Honor Indian Treaties - Get Involved

http://www.honorindiantreaties.com/act/ ^

[SheLion]

- HOME - ABOUT - LEARN MORE - GET INVOLVED - NEWS - ADS - CONTACT -

Get Involved

New York State wants to break the law.

Governor Pataki has already called it unconstitutional.

And yet, it’s been adopted for the 2003-04 budget.

It’s a provision that calls for the State Department of Taxation and Finance to collect tax on the sale of tobacco and gasoline on Native American territories. The state’s unconstitutional action will cause over 1,000 Indians and non-Indians to lose their jobs, consumer prices to rise and businesses to close.

Tell Governor Pataki to honor the supreme law of the land. Tell him that to break centuries old treaties would be to break the law.

Click on the link below to send an email message to Governor Pataki.

Because it’s wrong.

Because it’s not fair.

Because you won’t let it happen.

Contact the Governor:

Call Governor Pataki at 518-474-7516 or send him an email message by visiting his web site (http://www.state.ny.us/governor/) and clicking on "Contact the Governor."

If you wish to contact other state representatives, visit the state Assembly home page (http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/) or the state Senate home page (http://www.senate.state.ny.us/).

We are also encouraging supporters to send letters to the editors of the daily newspapers in New York state. Links to most of the state's media outlets are on a web site called the Empire Page (http://www.empirepage.com/medialinks.html).

Sample Message:
If you wish, copy the text below and paste it into your message:

- HOME - ABOUT - LEARN MORE - GET INVOLVED - NEWS - ADS - CONTACT -

This web site is sponsored by the Seneca Nation of Indians

 

[SheLion]

I do not like the setup per say - but breaking treaties is not the solution. These treaties were made in exchange for something the U.S. wanted and got - if the deal doesn't look good now - well.... hindsight's 20/20.

Only in New York! ~sigh

Maine is starting to give them a hard time too.............

[SheLion]

I don't think it's fair that American Indians can be free of US income tax for money earned on the reservation, yet vote in elections. I say, choose whether you want to be an American citizen, or pick whether you want to be an Indian, with all of its attendant perks (free college, tribal dividend payments, etc.).

The are Native AMERICAN Indians.

[SheLion]

I hope the Indians clean their clocks on this.

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[marron]

I entered into the argument earlier, agreeing basically with the idea that the legal situation with the tribes was somewhat obsolete, and needed to be re-examined. I mainly questioned tribal sovereignty.

But when I propose renegotiating the agreements, I am perhaps coming at it from a slightly different perspective. RWP says "I don't think someone should be exempt from state taxes because one... might have been done out of his land by some sharp practice..."

There is no "might" about it. There were two kinds of Indian Wars during the nineteenth century, there were wars caused by the simple competition for land, which might have been unavoidable (unavoidable, in the sense that the settlers had no intention of honoring Indian land claims). And there was a second kind of war, caused almost directly by corruption. Money was appropriated by Congress for the tribes and disappeared along the way in to other pockets. The result, starvation followed by an uprising followed by all out war. And the final destruction of the tribe.

I am aware of several examples of out and out corruption, so the "might" can be discarded out of hand. The treaties were negotiated to settle wars that were fought as settlers moved on to land that was not theirs.

If your ancestors were in Europe during the great Indian Wars, then you don't have any of their blood charged to your account directly, but you are probably living on land that was taken from them by force. I don't think we have any intention of giving it back, and the Hungarians are not moving back to the steppes of Central Asia. But we should approach the matter with a little humility.

I live not far from where small tribes were destroyed by miners out for a Sunday, who would sit up in the rocks and drink and shoot just for a laugh.

I agree that the legal situation should be re-examined, and if possible clarified, simplified, privatized, modernized. But we should approach it from the point of view that the treaties were imposed on the Indians by force, and were the least they were willing to settle for, faced with certain genocide.

"We're living in the 21th century; why are we living with a system that sucked even in the 19th century? " It sucked in the 19th century because it was imposed by force, and the people who administered it put the money into their own pockets. I agree, though, its time to modernize it.

[Arkinsaw]

The funny thing is, a lot of people have bought into the idea that the US owes the Indians something - and by Indians we mean someone who is 1/8 or even 1/16 of Indian ancestry - but they'll reject the same idea when it pertains to blacks. Why?

I can only speak as to why I have "bought into the idea". It has nothing to do with race particularly. It has to do with signed treaties and agreements and a history of broken treaties on our side. Its more about us than them. The Clinton administration's theft of billions entrusted to "our" care and their subsequent treatment of the issue sickened and embarassed me. And its not just that administration but many previous also. Its dishonorable behavior and I'm just not inclined to countenance it.

[marron]

"The Clinton administration's theft of billions entrusted to "our" care "

Really, it was during the Clinton years that it occurred to me that something needed to be done. I saw the way the BIA was used to vacuum up campaign money from the tribes, the way they played one tribe against another for partisan political purposes, the way the tribes played one against another to make sure one tribe got a casino permit and another didn't. This is what convinced me that things needed to be modernized.

I read about shoot outs on this or that reservation as one mafia sought to take control of the casino from another.

This is the source of my concern. I don't know what can be done to clean house but it seems to me something needs to be done.

[Right Wing Professor]

What happened in America was what happened on every other continent much earlier; an agrarian society drove out a hunter-gatherer society. We just happend to have newspapers to report the results.

When you say the Indians owned the land, in what sense? the Indians had no legal framework of individual land ownership. Various tribes occupied the land at various time. Conservatives in general reject the idea of collective land ownership - why make an exception in this case?

In this part of the Great Plains, there were no Indians until Europeans introduced horses; and by that time, we had coureurs du bois roaming around here from Canada. And even when they had horses, the Pawnee and Sioux fought bloody battles over Southern Nebraska. So who had title?

Yeah, the Indian wars were a mess. It wasn't all the white man's fault; just north of here, the Santee Sioux massacred 750, mostly Scandinavian, mostly women and children, on land they themselves had ceded in a treaty. By and large, they escaped retribution for it; Abraham Lincoln pardoned all but 39 of them.

My point is this; I have little time for racial entitlements. The fact that someone who now calls himself a Native American is descended from someone who was screwed just makes him equal to the rest of us. There is long standing title to reservation lands, and there are titles spelling out specific obligations of the federal goverment. These should be settled with the present tribal members, as individuals. What they collectively do with the land and the money is their own business. But I want no part of a country where you and I are subject to different laws or obligations, because of our different ancestry.

[Petronski]

We need more relief pitchers!

[Arkinsaw]

I understand your concern, but we should be cleaning up our own election system and cleaning up the political parties (we know who they are) that abuse the system. Those things we can definitely do.

After we clean our own house, then perhaps we can deal with the trickier Indian issues of treaty obligations and sovereignty while still remaining honorable. Billions of their funds were stolen while in our care. Got to clean that up on OUR end also. It's a lot easier to point a finger their way. Sure they have corrupt petty officials but they are small fry compared to the corruption on our end that supports them.

Regardless of what we do, we still have obligations that we gave our word on.

[Chad Fairbanks]

I think you've nailed the real issue here - The indians ever surrendered their freedom the way others have in recent decades, and it appears that jealousy has taken over. Could it really be that simple?

[Chad Fairbanks]

The funny thing is, a lot of people have bought into the idea that the US owes the Indians something - and by Indians we mean someone who is 1/8 or even 1/16 of Indian ancestry - but they'll reject the same idea when it pertains to blacks. Why?

As soon as you can show me a treaty that the government made with an independent nation of blacks that existed here in north america, your question will be relevent ;0) - But to address your other issue, the United States of America only owes indian tribes what they agreed to owe by ratified treaty. Nothing more.

[Chad Fairbanks]

But I want no part of a country where you and I are subject to different laws or obligations, because of our different ancestry.

Well, if the constitution means nothing to you, get out. Pretty simple.

[Consort]

It's good to check the Wampum rate of exchange daily.

[Right Wing Professor]

Why does one's possession of 1/16 of Indian ancestry entitle one to special rights?

[Right Wing Professor]

14th amendment, buddy. Read it and weep. Postdates almost all Indian treaties.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Well, I have a lot more than 1/16, and I am not aware of any "Special Rights" that I have. Can you name one right that I enjoy, which you do not share? Name one. Just one.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Relevent how?

[Right Wing Professor]

Can you name one right that I enjoy, which you do not share?

Do you vote in tribal elections? Do you pay state taxes?

(I won't even mention AA here)

[Chad Fairbanks]

By the way, just so you know? At the time the 14th amendment was ratified, American Indians were not universally U.S. Citizens. It didnt' apply to us.

[marron]

Regardless of what we do, we still have obligations that we gave our word on.

No argument.