News Archives - Page 291 of 446

Southern Leg of Keystone XL Near Completion as Opponents Lose Last Legal Battle in Texas

By Carol Berry, Indian Country Today Media Network

American Indians and others who oppose the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline have lost their last legal battle, enabling TransCanada to finish the project by year’s end.

While the northern part of the Keystone XL pipeline has been held up by controversy, the protests against the southern portion, known as the Gulf Coast Pipeline, have been to no avail. On October 9 a split federal appeals court upheld a lower court’s refusal to stop the pipeline’s construction because an injunction to stop construction, which is what the opponents sought, “would cost [TransCanada] at least hundreds of thousands of dollars per day,” the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals said in its ruling.

New York Times Journalists Threatened With Arrest While Reporting on Keystone XL Opposition

TransCanada has already spent at least $500 million on the 485-mile pipeline, which is expected to transport 700,000 gallons of crude oil daily from Cushing, in central Oklahoma, to Gulf Coast refineries.

The controversial Keystone XL extends through Sac and Fox territory. Other Oklahoma tribes that have spoken out about the pipeline’s impact on tribal patrimony include the Caddo, Choctaw, Southern Ponca and Pawnee, though none is party to the lawsuit.

The southern XL extension was formerly part of the full TransCanada XL pipeline, traversing some 1,700 miles of western and Midwestern states in its transnational route from Canadian tar sands, but vigorous opposition from Indian people, especially in northern areas, has delayed approval of the full section. The northern part must be approved by the U.S. Department of State, because it crosses an international line between Canada and the United States. The southern leg, purely domestic, was able to go ahead, despite a lack of thorough environmental reviews.

The Sierra Club and other plaintiffs had sought an injunction against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which had signed off on numerous permits so that TransCanada could move ahead. TransCanada proceeded even though the Corps had to issue 2,227 permits for water crossings, with minimal environmental review.

“Considering the number of permits issued by the Corps relative to the overall size of the Gulf Coast Pipeline, it is patently ludicrous for appellees to characterize the Corps’ involvement in the subject project as minimal, or to maintain that the Corps’ permitting involves only a ‘link’ in the Gulf Coast Pipeline,” said dissenting District Judge William Martinez in the October 9 Tenth Circuit ruling.

But the other two members of the three-justice panel in the federal appeals court, Circuit Judges Paul Kelly and Jerome Holmes, both said that financial harm can be weighed against environmental harm and in certain circumstances outweigh it.

The Sierra Club had alleged violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Clean Water Act and Administrative Procedures Act and contend that the pipeline constitutes a “major federal act” that requires NEPA analysis leading to a “hard look” at possible impacts.

Statement from Newly Elected NCAI President Cladoosby

New NCAI President Brian Cladoosby:

“Congress Must Act Immediately To Provide Rapid Recovery For Our Tribes And Work To Ensure That Political Gamesmanship And InactivityDoes Not Harm Native Peoples Again.”

Source: National Congress of American Indians

LaCONNER, WA- In his first statement after being sworn in as the 21^st president of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), Brian Cladoosby – Chairman of the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community – called for reduced thresholds for federal tribal disaster assistance and challenged Congress to prioritize Native peoples in the post-shutdown legislative calendar, including acting on the Farm Bill:

“As I begin my term, my thoughts and prayers are with the South Dakota tribes. The Oglala Sioux and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribes have been devastated by the recent storm that swept the Great Plains – and the federal government failed, again, to maintain treaty agreements that ensure disaster relief is provided when citizens are in distress. When the federal government neglects citizens in times of emergency, the effects can be long term.

Tribes are now eligible for federal disaster assistance under the Stafford Act, however the high monetary damages threshold hampers impoverished areas because what is lost by low-income citizens often does not meet the required amount. The federal government has a fiduciary duty to protect tribal citizens but without changes to the threshold, tribal citizens will continue to suffer from the consequences of disasters.

The immediate problems caused by collapsing homes and widespread loss of livestock are only the beginning. Tribal ranchers and farmers in South Dakota will feel the economic impact of this storm for years to come as they will now have to rebuild their livelihoods from scratch. Allowing the current Farm Bill to lapse without action, coupled with the government shutdown, meant that support systems at the Department of Agriculture were unavailable to Native farmers and ranchers during this terrible storm. These failures of Congress prolong the claims process and inhibit Native food production and economic development. Further, with no Farm Bill and the lack of government funding for food assistance programs, many tribal citizens were left without access to food all while these vital programs are used as political bargaining chips. No one – especially our tribal citizens most in need – should ever have to go without food while being used as pawns in the lawmaking process.

Congress must pass a Farm Bill that will support tribal nations and others around the country who are in dire straits and it must keep nutrition programs with farm policies because there should never be a disconnect between food production and feeding people. Congress must act immediately to provide rapid recovery for our tribes and work to ensure that political gamesmanship and inactivity does not harm Native peoples again.”

About The National Congress of American Indians:

Founded in 1944, the National Congress of American Indians is the oldest, largest and most representative American Indian and Alaska Native organization in the country. NCAI advocates on behalf of tribal governments and communities, promoting strong tribal-federal government-to-government policies, and promoting a better understanding among the general public regarding American Indian and Alaska Native governments, people and rights. For more information visit www.ncai.org

Oarfish Redux: Another Dead Sea Serpent Washes Ashore, Creeping Out Californians

Source: Indian Country Today Media Network

A second dead oarfish has washed up on the California coast, and marine experts say it is no coincidence coming five days after the first one.

They do not, however, go so far as to give credence to superstitions that such deaths portend a major earthquake, as Japanese legend has it. Neither do they say that the deaths are due to human activity. Rather, the animals were most likely caught up in a rogue current that dragged them into shallower waters than they are used to surviving in. The second one may even have been dashed to death in the swells, researchers said.

Oarfish number two washed up along Oceanside Harbor on Friday October 17 and measured nearly 14 feet long, which is four feet shorter than the 18-footer that was found in the shallows off Catalina Island on October 13. The smaller one was about to give birth, the San Diego Union Tribune reported.

Since oarfish dive below 3,000 feet, they are rarely seen, especially alive. An exception was the oarfish captured by oil rig video cameras in the Gulf of Mexico a couple of years ago.

The latest oarfish incident was witnessed by between 50 and 75 beachgoers, some of whom called police, according to the San Diego Union Tribune. Officer Mark Bussey responded and snapped a photo before a representative from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) came to measure and retrieve it. It was cut into sections and divvied up for study, the newspaper said.

Milton Love, a research biologist at the Marine Science Institute, told the Los Angeles Times that the deaths are most likely linked. A current probably dragged them both from the still, deep waters they are accustomed to navigating into a turbulent area closer to shore, which they were not adapted for, he said.

The bottom line, though, is that scientists have no idea what killed these creatures, said Russ Vetter, director of the fisheries resource division at the Southwest Fisheries Science Center, to the Los Angeles Times. He helped dissect the more recent fish find.

“With a rare event like this, it is a bit troubling, but it’s a total mystery,” he told the newspaper.

The deaths brought Japanese legend to the minds of many. A good 10 of the creatures washed ashore in Japan in 2010, about a year before the March 2011, 8.9-magnitude earthquake that shook the northeastern part of the country and spawned the tidal wave that wiped out thousands of people, the Union Tribune reported.

Scientists cautioned against assuming that potential seismic activity undetected by scientific instruments could be picked up on by marine life. But they did not completely dismiss the idea that deep-sea oil drilling or climate change’s effects on ocean currents could contribute to cause of death in otherwise healthy animals.

“The number of oarfish that beach themselves worldwide in a year is typically either one or zero, so this is unusual,” Love told the Union Tribune. “It’s possible any of those theories are true. I think it’s a little early to say anything.”

No scientific consensus on GMO safety – scientists release statement saying public is being misled

Earth Open Source, Monday 21 October 2013
http://www.earthopensource.org/index.php/news/150

There is no scientific consensus that genetically modified foods and crops are safe, according to a statement released today by an international group of over 85 scientists, academics and physicians.[1]

The statement comes in response to recent claims from the GM industry and some scientists and commentators that there is a “scientific consensus” that GM foods and crops are safe for human and animal health and the environment. The statement calls such claims “misleading” and states, “The claimed consensus on GMO safety does not exist.”

Commenting on the statement, one of the signatories, Professor Brian Wynne, associate director and co-principal investigator from 2002-2012 of the UK ESRC Centre for the Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics, Cesagen, Lancaster University, said: “There is no consensus amongst scientific researchers over the health or environmental safety of GM crops and foods, and it is misleading and irresponsible for anyone to claim that there is. Many salient questions remain open, while more are being discovered and reported by independent scientists in the international scientific literature. Indeed some key public interest questions revealed by such research have been left neglected for years by the huge imbalance in research funding, against thorough biosafety research and in favour of the commercial-scientific promotion of this technology.”

Another signatory, Professor C. Vyvyan Howard, a medically qualified toxicopathologist based at the University of Ulster, said: “A substantial number of studies suggest that GM crops and foods can be toxic or allergenic, and that they can have adverse impacts on beneficial and non-target organisms. It is often claimed that millions of Americans eat GM foods with no ill effects. But as the US has no GMO labelling and no epidemiological studies have been carried out, there is no way of knowing whether the rising rates of chronic diseases seen in that country have anything to do with GM food consumption or not. Therefore this claim has no scientific basis.”

A third signatory to the statement, Andy Stirling, professor of science and technology policy at Sussex University and member of the UK government’s GM Science Review Panel, said: “The main reason some multinationals prefer GM technologies over the many alternatives is that GM offers more lucrative ways to control intellectual property and global supply chains. To sideline open discussion of these issues, related interests are now trying to deny the many uncertainties and suppress scientific diversity. This undermines democratic debate – and science itself.”

The scientists’ statement was released by the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility in the week after the World Food Prize was awarded to employees of the GM seed giants Monsanto and Syngenta and UK environment secretary Owen Paterson branded opponents of GM foods as “wicked”.

Signatories of the statement include prominent and respected scientists, including Dr Hans Herren, a former winner of the World Food Prize and an Alternative Nobel Prize laureate, and Dr Pushpa Bhargava, known as the father of modern biotechnology in India.

Claire Robinson, research director at Earth Open Source commented, “The joint statement and comments of the senior scientists and academics make clear those who claim there is a scientific consensus over GMO safety are really engaged in a partisan bid to shut down debate.

“We have to ask why these people are so desperate to prevent further exploration of an issue that is of immense significance for the future of our food and agriculture. We actually need not less but more public debate on the impacts of this technology, particularly given the proven effective alternatives that are being sidelined in the rush to promote GM.”

Notes
1. http://www.ensser.org/media/
—
Summary of the statement, “No scientific consensus on GMO safety”:

1. There is no scientific consensus that GM crops and foods are safe for human and animal health.

2. A peer-reviewed review of safety studies on GM crops and foods found about an equal number of research groups raising concerns about GMO safety as groups concluding safety. However, most researchers concluding safety were affiliated with biotechnology companies that stood to profit from commercializing the GM crop concerned.

3. A review that is often cited to show GM crops and foods are safe in fact includes studies that raised concerns. Scientists disagree about the interpretation of these findings.

4. No epidemiological studies have been carried out to find out if GM crops are affecting human health, so claims that millions of Americans eat GM foods with no ill effects have no scientific basis.

5. There is no scientific consensus on the safety of GM crops for the environment. Studies have associated GM herbicide-tolerant crops with increased herbicide use and GM insecticidal crops with unexpected toxic impacts on non-target organisms.

6. A survey among scientists showed that those who received funding from biotech companies were more likely to believe GM crops were safe for the environment, whereas independent scientists were more likely to emphasize uncertainties.

7. Although some scientific bodies have made broadly supportive statements about GM over the years, these often contain significant caveats, call for better regulation, and draw attention to the risks as well as the potential benefits of GMOs. A statement by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) claiming GMO safety was challenged by 21 scientists, including long-standing members of the AAAS.

8. International agreements such as the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety exist because experts worldwide believe that a strongly precautionary attitude is justified in the case of GMOs. Concerns about risks are well-founded, as can be seen by the often complex, contradictory, and inconclusive findings of safety studies on GMOs.

Behind the backs of the People of California, Gov. Brown advances a policy harmful to Indigenous Peoples and Mother Earth

Source: Climate connection

San Francisco, Oct. 17 – Governor Jerry Brown of California was slated to receive the Blue Green Alliance’s Right Stuff award for environmentalism in San Francisco this evening but did not show up perhaps because he knew it was going to be protested. Outside of the awards ceremony at the Parc 55 Hotel, people protested including Tom Goldtooth, Executive Director of the Indigenous Environmental Network who read the following statement.

PRESS STATEMENT OF TOM GOLDTOOTH

(Executive Director, Indigenous Environmental Network)

Behind the backs of the People of California,

Gov. Brown advances a policy harmful to Indigenous Peoples and Mother Earth

Despite being awarded, as I speak, for his supposed environmentalism, Governor Brown is moving ahead with a policy that grabs land, clear-cuts forests, destroys biodiversity, abuses Mother Earth, pimps Father Sky and threatens the cultural survival of Indigenous Peoples.

This policy privatizes the air we breathe. Commodifies the clouds. Buy and sells the atmosphere. Corrupts the Sacred.

This policy is called carbon trading and REDD. REDD stands for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation. But REDD really means Reaping profits from Evictions, land grabs, Deforestation and Destruction of biodiversity. REDD does nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at source. And REDD may result in the biggest land grab of the last 500 years.

The State of California is ALREADY using national forests and tree plantations as supposed sponges for its pollution instead of reducing greenhouse gas emissions at source. The infamous oil giant Shell is using forests in Michigan to offset its refinery in Martinez, California.[i] California is at the vanguard of REDD in the world and posed to do REDD internationally.

REDD is bad for the climate, bad for the environment, bad for Californians, bad for human rights and bad for the economy.

REDD-type and carbon offset projects are already causing human rights violations, land grabs and environmental destruction.^[ii] California, you do not want Indigenous Peoples’ blood on your hands. You do not want to be complicit in the Continent Grab of Africa.^[iii] Governor Brown, you do not want to contribute to the destruction of the climate by allowing corporate criminals like Shell and Chevron off the hook.[iv] California must not include REDD in its climate law. It is matter of life and death for communities and the climate, and, ultimately, even for Californians.

Photo: The Mending News

Officially, California is telling us there is no date to make a decision about international REDD. However, meanwhile behind the backs of the good People of California, the State of California is charging ahead with this false solution to climate change that will render the planet uninhabitable and threaten YOUR future. The Governor recently returned from China where he talked climate and REDD. Behind your backs, California is negotiating the fine print of REDD risk insurance with oil giant Chevron.[v] Yes, Chevron, California’s biggest polluter, infamous for its destruction of the Ecuadorian Amazon and sending 15,000 Californians to the hospital last year after the explosion in its Richmond refinery.

Indigenous Peoples, environmental justice organizations and human rights advocates requested a meeting with Governor Brown to explain our grave global and local concerns with REDD but haven’t received even an acknowledgement of our request. But we are here right now!

REDD is bad for the climate because it lets climate criminals like Shell, Chevron and fracking companies off the hook.
REDD is bad for the environment because it includes clear-cutting, logging and tree plantations which destroy biodiversity.
REDD is bad for Californians because it allows polluters to not reduce their pollution and cause more asthma and cancer.
REDD is bad for human rights. REDD-type projects are already resulting in massive land grabs, violent evictions, forced relocation and carbon slavery.
REDD is bad for the economy because the carbon market is crashing and investing in it is bad business.

Over a century ago, Chief Seattle asked “How can you buy and sell the sky?” Well, that is exactly what California is doing. That is what Governor Jerry Brown is allowing to be done. This does not deserve an award.

Sitting Bull says that ‘the warrior’s task is to take care of the future of humanity.”

The future of humanity is precisely what is at stake.

Do we want more pollution?
Do we want more cancer and asthma?
Do we want more climate change?
Do we want carbon trading?
Do we want REDD?

It is time to defend Mother Earth and Father Sky. Your future depends on it.

Mi’kmaq Victory against fracking on their lands in New Brunswick

Source: Climate Connection

Yesterday and today we celebrate with Elsipogtog First Nation after the Court of Queen’s Bench decision to lift Southwestern Energy’s (SWN) injunction! This injunction was filed by the Texas based company to end the blockade protecting Mi’kmaq traditional territory from fracking.

For the last three years, the Mi’kmaq people in New Brunswick have proclaimed their right to consultation regarding shale gas exploration, commonly known as “fracking”, and have been part of a series of peaceful actions to protect their unceded territory. On Thursday Oct 18th, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) violently attacked their peaceful encampment.

Activist Suzanne Patles, one of those named in the injunction, said she believes the ruling from the judge sends a direct message to the energy company to stop their exploration activities and leave the province.The Elsipogtog protest was part of a larger campaign against fracking in New Brunswick encompassing 28 organizations. The 40 people arrested included most of the Elsipogtog First Nations leadership, including Chief Aaron Sock.

There was a press conference the morning of Oct 21st in Elsipogtog where people involved on the frontline shared their experiences of last weeks violence. The people of Elsipogtog are debriefing with the community about Thursday’s RCMP raid, and continue to discuss the next steps and development of a community process to move forward in protecting and defending their land and water against fracking.

Links to articles/videos:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/shale-gas-company-loses-bid-for-injunction-to-halt-n-b-protests-1.2128622

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/21/new-brunswick-fracking-protests

http://leannesimpson.ca/2013/10/20/elsipogtog-everywhere/

http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/ID/2412962477/

Twenty-two Certified to Help American Indians Improve Workplace Skills

The twenty-two newly-certified instructors for the Workin’ with Tradition workplace skills training program

Source: Native News Network

PIERRE, SOUTH DAKOTA – Twenty-two individuals from five South Dakota reservations were certified as course instructors for “Workin’ with Tradition,” a training program that helps individuals in rural Native American communities prepare for successful employment. The instructor certification course was sponsored by the South Dakota Indian Business Alliance, a group of community partners dedicated to growing Indian business throughout the state.

“Because of the way the reservation system was initially set up, Native communities had not had any kind of economy to speak of for several generations. Now we are starting to see businesses sprout up, and we have a new set of challenges to deal with,” says Stacey LaCompte, Standing Rock Sioux, SDIBA Secretary/Treasurer, who helped administer the training. With unemployment rates documented as high as 85 percent in some South Dakota reservation communities, business owners struggle in their hiring efforts due to a lack of qualified candidates.

“Economic development in Indian Country is not solely about helping businesses start up. The “Workin’ with Tradition” workshop is addressing the next step – after businesses grow to the point where they need to hire employees,” says LaCompte.

Many business owners in reservation communities that find it difficult to recruit and retain experienced employees are also having a hard time maintaining any growth their company experiences, and that impact extends out into the larger economy.

“The simple fact is that reservations just don’t have a history that has invested in their workforce, so this workshop is turning that around.” LaCompte continued.

The newly-certified instructors, who are from various non-profit organizations, tribal and state programs, and other employers, will be able to deliver the “Workin’ with Tradition” course in order to help individuals develop the interpersonal skills necessary for entering into and advancing in the workforce. Seven of the workshop participants received scholarships from SDIBA to help with the costs of the certification and have committed to delivering a total of at least nine workshops within their respective communities over the next year.

“This training brought out a lot of confidence in the participants. I noticed people turning from shy to assertive. If this training can give the working class confidence, can you imagine what it will do for the job-seekers?” says LaCompte.

The “Workin’ with Tradition” curriculum is part of the nationally recognized “Workin’ It Out” program developed by Dr. Steve Parese. “Workin’ with Tradition” was developed in partnership with Dr. Steve Parese and Opportunity Link, a non-profit organization with a focus on community development, with input from Montana’s Blackfeet Nation, Chippewa Cree Tribe, and the Fort Belknap Indian Community.

The curriculum is designed to address the unique challenges American Indians job-seekers face on and off reservations while maintaining the integrity of their Native culture. The “Workin’ with Tradition” instructor certification program is now being delivered throughout the country.

Elsipogtog regroups as chief ponders new anti-fracking leadership

By Jorge Barrera, APTN National News
ELSIPOGTOG FIRST NATION–The Mi’kmaq-led opposition to shale gas exploration in New Brunswick continued to regroup Monday, moving into a new phase which could also bring new leadership to the ongoing struggle.

The movement was buoyed Monday afternoon after a Court of Queen’s Bench judge ruled against a Houston-based energy company that was seeking an indefinite injunction against an encampment along Route 134 in Rexton, NB.

The judge said the injunction was no longer needed because trucks belonging to SWN Resources Canada had been freed following an RCMP raid on the encampment Thursday.

The encampment had been blocking the company’s trucks in a compound. The RCMP acted last Thursday, one day before an interim injunction was set to expire, sweeping onto the site with dogs and camouflaged tactical units, arresting 40 people and seizing three rifles, ammunition and crude explosive devices.

At a press conference Monday morning, Elsipogtog Chief Aaron Sock said he is planning on appointing new leadership for the band’s role in the shale gas exploration opposition. Elsipogotog has been at the heart of the protest movement which has been raging since the summer.

“I have three people in mind right now, but we have yet to sit down and discuss,” said Sock. “I do have a spiritual advisor that I turn to and he will be part of the process.”

While Sock wouldn’t give details about the “logistics” of the next phase, it has emerged that there are discussions underway to move the encampment from its current location on Route 134 to a previous base within Elsipogtog’s territory used this past summer which sits just off Hwy 116.

“We are planning on going to the 116 where the sacred fire was before and do our healing there and get ready for the next round,” said Elsipogtog’s War Chief John Levi.

Levi is not connected to the Mi’kmaq Warrior Society.

Levi said there is no longer any point to the Route 134 encampment after the raid freed the exploration trucks it was blocking.

“There is no sense to being on the side of the road, it’s only a danger for our people,” said Levi.

Levi was in talks with the RCMP to remove the burned-out remains of several RCMP vehicles that were torched in the aftermath of Thursday’s raid. He wanted the RCMP to ground their surveillance plane, which had been circling the community, before releasing the vehicles.

On Sunday night, Sock and three friends removed the charred remains using three shovels, a half-ton truck and a local towing company. Sock said an RCMP sergeant was also involved in the removal.

“I took it on my own personally, just being a good neighbour to the people of Rexton, NB.,” said Sock.

The RCMP plane, which had been circling the area relentlessly, returned Monday.

The Mi’kmaq Warrior Society was essentially in charge of the camp at the time of the raid. It remained unclear what role the society will play once new leadership is appointed.

Mi’kmaq Warrior War Chief “Seven,” who was arrested during the raid but has since been freed, said he had no comment and would wait to hear more information.

The Warrior Society has widespread support within Elsipogtog. Several of their key players remained in jail awaiting bail hearings scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday.

Some at the site said they do not want to move the encampment from Route 134.

Louis Jerome, from Gesgapegiag First Nation in Quebec, said the current encampment is better strategically because it sits near Hwy 11 which passes over Route 134. The encampment is about 15 kilometres northeast of Elsipogtog and 80 km north of Moncton.

Over 100 Mi’kmaq and supporters blocked Hwy 11 for about an hour Saturday. Hwy 11 is one of the main highways in the province, running from Moncton north to Bathurst.

“We are going to stay here,” said Jerome. “This is a place where we can battle…We can see traffic, what is going through.”

Jerome said the plan is to move the encampment a few metres east from the current site to a field on an adjacent road where a teepee currently sits.

Route 134 was again reduced to one lane by the Mi’kmaq Monday evening.

Others said it didn’t matter where the camp was, as long as people were unified. Hubert Francis, from Elsipogtog, said confusion abounded following the raid.

“I am hearing three or four different stories, from three or four different sources,” said Francis. “From day one there has been a lot of miscommunication…We really don’t have a direction on where we are going with this.”

While Sock and the grassroots continue to sort out next steps on the ground, the Elsipogtog chief also has to prepare to continue talks with the provincial government.

“I don’t think this is any longer between Elsipogtog and SWN. This is between Elsipogtog and the province,” said Sock. “That is where the battle is.”

Sock met with New Brunswick Premier David Alward Friday and, while the two had been making progress before the raid, Thursday’s events changed the landscape.

“When you have two opposing ideas, you just butt heads,” said Sock. “Right now we just don’t see eye to eye.”

Sock said Elsipogtog doesn’t want shale gas exploration while the province sees it as a “money maker.” The chief said the Mi’kmaq see no benefit to the province developing shale gas deposits through fracking, or hydraulic fracturing.

“We don’t want to be the ones at the end of the day, 50 or 60 years down the road, which is the average life span of a shale gas well, to be stuck with thousands of wells,” said Sock. “The province will have made their money and we are stuck with the refuse, the garbage.”

Yeah, the Government Is Open; How Come the News Ahead Is Worse?

By Mark Trahant, ICTMN

The government is back in business and now there are lots of questions. What was all that about, anyway? What’s next? And what’s the best course for Indian country?

To answer the first question you have to think on multiple tracks. Yes, the government was shuttered because of Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen. Mike Lee, and the House Republicans that combined to fight the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

But that was never really the fight. It was only a distraction.

The primary division is simpler: It’s about the role of government and how to pay for that government. This is the debate that Republicans – and some of their Democratic allies – have already won, the austerity framework. It starts with the premise that federal spending is “out of control” and therefore dramatic steps must be taken.

It’s a faulty premise but the results are a disproportionate impact on Indian country.

Indian country has an oversized and direct relationship with the federal government so deep spending cuts wipe out both investment and opportunity. That means less money for schools (which is future opportunity), less for economic development, and less money in general for local government (healthcare is a different story … more about that in a series I have coming soon on the Affordable Care Act & Indian country).

Beyond Indian country, the problem with austerity is that it does not work. It starts a cycle of general economic decline, instead of “saving” money for taxpayers (now or future ones). The government shutdown is a case in point: It cost billions of dollars in terms of economic output. It made the problem worse, not better. Ireland will soon be the first country to move past the austerity terms of its bailout. But the budget cuts continue and the damage to the country is severe. As Stephen Kinsella writes in Foreign Affairs: “The real threat to Ireland’s recovery is demographic. A recent survey found that young Irish people have no savings whatsoever. Their consumption levels are far below those of their European counterparts. With more babies born this year than in any other since 1891, Ireland’s only boom in the next few years will be in people.” This sentence could be Indian country. Only we have no where to go.

So what’s ahead? The deep divide over austerity remains. The Senate budget “fully replaces the harmful cuts from sequestration with smart, balanced, and responsible deficit reduction, which would save hundreds of thousands of jobs while protecting families, communities, and the fragile economic recovery.” While The House budget “cuts government spending to protect hardworking taxpayers.” So in order to meet in the middle, the two Houses will have to resolve their differences and (key word here is and) then get a majority of votes in both the House and Senate. Democrats will have to be happy with austerity and Republicans will have to live with more spending. There needs to be a resolution of these differences before January 15, 2014, when a new round of budget cuts will be required under the sequestration law (The Budget Control Act) that continues every year until 2021.

And, finally, what’s the best course for Indian country in this budget maze? The National Congress of American Indians report the Senate level of appropriations remain short of what’s required. The Interior budget, for example, accounting for inflation, “the Senate level is 11 percent below FY10,” NCAI said. “The House proposed level would drop critical tribal governmental services to 19 percent below the FY10 level.” NCAI said tribes are losing ground for critical governmental services.

The ideal would be for Congress to consider treaty obligations separately from the budget. A smaller scale solution might be trying to convince the Congress to forward fund more tribal programs, so that the money will not be at risk every time there’s another fight in Congress.

But forget the ideal in this Congress. We’ll be lucky to get a resolution of any kind. And that means more austerity for Indian country.

Mark Trahant is the 20th Atwood Chair at the University of Alaska Anchorage. He is a journalist, speaker and Twitter poet and is a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Join the discussion about austerity. Comment on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/IndianCountryAusterity.

Supreme Court Sides With Feds On Marijuana Prohibition

The highest court says there’s not enough evidence to warrant taking a second look at marijuana’s Schedule I status.

By Katie Rucke, Mint Press News

Despite a dramatic increase in public support for marijuana legalization in the U.S., the federal government doesn’t appear to be budging on decriminalization, legalization or “downscheduling” the substance anytime soon.

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court had the opportunity to review and reverse a ruling from a lower court that upheld the federal government’s current classification of marijuana as a Schedule I substance, but the high court declined to do so.

The ruling in question was issued this past January by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which ruled that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) was in the right when it rejected a petition to conduct a scientific review of marijuana’s safety and therapeutic efficacy.

The D.C. Court of Appeals said that the DEA was correct in its assertion that an insufficient number of clinical studies exist to “warrant a judicial review of cannabis’ federally prohibited status,” which the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with.

But as marijuana legalization advocate Russ Belville pointed out in an article for High Times, the court’s ruling is more about whether or not the DEA was following its own rules than whether or not marijuana should be rescheduled.

Currently marijuana is classified as a Schedule I substance, meaning that the U.S. government does not recognize a valid use of marijuana at any time — even for medical purposes — and believes marijuana is highly addictive, has a high potential for abuse, and functions as a gateway drug. Other Schedule I substances include heroin and phencyclidine (PCP).

Moving marijuana to a lower classification such as Schedule V would mean that marijuana had known health benefits and was not likely to be abused as much as other drugs.

“The DEA requires we show real, FDA-approved research proving marijuana is medical, safe and non-addictive, and since the DEA won’t let that research happen, there is nothing forcing them to change the scheduling of cannabis,” Belville wrote.

“But what about the 19,000+ published studies on cannabis’ medical benefits? The federal government patents on the medical effects of cannabinoids? The four surviving federal medical marijuana patients still receiving U.S. government-grown schwag? The 20 states with medical marijuana and the millions who are living testament to marijuana’s medical miracles?”

Each year the U.S. spends about $40 billion fighting the war on drugs, even though no one has ever died from consuming or smoking too much marijuana.

Since a large percentage of the DEA’s money comes from drug sting operations, specifically marijuana trafficking, many marijuana advocates have questioned whether the DEA opposes legalization simply because they don’t want to lose that income. According to a report from Americans for Safe Access, a medical marijuana patient advocacy group, each raid costs taxpayers around $17,000.

State vs. federal law

Since 1996, 20 states have legalized marijuana for medical use, and last year two states — Washington and Colorado — legalized recreational use of the drug, creating a direct conflict between state and federal law.

Though some lawmakers such as Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have pushed for the passage of federal legislation that would allow states to legalize marijuana for medical or recreational use, citing a waste of taxpayer and law enforcement resources, most lawmakers have been rather passive toward the legalization issue.

The Obama administration has been quiet in its stance on marijuana legalization, even though during his 2008 bid for the White House Obama indicated he would not crack down on medical marijuana users.

But in an interview with Mint Press News, Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), a marijuana legalization advocacy group, said the federal government has continued to raid large-scale marijuana retailers around the country, and as of November 2012, Obama had shut down more dispensaries that President George W. Bush did in his eight years in office.

However, in response to the passage of the legalization legislation in Colorado and Washington, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced last month that it had decided to defer its legal right to challenge the marijuana legalization laws and would not file a lawsuit against either state for failure to follow the laws under the federal Controlled Substances Act — at least for now.

As Mint Press News previously reported, the DOJ’s announcement made it clear that both states would be allowed to continue implementing state rules and regulations for recreational marijuana even though the substance will remain illegal under federal law. However the DOJ failed to mention anything about states that legalized medical marijuana or industrial hemp.

Though the DOJ’s new stance on marijuana wasn’t as progressive as many had hoped, states have continued to introduce legislation that legalizes medical marijuana, recreational marijuana and/or industrial hemp.

Why? Because legalization appears to be what the majority of Americans want.

A poll released earlier this year by Quinnipiac University found that as of December 2012, voters supported legalization of marijuana 51 to 44 percent. As Mother Jones reported, “Even in the relatively conservative states of Florida, Iowa and Kentucky, polls released in the past week have shown majority support for recently proposed medical marijuana laws.”

Legalization: only a matter of time?

In 2014, voters in Alaska are expected to vote on legislation that would legalize recreational marijuana, and by 2017, ten other states are expected to also have initiatives on the ballot that would legalize marijuana.

“Most Americans are tired of seeing their tax dollars used to arrest and prosecute adults for using a substance that is objectively less harmful than alcohol,” said Marijuana Policy Project executive director Rob Kampia. “Voters and state legislators are ready for change, and the federal government appears to be ready, as well.

“Marijuana prohibition has been just as problematic and counterproductive as alcohol prohibition,” Kampia said. “We look forward to working with elected officials, community leaders, organizations, and other local and national allies to develop more effective and efficient marijuana policies.”

One of those ten states is California.

Though California was the first state to legalize medical marijuana, voters in the state have yet to pass legislation legalizing recreational use of the substance. Many advocates said that because the state has borne the brunt of the federal government’s crackdown on marijuana, many voters in the state were likely reluctant to pass any legislation to further legalize the substance.

But on Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union announced they were working to put legalization back on the state’s ballot. Before any legislation appears on the ballot, however, the ACLU said it would be creating a new panel to study marijuana legalization in California in preparation for a 2016 ballot measure that would legalize the substance.

The panel is to be led by the state’s Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, and will include academics, drug policy experts, law enforcement authorities, and officials from Colorado and Washington.

Newsom said he is in support of legalizing marijuana because “enough’s enough. I can’t sit back and support the status quo any longer.” He explained that even though he doesn’t smoke marijuana, he isn’t concerned about any political fallout that may occur for his decision to take a stand on the issue.

“To me, it’s like smoking anything else — I want a regulatory regime that doesn’t advertise to kids, that doesn’t allow public use and secondhand smoke,” he said.

According to the ACLU, while California’s 2010 legalization measure was defeated with 53.5 percent of voters voting against the measure, a new poll found that legalizing recreational marijuana received support from 65 percent of polled voters.

In addition to efforts to legalize recreational marijuana, a few states are also considering legislation that would legalize medical marijuana, including Ohio, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.