responsibility is properly addressed by Native American Indian people now and for the future.
Readers have an expectation that the newspaper, engaged in the business of serious journalism, has checked the facts. In this case, the Kingsport Times-News has not checked the facts, leading to continued validation of false claims to tribal status of a local cultural club, the "Remnant Yuchi Nation". Lee Vest, founder of the organization just last year, acknowledges that he himself is not Yuchi, has never claimed to be Yuchi, and that the purpose of seeking tribal status is financial support for a 'living Indian village' which could become a major tourist attraction for Kingsport.
Taking the Yuchi name from the Yuchi tribe, currently living in forced exile in Oklahoma as part of the Muscogee/Creek Nation, without their permission is identity theft. Planning to re-create a Yuchi village with a stolen identity and misappropriated culture is cultural identity theft. Calling your local group of descendants a Native American Indian tribe is not only a bastardization of the meaning of the term but also an attack on the historical identity of the real Yuchi people.
The Commission of Indian Affairs created Tribal Recognition Criteria (Rule 0785-1) in 2006, and was then directed by legislators to repeal it in 2007, which it did. It is time for the Commission to re-assert its definition and process for state tribal recognition in order to make sure this vacuum of definitional responsibility is properly addressed by Native American Indian people now and for the future.
miércoles, 13 de febrero de 2008
a new year
• i live by the adage "Cui bono?" - who benefits? it helps me remember to look for the underlying purpose of things.
• i'd like to say 'yes' to everybody's proposals. and will try to say 'yes' to each person's proposal as long as it applies to him- or herself exclusively, ie, that the proposer will take responsibility for implementing her/his proposal, and that the rest of us are not burdened by it. so please, keep More Improved New Rules To Live By off of and away from this Old Republican.
• any oath required of one commissioner in the appointment process should be required of all commissioners. currently only one oath - from the governor's office - is required. adding another oath on top of that is paperwork and show. imo, nothing substantial. - why should we want to add more paperwork for us, for the state?
• i'm concerned that reviewing new internal texts for the commission, like oaths, ethics, standing rules, procedures, etc., is all so much internal furniture re-arranging that has little or nothing to do with the commission actually doing something for the state and indian people.
• i need to be reminded that some of my proposals fall into this category. not that i like to be reminded of it, but that i too - especially in the spring - like to engage in a little house-cleaning and just plain re-arranging for change simply because it is different. and that can be good sometimes too.
• i don't know how i'll vote on any specific proposal, but we will be judged in one year on what we do, not what we write or re-write or say we believe in. there may be some rules that could help us operate better, like oil in an engine, but if we focus on this internal stuff for more than hour, i will be concerned and impatient that we are losing sight of our purpose: DOING.
• the time for commissioners sitting on the commission like bumps on a log is over. imo, each of us needs to come to the table at this next meeting with a specific project that will benefit the state and the indian community in general. or find someone else's project that we can help move and/or transcend. with monthly benchmarks that we can use to measure each project's progress.
• if you think this opinion exceeds the state Sunshine law (formation of public policy & decisions is public business and shall not be conducted in secret. TCA 8-44-101), i'll be happy to discuss it publicly. just wanted you to know my feelings up front & personal like before we get together so folks wouldn't feel bushwhacked by my lack of sympathy with more paper-pushing and window-dressing. i hope i have not offended anybody by these comments.
;>
• i'd like to say 'yes' to everybody's proposals. and will try to say 'yes' to each person's proposal as long as it applies to him- or herself exclusively, ie, that the proposer will take responsibility for implementing her/his proposal, and that the rest of us are not burdened by it. so please, keep More Improved New Rules To Live By off of and away from this Old Republican.
• any oath required of one commissioner in the appointment process should be required of all commissioners. currently only one oath - from the governor's office - is required. adding another oath on top of that is paperwork and show. imo, nothing substantial. - why should we want to add more paperwork for us, for the state?
• i'm concerned that reviewing new internal texts for the commission, like oaths, ethics, standing rules, procedures, etc., is all so much internal furniture re-arranging that has little or nothing to do with the commission actually doing something for the state and indian people.
• i need to be reminded that some of my proposals fall into this category. not that i like to be reminded of it, but that i too - especially in the spring - like to engage in a little house-cleaning and just plain re-arranging for change simply because it is different. and that can be good sometimes too.
• i don't know how i'll vote on any specific proposal, but we will be judged in one year on what we do, not what we write or re-write or say we believe in. there may be some rules that could help us operate better, like oil in an engine, but if we focus on this internal stuff for more than hour, i will be concerned and impatient that we are losing sight of our purpose: DOING.
• the time for commissioners sitting on the commission like bumps on a log is over. imo, each of us needs to come to the table at this next meeting with a specific project that will benefit the state and the indian community in general. or find someone else's project that we can help move and/or transcend. with monthly benchmarks that we can use to measure each project's progress.
• if you think this opinion exceeds the state Sunshine law (formation of public policy & decisions is public business and shall not be conducted in secret. TCA 8-44-101), i'll be happy to discuss it publicly. just wanted you to know my feelings up front & personal like before we get together so folks wouldn't feel bushwhacked by my lack of sympathy with more paper-pushing and window-dressing. i hope i have not offended anybody by these comments.
;>
miércoles, 18 de julio de 2007
state recognition vs. tribal reconnection
some descendants of indians in Tennessee want to be "recognized" by the state as politically-valid generic indians, competent and able to speak for the in-state interests of Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Muscogee, Yuchi and other nations. the idea that biological descendancy creates national identity - that one drop of indian blood makes a person indian - is as false as any principle of racial determinism.
before a non-indian political entity like the State of Tennessee is used as the means of identifying the generic indian, two questions need to be competently answered:
1. what is the need for state-approved generic indians in Tennessee? and
2. what efforts have been made to reconnect descendants with their tribal relatives?
if there is no demonstrable need for an alternative authority on indian identity in the state, then we shouldn't be wasting our time trying to make a state agency act like a tribe.
and if no efforts have been made to re-establish contact and affiliation between descendants and existing tribes, we need to question the political intent of the descendants and apply ourselves to reconnecting the tribal-Tennessee relationship.
before a non-indian political entity like the State of Tennessee is used as the means of identifying the generic indian, two questions need to be competently answered:
1. what is the need for state-approved generic indians in Tennessee? and
2. what efforts have been made to reconnect descendants with their tribal relatives?
if there is no demonstrable need for an alternative authority on indian identity in the state, then we shouldn't be wasting our time trying to make a state agency act like a tribe.
and if no efforts have been made to re-establish contact and affiliation between descendants and existing tribes, we need to question the political intent of the descendants and apply ourselves to reconnecting the tribal-Tennessee relationship.
viernes, 22 de junio de 2007
candidates: get real
in this election the two most important qualifications in evaluating the candidates, imo, are:
history repeats itself. people who haven't done anything in the past will more than likely continue to do the same in the future. people who talk ideas but have no record of action to show how they implement their ideas are like Paul's clanging cymbal warning of 1 Cor. 13.
talk is cheap. action costs. we need people on the Commission who do things, who get things done, who will get us out of this morass of 'recognition' into projects that will physically benefit the indian community and the state.
get real. tell us precisely what you want to accomplish in the next year.
then maybe we'll vote for you.
- what has the candidate actually done for the TN indian community over the past 4 years?
- what does the candidate propose to accomplish - with actual projects - for the TN indian community in the next 4 years?
history repeats itself. people who haven't done anything in the past will more than likely continue to do the same in the future. people who talk ideas but have no record of action to show how they implement their ideas are like Paul's clanging cymbal warning of 1 Cor. 13.
talk is cheap. action costs. we need people on the Commission who do things, who get things done, who will get us out of this morass of 'recognition' into projects that will physically benefit the indian community and the state.
get real. tell us precisely what you want to accomplish in the next year.
then maybe we'll vote for you.
miércoles, 20 de junio de 2007
responses to Questions
responses to Questions about organizational & individual recognition
at www.tncia.org/recognitionqueries.html
at www.tncia.org/recognitionqueries.html
lunes, 18 de junio de 2007
Questions about organizational & individual recognition
The following are some questions about the past and future Native American Indian Organizational and Individual Recognition in Tennessee that need to be answered before the state Commission of Indian Affairs considers writing new rules for Native American Indian organizational and individual recognition. We all should know and be satisfied with the complete answers to these questions before we go any further toward developing state rules about indianness in Tennessee.
- Purpose of recognition
- What is the purpose of 'recognizing' Native American Indian organizations and individuals by the state of Tennessee? Is there a goal to 'recognition'?
- To what degree do the tribes, the state, the public, the organizations and the individuals benefit from state recognition of Native American Indian organizations and/or individuals?
- What are the material benefits of Native American Indian organizational and individual recognition? Will recognized individuals or members of recognized organizations qualify for K-12 federal funding, college scholarships, artisan status under the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, Small Business Administration 8(a) minority contract set-asides, Administration for Native Americans grants?
- What was the political situation that initiated discussion and desire for recognition criteria?
- How have organizations and individuals recognized in the past (1990-2000) as Native American Indian by the State of Tennessee benefitted from their changed recognition status?
- What are the problems associated with Native American Indian organizational and individual recognition?
- What are the traditional Native American Indian cultural values that are being promoted by state recognition of Native American Indian organizations and individuals?
- Is state-based 'recognition' of a person or group as Native American Indian a valid racial or ethnic entitlement, ie, a rectification of past injustice?
- What is the purpose of 'recognizing' Native American Indian organizations and individuals by the state of Tennessee? Is there a goal to 'recognition'?
- Authority
- Who recognizes indians as indians? Indians or non-indians? Tribes or non-indian governmental agencies?
- Why should the state be interested in 'recognizing' organizations or individuals as Native American Indian?
- Given the Equal Protection clause of the US Constitution, does the state define, determine and officially 'recognize' organizations and individual members of other racial/ethnic/minority groups?
- How is the principle of Tribal Sovereignty advanced through the development of Native American Indian organizational and individual recognition controlled and provided by a non-tribal public governmental agency?
- Who recognizes indians as indians? Indians or non-indians? Tribes or non-indian governmental agencies?
- Comparative recognition
- Which states have or had or are considering state tribal recognition and what are their regulations?
- Which states have or had or are considering state organizational recognition and what are their regulations?
- Which states have or had or are considering state individual recognition and what are their regulations?
- Given that other states have such types of recognition, what are the opinions of their Indian Affairs Commissions regarding the benefits and problems associated with each type of recognition?
- Which states have or had or are considering state tribal recognition and what are their regulations?
- Alternatives
- Tribes can charter affiliate organizations directly or or recognize an associated organization by resolution in the same manner as states.
- Which tribes have affiliate or associate organizational recognition?
- How are these affiliate or associate organizations chartered by the tribe?
- Native American Indian organizations and individuals in this state and in others have survived without recognition for years. How are they coping without recognition?
- Which tribes have affiliate or associate organizational recognition?
- Elder relatives' opinions
- Being indian means that an organization or an individual is related by family to a larger and much older social group of a tribe or nation. As older relatives, their opinions should be requested and acknowledged. To deny them a voice is to deny relationship.
- Why did the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs amend the rules to severely restrict individual recognition in 1991, less than one year after implementation?
- Why did the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs call a meeting on 22 december 1997 to dismantle the recognition criteria seven years after implementation? Was that meeting ever held?
- What do tribes say about state recognition of Native American Indian organizations and individuals?
- What do other non-tribal indian organizations (eg, National Congress of American Indians, Governors Interstate Indian Council, Intertribal Council of the Five Civilized Tribes) say about state recognition of Native American Indian organizations and individuals?
- Why did the Tennessee Commission of Indian Affairs amend the rules to severely restrict individual recognition in 1991, less than one year after implementation?
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
