Native Americans Archives - Page 9 of 22

Indian Country Grapples With Health Funding Shortfalls, Non-Payment

Slowly but surely, tribal governments — especially those in Alaska — are receiving millions of dollars in decades of unpaid contract costs from the Indian Health Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Liz DeRouen, 49, left, gets her blood pressure checked by medical assistant Jacklyn Stra, right, at the Sonoma County Indian Health Project in Santa Rosa, Calif.

By Christine Graef, Mint Press News | September 17, 2014

WASHINGTON — Tribal health programs working to serve native people are not seeing funding of administrative costs keeping pace with need, and the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs owe millions to tribal governments.

“The federal government has broken too many promises with tribes and though we have more work to do, I am pleased that we are seeing good progress with Alaska tribes receiving the money they are owed,” Alaska Sen. Mark Begich told the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium last month. “Failure to pay the full costs is unacceptable and I will continue to use my position on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee to keep up the pressure on the federal government.”

The IHS, a Department of Health and Human Services agency, provides health service systems for about 2.2 million of the nation’s estimated 3.4 million American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Funds allocated by the IHS, currently $4.4 billion per year, go toward administering medical care to tribes or are turned over to tribes for them to administer the care themselves. The IHS had been failing to provide full payments of contract costs until the Supreme Court ruled in June 2012 that the government must pay, determining that the tribes had been underpaid “between 77 percent and 92 percent of the tribes’ aggregate contract support costs” during previous decades.

Yet, according to Jacqueline Johnson Pata, executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, “payment has not happened.”

“The class action lawyers recently reported to NCAI on the lawyer’s discussions with the Justice Department. Although they couldn’t share much information, they did explain that there are close to 9,000 claim years at issue involving about 500 tribes and 19 years worth of contracts (1994-2013),” she told the U.S. Senate Committee of Indian Affairs last year.

Sen. Begich introduced Senate Bill 2669 in July to the Senate Appropriations Committee
to mandate funding for certain payments to Indian tribes and tribal organization. Additionally, the federal government has treaty and statutory obligations under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, which requires the government to contract with tribes to operate BIA and IHS programs. The agreement between the government and tribes is embedded in Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution.

At the end of 2013, less than 1 percent of thousands of claims in more than 200 lawsuits filed by tribes seeking a combined $200 billion had been settled — just 16 claims of an estimated 1,600.

Of the 566 nations the federal government recognizes, 229 are spread across the vast 572,000 square miles of Alaska, where they occupy small villages in remote areas — many only accessible by air or boat. For these tribes in remote areas, seeing a doctor might be inconvenient, to say the least, and almost definitely costly.

Lead counsel in the cases establishing government liability for IHS’s failure to pay, Lloyd Miller, an attorney based in Anchorage, Alaska, said IHS is severely underfunded.
“IHS is a prepared health plan paid for with a lot of blood and millions of acres of land,” Miller said. “Because the government took away their lands, there’s a responsibility.”
IHS gets $4.4 billion from Congress annually for what’s estimated to be a $15 billion need to meet the costs, he said.

Miller represents about 60 tribes, each with several claims filed for the costs owed.
In an August 2007 letter to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs requesting an oversight hearing, Alaskan tribal health care providers reminded the committee that the Indian Self-Determination Act requires money to provide federal trust responsibilities.

“We write to once again call your attention to the grave crisis we face as a result of insufficient contract support cost appropriations which, together with Indian Health Service policies, have left our tribal organizations with annual shortfalls running from $2 million to over $8 million. We respectfully request that the Senate Indian Affairs Committee convene an urgent oversight hearing this Fall, to review what has become a genuine crisis in Indian country, and a crisis that has seriously eroded the national policy of Tribal self-governance and the delivery of quality health services to Alaska Native people,” the letter stated.

By August of this year, 12 of Alaska’s tribal health providers received $449 million to resolve contract support costs disputes with the IHS. Another 11 providers were still in negotiations. The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, serving more than 143,000 native people, received the largest payment, with a $153 million settlement that includes $115.5 for past-due costs and $37.7 million in interest. At about $128 million, Southcentral Foundation received the next largest settlement.

The NCAI has been working with tribes and the IHS on contract costs since the Indian Self-Determination Act went into effect.

The congress is hosting the annual Tribal Unity Gathering and Legislative Impact Days on Sept. 16 and 17 in Washington. During the event, tribal leaders and representatives will meet with their delegates to the U.S. Congress to encourage action on important delegation before this session ends. IHS appropriations will be among the issues discussed.

“There’s strong support from the House and Senate,” said Amber Eberb, program manager of the NCAI Policy Research Center. “There’s quite a few champions who understand that tribes administering their own programs to respond to their community needs is more effective than a federal agency.”

There’s still progress to be made, Eberb said.
“Contract costs and other treaty issues should not be considered discretionary but mandatory,” Ebarb said. “All program money that uphold treaty agreements should be mandatory. It’s morally correct to do. Perhaps a little difficult to do right now.”

Disparities in well-being

American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) death rates were nearly 50 percent greater than rates among non-Hispanic whites during 1999-2009, according to a study by the Centers for Disease Control.

The study was carried out by the CDC’s Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, CDC researchers, the IHS, and partners from tribal groups, universities and state health departments.

It revealed:

Among AI/AN people, cancer is the leading cause of death, followed by heart disease, while the opposite is true for other races studied;

Death rates from lung cancer have shown little improvement in AI/AN populations. AI/AN people have the highest prevalence of tobacco use of any population in the United States;

Deaths from injuries were higher among AI/AN people compared to non-Hispanic whites;

Suicide rates were nearly 50 percent higher for AI/AN people compared to non-Hispanic whites, and more frequent among AI/AN males and persons under age 25;

Death rates from motor vehicle crashes, poisoning, and falls were two times higher among AI/AN people than for non-Hispanic whites;

Death rates were higher among AI/AN infants compared to non-Hispanic white infants. Sudden infant death syndrome and unintentional injuries were also more common. AI/AN infants were four times more likely to die from pneumonia and influenza;

By region, the highest mortality rates were in the Northern Plains and Southern Plains, while the East and Southwest had the lowest.

“Many of the observed excess deaths can be addressed through evidence-based public health interventions,” the report concluded.

In November 2013 testimony before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said:

“I listened very intently yesterday at the tribal summit when the President spoke. I went there specifically to hear what he was going to say on the issue of contract support costs. What I heard him say is, we have heard you loud and clear, but we are still working to find the answers. I don’t think we need to work to find any answers. I think that the court laid it out very, very clearly. It said that full reimbursement will be provided. So we have to make that happen within that budget. We have to make that priority.”

Murkowski said she had listened to the stories of the impact of lack of funds, saying, for example, that the regional health provider in Juneau had to close its alcohol treatment facility. Further north, in the Yukon Delta, the regional health provider laid off 20 employees, permanently closed 40 vacant positions, and reduced services for elders, she continued.

The impacts of the sequestration, she said, also meant that tribes would not be able to reduce waiting times at emergency rooms or outpatient and dental clinics.
“The impact, I think we recognize, has been significant,” she said.

Murkowski submitted comments she received from Alaska Natives around the state, including the Association of Village Council Presidents.

Proposed Increase for IHS Budget

“Tribes have not recovered from sequestration that resulted in across-the-board cuts to all federal programs that tribes are reliant upon. Nowhere was this more impactful than to the Indian Health Services, where due to sequestration, continuing resolutions, and the 16 day government shutdown — healthcare to Indian people was jeopardized,” U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Chairman Jon Tester, of Montana, said in March.

Tami Truette Jerue, tribal administrator and director of social services for the Anvik Tribal Council in Alaska addressed the committee’s oversight hearing in February. The Anvik are an Athabascan village of about 275 members on the west bank of the Yukon River.

Jerue represented the 37 federally recognized tribes that make up the Tanana Chiefs Conference, an inter-tribal health and social services consortium that serves an area of Interior Alaska that is roughly the size of Texas.

She delivered a message from more than 200 tribes across Alaska:
“It is absolutely essential that, without regard to technical land titles and the technical Indian country status of lands or tribal communities, our Tribes must have the tools necessary to combat drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, and violence against women. Fighting these scourges in our communities and healing our people cannot be made to stand on technicalities. We need to get to work, and now. And we need Congress’s help to do that. The State is not the problem, because the State is nowhere to be found in most of our Villages….

“Today, the tribes of Alaska come to you, not as victims of a failed governmental policy, but as powerful and responsible advocates for our people. We are stepping up to do what we must do. But without equally firm action from Congress, our people will suffer, we will continue with decades more of litigation battles and loopholes will continue to be found which deny our tribes the funding necessary to improve law and order in our communities.”

In the budget for the 2015 fiscal year, the Obama administration proposed a 4.5 percent increase for IHS, representing a $200 million increase over the current level to $4.6 billion.

The 2015 budget request includes:

An additional $50 million to help obtain health care from the private sector through the Purchased/Referred Care program (formerly known as the Contract Health Services program). This program allows for the purchase of essential health care services that the IHS and tribes do not provide in their local facilities;

An additional $71 million to support staffing and operating costs at four new and expanded facilities;

An additional $30 million to fully fund the estimated amount of contract support costs for new and expanded contracts and compacts in fiscal year 2015. This will help tribes cover the cost of administrative functions for compacts or contracts established under the authority of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act;

An additional $31 million to address medical inflation costs;

Additional funding to pay costs for new tribes and restoration of reductions in the fiscal year 2014 operating plan.

In his statement, Tester noted the “positive highlights” in the budget request.

“The Committee is pleased that the Administration finally understands its legal obligation to fully fund Contract Support Costs for the both the Indian Health Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs,” Tester said. “I am particularly encouraged by the $11 million increase for social services and job training to support an initiative to provide a comprehensive and integrated approach to address the problems of violence, poverty, and substance abuse.”

Covering IHS shortfalls with the Affordable Care Act

The Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium and more than 50 tribes wrote a letter to President Obama on Oct. 13.

In part, it said, “Among your administration’s most important achievements has been the development of historic settlements with Indian Tribes in several major litigations, its advocacy for amendments to the Indian Health Care Improvement Act and the Violence Against Women’s Act, and its commitment to critical appropriations measures. But when it comes to honoring the Nation’s commitment to the contracting and compacting Tribes who were historically, and illegally, underpaid, and who continue to be underpaid, the administration has permitted fiscal concerns to eclipse the imperative to do justice and to honor the nation’s obligations.”

In July the IHS reached a settlement with the consortium for claims during the years 1999 through 2013. The payment — $39.5 million plus interest — totals about $53 million.
“A lot of tribes had to close down programs because of lack of funds,” Andrea Thomas, outreach and enrollment manager of SEARHC, told MintPress News. “Part of what the settlement can do is bring back what was lost.”
Alaska did not create reservations like the 48 contiguous states, and many Native communities formed consortiums, like SEARHC, to use IHS funding for health care to serve them all.

SEARHC is a nonprofit tribal health consortium of 18 Native communities which serves the health interests of the Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian, and other Native people of Southeast Alaska. In 1982, the consortium took over operations at the IHS clinic in Juneau, and then took over operations at Mt. Edgecumbe Hospital, formerly an IHS-run facility, in 1986.

“In Alaska we have the highest cost of health care in the nation,” Thomas said. “There’s vast wilderness surrounding each place. In order for me to get out of my community, I’d have to fly or take a ferry. This gets incredibly expensive.”
Many Alaskan villages have a community health clinic, but complicated procedures such as chemotherapy or serious surgeries, require patients to go to hospitals at regional hubs or to the Alaska Native Medical Center in Anchorage. The burden is on the tribal health consortium to pay the costs of a commercial jet, float plane, ferry, or boat.

If a medical evacuation helicopter is needed, it would cost SEARHC about $95,000 — a cost that could be absorbed by the Affordable Care Act.

“The issue is that IHS only provides about half the money for services,” Thomas said. “We rely on other revenues like grants and billing Medicare and Medicaid. If native people enroll, it puts more money back and we could offer more services or expanded services.”
Further, a member of a federally recognized tribe can get a lifetime exemption. Alaska Natives and American Indians are exempt from Affordable Care Act tax penalties because they receive care through the IHS. But through the new health care scheme, they are eligible for subsidies from private insurance. Thomas said that those who fall between 100 percent and 500 percent of the federal poverty level pay a monthly premium, but no deductibles or out-of-pocket expenses.

Yet, of more than 100,000 self-identified Alaskan Natives or American Indians, only 115 had signed up for health insurance through the Affordable Care Act as of April.

“Not a lot of people realize what the Affordable Care Act does for Alaskan Native people,” Thomas said.

Coverage also extends to Native people who are not enrolled members of a federally recognized tribe and meet federal guidelines. Thomas said they can receive a lifetime hardship exemption, rather than a tribal exemption, and there may be some out-of-pocket expense.

That’s So Money! Code Talkers and Iron Workers Score Coin Tributes

Source: usmint.govA detail of the design for the 2016 Native American dollar coin, 'Code Talkers from both World War I and World War II (1917-1945),' — Source: usmint.gov
A detail of the design for the 2016 Native American dollar coin, ‘Code Talkers from both World War I and World War II (1917-1945),’

Indian Country Today

The U.S. Mint has announced its designs for the 2015 and 2016 Native American $1 coins, and the choice of subjects—Mohawk Iron Workers and Code Talkers—represent a focus on late 19th- and 20th-century Native history. Since 2009, beginning with a depiction of the “three sisters” agricultural technique, which Natives practiced for thousands of years before European contact, reverse-side coin designs have spotlighted elements of Native culture or episodes from history in a sort of timeline. The 2014 coin commemorated the Native role played in Lewis and Clark’s 1804-06 journey into the Pacific Northwest.

2015 Native American one-dollar coin reverse design, ‘Mohawk high iron workers, builders of New York City and other skylines (from 1886).’

Under the terms of the Native American Coin Act signed by President George W. Bush in 2007, the 2016 coin will be the program’s last.

2016 Native American one-dollar coin reverse design, ‘Code Talkers from both World War I and World War II (1917-1945)’

Below is the full press release, dated September 3, from the U.S. Mint:

WASHINGTON – The United States Mint announced today the reverse (tails side) designs selected for the 2015 and 2016 Native American copy Coins.

The theme for the 2015 design is “Mohawk high iron workers, builders of New York City and other skylines (from 1886).” The design depicts a Mohawk ironworker reaching for an I-beam that is swinging into position, rivets on the left and right side of the border, and a high elevation view of the city skyline in the background. The design includes the required inscriptions United States of America and copy, and the additional inscription Mohawk Ironworkers. United States Mint Artistic Infusion Program (AIP) artist Ronald D. Sanders designed the reverse, and United States Mint Sculptor-Engraver Phebe Hemphill will sculpt it.

The theme for the 2016 design is “Code Talkers from both World War I and World War II (1917-1945).” The design features two helmets with the inscriptions WWI and WWII, and two feathers that form a “V,” symbolizing victory, unity, and the important role that these code talkers played. The design also includes the required inscriptions United States of America and copy. Artist Thomas D. Rogers, Sr. designed the reverse. The sculptor-engraver will be selected at a later date.

The obverses (heads sides) of the 2015 and 2016 Native American copy Coins will continue to feature sculptor Glenna Goodacre’s “Sacagawea” design, introduced in 2000. Inscriptions will be LIBERTY and IN GOD WE TRUST. The year, mint mark, and E PLURIBUS UNUM will be incused on the coins’ edges.

The Native American copy Coin Program is authorized by the Native American copy Coin Act (Public Law 110-82). The program, launched in 2009, calls for the United States Mint to mint and issue copy coins featuring designs celebrating the important contributions made by Indian tribes and individual Native Americans to the history and development of the United States.

A New PNW Alliance Aims to Shield the Salish From Destruction

Native Americans, environmentalists, and fed-up citizens unite to keep corporations from turning the region into a fossil fuel corridor

The Nawt-sa-maat is fighting to save the Salish Sea from destruction. Photo by Kelton Sears

By Kelton Sears, Wed., Sep 10 2014, Seattle Weekly

On August 4, a dam holding back mining wastewater burst open in Likely, B.C., gushing roughly 6,604,301,309 gallons of toxic waste into the nearby lakes—a spill 78 percent larger than initial estimates. Only a month after the incident, Imperial Metals, the corporation responsible, declared the water safe to drink again.

“One of my friends caught a salmon alive and kicking there last week,” Sundance Chief Rueben George from the Tsleil-Waututh Nation said to a packed Seattle crowd at the Daybreak Star Indian Cultural Center on Sunday. “But when my friend picked it up, the fish’s skin slid off in his hands.”

Salmon have long been spiritual symbols of the Pacific Northwest—aquatic residents of the Salish Sea that have given life to Coast Salish people for 14,000 years and white settlers for 150. That the skin of the Northwest’s spirit animal is melting off is just one of many reasons organizers say they are forming the brand-new Nawt-sa-maat Alliance, a group that has vowed to defeat oil and coal corporations bent on turning the Pacific Northwest into a fossil-fuel corridor.

Nawt-sa-maat, a Coast Salish word that means “One house, one heart, one prayer,” is an unprecedented trans-border coalition of Coast Salish indigenous nations, environmentalists, interfaith groups, and youth activists that met for the first time this past weekend in Discovery Park. The Alliance’s goal? “To protect the sacredness of the Salish Sea.”

“The tribes are the original environmentalists,” Annette Klapstein, a member of the Seattle Raging Grannies and a new member of the Nawt-sa-maat Alliance, said at the initial meeting on Sunday. Klapstein was one of three protesters who sat on train tracks in Anacortes to block the controversial “exploding” oil trains in July. It was her first direct action after years of fruitless writings to the Seattle City Council and visits to Olympia to persuade politicians to do something about the influx of dangerous rail cars.

“It was always very iffy for tribes to work with environmental organizations because these organizations were arrogant,” Klapstein said. “They would tell tribes what to do, which didn’t go over very well. This new alliance, based on respect and understanding, is so important because these different groups’ goals are much the same, and we are so much more powerful together.”

Chief George (right) with civic leader and alliance co-founder Jon Ramer (left). Photo by Kelton Sears

Chief George, one of the three main founders of the Nawt-sa-maat, presided over the initial meeting and made it clear that one of its biggest enemies was the massive energy company Kinder Morgan. “We stand as one, and together we will protect and restore the sacredness of the Salish Sea,” he said. “Together, we are stronger than those who wish to use our home and waters as a mere highway for dirty oil and coal. Together, we will stop them. Kinder Morgan will not win this battle.”

Formed by Richard Kinder, an ex-Enron employee, the oil mega-corporation is proposing a massive $5.4 billion oil pipeline connecting the Alberta tar sands to the Pacific through Burnaby, B.C., tripling current capacity and creating the potential for enormous spills in the North Salish that would directly affect us in Washington. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been pushing the project despite massive backlash from British Columbian activists and the indigenous Tsleil-Waututh, who are now taking the project to court for failing to consult with the First Nations tribe on the federal review.

“You know, I’d like to thank Stephen Harper,” said Nawt-sa-maat co-founder Chief Phil Lane Jr. of the Yankton Dakota and Chickasaw First Nations, “because in his complete unawareness, he’s awakened a sleeping spiritual giant.”

The mood at the meeting was intensely spiritual at times. Four local religious leaders, a United Methodist, a Buddhist, a Sufi, and an Interspirit, came together to bless the gathering in their respective traditions, ending with an indigenous cedar-bough blessing that the crowd happily lined up to receive. Many of the religious groups present vowed to convert their houses of worship to solar energy in an act of good faith.

Being a member of the Nawt-sa-maat effectively means a couple of things. Members are expected to join in a “4 Days of Action” campaign, starting on Sept. 19, that ranges from a salmon homecoming celebration to a climate-change rally at the Canadian border and ends with an international treaty signing that will effectively ratify the new trans-border Nawt-sa-maat Alliance. Members are then expected to join in future actions and work to build the nascent network, which will soon expand its scope to tackle the proposed coal-extraction sites at Cherry Point, sacred land to the people of the Lummi Nation near Bellingham.

“I just want to make this very clear,” Chief George said as he doled out salmon to the Nawt-sa-maat near the meeting’s end, “this Alliance isn’t just for one group. It’s for everyone. The Salish Sea is for everyone, not just corporations. We will win this fight.”

The 2,128 Native American Mascots People Aren’t Talking About

By Hayley Munguia, FiveThirtyEight.com

When Samuel Henry was a kid growing up in D.C. in the late 1950s, he and his friends were devoted Washington Redskins fans — they had the jerseys and knew the lore. And as the lore had it, the “reddish-brown tint” of paint on the team’s downtown D.C. headquarters came from the blood of Native Americans. “When I was a kid, me and my friends, we really thought that they had captured and killed Native Americans and pasted them all over the building,” Henry said. “We were just kids, we didn’t know any better. But we really, honestly believed that.”

Now, almost 60 years later, the Redskins are enmeshed in a debate about whether their name is a racist epithet and should be changed. Advocates for keeping the name reference its origins: In 1937, owner George Preston Marshall changed the team name from the Braves to the Redskins. Marshall said the change was in honor of the head coach at the time, William Henry Dietz, who claimed to be part Sioux (although that claim is suspect). Critics including Henry say its origins are irrelevant and that the name is racist and demeaning. “I’d love to see a boycott of all things Redskins,” he said.

Dan Snyder, the current owner, purchased the team in 1999, when it was fighting its first legal battle over the name. The lawsuits have continued, and earlier this year, the Trademark Trials and Appeal Board canceled the franchise trademark because “a substantial composite of Native Americans found the term Redskins to be disparaging.” Snyder has faced mounting pressure to change the name, even from President Obama and George Preston Marshall’s granddaughter. But Snyder plans to appeal the trademark decision and says he will “NEVER” change the name. Polling suggests Snyder has the backing to ignore the calls; most NFL fans (and Redskins fans in particular) oppose a name change.

What’s considered an outrage in the NFL is embraced or at least tolerated all over the country. While we’ve been consumed by the debate about the Washington Redskins, we’ve overlooked thousands of team names and mascots depicting Native Americans, often stereotypically. These teams are not feeling the kind of pressure that Snyder is. To understand the Washington Redskins, we have to understand the Estelline Redmen, the Natick Redmen, and the Molalla Indians, too.

Terry Borning, the proprietor of MascotDB, has kept a database of the nation’s mascots since 2006. He gathers his data from a variety of sources, including state high school athletic associations, websites and local newspapers. Borning’s database doesn’t have every high school, college and pro team in the country, but it does have 42,624 of them. Looking at MascotDB is as close as we can get to understanding how prevalent Native American team names and mascots are across the country.

“There were a lot of interesting mascots where I lived growing up,” Borning said. “But those have mostly fallen by the wayside. Some of those things of the past were definitely offensive, but also more interesting than the generic mascots we have now.”

I searched the database and found 2,129 sports teams that reference Braves, Chiefs, Indians, Orangemen, Raiders, Redmen, Reds, Redskins, Savages, Squaws, Tribe and Warriors, as well as tribe names such as Apaches, Arapahoe, Aztecs, Cherokees, Chickasaws, Chinooks, Chippewas, Choctaws, Comanches, Eskimos, Mohawks, Mohicans, Seminoles, Sioux and Utes. (Not all teams with the names “Raiders” and “Warriors” are referencing Native Americans, but we spot-checked 20 schools with each name and a majority of each did.)

Some 92 percent of those 2,129 team names belong to high schools (the rest were college, semi-pro, pro and amateur league teams). Of all the active high schools in the database, 8.2 percent have Native American team names.

I reached out to about a dozen of those high schools, and most didn’t want to comment on a controversy that hadn’t yet arrived. But the conversations I did have suggested that the way communities regard their teams’ Native American names and mascots depends on the makeup of the communities themselves.

Estelline High, home of the Redmen, is located in a small town in South Dakota, 24 miles west of the Minnesota border. South Dakota has the third-largest Native American population share in the country, but Estelline hasn’t seen the kinds of protests directed at the Washington Redskins. The town has experienced little, if any, controversy over the Redmen name.

The mascot dates back to sometime between 1915 and 1920, when a local newspaper referred to the Estelline athletic team by the color of its uniforms — “the men in red.” The name wasn’t officially adopted, but the team soon became known by its unofficial moniker, the Redmen. According to Estelline superintendent and high school principal Patrick Kraning, the association with Native Americans didn’t come until around 1930. Estelline followed with its own depiction of a “Redman” as a stereotype of a Native American chief wearing a headdress. Events such as the annual naming of a “Moon Princess” and “Big Chief” at homecoming became part of the tradition.

“There’s been very little controversy over the team name,” Kraning said. “In the ’90s there was some discussion about changing the name for a series of schools [throughout southeastern South Dakota] that still referred to themselves as ‘Redmen.’ But in the end, a lot of us — Estelline included — decided to keep the name and just keep away from any Native American imagery associated with it.”

Since then, the only symbol associated with the Estelline Redmen is a logo of an E with two feathers attached. Kraning believes that this change, combined with the fact that Estelline doesn’t have a significant Native American population, is why there hasn’t been much local debate on the topic.

“There’s a community feeling that since the origin of the nickname was not a Native American reference, there’s not a desire for change,” he said. “If there were a discussion, most people would probably view it as going against 80 or 90 years of tradition.”

Natick, Massachusetts, did go against tradition. In 2007, the school board dropped its high school mascot — also the “Redmen” — after an alumna of Native American descent came to the board and said she was offended by the activities surrounding the team she had experienced at Natick High School. The historian for the local Nipmuc tribe told me that the logo and mascot used by the school depicted a “stereotypical northern Native with a headdress,” but that depiction bore no resemblance to the actual indigenous people who lived in the Natick area. Nevertheless, protest groups soon sprouted up, claiming that the Natick Redmen honored Native Americans and were an important tradition.

Soon after the change, school board meetings and a town-wide referendum turned the issue into a much broader discussion. The main critique came from the Redmen Forever Committee, a self-described grassroots effort that sought to influence the non-binding referendum. “We added a question to the referendum asking if townspeople wanted the Redmen name restored,” said Erich Thalheimer, co-founder of the Redmen Forever Committee. “It won overwhelmingly, but the school committee didn’t abide by the town’s wishes.”

“If it were decided by popular vote, we would have the name,” said Anne Blanchard, a member of the Natick School Board. “But we had to take into account our nondiscrimination policy, as well as minority and majority interests.”

The Redmen Forever Committee says it won’t give up the fight. “We chose the name of our committee very intentionally, very purposefully,” Thalheimer said. “This is our town. We’re going to live here until we die. We will forever try to re-establish the Redmen name.”

While the controversy in Natick stemmed from a decision that affected one school, several states have taken a grievance from a single school and used it to forbid Native American mascots. One of the more sweeping bans so far was implemented with the help of Samuel Henry, the man who grew up earnestly believing that the Washington Redskins had painted their downtown D.C. headquarters with the blood of Native Americans. Henry is currently the chair of Oregon’s Board of Education, which instituted a statewide ban on Native American mascots and team names in 2012.

The story goes back to 2006, when Che Butler, a member of the Siletz tribe and a student at Taft High School, raised the issue before the board. Butler said he was offended by the stereotypical and inauthentic manner in which the mascot of a rival school, the Molalla Indians, portrayed Native Americans. He and fellow Taft student Luhui Whitebear, a member of the Coastal Band of the Chumash Tribe, made a presentation at a board meeting asking for a statewide ban on mascots that “misrepresent” Native people, who instead “should be represented with true honor and respect.”

According to Henry, the board agreed that “having Native American mascots did not seem like a good idea,” but decided to defer the decision.

The grievance was taken up again six years later, when the director of public instruction decided to put it back on the board’s agenda. This time around, after some member turnover, the board agreed to ask its chief attorney to draft a proposal for a ban on the use of Native American mascots in public schools. The only dissenting vote came from a woman who claimed that it was too selective, and that devils and saints should be banned as well.

As in Natick, one of the major arguments against the ban came from people who said that the mascots didn’t disparage Native Americans, but honored them. Many of these opponents knew little of Native American culture, Henry said. “I asked one of the students who made that argument what the name of the local Native American tribe was, and she didn’t know,” he said. “To me, that indicated that her reliance on saying that they were honoring Native Americans — that the support for that argument was pretty thin at best.”

For high schools, a statewide ban is about as sweeping as it gets. Graduate to the next level, though, and schools have broader authorities to answer to. In 2005, the NCAA implemented its own de facto ban¹ on Native American mascots for all NCAA colleges.² The ban focused on a specific list of schools whose mascots were deemed “hostile or abusive,” and precluded them from participating in postseason play if those nicknames or mascots appeared on any team uniforms or clothing.

The NCAA had already taken a stand on a similar issue: the use of Confederate flags. In 2001, the organization banned arenas in South Carolina and Mississippi from hosting postseason championships because the Confederate flag flew proudly on their statehouse grounds. After that decision, the president of St. Cloud State University in Minnesota asked the NCAA to impose a ban on Native American mascots.

The NCAA called on 18 schools (out of 1,046 total member schools at the time, or 1.7 percent) to drop their mascots.

Not all of the targeted schools felt that their nicknames or mascots were “hostile or abusive,” and the ban was followed by a surge of criticism.

“I must have gotten 2,000 emails from people just complaining about it,” the NCAA’s executive committee chairperson at the time, Walter Harrison, said. Even almost 10 years later, he still remembers one persistent caller. “He, or she, I don’t know if it was a man or a woman, would call my office phone at four in the morning and just play their school’s chant until the answering machine cut off,” he said.

But the more serious backlash came in the form of appeals. One came from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and its Fighting Illini. The Fighting Illini were portrayed at halftime performances by a student dressed in full Lakota regalia, including face paint and a headdress. He went by the name “Chief Illiniwek,” and became the focus of the university’s fight against the ban.

Controversy surrounding Chief Illiniwek predated the NCAA’s ruling by decades. The university’s board of trustees had been quietly in the process of considering a potential mascot change since 2001, and the publicity surrounding the nationwide ban reignited already-existing tension among students and alumni. Lawrence Eppley, who was the chair of the university’s board of trustees at the time, said he received hundreds of comments from foundations and alumni organizations threatening to withhold donations. He and the rest of the board figured the only option was to strike a compromise to keep both sides — passionate students and alumni and the NCAA — happy.

Through its appeal, the school was allowed to keep its team name, but not its mascot. Chief Illiniwek portrayers, who had been a part of an official student organization called the Council of Chiefs, could continue the tradition as long as the group no longer had any official affiliation with the university. “One of the things that made it tough to retire it was making sure the fans knew that, if you loved the chief, that was nothing to feel guilty about,” Eppley said. “It’s just that times change, and there’s not much we can do about that.”

Ivan Dozier, who currently portrays Chief Illiniwek, said that officially retiring the mascot was the wrong way for the university to respond. He believes that Native American mascots are a way to reach and educate an audience that wouldn’t normally be knowledgeable about Native American culture or history. “What concerns me is if you eliminate all references to Native American culture, people aren’t asking questions anymore,” he said. “Sports fans here are the vocal majority. They’re the ones who need this information the most, and now they have no way to go about getting it.”

Eight of the schools on the NCAA’s list secured vocal support from local Native American tribes to successfully appeal and retain their team names and mascots. Eight others have changed their names and one dropped the use of a mascot entirely. Carthage College changed its team name from the Redmen to the Red Men and dropped all Native American imagery, which satisfied the NCAA’s requirements.

Turning the Washington Redskins into the Red Skins is unlikely to appease the team’s critics, though. Given that the name is racist by definition and no tribe has come out in support of Snyder, it probably wouldn’t pass the NCAA’s grounds for appeal, and it certainly doesn’t pass in the court of Native American opinion.

But even if the Redskins became the Red Skins or the Red Flyers or the Red Snyders, there would still be thousands of other teams that reference Native American imagery. Whatever happens with the Redskins, there will still be the Estelline Redmen, Chief Illiniwek, and the West Texas Comanches, each upholding the questionable legacy of Native American sports names.

Native American politics heat up in Wyoming

BEN NEARY, Associated Press

CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) — American Indians in Wyoming increasingly are asserting themselves, fighting for more say on environmental issues and fielding more candidates in state and local elections.

The Northern Arapaho and Eastern Shoshone tribes share the Wind River Indian Reservation, a block of land in central Wyoming that’s roughly the size of Yellowstone National Park.

Rep. Patrick Goggles, D-Ethete, announced early this year he’s not seeking re-election to the Legislature after 10 years of representing a district centered on the reservation. Yet Goggles, a Northern Arapaho and the only Indian in the Legislature, said it’s critical that the tribes continue to have a political presence in the state.

“There are issues that are unique to this reservation, and to the other Native Americans that reside here,” Goggles said. “That perspective should not get lost.”

Democrat Andi Clifford, a Northern Arapaho, is running for Wyoming House of Representatives seeking the District 33 seat held by Goggles, her uncle. Clifford, 42, works as a manager at the Wind River Hotel and Casino.

“We have 2.2 million acres with a lot of resources in our land and water,” Clifford said. “We want to be sitting at the table. We want to start discussing things that impact us and start having those conversations, and people to respect those conversations and respect where we’re coming from, because we live here.”

Gary Collins, tribal liaison between the Northern Arapaho Tribe and the state of Wyoming, said he counts seven Native American candidates in area legislative and local elections this year, up from three in 2012.

Collins, a Northern Arapaho, said a victory he and other tribal members won in a Voting Rights Act lawsuit against Fremont County a few years ago has inspired greater political involvement among Wyoming Indians.

U.S. District Judge Alan B. Johnson in 2010 ruled Fremont County’s system of at-large voting for county commissioner elections left Indians disenfranchised. Despite bitter opposition from county officials, Johnson ordered the county to establish voting districts to ensure Indian representation.

“The long history of discrimination against Indians in the United States, Wyoming and Fremont County is undeniable,” Johnson wrote in his 2010 decision. “The evidence presented to this court reveals that discrimination is ongoing and the effects of historical discrimination remain palpable.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency added to local tensions late last year when it ruled that lands around Riverton, a town on the reservation’s eastern boundary, legally remain Indian Country.

The EPA addressed the boundary issue when it granted a request from both the Northern Arapaho and Eastern Shoshone tribes to treat their reservation as a separate state under the federal Clean Air Act.

Wyoming, together with Riverton, Fremont County and other groups, has appealed the EPA decision in federal court in Denver. The tribes have entered the lawsuit, too, arguing to uphold the federal agency’s position.

The tribal boundary dispute also drew the attention of a national group that’s dedicated to ending tribal sovereignty. The Citizens Equal Rights Alliance held a workshop in Riverton in June, saying they wanted to instruct local officials how to fight over federal government overreach.

Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, is a veteran state lawmaker and a non-Indian. He faces Democratic challenger Sergio Maldonado Sr., a Northern Arapaho, in November’s general election.

Case said he was invited to the CERA workshop but didn’t attend. Although he said he believes the state ultimately will win on the boundary issue in court, he said he regarded CERA’s presence as unhelpful and divisive.

Case served as chairman of the legislative committee that redrew legislative districts after the 2010 census. He said the committee was careful not to dilute Native American voting strength and credits that as a factor in their increasing involvement.

Case said all voters in his district will have to assess which candidate they believe can do the best job. “I’m not native, but I really try very hard to do a good job of representing them,” Case said.

Kimberly Varilek, attorney general for the Eastern Shoshone Tribe, said she believes both the Voting Rights Act ruling and the uproar over the EPA boundary decision both have given tribal members hope that they have a chance to play a greater role in politics beyond the reservation boundaries.

“I’ve noticed that there’s more interest in regards to tribal members,” Varilek said. “Potentially, maybe they feel like there’s more access.”

Seattle City Council Postpones Vote on Columbus Day Renaming

Matt Remie testifies before Seattle City Council on Tuesday.

By: Levi Rickert, Native News Today

SEATTLE — On Tuesday the Seattle City Council decided to postpone its vote to rename Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples Day until October 13 so that the mayor and other elected officials can hold a signing ceremony.

Several dozen American Indian supporters gathered at Seattle City Hall’s steps in support of the name change with drumming and speeches.

The effort to do away with Columbus Day was led by Matt Remie, Ethel Branch and others in Seattle’s Native community. This group influenced the Seattle Human Rights Commission to push through a resolution on July 24, 2014.

“This is simply nothing more than respect and honor for the First People of this land. As this moves forward, I have no doubt whatsoever that the Council and Mayor will be amazed by the strength and power that comes from the original People of this land. Let’s hope this is the beginning of a new chapter and a new partnership,” commented Chris Stearns (Navajo), attorney and past Chairman of the Seattle Human Rights Commission to Native News Online late Tuesday.

The resolution that made its way to the City Council was led by Council Members Bruce Harrell and Kshama Sawant. Mayor Ed Murray is in full support of the renaming.

Seattle Native community

Columbus Day dates back to 1892 when President Harrison made a proclamation observing a day set aside to celebrate Christopher Columbus. It has been a federal holiday since 1937.

AB 52, Native American bill, passes Senate

Major changes to legislation co-authored by Alejo

By Phillip Molnar, Monterey Herald

SACRAMENTO >> Native American legislation seemingly opposed by thousands was significantly altered before it was passed by the California Senate on Wednesday.

AB 52, a bill co-authored by Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville, is designed to give Native American tribes more power in the state’s environmental laws, but it galvanized non-federally recognized tribes not included in the bill.

Non-federally recognized tribes pestered lawmakers for months and started an online petition which gathered 8,386 signatures.

In the amended version, both federally and non-federally recognized tribes are included in the definition of a tribe and non-federally recognized tribes were included in the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA.

“Although there are still a few sections where we have some reservations, overall, AB 52 in its final draft reflects the two big changes our coalition requested,” said Angela Mooney D’Arcy, executive director of the Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples.

Alejo spokesman John de los Angeles said the assemblyman passed on concerns some Native Americans had with the bill, especially from his own district, to its main author, Assemblyman Mike Gatto, D-Los Angeles.

Efforts to reach Gatto were unsuccessful.

The bill passed in the Senate 35-0. It must now go back to the Assembly because of the many amendments in the Senate. After that, it can go to Gov. Jerry Brown.

After the changes were announced, signers of the petition on Changes.com expressed delight.

“Congratulations to all the CA tribes,” wrote Carolyn Kualii. “This is a move in the right direction!”

The bill still faces major opposition from business groups because they fear it will result in more CEQA litigation because of claims of tribal heritage at development sites.

The Sacramento Bee editorial board put AB 52 on its “three bills for the governor to kill” list because of classifications of “sacred places” and “cultural resources.”

“The definition is left so open-ended it would add a new layer of anxiety to what is already a horror movie of an environmental review process,” it wrote.

There are 110 federally recognized tribes in California and 78 tribal communities petitioning for recognition, including three in Monterey County, according to the Judicial Council of California.

Louise Miranda Ramirez, tribal chairwoman of the local Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation, said she was still concerned about some of the language which allows lead agencies in some cases to “consider” mitigation measures (rather than “select,” as it said before.).

Ultimately, she said she was pleased with the changes but questioned why the bill “was so broken in the first place.”

Phillip Molnar can be reached at 831-726-4361.

Trahant: Take the ‘Voting Booth’ Challenge

Last winter, months before your Facebook feed started filling with videos of folks taking the “ice-bucket challenge,” Native Americans did the “winter challenge.” Participants jumped in ice-cold streams or banks of snow and challenged others to do the same. Imagine what could happen if Indian Country focused social media on addressing health or civic issues.

By Mark Trahant, The Daily Yonder

Last winter, Native Americans adapted an old practice of private challenges to the new platform of social media. A swarm of Canadian cold-water plunges resulted.

I remember getting in trouble as a teenager. The story beat me home. I was stunned at the velocity of information in a small community. The chain went like this: Something happened. People talked. And the story spread. Fast.

I guess that’s why social media, to me, is an old form of storytelling. It’s how we naturally tell stories, spreading the word to one friend (or follower) in real time. And then another. And again. But while the forum is essentially the same, there are two new twists: the use of digital tools and the increased size of our network. (A generation ago our “network” might be a few friends gathered for coffee at the trading post. Today it’s a thousand friends on Facebook, their thousand friends, and definitely more on Twitter, Tumblr or Snapchat.)

The ice-bucket challenge to raise money to prevent ALS — Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis — or Lou Gehrig’s Disease is a great example of how social media works. The brilliant campaign has earned more than $70 million with the goal of creating a world “without ALS!”

Every day my Facebook feed has new posts from someone taking this challenge.

Of course this whole challenge thing is familiar anyway. It’s a lot like the Winter Challenge that spread across Canada and Indian Country. Carielynn Victor, from Chilliwack, B.C., told Global News Canada that the idea was not a new one, but the concept of taking it public was new.

So why ALS? It’s a fabulous cause and worth doing. That said: What if Indian Country could harness social media to affect the diseases that are killing most of our friends and family?

So heart disease is the leading killer in Indian Country. What if we raised money for research and action for American Indians and Alaska Natives? Or diabetes? Or any disease that affects most of us. It could be money targeted to make a real difference in our lives.

Then, the power of social media is not just about money. Imagine what we could do to health disparities if social media challenged tens of thousands of people to walk more. Or eat better. Then post results in real time so that we all stay on task.

Beyond disease and public health, social media could be used to “challenge” American Indians and Alaska Natives to register and vote at levels that are unprecedented. If the same intensity of the winter challenge, or the ice bucket challenge, or any social media phenomenon, was applied to November’s balloting, well, it would upend the status quo. Guaranteed.

One reason the winter challenge and the ice-bucket challenge worked so well is that they were simple to do, and easy to pass along virally. It’s fun to see a friend jump in a creek. We laugh at the way people met their challenge. (I did a snow angel in the shadow of Denali courtesy of Laura John at the Montana Policy and Budget Center.)

So any election challenge must be simple and fun. And be specific. Laura challenged me. Then I added friends, creating an exponential network.

There have already been some really smart efforts to increase Native voting. Indeed, the last election cycle produced record numbers. In New Mexico and Montana, for example, Native Americans voted at a higher percentage than the general population, 77% and 64%. That could be across the country. Especially in Alaska, Oklahoma, Arizona, the Dakotas. Already this year, the National Congress of American Indians has called for a summer of action for the Native Vote (there was a Google hangout that explores details) to do just that.

Now it’s time to add to those efforts and tap the awesome power that is social media. If we can ask our friends to jump into a creek, we sure as hell can ask them to vote. We ought to do that in a video and on our Facebook page. Let’s take the ice bucket into the voting booth and really change the country.

Mark Trahant serves as the Atwood Chair at the University of Alaska Anchorage. He is an independent journalist and a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. For up-to-the-minute posts, download the free Trahant Reports app for your smart phone or tablet.

Limits on Access to Eagle Feathers Questioned

By Cameron Langford, Courthouse News Service

(CN) – The Interior Department may be infringing on the religious freedom of Native Americans by limiting the right to possess eagle feathers to federally recognized tribes, the 5th Circuit ruled.
Understanding golden and bald eagles are essential for the religious practices of many American Indian tribes, Congress amended the Eagle Protection Act in 1962, adding an exception “for the religious practices of Indian tribes.”
Under the law, Native Americans could apply for a permit to take and possess eagles by attaching a certificate from the Bureau of Indian Affairs that verified them as Indian to their application.
Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt narrowed the eligibility in 1999 to members of federally recognized Indian tribes.
The National Eagle Repository in Colorado takes in dead eagle parts and distributes them to qualified permit applicants, with whole bird orders taking more than three years to fill, and loose feather requests taking about six months to turn around, court records show.
At a 2006 powwow a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agent found Robert Soto in possession of eagle feathers.
Soto told the agent he was a member of the Lipan Apache Tribe, and after the officer determined the tribe is not federally recognized, he met with Soto, who voluntarily gave up his eagle feathers in return for the government dropping its criminal case against him.
As pastor of the McAllen Grace Brethren Church and the Native American New Life Center in McAllen, Texas, Soto uses eagle feathers for his ministry’s religious ceremonies.
Soto “has been a feather dancer for 34 years and has won many awards for his Indian dancing and artwork at various powwows throughout the nation,” according to his self-published biography.
After the Interior Department denied Soto’s petition for the return of his feathers, he and 15 other plaintiffs sued, claiming the feather confiscation violated religious freedoms established by the First Amendment.
U.S. District Judge Ricardo Hinojosa sided with the feds and Soto appealed to the 5th Circuit in New Orleans.
Writing for a three-judge panel of the appellate court, Judge Catharina Haynes found the government had not carried its burden of showing its regulations are the least restrictive means of protecting what it claims are its compelling interests: protecting eagles and fulfilling its responsibility to federally recognized tribes.
Noting that the 1962 Amendment to the Eagle Protection Act “did not define ‘Indian Tribes,'” Haynes wrote on Wednesday, “We cannot definitively conclude that Congress intended to protect only federally recognized tribe members’ religious rights in this section.”
She added: “The Department has failed to present evidence at the summary judgment phase that an individual like Soto-whose sincerity is not in question and is of American Indian descent-would somehow cause harm to the relationship between federal tribes and the government if he were allowed access to eagle feathers, especially given congressional findings that the exception was born out of a religious concern.”(Emphasis in original.)
The law also grants the Interior Secretary authority to OK the taking of eagles or eagle parts for public museums, scientific groups, zoos, wildlife and agricultural protection.
Haynes took issue with the fact that the government did not bring up these various nonreligious exceptions to the law.
The feds additionally argued that removing barriers to possession would lead to a spike in poaching to supply a black market in eagles and eagle feathers.
But Haynes dismissed that as “mere speculation” by the federal agents who testified in the case.
“This case involves eagle feathers, rather than carcasses. It is not necessary for an eagle to die in order to obtain its feathers. Thus, speculation about poaching for carcasses is irrelevant to Soto’s request for return of feathers,” the 25-page ruling states.
In coming down on the side of religious freedom, the panel relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s recent Hobby Lobby ruling, which found that requiring some corporations to supply contraceptives to their employees against their religious objections violates the Religious Freedom of Restoration Act.
The panel reversed and remanded the case to Hinojosa and urged the government to prove the permitting system does not violate the RFRA.
In a one-page concurring opinion Judge Edith Jones said the ruling should be read to only apply to American Indians.
“Broadening the universe of ‘believers’ who seek eagle feathers might … seriously endanger the religious practices of real Native Americans,” she wrote.

Remarks by Associate Attorney General Tony West at the Four Corners Conference

Source: U.S. Department of Justice

Flagstaff, AZ ~ Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Remarks as Prepared for Delivery

Thank you, Carlie for that kind introduction and for hosting this important gathering along with U.S. Attorneys Judge Leonardo from the District of Arizona, John Walsh from the District of Colorado, and Damon Martinez from the District of New Mexico.

With the Native America Issues Subcommittee of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee meeting here today, we are fortunate to have over a dozen additional U.S. Attorneys in attendance. Thank you all for your commitment to serving Indian Country in your districts.

I am so pleased to be with you at this twenty-second convening of Four Corners Conference. For over two decades, this conference has provided federal and tribal leaders, social service providers, law enforcement officers, judges and prosecutors with a unique opportunity explore ideas, share best practices and forge critical collaborations that help us move forward in our common desire to make Indian Country safer and stronger.

Two years ago, I had the privilege of speaking to this Conference when you gathered in Pojoaque Pueblo, New Mexico. I said at that time ours was a moment of hope, challenge and opportunity, as we confronted the reality of alarmingly high rates of violence against Native women and girls in Indian country.

You’ll recall that at that time, the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act – or VAWA 2013 – hung in the balance. And notwithstanding efforts by the Justice Department, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, to push forward legislative recommendations that would enhance the ability of tribes to protect Indian women from domestic violence, the outcome of that effort, you’ll remember, was far from certain. In fact at times, it looked as if VAWA would not be reauthorized by Congress for the first time in nearly twenty years.

But thanks to the many courageous Native women who stood up and spoke out and told their stories of pain and heartache; thanks to the many tribal leaders who said enough is enough, that whether a Native woman receives justice should not depend on the race of her perpetrator; indeed, thanks to many of you in this room today, together we met that challenge and today VAWA 2013 remains the law of land, and now with additional statutory tools for both Federal and tribal governments to prosecute intimate partner violence.

And VAWA’s reauthorization was just the latest in what has been a remarkable surge in positive federal activity in Indian Country over the last five years, a commitment that began with Attorney General Holder’s convening of over 500 tribal leaders for a listening session in his first year of office.

It’s a commitment we reflect in the litigation positions we take as a Department – from our work to resolve decades-long, painful disputes like the Cobell tribal trust litigation and the Keepseagle Native American farmers discrimination lawsuit; to our repeated court filings in support of presumptive tribal jurisdiction over Indian child-custody proceedings, even though our arguments do not always prevail, because standing up for ICWA means standing strong for tribal sovereignty.

In fact, earlier this month, the Department took a strong stand on behalf of Indian children and their families involved in state child welfare proceedings in a South Dakota federal court. We filed a brief in the case out of concern for the harm to Indian families that even the temporary removal of their children can cause. This case could set important precedent regarding how the emergency removals and placements of Indian children are to be handled and how ICWA is interpreted.

Our commitment to Indian Country has likewise led us to create CTAS, an effort to streamline the way we administer Justice Department grants to tribal grant applicants.

And that commitment is made manifest in the tireless work of so many federal investigators, AUSAs and SAUSAs throughout the nation — including many of you here today – to enhance public safety on tribal lands throughout Indian Country – efforts that have resulted in a remarkable 34% increase in Federal criminal prosecutions in Indian Country since 2009.

Indeed, today, the Justice Department is releasing its second Indian Country Investigations and Prosecutions report to Congress, and it reflects this Administration’s commitment to public safety in Indian Country. Although declination rates alone are not the best way to measure the success of our law enforcement efforts, the report show that with few exceptions, areas where the largest populations of American Indian people live and suffer from the most serious crime rates – such as here in the Southwest and in the Northern Plains states – federal declination rates were among the lowest in the nation.

So we’ve come a long way and made a lot of progress in a relatively short period of time. We are witnessing an unprecedented era of collaboration among U.S. Attorneys’ offices and tribal law enforcement and prosecutors across the country.

Yet it’s in that success that lies our greatest and perhaps most difficult test: How do we take the success we’ve achieved over the last five years and make it sustainable over the long term?

I believe solidifying those gains requires us to double-down on the collaborations that enhance tribal public safety; to expand the culturally-informed law enforcement training we’ve conducted; and to encourage and incentivize interdisciplinary approaches to violence reduction.

What’s essential to our long-term success is for us – at the federal, tribal, state and local levels — to takes steps that will institutionalize our commitment to Indian Country public safety, such that the best practices you are sharing, the promising pilot projects you’re launching, the interdisciplinary collaborations your spearheading – they need to become part of the routine work we do to pursue effective law enforcement in Indian Country so that the impact you are having will continue to be felt for years, even generations to come.

Our dedication to Indian Country must be transformed from an initiative defined by the contours of any one Administration’s commitment and ingrained into the DNA of federal law enforcement practice. It must be part of the yardstick by which we measure our own success or failure as federal law enforcement professionals.

So what does institutionalizing our commitment to justice in Indian Country look like? I think there are three areas that illustrate this, and they are areas where I am pleased to report we are making good strides.

First, institutionalizing our commitment means enhancing our existing collaborations between tribal and federal law enforcement, and a good example comes from our recent experience with VAWA.

As soon as VAWA’s reauthorization was signed into law, the Justice Department ’ s leadership engaged in an expedited but extensive consultation with tribal officials on how best to implement VAWA’s newest provisions dealing with tribal special criminal jurisdiction.

We came up with a voluntary Pilot Project that allowed some tribes to begin exercising that jurisdiction earlier this year – ahead of law’s March 2015 effective date – if the tribe’s criminal justice system has adequate safeguards in place to protect defendants’ rights. Six months ago, I authorized three tribes – the Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona, the Tulalip Tribes of Washington, and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation – to become the first tribes in the United States to exercise special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction.

And importantly, while these tribes have moved swiftly, they have also acted with deliberation to combat domestic violence by protecting the safety and rights of victims, while simultaneously safeguarding defendants’ rights. They are closely coordinating with their local U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to identify those cases that are best handled in tribal court and those which are more appropriate for federal prosecution. Here in Arizona, for example, the Pascua Yacqui Tribe worked with the United States Attorney ’ s Office to refer four of the 12 non-Indians arrested by the tribe for federal prosecution.

Other tribes are also carefully preparing to exercise the new jurisdiction. Since June of last year, 39 tribes have voluntarily joined the Department’s Intertribal Technical-Assistance Working Group, working with Department officials and other tribes in an effort to exercise effectively the new special criminal jurisdiction in 2015.

And as more tribes step up to assume this new exercise of sovereignty, more Tribal-Federal partnerships will be established; more interdependence and collaboration on public safety matters will result; and more tribal capacity to protect the integrity, culture and safety of the tribe will be created, enhancing the opportunity for long-term, sustainable tribal justice.

Second, we can institutionalize our commitment to public safety in Indian Country by expanding our training efforts, thereby increasing the ability of law enforcement to investigate and prosecute effectively Indian Country crimes, which in turn heightens the priority of pursuing these crimes for law enforcement.

Most of you know Leslie Hagen, who is here and who has been instrumental in leading the Justice Department’s training efforts around Indian Country public safety. One of the many Indian Country training modules she conducts for federal and tribal investigators, prosecutors, advocates, and medical professionals around the country in one that raises awareness about the lethality risks for strangulation and suffocation crimes. It is work that can pay dividends in our efforts to better protect Native women from violence, because almost half of all domestic violence victims have experienced at least one episode of strangulation prior to a lethal or near-lethal violent incident.

One FBI agent who took the training wrote Leslie an email saying fifteen days after he had taken her course, a strangulation assault occurred that was assigned to him. He wrote the training helped him to ask the right questions and present the case persuasively to the AUSA, who successfully prosecuted the assailant. According to the FBI agent, “this conviction is a direct result of the Indian Country Strangulation and Suffocation Class,” and he went on to teach what he had learned to other local, state and federal investigators.

And with VAWA 2013, Congress recognized the gravity of strangulation and suffocation crimes and amended the federal assault statute to include a specific charge of assault or attempted assault by strangulation or suffocation – making Leslie’s training all the more important and relevant to federal law enforcement priorities. Indeed, just over a year after Congress enacted these new provisions, U.S. Attorney Mike Cotter and his office in the District of Montana secured one of the first federal strangulation convictions: a 2.5-year prison sentence against a man who strangled his girlfriend into unconsciousness on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation.

Finally, I believe institutionalizing justice in Indian Country means intensifying our work and deepening our investment in efforts to reduce violence against Native women and children, not only because rates of victimization remain intolerably high; but also because our best hope of reversing those rates begins with early and predictable intervention – both from a prevention and enforcement standpoint – that helps us break the cycle of violence.

U.S. Attorneys Tim Purdon and Mike Cotter know well what I’m talking about. In their districts of North Dakota and Montana, a meteoric population boom in the geographically isolated region of the Bakken has led to escalated rates of violence, particularly against Native women. Earlier this year, Tim and I met with local law enforcement officials who spoke of the dramatic spike in sex and drug trafficking which was taxing their capabilities. We met with service providers from around the state who told us of their inability to absorb the sudden increase in demand for victim’s services. And I heard tragic stories of sexual exploitation suffered by women and girls.

To address the unique and critical needs of victims, responders, and service providers within this rural region, the Department’s Office on Violence Against Women established its Bakken Region Initiative. And as part of that effort, today, I am pleased to announce the award of seven new grants, totaling nearly $3 million, to the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of Fort Peck Indian Reservation in Montana; the Montana Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence; the North Dakota Council on Abused Women’s Services; the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation of North Dakota; and the First Nations Women’s Alliance in North Dakota. These awards will fund Tribal Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys – attorneys who are cross-designated tribal-federal prosecutors – as well as victim service providers who are working to prevent violence and support survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking.

Now at the same time we are strengthening our efforts to protect Native women, we must also do more to shield Native children from violence.

We know that more than 60 percent of all children in the United States are exposed to some form of violence, crime, or abuse, ranging from brief encounters as witnesses to serious violent episodes as victims. And while current research doesn’t give us a complete picture for American Indian and Alaska Native children, a 2008 report by the Indian Country Child Trauma Center calculated that Native youth are two-and-a-half times more likely to experience trauma when compared with their non-N ative peers.

In fact, the rate of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for Indian youth is almost triple the rate of the general population – comparable to the rates of PTSD among soldiers returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

According to the CDC, suicide is the second leading cause of death among American Indians and Alaska Natives aged 15- to 34-years of age and is 2.5 times higher than the national average for that age group.

Appalled by these statistics, the Attorney General last year invested Justice Department resources to establish a Task Force on American Indian and Alaska Native Children’s Exposure Violence, including a Federal Working Group led by U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall and OTJ Director Tracy Toulou. And over the last year, the Task Force’s Advisory Committee held public hearings and listening sessions around the country – including one here in Arizona – examining the unacceptably high levels of violence that Native children suffer.

I participated in three of those hearings, the most recent of which was held in Anchorage, Alaska. And at each hearing, researchers told us about how victimization can steal a child’s future. Practitioners shared lessons learned from experience and outlined approaches that could help us better serve child victims in the future. Survivors courageously shared their experiences in the hope that by telling their stories, they might lift the curtain of shame and fear that too often shrouds acts of violence and exploitation against children.

And this fall, based on those hearings, the Task Force’s Advisory Committee will present the Attorney General with a blueprint of comprehensive policy recommendations for preventing and reducing the negative effects of Native children’s exposure to violence – a guide for action we are eagerly anticipating.

So let me close by saying this. Fifty years ago, Attorney General Robert Kennedy predicted that the tide was turning for Native American generations yet unborn; that the shadow of poverty and affliction and unfairness in Indian Country would be lifted.

Working with you to help make that prediction a reality has been among the highest privileges of my professional life. Still, it’s clear we have much work to do.

As long as Native youth on reservations endure rates of suicide we would never tolerate in any major American city;

Or as long as Native men and women living in remote corners of this country are denied the fundamental right to vote by state laws that make it harder for them to access the ballot box and have a voice in offices that shape their everyday lives;

Or as long we have to explain, over and over again – because of a long, sorry chapter in American history of violence, termination, forced relocation, and discrimination – why the use of “Redskins” is so painful to so many, Native and non-Native alike, then we have work to do.

But I also believe that your work over the last five years — those of you in this room – you are helping to turn the tide. You know that like any relationship that is worthwhile, our relationships with sovereign tribal nations continue to be works in progress. They require constant attention, unwavering commitment, candor about what is working well and what is not. And they require the most important of ingredients — mutual trust, faith and respect — born of a common history and shared destiny.

And with that knowledge you are forging a legacy and a future of reconciliation and respect; of support for sovereignty and self-determination; of commitment to tribal safety. And for that unwavering dedication, know that I salute you, proudly stand with you, and look forward to supporting you today and in the days to come.

Thank you.