The second Cobell settlement deadline is approaching on March 1. Indian class members must have submitted their applications for the second payments of the settlement, the trust administration class payments, by that date.
“Any claim forms must be postmarked by March 1, 2013,” according to a notice posted on indiantrust.com, the website established by the Cobell lawyers. Claim forms can be found on the site.
In December, historical accounting class payments of $1,000 started going out to beneficiaries who had registered their correct addresses with the federal government, the Cobell lawyers and/or the Garden City Group, the settlement administration company managing the two-part settlement payments process at the direction of the overseeing court.
Some of these payments were sent to wrong addresses, so it is important to contact the Garden City Group to be sure that correct information is in place for the second payment, officials with the National Congress of Americans (NCAI) said during a January conference call with tribal representatives regarding the process.
The number for the Garden City Group is 1-800-961-6109, and their e-mail is info@IndianTrust.com.
NCAI officials estimated that most beneficiaries would receive about $800 under this second payment process, but some could receive more. The calculation is based on the level of activity in beneficiaries’ Indian Money (IIM) accounts, held with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).
The Garden City Group is expected to calculate the amount of the second payments, and the Cobell lawyers expect the payments to be sent by fall. Some $265 million of the $3.4 billion overall settlement has been released to date, according to the lawyers. Of that, $1.9 billion was released to the U.S. Department of the Interior to run a land-consolidation program over the next 10 years. Approximately $100 million was scheduled in to be divvied among the lawyers in the case. Some lawyers continue to battle over their share, according to court documents and press accounts. Lead lawyer Dennis Gingold left the case in December.
On December 17, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia appointed Judge Richard A. Levie to become a special master during the payments process. Levie will oversee appeals of payments and other issues surrounding them. Appeals questions should be directed to the Garden City Group.
NCAI Praises Passage of Protections for All Women; Tribal Courts Gain Jurisdiction over Non-Indian Domestic Violence Perpetrators
Bill represents major advance for public safety in Indian Country; Legislation headed to President for Signature
By Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Washington, DC – Today, in a historic vote the House of Representatives passed S.47, the Senate reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), sending the legislation with the tribal provisions supported by the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) to President Obama’s desk to be signed into law. NCAI is praising the efforts of the House and the Senate to reauthorize VAWA and the bipartisan support of the Senate version of the legislation in both chambers with resounding votes of 286 – 138 in the House and 78-22 vote in the Senate earlier this month.
“It is with a glad heart and soaring spirit that I celebrate the passage of VAWA. Today the drum of justice beats loud in Indian Country in celebration of the reauthorization of VAWA and we stand in unity with all of our partners and leaders who were unrelenting in support of protections for all women, including Native women,” said Juana Majel Dixon, First Vice President of NCAI, and co-chair of NCAI’s Task Force on Violence Against Women. Juana Majel serves as a Traditional Councilwoman Pauma Band of Mission Indians located within the state of California. “500 plus days is too long to not have a bill for all women in America. For an unimaginable length of time those who have terrorized our women in our most sacred places, in our relationships, in our homes, and on our land, have gone unprosecuted. Now that time has come to an end and justice and security will flourish in these specific instances. We celebrate the protections for all women included in VAWA, including those for Immigrant and LGBT women,” added Juana Majel.
“With this authority, comes a serious responsibility and tribal courts will administer justice with the same level of impartiality that any defendant is afforded in state and federal courts,” said Jefferson Keel, the President of NCAI and Lt. Governor of the Chickasaw Nation, speaking about implementation of the new law. “We have strong tribal courts systems that protect public safety. The law respects tribal sovereignty, and also requires that our courts respect the due process rights of all defendants. My hope is that this new law is rarely used. Our goal isn’t to put people in jail. It is to create an effective deterrent so that our people can lead safe lives in our communities and nations.”
The constitutionally sound tribal jurisdiction provisions in VAWA authorize tribal governments to prosecute non-Indian defendants involved in intimate relationships with Native women and who assault these victims on tribal land. Current federal laws do not authorize tribal law enforcement or tribal courts to pursue any form of prosecution or justice against these perpetrators.
“There were at least five things that came together: an enormous grassroots effort from Indian country; the coalition of the National Task Force to End Domestic Violence; statistics so we could finally show the problem; steadfast leadership from the Department of Justice; and incredible support from so many Members of Congress both Republicans and Democrats,” said Terri Henry, Council Member at Eastern Cherokee and Co-Chair of the NCAI Task Force on Violence Against Women spoke of the large collective effort that led to the passage of the Senate version of VAWA. “We really want to thank everyone for their hard work. Now we are going to use this tool to protect Native women from violence.”
“Women and men – Native and non-Native, Senators and Representatives from all backgrounds, and tribal leaders from across Indian Country have all spoken that these injustices must not continue. We intend to keep speaking from our heart and with the law by our side,” added NCAI’s First Vice President Juana Majel Dixon. “We are thankful that there are strong leaders in both the House and Senate that have stood for the protections of Native women, regardless of party politics.”
“Today marks not the end of our efforts at NCAI to combat domestic violence issues that Indian Country faces but an important step along the way. We will remain as dedicated as we have been since we began addressing this issue as an organization. There have been many members of Congress who have stood with tribal nations throughout this effort and they have stayed true to the constitution, to the trust responsibility, and to the truth that tribal nations are the best to address our situations at the local level. Today we advance the protections tribal nations can provide all people, Native and non-Native,” said Jacqueline Pata, Executive Director of NCAI.
Findings show that 34% of American Indian and Alaska Native women will be raped in their lifetimes* and 39% of American Indian and Alaska Native women will be subjected to violence by an intimate partner in their lifetimes**. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 46% of people living on reservations in 2010 were non-Natives (single race) and 59% of American Indian women in 2010 were married to non-Native men***.
The NCAI Task Force on Violence Against Women was established in 2000 and has been working for thirteen years to protect the lives of Native American women and create more secure tribal communities
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Findings from the National Violence against Women Survey.
** Centers for Disease Control. (2008). Adverse health conditions and health risk behaviors associated with intimate partner violence.
***US Census Bureau, Census 2010.
About The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI):
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
A coal train moves through Seattle en route to Vancouver, B.C. Efforts to bring coal terminals to Washington and Oregon have enlisted some lobbyists and public-relations firms long connected with environmental causes. Photo: Greg Gilbert / The Seattle Times
Several prominent local strategists with “green” reputations are now pushing a set of controversial proposals to make the Pacific Northwest the continent’s biggest coal exporter.
As executive director of Washington Conservation Voters, Bruce Gryniewski helped shape the organization into one of the state’s most influential environmental groups.
Five years after leaving for a consulting firm, Gryniewski has resurfaced as a player in one of the biggest environmental battles in the Pacific Northwest in decades.
Only now he’s working for the other side.
“Our firm has a passion for growing the Northwest economy,” said Gryniewski, explaining his work in support of a proposed new coal port in Longview. He added, “I don’t believe in this eco-McCarthyism view that if you work for coal, you can’t do anything good in the world.”
Gryniewski is among a group of local strategists with “green” reputations hired by coal companies to build support for the Longview facility and four other proposed ports in Washington and Oregon that would ship Rocky Mountain coal to Asia.
The proposals — which would bring hundreds of union-wage jobs and, at least temporarily, hundreds of millions of tons of coal to the Pacific Northwest — have cheered job-hungry workers but enraged environmentalists who are now hoping to use the debate to highlight the harmful effects of global warming.
As the proposals begin a yearslong approval process, the strategists are crafting advertisements, handling media relations, lobbying public officials and getting people to come to hearings or write letters to the editor.
Their firms were described in a recent report by the Sightline Institute, a prominent coal opponent. They include several that are well-known in Democratic circles in Seattle and Portland: Nyhus Communications, Edelman, Berk, ECONorthwest and Smith & Stark Strategic Solutions.
The unusual dynamic has caused a few awkward interactions between traditional allies now turned adversaries, some state lawmakers say. Others argue that the situation illustrates a divide between the union and environmental wings of the Democratic Party.
In interviews, representatives from several of the firms argued the new jobs for the region would outweigh negative consequences from the coal, which they said Asian countries would get from somewhere anyway.
“I think it’s an oversimplification to say that if you don’t meet that demand, it will disappear,” said Lauri Hennessey, a vice president at Edelman who has worked at the Environmental Protection Agency. “The more you dig into the whole complicated issue, I feel very, very proud about being involved.”
As for personal relationships, Hennessey said she believes “it’s very possible to disagree with someone and still respect them.”
But some environmental leaders said reconciliation will be difficult this time simply because of the stakes of the fight.
“This isn’t like being on different sides of a primary or something like that,” said Brendon Cechovic, who now serves in Gryniewski’s old role at Washington Conservation Voters. “This is a completely unprecedented proposal in our state’s history. This is a big deal.”
Port proposals
The “unprecedented proposal” is actually five separate proposals of coal-shipping plans. Each involves different companies and is operating on different timelines.
In Washington, Peabody Energy and SSA Marine want to build the Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point near Ferndale to ship 48 million tons each year, and Ambre Energy and Arch Coal are hoping to construct the Millennium Bulk Terminal in Longview to ship 44 million tons.
The other three, all smaller, would be in Oregon.
If all five are built, they would ship nearly 150 million tons of coal to China and other Asian countries — making the Pacific Northwest the largest exporter of the fossil fuel in North America.
There now are only two coal berths on the West Coast: in Alaska and southern British Columbia.
The scramble to increase exports stems from rising demand in Asia and declining American reliance on coal power.
But before construction, each proposal must pass a review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the state Department of Ecology and county governments.
Those agencies haven’t even decided the scope of the reviews.
Supporters hope to limit the reviews to the economic and environmental effects on the immediate areas. Opponents want to include factors such as how mile-long trains hauling the coal westward would affect life in towns along the route and how burning coal affects the Earth — which would offer a platform to call attention to harmful effects of climate change.
Public input is part of the process. So supporters are focused on getting as many people on board as possible.
Public relations
That’s the job of the communications firms.
Gryniewski’s firm, Gallatin Public Affairs, is doing public relations for the Longview project. The firm’s point person is Aaron Toso, a former spokesman for then-Gov. Chris Gregoire.
Hennessey’s firm, Edelman, is the voice behind the Alliance for Northwest Jobs and Exports, a coalition of pro-export unions.
Nyhus is involved with another coalition, Move Forward Washington.
“We’re proud of our environmental commitment — the work we’ve done for a variety of sustainable enterprises, from clean technology to green buildings,” said Roger Nyhus, who served as a spokesman for then-Gov. Gary Locke. “I don’t see that being inconsistent with the work that we’re doing here.”
Smith & Stark has done public relations for the project near Ferndale in Whatcom County. Gary Smith said he is personally involved with several environmental groups but doesn’t often represent them professionally.
And ECONorthwest and Berk, which traditionally analyze projects on behalf of environmental groups and municipal governments, each did an analysis of an export proposal paid for by the coal companies.
Strategic hiring
Opponents, who themselves are well-funded and organized, speculated that the coal companies intentionally hired strategists with green reputations.
“If you’ve fought shoulder to shoulder with someone for years on similar causes, it might make your voice carry more weight,” said state Rep. Jeff Morris, a Mount Vernon Democrat whose district is near Ferndale.
Indeed, Gryniewski’s bio on Gallatin’s website highlights his tenure at Washington Conservation Voters and notes that he brings “practical relationships and public policy knowledge to help business interests navigate the often-challenging political and regulatory environment in the Pacific Northwest.”
The coal companies disputed the opponents’ theory.
In a statement, Millennium CEO Ken Miller said his firm chose Gallatin because it is “a bipartisan firm with a successful track record working with brownfield-redevelopment sites and experience permitting large infrastructure projects.”
Regardless of the reason for the hires, state Rep. Reuven Carlyle said he is “deeply disappointed” in the traditionally green strategists now working for the coal companies.
But then the Seattle Democrat paused and said he doesn’t take it personally.
“It’s just one of those realities when hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake,” he said. “This is the gig, and the game we’re in.”
I’m wandering the aisles of Central Co-op, a natural foods market on Capitol Hill, checking its shelves for genetically engineered foods. Once you know what to look for, it turns out those ingredients are everywhere—even here, among the fake meats and packages covered in leafy art, smiling animals, and hand-lettering. They’re in the whole-grain bread, in the veggie burgers, in the peanut-free soy nut butter. You can’t always tell from friendly labels—”100% natural,” “multi-grain,” “fair trade.” But you may be able to tell soon.
Washington State will be voting in November on Initiative 522, which would require food made with genetically engineered ingredients (also known as genetically modified organisms, or GMOs) to be labeled as such at the retail level.
When I set out to research the initiative, I thought I’d end up with a clear and obvious answer about how I felt about it—and what the science says. I was wrong.
I was raised on organic produce, bulk-bin grains, and peanut butter you had to crank by hand; these food-labeling people are my people. But I still wanted to see hard science that backs up the squick factor of vegetables birthed in a petri dish. I wanted studies I could point to, something I could wave around and say, “Here! Here is incontrovertible proof that GMOs are evil! Their curse will last for generations and our grandkids will have four noses, and here, have some organic hummus.” But the smoking gun just isn’t there. Not that the anti-labeling side is all that convincing, either.
Genetically engineered food crops have been around since the 1990s, and they took off rapidly across the United States. Now certain American crops are almost universally GMO: more than 90 percent of soy and sugar beets, and 88 percent of corn, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Modifications are done at the genetic level (mainly by corporations that don’t exactly inspire trust, like Monsanto and Dow Chemical), often to make a crop resistant to a particular pest or herbicide. The FDA regularly approves new GMO plants—and soon, an animal: GMO salmon are on their way.
GMOs aren’t just in the processed food you grab in a stoned midnight run to Safeway. And while a 100 percent organic product can’t contain GMOs, lots of foods we think of as “natural” can and do.
For example, Gardenburger’s package is stamped with a cartoon cow and chicken embracing, and the message “There are no unimportant ingredients. If it’s in here, then it’s got a role to play.” That includes corn- and soy-based ingredients (and remember that nearly all US corn and soy is GMO), and when we e-mailed their parent company, the automated response we got back said that some of their products “do contain biotech ingredients.” In a form letter, the company explained: “It has become increasingly difficult to maintain non-biotech sourcing of the soy proteins.”
Franz Family Bakeries offers a “100% Natural, 100% Whole Grain” loaf of bread, touting its “premium Northwest grown & milled ingredients” and lack of high-fructose corn syrup. We asked Franz about GMOs in their bread, and they “do use cornmeal, soybean oil and canola oil in our products, and most of the corn, soybeans, and sources of canola oil are GMO, so most certainly these ingredients would be genetically modified.”
Even the crazily named I.M. Healthy Chunky SoyNut Butter, which announces on the label that it contains non-GMO soybeans, doesn’t guarantee that other ingredients in the same jar, such as corn-derived maltodextrin, aren’t genetically engineered. And the boxed gluten-free cake mix from Cherrybrook Kitchen contains some ingredients that “are not GMO-free,” the company says.
This isn’t to pick on these companies at all, or the groovy grocers that carry them; it’s just to point out how ubiquitous GMO ingredients are. And if I-522 passes this fall, we’ll be reminded wherever we shop how common they’ve become. Or, on the other hand, the measure could prompt more food producers to eradicate GMOs from their ingredients to avoid the GMO label altogether.
A vast majority of the American public supports labeling foods with GMO ingredients. A 2010 NPR/Thomson Reuters poll found that 93 percent of Americans were on board. Worldwide, more than 60 countries already label foods with GMO ingredients, including members of the European Union, China, Japan, and India.
Still, the opposition to labeling is fierce. In November, Proposition 37, which would’ve mandated labeling of GMO foods, lost on the California ballot after the opposition dumped more than $45 million into a campaign arguing that labeling GMOs would be deceptive, pointless, and expensive. The donor list looked like exactly what you’d expect: Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, BASF Plant Science, Kraft Foods Global, Nestlé USA, ConAgra Foods.
Here in Washington, there’s already opposition to I-522. The Seattle Times came out strongly against it, saying that “there is no reliable evidence crops containing genetically modified organisms… pose any risks.” The Washington Association of Wheat Growers is opposed as well, saying that mandatory labeling of GMO foods “that are indistinguishable from foods produced through traditional methods would mislead consumers by falsely implying differences where none exist.”
When it comes to the science, people on each side promise they can debunk anything the other side claims to prove. Biotech researcher Dr. Martina Newell-McGloughlin gave compelling testimony at an I-522 hearing in Olympia, saying, “There is practically no domesticated plant or animal today that has not been genetically engineered over the last 10,000 years,” since we’ve been selectively breeding, grafting, and even irradiating foods forever. Today’s precise genetic engineering has been found by all major science and health organizations to be “as safe or safer than” conventional methods, she said. Further, she argued, GMO foods are actually “more thoroughly tested than any in the history of food,” subjected to years of research before they make it to market.
But George Kimbrell of the Center for Food Safety, who helped draft I-522, says, “We’re essentially taking the science from the industry for safety,” because the FDA doesn’t do its own pre-market testing, instead signing off on testing done by Monsanto and other companies developing the biotech foods. Dr. Michael Hansen testified in favor of I-522 in Olympia; he works for Consumers Union, the public policy arm of Consumer Reports, and he points to his organization’s long-standing position in favor of mandatory pre-market testing as opposed to the current system of “voluntary safety consultations,” as Consumers Union describes it. In place of that, Hansen says, they support labeling so consumers can at least make informed choices.
Another commonly heard argument is that labeling would burden manufacturers and grocery stores. But initiative spokeswoman Trudy Bialic, who works for PCC Natural Markets, which is running the I-522 campaign, says that’s bogus. GMO labeling would be “no different from any of the other things we keep track of already,” she says. “It did not cost us to add country of origin labeling, it did not make food unaffordable when we added nutrition panels, [and] it did not create a lot of extra costs when we started labeling trans fats.”
I-522 is also written differently than Prop 37. It specifies who’s required to do the labeling—the manufacturers—whereas Prop 37 didn’t. And Prop 37 was roundly criticized as being catnip for tort lawyers, who could claim damages from companies that didn’t properly label. In Washington, I-522 doesn’t allow awards for damages, just a reimbursement of attorney’s fees. Kimbrell says it was “deliberately drafted narrowly” to disincentivize costly lawsuits.
In the end, a lot of this comes down to how hard the food-industry opposition is willing to fight I-522. And weirdly, it turns out that buying some of the hippie products at the co-op may still be supporting the GMO industry. In California, big food companies poured money into the anti-labeling campaign, leaving labeling supporters furious. Angry green websites called for boycotts of GMO-free Silk soy milk (owned by Dean Foods), Kashi cereals (owned by Kellogg’s), Odwalla juice (owned by Coca-Cola), and tons more, since all those larger parent companies wrote checks to fight labeling. Here, as of yet, no counter-campaign to I-522 has filed with the state.
EVERETT — A man who allegedly gave a homicide suspect a ride on the evening of a fatal stabbing in Marysville has been booked into the Snohomish County Jail for investigation of intimidating and tampering with a witness.
A judge Tuesday set bail at $250,000 for the Tulalip man, 35.
Court records allege he gave a ride to Delaney Wood, 28, the same day Arthur Schroeder was killed in his travel trailer at the Brookside Mobile RV Park in the 9800 block of State Avenue.
Wood, who was a neighbor of the victim, and Robert Ruben Kennedy, 26, were booked into the Snohomish County Jail for investigation of first-degree murder, robbery and motor vehicle theft.
Schroeder, 82, was found Jan. 25 inside his ransacked trailer.
Marysville police arrested the Tulalip man for investigation of witness tampering late Monday night.
Detectives believe the man gave Wood a ride from Everett to Marysville late on the night of the stabbing. Cellphone records show that Wood contacted the man twice that evening.
That night he and Wood allegedly stopped by one of his friend’s homes to use her phone. The woman told police she saw Wood in his car and that she was unresponsive with a “freaked-out look like a look of guilt,” court papers said.
The man allegedly told his friend that Wood had “spilled her guts” about the homicide, according to court documents.
The woman said the next day he called her to tell her to be quiet about the homicide. He allegedly told her, “Don’t say anything. People are going to disappear. You might be the next.”
He also allegedly told her police would be asking questions and warned: “Keep your mouth shut if you know what is good for you or you’re going to get hurt.”
After the stabbing, Wood allegedly bragged about killing a sex offender. Kennedy allegedly told a friend that “things went bad” and he was sorry for what happened, according to one of several search warrants in the case. Kennedy reportedly said he and Wood went to Schroeder’s home to get money, but the elderly man didn’t want to give them any.
As it turned out, the pair said they only got $200 from the robbery and they split it, according to an acquaintance who spoke with police.
Schroeder’s pickup also was missing from his driveway. It was found ablaze on vacant land north of Arlington, hours after the body was discovered.
National Public Radio host Michel Martin talked with Ray Halbritter, of the Oneida Nation, about the gesture to pay for schools uniforms after the decision to change the “Redskins” name at Cooperstown Central School. Listen here
The message that calling sports teams “Redskins” isn’t right seems to be getting across in some circles and, perhaps most important, to the younger generation.
Some, including Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder, still say the derogatory term is fine. Though others say his argument, that it’s all right to use because there are some 70 high schools in 25 states that use the name, is weak.
In her February 13 Washington Post column titled, “On Washington Redskins’ name, it’s time the grown-ups talk sense into Daniel Snyder,” Sally Jenkins was one of them.
“If you’ve long suspected that football is not a measure of intellect…a series of prominently displayed pseudo-articles defend the club’s use of a racial slur as a mascot on the grounds that lots of high schools are nicknamed ‘Redskins’ too — so it must be okay,” she says. “Which we can only take to mean that pretty soon owner Daniel Snyder will be skipping class to build a potato gun.”
But Snyder couldn’t be more wrong. In fact, recent events fly in the face of his argument. Like at Cooperstown Central School, when in early February, the students there decided they no longer wanted to be known as the Redskins.
When Cooperstown students stood up, national news media noticed. Their decision to get rid of the nickname was reported by The Associated Press, ESPN, Fox Sports, the Wall Street Journal and Indian Country Today Media Network.
“There were several students who came forward to the superintendent and myself,” Cooperstown Board of Education President Dr. David Borgstrom told ICTMN. “They told us how uncomfortable they felt about it and we made a commitment to educate the students about cultural diversity. When they brought it forward there wasn’t really any other response we could give them than, ‘You’re right.’”
Borgstrom said he’s incredibly proud of the students for coming forward and that the most important thing he has learned in this name-change process is just how socially aware the younger generation is and that they recognize the role they can play in making changes.
The older generations, especially alumni from schools that use the mascots under scrutiny, have been harder to change.
This has been the case in Cooperstown as well. Borgstrom said that when there was heated debate over the mascot changing at a board meeting, the students stood their ground. The next board of education meeting is scheduled for March 6. That’s when the official vote on whether to keep or remove the Redskins mascot will take place.
“What we have been discussing here has been linked to the football team in Washington and I think it has put more pressure on them and the Cleveland baseball team…. If a few students coming forward in Cooperstown paves the way for change elsewhere, wouldn’t that be wonderful,” Borgstrom said. “The way this is going it’s not out of the realm of possibilities.”
But changing monikers is going to cost money. Money that some schools just don’t have. That’s why when the Oneida Indian Nation heard about the students in Cooperstown, it offered to pay for the school’s new uniforms once a new nickname is chosen. Borgstrom couldn’t give a definite cost for new uniforms, but estimated it will cost between $5,000 and $7,000 to make the change.
“You have announced a standard that recognizes that mascots which are known to dehumanize and disrespect any race of mankind have no place in our schools, or our great country,” wrote Oneida Nation Representative and CEO Ray Halbritter in a letter to the Cooperstown students. “We understand that your courageous decision also comes with a financial consequence and, unfortunately, potential backlash from those who somehow claim that ethnic stereotyping is a victimless crime.”
By providing monetary help, the Oneida Nation has taken one worry off the school board’s plate.
“I think it’s a wonderful gesture on the part of the Oneida Nation. It speaks to the importance of it to them,” Borgstrom said.
This could mean there are other tribal nations out there willing to help other schools that want to take the plunge and get rid of their Native mascots or logos.
That’s why in an upcoming issue of This Week From Indian Country Today, there will be a call to action to establish a fund to help other schools. The idea is to make students feel empowered, not hampered when thinking about making the decision to leave behind dehumanizing terms like “redskins.” Offering donations will be a way to help students understand they have help with this journey and won’t have to take money away from other programs their schools offer.
WHAT: Cabela’s Spring Great Outdoor Days and Captains Weekend. Cabela’s is offering free events for the whole family this weekend at the Tulalip Cabela’s. Free kids’ fishing pond and fish fry on Saturday, live music by The Bobber’s, fly tying demos, free presentations by local fishing experts, in store boat show and a whole lot more!
WHEN: Saturday, March 2 10:00am-4:00pm and Sunday, March 3rd 10:00am-4:00pm
WHERE: 9810 Quil Ceda Blvd, Tulalip, WA 98271. Located throughout the store.
WHY: To enhance your experience in the outdoors by providing free educational and interactive presentations to help you learn.
DETAILS:
Come to Cabela’s this weekend to hear seminars on Halibut, Salmon, Trout, Ling Cod fishing and more provided by local fishing experts, Captain Nick Kester and Captain Gary Krein, Captain’s Jim and Jennifer Stahl, Captain Michael Jamboretz, Captain Chris Long, expert guide Dennis Dickson and many more. Bring your kids on Saturday for a free kids fishing pond, then let us clean and fry your fish so you can give it a try! Enjoy live music by The Bobber’s. Local partners will be onsite to answer questions and provide fun activities that the whole family can enjoy, from Backyard Bass to Fly Tying and Gold Panning, you will have a great time at Cabela’s in Tulalip this weekend!
SCHEDULE OF SEMINARS:
Saturday, March 2nd
10:00am – Beginning Trout Fishing by Dennis Dickson
11:00am – Fly Casting for Ladies by Evergreen Fly Fishing Club
12:00pm – Successful Salmon Fishing on the WA Coast by Captain Michael Jamboretz
1:00pm – Kokanee Fishing Techniques by Captain Doug Saint-Denis
2:00pm – Puget Sound Ling Cod Tactics by Captain Nick Kester
3:00pm – Spring Chinook Fishing by Captain Jim and Jennifer Stahl
4:00pm – Navigation for Hikers presented by Chris Chisolm, Navigation Specialist
Sunday, March 3rd
11:00am – Fly Tying – Patterns for Spring by the Evergreen Fly Club
1:00pm – Spring Chinook Methods that Work by Captain Gary Krein
2:00pm – Gold Fever by the Gold N Gem Prospecting Club
3:00pm – Hauling in the Halibut by Captain Michael Jamboretz
4:00pm – Advanced Trout Fishing by Captain Jim and Jennifer Stahl
TWO Republicans running for Congressional seats last year offered opinions on “legitimate rape” or God-approved conceptions during rape, tainting their party with misogyny. Their candidacies tanked. Words matter.
Having lost the votes of many women, Republicans now have the chance to recover some trust. The Senate last week voted resoundingly to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, the 1994 law that recognized crimes like rape, domestic abuse and stalking as matters of human rights.
But House Republicans, who are scheduled to take up the bill today and vote on it Thursday, have objected to provisions that would enhance protections for American Indians, undocumented immigrants and gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender youth, among other vulnerable populations.
Here in Minneapolis, a growing number of Native American women wear red shawls to powwows to honor survivors of sexual violence. The shawls, a traditional symbol of nurturing, flow toward the earth. The women seem cloaked in blood. People hush. Everyone rises, not only in respect, for we are jolted into personal memories and griefs. Men and children hold hands, acknowledging the outward spiral of the violations women suffer.
The Justice Department reports that one in three Native women is raped over her lifetime, while other sources report that many Native women are too demoralized to report rape. Perhaps this is because federal prosecutors decline to prosecute 67 percent of sexual abuse cases, according to the Government Accountability Office. Further tearing at the social fabric of communities, a Native woman battered by her non-Native husband has no recourse for justice in tribal courts, even if both live on reservation ground. More than 80 percent of sex crimes on reservations are committed by non-Indian men, who are immune from prosecution by tribal courts.
The Minnesota Indian Women’s Resource Center says this gap in the law has attracted non-Indian habitual sexual predators to tribal areas. Alexandra Pierce, author of a 2009 report on sexual violence against Indian women in Minnesota, has found that there rapes on upstate reservations increase during hunting season. A non-Indian can drive up from the cities and be home in five hours. The tribal police can’t arrest him.
To protect Native women, tribal authorities must be able to apprehend, charge and try rapists — regardless of race. Tribal courts had such jurisdiction until 1978, when the Supreme Court ruled that they did not have inherent jurisdiction to try non-Indians without specific authorization from Congress. The Senate bill would restore limited jurisdiction over non-Indians suspected of perpetrating sex crimes, but even this unnerves some officials. “You’ve got to have a jury that is a reflection of society as a whole, and on an Indian reservation, it’s going to be made up of Indians, right?” said Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. “So the non-Indian doesn’t get a fair trial.”
Leaving aside the fact that most Native defendants tried in the United States face Indian-free juries, and disregarding the fulsome notion that Native people can’t be impartial jurists, Mr. Grassley got his facts wrong. Most reservations have substantial non-Indian populations, and Native families are often mixed. The Senate version guarantees non-Indians the right to effective counsel and trial by an impartial jury.
Tribal judges know they must make impeccable decisions. They know that they are being watched closely and must defend their hard-won jurisdiction. Our courts and lawyers cherish every tool given by Congress. Nobody wants to blow it by convicting a non-Indian without overwhelming, unshakable evidence.
Since 1990, when Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a senator from Delaware, drafted the original legislation, the Violence Against Women Act has been parsed and pored over. During reauthorizations in 2000 and 2005, language on date rape and orders of protection was added. With each iteration, the act has become more effective, inclusive and powerful. Without it, the idea that some rape is “legitimate” could easily have been shrugged off by the electorate.
Some House Republicans maintain that Congress lacks the authority to subject non-Indians to criminal trials in tribal court, even though a Supreme Court opinion from 2004 suggests otherwise. Their version of the bill, as put forward by the majority leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, would add further twists to the dead-end maze Native American women walk when confronting sexual violence. John Dossett, general counsel for the National Congress of American Indians, said it would create “more off ramps for defendants by adding multiple levels of removal and appeal, including the right to sue tribes.” A compromise backed by two other Republicans, Darrell Issa of California and Tom Cole of Oklahoma, is vastly preferable to the Cantor version. It would offer a non-Indian defendant the right to request removal of his case to a federal court if his rights were violated.
What seems like dry legislation can leave Native women at the mercy of their predators or provide a slim margin of hope for justice. As a Cheyenne proverb goes, a nation is not conquered until the hearts of its women are on the ground.
If our hearts are on the ground, our country has failed us all. If we are safe, our country is safer. When the women in red shawls dance, they move with slow dignity, swaying gently, all ages, faces soft and eyes determined. Others join them, shaking hands to honor what they know, sharing it. We dance behind them and with them in the circle, often in tears, because at every gathering the red shawls increase, and the violence cuts deep.
WASHINGTON — A deeply divided Senate voted on Tuesday to confirm Republican Chuck Hagel to be the nation’s next defense secretary, handing President Barack Obama’s pick the top Pentagon job just days before billions of dollars in automatic, across-the-board budget cuts hit the military.
The vote was 58-41, with four Republicans joining the Democrats in backing the contentious choice. Hagel’s only GOP support came from former colleagues Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Dick Shelby of Alabama as well as Mike Johanns of Nebraska and Rand Paul of Kentucky.
The vote came just hours after Republicans dropped their delay of the nomination and allowed it to move forward on a 71-27 vote.
Hagel, 66, a former two-term Nebraska senator and twice-wounded Vietnam combat veteran, succeeds Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. Hagel is expected to be sworn in at the Pentagon on Wednesday.
Republicans had opposed their onetime colleague, casting him as unqualified for the job, hostile toward Israel and soft on Iran.
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona said several GOP lawmakers had “a lot of ill will” toward the moderate Republican for his criticism of President George W. Bush over the Iraq war and his backing for Democratic candidates. McCain voted against his onetime friend and fellow Vietnam veteran.
Obama portrayed the war-tested Hagel as a man who understands that conflict is not an abstraction and called him the “leader that our troops deserve.”
Hagel joins Obama’s retooled second-term, national security team of Secretary of State John Kerry and CIA Director-designate John Brennan at a time of uncertainty for a military emerging from two wars and fighting worldwide terrorism with smaller, deficit-driven budgets.
Among his daunting challenges are deciding on troop levels in Afghanistan as the United States winds down its combat presence and dealing with $46 billion in budget cuts set to kick in on Friday. He also will have to work with lawmakers who spent weeks vilifying him.
Republicans insisted that Hagel was battered and bloodied after their repeated attacks.
“He will take office with the weakest support of any defense secretary in modern history, which will make him less effective on his job,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the Senate GOP’s No. 2 Republican.
Not so, said Democratic Sen. Jack Reed, who pointed out that Hagel now has the title and the fight is history.
“All have to work together for the interest of the country,” said Reed, D-R.I.
The vote ended one of the most bitter fights over a Cabinet choice and former senator since 1989 when the Democratic-led Senate defeated newly elected President George H.W. Bush’s nomination of Republican John Tower to be defense secretary.
In the course of the rancorous, seven-week nomination fight, Republicans, led by freshman Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, insinuated that Hagel has a cozy relationship with Iran and received payments for speeches from extreme or radical groups. Those comments drew a rebuke from Democrats and some Republicans.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, dismissed the “unfair innuendoes” against Hagel and called him an “outstanding American patriot” whose background as an enlisted soldier would send a positive message to the nation’s servicemen and women.
Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., questioned how the confirmation process devolved into a character assassination in which Hagel was accused of “having secret ties with our enemies.”
“I sincerely hope that the practice of challenging nominations with innuendo and inference, rather than facts and figures, was an aberration and not a roadmap,” she said in a statement after the vote.
Obama got no points with the GOP for tapping the former two-term Republican senator. Republican lawmakers excoriated Hagel and cast him as a radical far out of the mainstream.
McCain clashed with his onetime friend over his opposition to Bush’s decision to send an extra 30,000 troops to Iraq in 2007 at a point when the war seemed in danger of being lost. Hagel, who voted to authorize military force in Iraq, later opposed the conflict, comparing it to Vietnam and arguing that it shifted the focus from Afghanistan.
Republicans also challenged Hagel about a May 2012 study that he co-authored for the advocacy group Global Zero, which called for an 80 percent reduction of U.S. nuclear weapons and the eventual elimination of all the world’s nuclear arms.
The group argued that with the Cold War over, the United States could reduce its total nuclear arsenal to 900 without sacrificing security. Currently, the U.S. and Russia have about 5,000 warheads each, either deployed or in reserve. Both countries are on track to reduce their deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 by 2018, the number set in the New START treaty that the Senate ratified in December 2010.
In an echo of the 2012 presidential campaign, Hagel faced an onslaught of criticism by well-funded, Republican-leaning outside groups that labeled the former senator “anti-Israel” and pressured senators to oppose the nomination. The groups ran television and print ads criticizing Hagel.
Opponents were particularly incensed by Hagel’s use of the term “Jewish lobby” to refer to pro-Israel groups. He apologized, saying he should have used another term and should not have said those groups have intimidated members of the Senate into favoring actions contrary to U.S. interests.
The nominee spent weeks reaching out to members of the Senate, meeting individually with lawmakers to address their concerns and seeking to reassure them about his policies.
Hagel’s inconsistent performance during some eight hours of testimony during his confirmation hearing last month undercut his cause.
On Feb. 12, the Armed Services Committee approved the nomination on a party-line vote of 14-11. Two days later, a Democratic move to vote on the nomination fell a few votes short as Republicans insisted they needed more time to consider the pick.
Hagel’s nomination also became entangled in Republican demands for more information about the deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last September. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in that attack.
Laura Waterman Wittstock, Indian Country Today Media Network
Hundreds of travelers left their home areas from points all over the United States and Canada last weekend to meet in the tiny village of Wounded Knee, South Dakota. There, they will observe the 40th anniversary of one of the most unusual military undertakings the United States has ever engaged in—or we could say entangled in—during the 20th century. Wounded Knee is located in the southwestern corner of the 11,000 square mile Pine Ridge reservation.
According to then Senator James Abourezk, when the American Indian Movement arrived in Wounded Knee on February 27, 1973, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and federal marshals were already there on alert for armed activity on the Pine Ridge Reservation. The marshals were there in the event of a civil disturbance that might occur during a possible attempt to impeach the tribal chairman.
There were many issues on the table but two that emerged at the top of the list were the torture death of Raymond Yellow Thunder, which took place in Gordon, Nebraska. Yellow Thunder was from Kyle on the reservation. AIM leaders were incensed at the brutal death and what appeared to be a lack of concern for the victim. The other issue was Pine Ridge tribal chairman Richard (Dick) Wilson’s presumed disrespect of traditional Lakota culture. So strong was the sentiment that Gladys Bissonette and others formed the new organization OSCRO: the Oglala Sioux Civil Rights Organization.
According to AIM’s national chairman Clyde H. Bellecourt, it seemed that as soon as a meeting with OSCRO and traditional leaders got underway, word of the movement of FBI and federal marshals toward Wounded Knee was taking place and a defense perimeter was needed. By the next morning, an armed standoff began to take shape. There were three governmental groups lined up: Dick Wilson’s GOONS, the federal marshals, and the FBI. The federal group brushed aside Wilson’s government and took over the tribal offices with its only telephone, which made reporters on the scene wait in line for their turn to call in stories.
Newspapers across the country blared headlines about the “occupation of Wounded Knee.” At that time the name “Wounded Knee” was also part of the name of an American best seller by librarian Dee Brown, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. The book title was taken from the poem, “American Names” by Stephen Vincent Benet, and a strong sense of American romanticism attached itself to what was happening at Wounded Knee. Of course distance added much to the élan presumed to be part of the takeover, but a close up showed unarmed women and little children becoming increasingly pinned down with little prospect for food and the daily necessities of life. February was cold and March was no warmer. Blanketed Indians were photographed moving around the compound and it could be seen in Kevin McKiernan’s photographs that nearby cattle were being sacrificed for food.
With little time to plan, all action was about response and reaction. Help poured in as Indians from all over the U.S. came to help, as did Vietnam Vets and the traditional government of the Haudenosaunee of the Six Nations in Iroquoia.
Negotiations began to end the standoff and secure direct communication between the traditional chiefs and the U.S. government. Representatives of the Richard M. Nixon administration, primarily Assistant U.S. Attorneys General Kent Frizzell, were sent to secure a peace. Presumably, an internal fight over how much violence to use against the occupiers was underway, but the president did not want dead unarmed civilians to be among the casualties.
Some help was less evident, such as that of screen star Marlon Brando, who helped the negotiations through support of the work of Hank Adams. These were pre mobile phone and pre Internet days. Official government papers had to be typed out and signed. At one point, between May 3 and 5, Adams was in the process of delivering a letter with terms to the chiefs and it had been decided that the letter would be delivered at the reservation border. The chiefs, headmen and their interpreters numbering 100 feared breaking the government seal until they could carry the letter into Wounded Knee, Adams writes in the Hank Adams Reader.
The invisible hand and pocketbook of Brando helped bring the negotiations to a successful conclusion on the weekend of May 5-6, 1973, and arms were laid down. The Sioux National Anthem filled the air with a heart-filling swell of notes at sunrise on May 8 and around 125 Wounded Knee defenders surrendered to federal authorities in three predetermined groups. Federal authorities then overran the village, searching for arms and explosives. Returning residents were searched. No arms or explosives were found and the marshals went to their cars and drove out of Pine Ridge.
Laura Waterman Wittstock’s book with Dick Bancroft’s photographs, We Are Still Here: A Photographic History of the American Indian Movement, will be released in May, 2013.
Rob Capriccioso of ICTMN 
