Home | Entries [Previous |Next]
1 Comments
Daily Dose for November 16, 2007
Berke Wins
Berke Wins -- Democrats held on outgoing State Sen. Ward Crutchfield's seat last night. Dems captured the special election in State Senate District 10 last night with Democrat Andy Berke defeating Republican Oscar Brock. Vote totals for Hamilton and Marion Cos.: Berke - 9,790 (63%), Brock - 5,747 (37%). The race puts the balance in the State Senate at an evey split between Republicans and Democrats with one Independent - State Sen. Mike Williams. More on the race here, here, here.
Metro Can't Ban Smoking in Parks -- State Attorney General Bob Cooper issued an opinion this week ruling that Metro or any other local government cannot ban smoking in public parks. As it turns out the 1994 Prevention of Youth Access to Tobacco Act says that the Legislature intended to “occupy and pre-empt the entire field of legislation concerning the regulation of tobacco products.” In other words, the Legislature preempted all local legislation dealing with tobacco except regulation of buildings the local government controls. Since parks are not buildings, it would take an act of the Legislature to ban smoking in public parks. State Sen. Paul Stanley requested the opinion after hearing of Nashville's plans to ban smoking in outdoor parks.
Indian Affairs Commission Could Be Scratched -- State officials are considering axing the State's Indian Affairs Commission again - after crtics bemoaned the rules of the Commission to recognize certain groups as Native American tribes. The Commission currently oversees all issues dealing with Native Americans, and designates certain groups as authentic Indian tribes, allowing them to sell goods and qualify for other governmental programs. The state standard for being defined as an Indian tribe is less stringent than the federal standard - and that has divided Native Americans who think the standards should remain less strict - allowing more groups to qualify as authentic Native American tribes - and those who think the state should be more restrictive and adopt federal standards.
Education Update -- State Rep. Mike Turner says he is planning on drafting state legislation to fix Metro schools since the schools themselves are so slow to improve. Turner blames a falling away from community centered schools and says kids now have to have long bus rides to schools not close to their homes, because of concerns of racial segregation. He says he will propose legislation that would require neighborhood school districts or he’ll propose a special school district for the northeastern part of the county. State Rep. Sherry Jones seems to be on board. She says she hears the same concerns about busing from black parents. In Chattanooga, the Hamilton Co. Board of Education rejected an application for an 'environmental' charter school that would give students a four day week and include classes on yoga and organic gardening.
Six Qualify for Rutherford's Seat on Chattanooga City Council -- Six people have qualified to run for Chattanooga City Council to fill embattled former Councilwoman Marti Rutherford's seat. Carol Berz, Julie Chamberlain, Melinda Hickey, Rick Igou, Barbara Kelley and Charles Shaw all met today's noon deadline to be candidates in the election, according to the Hamilton County Election Commission. The City Council is expected next Tuesday night to select an interim caretaker to hold the seat before the special election. The four people who applied for consideration are Steve Parks, Donna Weeks, Mike Feely and Matthew Rivers.
Once again, the Tennesseean has failed to look further into a story about Indians than what their few sources tell them and use negative labels for disagreements inside the Indian community.
The argument made by the motioning Senator to sunset the commission was that recognition is clearly a federal issue and recognition put the state at risk of lawsuit, and an implication that anything that would or could be done for Indians was unconstitutional.
The argument presented by Poteete and Jack Baker of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma was that when their nation left in or around 1835-1838 and according to the removal treaty, there were no "Cherokee" left in Tennessee - that any "left behinds" ceased to be "Cherokee."
The arguments presented by Joe "Manycoats" Walters and his compatriots were so incoherent and historically inaccurate, you could rarely discern exactly what their issues were. What was clear was that they felt the commission did not represent their groups' interests over, above, and exclusive to all other groups, that they had not participated in the democratic process that populates the commission, that they had not collectively or individually particpated in or attended meetings of the commission to present their issues or represent their groups, and that they believed the criteria should be lowered to accomodate them rather than their having to work to gather up the proof that they could meet the criteria.
Were the commissioners right in choosing to keep the baby over the bathwater? Absolutely.
It is MORE critical that the approximately 44,000 American Indian residents of Tennessee have a voice that is officially acknowledged by the State because without that voice, this particular state turns a blind, deaf and DUMB ear to Indian affairs and issues.
Because in addition to the recognition issue that the likes of Herstle Cross and Joe Walters have inundated and monopolized the commission with for the past four years, the commission has vital and critical other duties it must carry out for the 44,000 American Indian people living in this state.
Because sunsetting the commission over Rule 0785-01-01 is merely an excuse to ignore the other issues altogether and makes about as much sense as sunsetting the entire state government because one department is deemed unecessary or a risk.
The Tennesseean FAILED to examine the real issues behind the threat to the future of the commission and chose, instead, to take the word of its opponents - Herstle Cross, the CNO, Joe Walters and his associates. The Tennessean has just broadcast that the motivation for sunsetting the commission is internal disagreement within the Indian community here.
BUNK, BULL, YOU CONTINUE TO DENIGRATE AND SEE ONLY ONE SIDE OF INDIAN ISSUES!
Argument 1: The state has no authority to recognize Indians (1 senator plus Baker & Poteete). FALSE. The 10th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States gives states the soveriegn authority to do whatever they need to do to take care of their citizens as long as they don't violate federal law. The only "restriction" of Indian Affairs to exclusively the federal government is included in the commerce clause and is relevant to negotiating trade. Rehnquist narrowed that definition to commerce in a business/industry sense. Numerous other states recognize tribes.
Argument 2: Tennessee will be sued. FALSE. The 11th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States protects nonconsenting states from being sued. Tennessee is a nonconsenting state. It's ridiculous that a Senator of this state has to parrot the fear tactic falsehood whispered into his and other "official" ears by Baker and Poteete when their own attorney general has already told them this state DOES have the authority to recognize Indians. It's even more ridiculous that every other Senator and Representative voting on that panel save ONE supported that falsehood and apparantly knew nothing about one of the most critical amendments relevant to the sovereignty of the very state they allegedly serve!
Argument 3: The removal treaty clearly stated any Indian who did not remove to Oklahoma with the Cherokee were no longer Cherokee. FALSE. It clearly referred to those Indians who chose to remain behind as "these Cherokee heads of households" and that they would become citizens of the US. The only thing they ceased to be was citizens of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. In other words, the US Government acknowledged from the very beginning of the separation that there were INDIAN PEOPLE ESPECIALLY CHEROKEE REMAINING IN TENNESSEE.
The GOVERNMENT of the CNO very often argues that people seeking state recognition "only want what we have." I'm sorry, that's an inaccurate statement. The problem is the CNO "fear" the people seeking recognition "might get what we (the CNO) WANT," which - among other things - is control of the native tourism market that the Trail of Tears Heritage Trail brings to this state and assurance that no history of the Cherokee be introduced that might contradict their version of Cherokee history - a version that isn't even fully supported by their own citizens and cousins from the other two federally recognized Cherokee nations.
The CNO argues that the commission should consist ONLY of individuals who are federally recognized. Baker knew exactly how many of the CNO's citizens live in Tennessee. The CNO knew before the commission was ever officially created through law that there would be a commission. They knew about the democratic process through which the commissioners are nominated. They knew intimately everything that went on with the commission right up until their mole abandoned a seat on the commission and scurried off to live in Oklahoma.
So why didn't the CNO invest 47 cents per quarter per year and encourage or ask their 724 citizens living here in Tennessee to participate in the process? They had the same opportunity as any other Indian person living in this state.
The Creek citizens living in this state have always participated in the process as have the Choctaw citizens and the Eastern Band of Cherokee citizens as well as citizens of the Six Nations, Navajo Nations, Odawa Nation, various Lakota nations and the list goes on. Why does the CNO feel it should be exempt from participating and WORKING for and with the community and those seats on an equal level with any other federally recognized nation and any other Indian?
Argument 4: The criteria was less strict than the federal criteria. WRONG! For starters, try COMPARING THEM YOURSELVES and when you do, don't match section number to section number. THEY ARE EQUAL. And since they are equal, how can the state mess up (as the CNO imply) and recognize a group that doesn't meet the criteria it passed? It can't. Again ... the CNO fear someone might get what THE CNO WANTS.
As far as the complainers that it was TOO strict? Not if they're truly Indian and that IS the point of establishing criteria, isn't it? To make sure that only INDIANS are called INDIANS?
Herstle Cross, Joe Walters and all those who promote - overtly or subtly - elimination of the commission believe that, once it and its rule are removed as the obstacle they perceive it to be, they can stroll into the legislative plaza, sweet talk the legislators and get rubber-stamped recognition directly from the General Assembly WITHOUT having to meet a prescribed standard.
The state prefers to just let it all fade into the sunset, basing the excuses for their apathy and distaste on purposefully made misrepresentations of constitutional law.
And the Tennesseean takes its usual "blame the victim" stance on Indians. Way to go, folks. That's some good investigative, fact-checked journalism, alright. Bet they win an award for this one.
Posted by: V. Ohle | November 16, 2007 10:12 AM