Congress Seats for Native American Tribes.

[mike2810]

That’s something I have wondered about. Do the tribes that profit from their casinos spread the wealth throughout their community? And if not, why not?

If this site is correct (I didn't look up the USC code) here is what it says about Indian casino profits are used:

"(25 USC 2710), gaming net profits may be used only to:

1) Fund tribal government operations or programs;

2) Provide for the general welfare of their members;

3) Promote tribal economic development;

4) Donate to charitable organizations; and

5) Help fund operations of local government agencies

This means the tribe must use gaming revenue to improve its infrastructure, develop education opportunities, and provide social programs for the people. Even if tribes want to distribute gaming revenue in per capita payments to their tribal members, they must first develop a “revenue allocation plan” and gain approval of the plan from the DOI Secretary."
The Myth of Indian Casino Riches

 

[Bullseye]

That’s something I have wondered about. Do the tribes that profit from their casinos spread the wealth throughout their community? And if not, why not?

The ones here in San Diego do support many causes in the general community. They been active in food distribution during the pandemic, for instance. Tribe members get a cut of the profits as well.

 

[Court Jester]

But what, if anything, can be done to alleviate this damage? The Native American tribes currently hold the status of domestic dependent nations. They enjoy a certain degree of political autonomy, but are still subject to the powers of the United States government. And yet unlike the States, they are not given any direct political representation in Congress.

My belief is that the Native American Tribes must be given formal, direct representation in congress, in the form of seats in the Senate and/or the House of Representatives. In this manner, they will be able to elect their own representatives, able to advocate directly on their behalf. Only then will the First Nations, the original human inhabitants of America, have enough political influence to ensure that their people are no longer overlooked, marginalized, or exploited in their own land.

Uh-- no.

Next question.

 

[Bullseye]

If this site is correct (I didn't look up the USC code) here is what it says about Indian casino profits are used:

"(25 USC 2710), gaming net profits may be used only to:

1) Fund tribal government operations or programs;

2) Provide for the general welfare of their members;

3) Promote tribal economic development;

4) Donate to charitable organizations; and

5) Help fund operations of local government agencies

This means the tribe must use gaming revenue to improve its infrastructure, develop education opportunities, and provide social programs for the people. Even if tribes want to distribute gaming revenue in per capita payments to their tribal members, they must first develop a “revenue allocation plan” and gain approval of the plan from the DOI Secretary."
The Myth of Indian Casino Riches

One of the ironies of the situation. USC dictates how a theoretically independent nation can spend its income. What I've seen locally pretty much echoes this.

 

[mike2810]

One of the ironies of the situation. USC dictates how a theoretically independent nation can spend its income. What I've seen locally pretty much echoes this.

Yes. To further complicate Indian gaming is the State laws. In AZ the State and the Tribes and to sign a compact.

"The Compact sets forth the types of permitted games, establishes technical standards for the gaming machines, authorizes the State to inspect casinos, requires background investigations and licensing of casino employees and vendor companies, and requires tribes to contribute 1 to 8 percent of their net gaming revenues to state and local governments."

Gaming Compact & Statutes | Arizona Department of Gaming

 

[Bullseye]

Yes. To further complicate Indian gaming is the State laws. In AZ the State and the Tribes and to sign a compact.

"The Compact sets forth the types of permitted games, establishes technical standards for the gaming machines, authorizes the State to inspect casinos, requires background investigations and licensing of casino employees and vendor companies, and requires tribes to contribute 1 to 8 percent of their net gaming revenues to state and local governments."

Gaming Compact & Statutes | Arizona Department of Gaming

I believe that's true here in California, as well.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

The ones here in San Diego do support many causes in the general community. They been active in food distribution during the pandemic, for instance. Tribe members get a cut of the profits as well.

Excellent. Good for them, and the community.

Years ago, I had a young mid grade enlisted sailor in my shop who was Cherokee tell me that before she could join her family in the casino business she had to complete a hitch in the service. That was pretty cool.

 

[Irredentist]

There are about 1.5 million Native Americans currently living on reservations throughout the United States. How would districts be drawn? How many reps would they rate for the relatively small population? What about senators?

I am of two minds on the issue. On one hand, I think that each individual tribe should receive at least one senatorial seat. But perhaps for the purpose of apportioning seats in the House of Representatives, the native american population should be counted collectively, as a unified body?

I would be interested to hear any thoughts or proposals you might have.

 

[Irredentist]

Uh-- no.

Next question.

This is the question. I would be delighted to hear any criticism you might have to offer. It is necessary to help me improve upon this idea, that it be attacked and questioned.

 

[Bullseye]

I am of two minds on the issue. On one hand, I think that each individual tribe should receive at least one senatorial seat. But perhaps for the purpose of apportioning seats in the House of Representatives, the native american population should be counted collectively, as a unified body?

I would be interested to hear any thoughts or proposals you might have.

Do you have any idea how many tribes there are? Here in San Diego we have 19 federally recognized tribes.
In the state of California there are 109 recognized tribes.

 

[Irredentist]

Do you have any idea how many tribes there are? Here in San Diego we have 19 federally recognized tribes.
In the state of California there are 109 recognized tribes.

Then perhaps instead, the broader native american population could collectively be assigned a certain number of senate seats. With each individual tribe instead receiving a number of Representatives, depending on their population size.

Thank you, this information is helpful.

 

[Glitch]

It is an historical fact that Native American tribes have been politically, culturally, and economically marginalized within the United States. Many tribal communities are among the poorest to be found anywhere in the US, and even for those that have seen economic development, it has often come at the cost of serious environmental degradation due to resource exploitation.

In order to achieve economic independence, many native americans are forced to leave their communities, and to assimilate into white society. This has contributed to the ongoing loss of their cultural heritage, a process forcibly initiated by European colonizers.

But what, if anything, can be done to alleviate this damage? The Native American tribes currently hold the status of domestic dependent nations. They enjoy a certain degree of political autonomy, but are still subject to the powers of the United States government. And yet unlike the States, they are not given any direct political representation in Congress.

My belief is that the Native American Tribes must be given formal, direct representation in congress, in the form of seats in the Senate and/or the House of Representatives. In this manner, they will be able to elect their own representatives, able to advocate directly on their behalf. Only then will the First Nations, the original human inhabitants of America, have enough political influence to ensure that their people are no longer overlooked, marginalized, or exploited in their own land.

First, anyone born in North America, Central America, or South America is by definition a "Native American." I am presuming that when you make a "Native American" reference you are referring specifically to aboriginal North Americans, pre-1492 AD.

Second, it is historical fact that aboriginal Alaskan tribes were not politically, culturally, and economically marginalized within the United States. Nor are they the poorest communities to be found anywhere in the US. You are making a lot of wild accusations with absolutely nothing supporting your position.

Third, the treaties made with the aboriginal native tribes in the lower-48 recognizes them as sovereign nations on their own reservations. They have absolutely no business in Congress, just like US territories. They wouldn't even be US citizens had it not been for the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

Thankfully, Congress did not make that mistake in Alaska. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 abolished the concept of reservations and made all aboriginal Alaskans citizens, subject to State law, and treated them no differently from any other resident of the State. They were also awarded 44 million acres of land, which they are prohibited from selling by act of Congress, and $963 million (in 1971 dollars, $6.161 billion in 2020 dollars).

Many of the aboriginal Alaskan tribes have been very active in Alaska's politics. Particularly the Tlingit, who occupy most of the southeastern Alaskan panhandle. The Inuipit and Athabaskan tribes are also very active in Alaska's politics. Any of the aboriginal Alaskans are also free to run for US House Representative, or US Senate, or President, if they qualify, just like any other US citizen. So they certainly don't require any "special" representation.

 

[Irredentist]

First, anyone born in North America, Central America, or South America is by definition a "Native American." I am presuming that when you make a "Native American" reference you are referring specifically to aboriginal North Americans, pre-1492 AD.

Second, it is historical fact that aboriginal Alaskan tribes were not politically, culturally, and economically marginalized within the United States. Nor are they the poorest communities to be found anywhere in the US. You are making a lot of wild accusations with absolutely nothing supporting your position.

Third, the treaties made with the aboriginal native tribes in the lower-48 recognizes them as sovereign nations on their own reservations. They have absolutely no business in Congress, just like US territories. They wouldn't even be US citizens had it not been for the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

Thankfully, Congress did not make that mistake in Alaska. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 abolished the concept of reservations and made all aboriginal Alaskans citizens, subject to State law, and treated them no differently from any other resident of the State. They were also awarded 44 million acres of land, which they are prohibited from selling by act of Congress, and $963 million (in 1971 dollars, $6.161 billion in 2020 dollars).

Many of the aboriginal Alaskan tribes have been very active in Alaska's politics. Particularly the Tlingit, who occupy most of the southeastern Alaskan panhandle. The Inuipit and Athabaskan tribes are also very active in Alaska's politics. Any of the aboriginal Alaskans are also free to run for US House Representative, or US Senate, or President, if they qualify, just like any other US citizen. So they certainly don't require any "special" representation.

Alaskan natives represent a somewhat unique situation, compared to other native americans. As the total population of alaska is so low, Alaskan Natives represent a much greater percentage of the total population of Alaska than native americans do in in any other US state. This gives Alaskan Natives a much greater share of political power in their own state. Although still not much on a national level.

 

[Glitch]

Alaskan natives represent a somewhat unique situation, compared to other native americans. As the total population of alaska is so low, Alaskan Natives represent a much greater percentage of the total population of Alaska than native americans do in in any other US state. This gives Alaskan Natives a much greater share of political power in their own state. Although still not much on a national level.

The reservation system used in the lower-48 was created before many of the western States became States. They were still US territories at the time and Congress made the mistake of recognizing them as independent sovereign nations. Had they been incorporated into the State, awarded property and made citizens of the State (subject to State laws) when the State was created, there wouldn't be the disparity we see today. Instead, they were created specifically to be entirely dependent on the largess of the federal government.

The only logical thing to do is to allow them to keep the property that consists of their reservation, and make them residents of the States where they happen to reside, subject to State laws. That would allow them to vote in State elections, and participate in both the State and national governments. It would also abolish the Bureau of Indian Affairs within the Department of the Interior, and they would no longer be taxpayer parasites, but actual contributing citizens.

There is only one problem with that solution: It requires violating existing treaties. Since treaties are equal to the US Constitution itself once they are ratified, that is not something that should be taken lightly.

 

[Helix]

yep, i'll support that. it will also piss off some on the right, which is sort of a side benefit.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

I am of two minds on the issue. On one hand, I think that each individual tribe should receive at least one senatorial seat. But perhaps for the purpose of apportioning seats in the House of Representatives, the native american population should be counted collectively, as a unified body?

I would be interested to hear any thoughts or proposals you might have.

I’m not very familiar with Native American tribes, locations of their reservations, or the total population, so I did a little bit of googling. Turns out there are well over 500 different/separate tribes, so allowing 1 Senator per tribe is obviously out of the question.
List of federally recognized tribes in the United States - Wikipedia

And regarding possible Congressional seats, Native American reservations are so widely spread out, I’m not sure how seats would be apportioned.

Still, I don’t think it’s impossible or too late to make changes that would vastly improve the lives of folks who live on the poorest reservations.

 

[AmNat]

That largely depends on the tribe in question. Some are fortunate enough to be located in relatively prosperous, populated areas. Many others were pushed into undesirable locations by white settlers: wasteland regions with little to no potential for economic development.

This process was an intentional campaign on the part of the US government, to use their political power to dominate the native american tribes, and to push them to the margins of society.

You seem to be missing the point. None of the "potential for economic development" that you're whining about existed before we showed up. That some Indians have benefited from white society more than others does not make any of them worse off for having known us.

It is time for the balance of political power to be shifted back. Those whose voices were silenced will now be heard.

Ah yes, good old fashioned libido dominandi. That's what leftist politics always comes down to.

 

[Court Jester]

This is the question. I would be delighted to hear any criticism you might have to offer. It is necessary to help me improve upon this idea, that it be attacked and questioned.

The answer is obvious, being already included in the census, tribal people already have representation in congress. So, why should they be given double representation?

 

[Excon]

Your idea is dumb and flies in the face of the Constitution and the rest of the Country's people.