H., (5/5/2009 11:29:12 AM)

Don't know why people from California and Massachusetts think they understand Indian tribes. I think Chief Ellis said it pretty well, that if you are Indian you are in the tribe and if you are not Indian you are not in the tribe. That makes sense to me.

DT, (5/5/2009 11:50:13 AM)

Indian nations have an inherent right to self-determination, including the right to determine their own identity as a "distinct people" through their citizenship laws. The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples says clearly that both forced assimilation AND forced integration of an indigenous people is forbidden. Both are considered to be forms of cultural genocide are grave violations of the human rights of indigenous peoples.

Indian nations have struggled for centuries to survive as sovereign tribal entities. It's a shame that this is not respected when some people decide that what they want is more important than the most basic of indigenous rights. The Cherokee Nation enrolls all those with the required proof of Indian ancestry regardless of color.

Eagle 4, Tulsa (5/5/2009 11:51:31 AM)

"Over forty years after enactment of the landmark Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, there is a place in the United States that African Americans cannot vote or receive federal benefits as a matter of law,'' they state in a letter reported earlier by The Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper.

Just a slight technicality - the forebearers of the Five Civilized Tribes left Africa more than 50,000 years ago. If African Americans get on the rolls, my cracker azz wants the same privilege!

This punishment of the Tribes by the Yankee winners in 1865 was neither just nor equitable and ALL need to butt out of Tribal sovereignty.

Ayo, T-Town (5/5/2009 12:09:14 PM)

There are many misconceptions involving tribes, sovereignty, enrollment privileges, tribal constitutions, Dawes Roll enrollments, and the money that each tribe does or does not currently have.

Since each sovereign tribe writes and amends their own constitutions then they are the ones who determine who is a citizen of that tribal nation. If they want to, they can write blood quantums into the constitution. That actually is quite common, and is the way it use to be. If they wish to set the blood quantum at 1/2, or 1/4 before allowing someone to be an enrolled member they have the authority to do so.

Each of the five tribes had slaves at one time. They had followed the practice of the European immigrants. Once removed from the SE those slaves became freed men, and most traveled with the tribes on the move to Indian Territory. On the enrollement through the Dawes Act the freedmen were enrolled as FREEDMEN, and not as a tribal member.

Anyone who wants to point fingers and play the blame game then blame the Dawes Commissioners. Trust me, those people screwed up many things. They screwed up the blood quantums, and they changed peoples names, at will.
There are Indians today who cannot enroll in their tribe because their grandparent or great-grandparent didn't get on the original Dawes roll. And they are Indian by blood.

There are quite a few people that are enrolled with Muscogee Nation who are part African American, but that is because they are also part Muscogee.

AP, Tulsa (5/5/2009 12:10:11 PM)

The relationships between tribal governments and the U.S. government is built on a history of broken treaties. I find it ironic that the treaty the tribal governments break after all of the treaties the U.S. government broke throughout American history gets a rise outta some "Influential members of Congress."

I wish this broken treaty didn't have to come at the expense of freedmen descendants.

Cheyenne, Tulsa (5/5/2009 12:17:40 PM)

The original Freedmen were given tribal privileges to compensate them for their suffering. I don't think that their ancestors so many years later are entitled to those privileges. I am Cherokee and some of my ancestors were slaves owned by the white settlers of this country. They were not made "honorary" whitemen to compensate for that.

Rocketman, Tulsa (5/5/2009 12:18:03 PM)

Let a DNA test decide who is a member.

Aleister Crowley, (5/5/2009 12:40:59 PM)

If we're going to let Indians have their own race-based sovereign governments, it's only logical that they be able to restrict membership to members of their own race.

In fairness, however, we should let other races set up their own race-based governments and limit membership to those who can prove that they have some European blood, African blood, Mexican blood, etc.

zzx375, BA (5/5/2009 12:46:05 PM)

"They had followed the practice of the European immigrants"

Did they not seize members of other Native American tribes and hold them against their will?

Perhaps I am confused but I thought the Native American tribes were to be treated as soverign nations who largely governed themselves.

This might get interesting.

Popeye, T-Town (5/5/2009 12:53:40 PM)

Get a JOB!

Popeye, T-Town (5/5/2009 12:56:16 PM)

""Six Democratic members of Congress signed the letter, including U.S. Reps. John Conyers of Michigan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee; Diane Watson, who has been the most vocal critic of the Cherokee Nation on the freedmen issue, Barbara Lee, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Georgia Rep. John Lewis, a veteran of the civil rights movement and Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee.""

TERM LIMITS!!! NOW!!!!!!!

Graybeard, Tulsa (5/5/2009 1:13:31 PM)

Abolish the BIA. Stop sending money to the Tribes.

Buffaloe, (5/5/2009 1:30:34 PM)

Graybeard,

Amen. Shut down the whole drill. I have Indian blood but I don't need some subsidy because some white guy supposedly "disenfranchised" me. Abolish the nations treaty. Time as run out.

What it is: handout to a bunch of blue haird readnecks who drive cadillacs.

fullblood, Okemah (5/5/2009 1:58:24 PM)

Hey you whites listen at 'chu. What makes you think you know better for the Indians? We have to deal with these benefit grabbing blacks. Who's benefits? Indian benefits. Benefits the whites will have to pay for until water stops running and grass stops growing. That maybe soon.
It's comical for a U.S. lawmaker to say the freedmen were illegally expulsed from the tribes.
Hey, the Indians just exercising sovereign rights.
Chief Ellis gives language that all can understand, Indian blood = Indian = Indian Tribe. AMEN

Ayo, T-Town (5/5/2009 1:59:07 PM)

"Abolish the BIA. Stop sending money to the Tribes."

Even if the BIA were abolished the tribes would remain sovereign nations. Do you really think that the money comes from the BIA? Baby, that was last century's news. K?
You're so far out of the ballpark with so little knowledge you're not the keystrokes.

From a few of the comments it's apparent that many of you were taught very, very little in both U.S. history, and current law.

You guys don't get it. You can't just 'shut down the whole drill'.

"I have Indian blood in me....."hheheheheh. We've heard that one so many times. I bet you had a great-grandmother that was a Cherokee 'Princess' too, enit?

Ignoramuses that are not worth the keystrokes.

wotko, Sapulpa (5/5/2009 2:14:06 PM)

As soon as you start talking about Indians it doesn't take long for the ignorance, hatred and bitterness to show up.

This isn't about keeping blacks/African Americans out of tribes it is about keeping non-Indians out of Indian tribes. As Ayo said some tribes require that you have a certain blood quantum before you can be a member. All of the 5 Civilized Tribes or 5 Tribes will allow you to be a member so long as you have some degree of blood from the tribe you are trying to obtain membership from. Kiowas, Comanches and Ponca's as well as several others all require that you be at least 1/4 blood of their tribe to obtain membership.

The tendency is the less blood you have the less you care and know about the culture. Believe it or not some Indians still try to live their lives as traditional as possible. I was at my ceremonial ground this past weekend and this very issue came up. The consensus was if your not Indian or have a tie to the ground you have no place there. The fact that many of you don't know or understand the tribal cultures is evidenced by the ignorant comments of many of the posters here. Non-Indians like to complain about the economic success of tribes but how about this: The tribal nations of Indian territory tried to create their own state, the state of Sequoyah but they weren't allowed to and instead we wound up with the merger of Oklahoma and Indian Territories for the state of Oklahoma. Indians weren't allowed their own state but the state of Oklahoma didn't mind using Indians for marketing propaganda by saying the Oklahoma was "Native America."

A large part of the reason that Indians require money from the government is because trying to live a traditional life is a full time job. Land and resources were taken from the tribes which requires the need for cash to supplement the missing land and resources. Shut off the cash flow and return the stolen land and the resources there are many who will do just fine without the money. Also, Buffaloe I suggest you renounce your tribal citizenship if you have it as you no longer need it. It is evident that you have become fully assimilated. Also feel free to pick through my hastily typed comment for grammatical errors to point out my own ignorance.

fullblood, Okemah (5/5/2009 2:16:16 PM)

STOP Socialist Security Checks to Greyface. I agree, get rid of the BIA. It's the worst fed govt agency out of 206 agencies.

But send more money to tribes, the white dominant society is behind on their lease checks. Fed Law History says, Indians are going to be here, FOREVER. Huks-tah-ha!!!

Oh well, live with it.

MaryBSperry, Tulsa (5/5/2009 2:29:06 PM)

wotko you could not have said it better!
The white man cannot and will not fully understand our traditions therefore they know not what they say.

wolf pup, Broken Arrow (5/5/2009 2:33:06 PM)

Take you a look see tonight on PBS at the way the US government Treats Indians !IS this the start of something ? White man help me ? yes they shall as they have in the past enjoy the gifts !

mama sandy, tulsa (5/5/2009 2:36:07 PM)

hey passin thru i think i love you. like your comments. i truly believe that people need to learn more about tribal treaties aka history before they voice opinions. what this boils down to is "blood" and "proof" of blood which i had to prove, my Mom had to prove, dad, sister, brother daughter, etc. we have been lied (aka screwed) to for hundreds of years by the government, come on people "read up".

Few Clothes, Austin, TX (5/5/2009 2:55:50 PM)

I think all of the tribes have had enough of Government meddling. Democrats need to stay out of their lives. They don't owe the blacks anything.

seymore1965, Tulsa (5/5/2009 3:06:27 PM)

"Without any blood, you are not going to be Creek around here." lol. I'm Cherokee but I like that statement. Those Congressman, the benefit hounds, will need to start understanding this fact or be proven wrong, whichever comes first.

fullblood, Okemah (5/5/2009 3:08:09 PM)

How you like Chief Ellis' pose?

Looking up, appearing 'spiritual.' Yeah, Navajo's have 1/4 blood quantum.

Navajo's say, if you're less than 1/4 Navajo, you're something else, you don't belong here. The five tribes need 1/4 blood quantum. It'll get rid of thinbloods and wannabe's, you know the ones, "my great-grandma was a Cherokee Princess."

What? Your great-grandma liked Cherokee men?

'chu say she was snagged by Cherokee men?

DANG!

demusmartinezwsla, Warm Springs (5/5/2009 3:16:05 PM)

I have followed this topic for sometime now and at first was against the Tribes for doing this, then against our POTUS, because he introduce legislation to forgo "all" Indian monies a few years ago when this topic hit the news.
Here is what I know. If anyone has an inkling of Federal and/or Tribal law, they should know of case law; Martinez Vs. Santa Clara, has already settled any questions that any law maker would have in regards to Tribes and their enrollment. It is my belief that these "freedmen" are not indeed "Indian" by any legal definition. Truthfully, I do not see any reason why California or Massachusetts representatives should have any involvement. For gods sake, California's Boxer is a "super liberal" and does not have close ties to her own "Indians" in California, and as for Mr. Frank, need I say more. Now I am little jaded, I am a recent defector to the Dem's party after being a life long Republican, but I do not enjoy any Representative or Senator, POTUS or US Supreme Court Justice telling us "Indians" who is a "Indian" from their point of veiw.
I loathe being the only race of human species that has to prove a % [percentage] of who they are. Perhaps, if the USG and BIA would do some good for Natives and remove us from the Department of Interior and allow the US State Department to oversee affairs with all Natives. THE fact is this....FREEDMEN are not Indian/Native by BLOOD, only by treaty. HEY, all these lawmakers confess they are appalled or distressed over these Tribes "breaking" their treaty....WAKE UP!!! The USG has and still is breaking their treaties with Natives. So the treaty breaking is nothing new to us. As for the Freedmen, I understand their argument, but they have very little legal traction to use to reverse any actions taken. But the Freedmen are not Indian and never will be, even if Congress/Senate says they are, they may be by enactment, but in their heart....they never will be.

AJO!

What the ?, Tulsa (5/5/2009 3:17:07 PM)

No blood...no right. Someone needs to do something with that Watson gal...she's nothing but a meddling woman. She knew nothing of this until someone asked to get on the bandwagon. (Of course, she says Pocahontas is her ancestor...yeah, right! LOL)