Lakota Indians declare themselves independent of US

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Kevin

If the U.S. is no longer bound by the treaty, then the U.S. will probably lay claim to the land the Lakota think is theirs. Further, the Lakota, by repudiating their treaty are probably giving up very significant mineral and water rights which they won't get to have anymore.

I just don't see how this can be a good thing for the Lakota.

I think the Lakota know how unpopular actually doing what you suggest would be.

I don't think we have a single elected official who would ultimately stand behind a decision, even though I think it would absolutely necessary under the circumstance.

And, let's be honest, name a bunch of countries who have treated their aboriginal peoples any better? (How did the native Britons or Celts fare in England, say?) The US just seems even worse because our treatment was so much more recent and well documented.

Note that I'm not saying the US treatment was all right: just that historically very few groups remain on the land they originally occupied, and that I don't think there's any way things work out well for the groups with lower fire power. (although we seem to be entering an era where because so many Americans want to pretend this isn't true or can be righted through legislation and multi-culturalism, where the US may just elect to give the country away, either in cases like the Lakota, recent developments in Hawaii, or through unregulated immigration and expanded "government" funded entitlement. I mean, why not? It seems like the right thing to do from a humanitarian perspective.)

[sageofages]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Perhaps, my point is they may not pay the same taxes as you or I now. Tribal lands are considered semi-autonomous. Also, many tribes are taking over services that were once provided by outside state and/or federal agencies because they're not effectively targeting the tribal populations. Schools are a big example. I'm just saying that everyone can stop complaining about their tax dollars because residency in the new country appears to require renouncing your US citizenship. You wouldn't then turn around and receive Medicaid because you do not reside in the US, nor are you a citizen.

(All operating on the assumption that their suit is successful. I suspect they'll end up settling with the US government.)

Honestly, the way Am. Indians have been treated in this country, I don't blame them. The least of which is that they're stereotyped as either the noble savage, the casino owner, or the alcoholic living on "our" tax dollars. And considering the US can't be bothered to actually adhere to the written treaties that exist with the various populations, good on them.

While I empathize with the historical abuses they have suffered...this is just cutting their nose off to spite their face. I just hope it is all a ploy to update and modernize treaty agreements.

I guess what I would do would make me an "ugly" american.

You want to be a sovereign nation...fine.

Time to negotiate contracts for your utilties (or do you produce your own electricity and have your own water resources).

You are now an international border. No one in or out without a passport. No one works outside your country in the US without a green card. Stand in line to get one. Want an education at a US school, apply for a student visa.

Trade with you for goods and services will have to come under international trade regulations (yes yes I am aware most are a joke). Trust that what you export to us just may incurr some tariffs and other restrictions. We don't have a fair trade agreement with you.

Oh and just how are you going to get your trade with other nations into you? Have an airport that can handle shipping containers? Need a highway in to you....uh, doesn't it have to go through us first? Rail access?

You need a national defense? I hope you have a munitions industry to gear up to make your weapons , cause right now there are trade and travel restrictions regarding weapons trading with you.

It seems to me that the tribes want it both ways...autonomy with the benefits of US citizenship.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I'm not sure how taxes work for the Lakota now, but considering they'd be renouncing their US citizenship, I doubt they would be eligible to receive government aid and wouldn't pay taxes either.

Assuming this ever occurs though.

You can't ex-pat to avoid taxes - even if you renounce citizenship, you still owe the IRS for 10 years, if my recollection is correct. This doesn't change what/whether they pay now, but that portion is pretty inconsequential in a "the more you know" lame sense.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

You can't ex-pat to avoid taxes - even if you renounce citizenship, you still owe the IRS for 10 years, if my recollection is correct. This doesn't change what/whether they pay now, but that portion is pretty inconsequential in a "the more you know" lame sense.

I suppose it depends on if they'd be working within the US. I don't think they're attempting to duck their current taxes.

[EE-BO]

Thanks for the link.

I did not take the time to dig too deep, but when I run a Google search on "Lakota Casino", the basic results suggests quite a different motive for the declaration of independence than that presented in the article about the evil white man etc.

This is a very hard issue to address since I have seen both sides. I lived on the Navajo reservation for a few weeks during high school as part of an exchange program. And I also have a few years experience on the finance side of the oil industry where I have seen tribes blackmail oil companies into paying as much as $25,000 per acre for right of way to run pipelines across barren and otherwise useless land when the actual going rate for right of way over land own by the government or US citizens is closer to $150.

But the casinos could be an even bigger gold mine than that- and they are not subject to the same regulation as casinos in Las Vegas, Atlantic City or on any other US real estate outside of the Indian reservations.

There is no regulatory or public visibility into just how much the reservation casinos make, what the odds are on the games or whether the machines are programmed to run in an "ethical manner" for lack of a better term.

In recent years, there has been rising pressure in Congress to regulate and perhaps even tax revenue on the Indian casinos. With the country so evenly split at election time, not much is being done- but it is definitely a big issue on the table.

And in one recent highly publicized re-negotiation of right-of-way between one Indian tribe and a major US energy company, it was made publicly clear that the intervention of the US government might be sought to prevent the tribe from seeking extortionist levels of compensation. And to bring such an issue to the attention of the public when gas prices are so high would likely have not only resulted in government intervention, but also in the tribe being forced to accept a deal closer to $150 per acre than the $10K+ under their old contract or the $20K+ they were demanding in the new contract.

So it would not surprise me one bit to see Native American tribes try to secede from the United States.

In the grand scheme of history- both man and other forms of life struggle and compete. And typically the stronger party wins and eventually takes full domination. The surviving defeated either assimilate or become extinct.

While the concept of the reservation was a noble one, it is fundamentally flawed because it flies in the face of reality.

There are no sales taxes on Indian reservations. To my knowledge there is no income tax either. Most residents live in government built housing and work jobs paid- in part or in full- by the US government.

The unfortunate by-product of this is that the tribal peoples of the reservations are raised in an isolated environment and offered little opportunity to ever really break out into the real world.

When I was staying in a town on the Navajo reservation, I attended classes with the high school seniors. The ones I befriended had a wide range of career interests- but ALL of them expressed an incredibly powerful desire to leave the reservations forever and never come back.

While it is a form of guaranteed existence and subsidy, it is no life for any American seeking opportunity and a better life.

Right-of-way revenues and casinos have the promise of providing that better life- but just as a small elite ruling class in Mexico and Russia controls all the wealth, such it is in the reservations today. Clinics for 40 patients (such as the one the article linked in the original post mentions) are window dressing. At the end of the day, a very few people derive any real benefit from the enormous wealth being amassed today on the reservations.

The only solution I see is to disband the reservations entirely and let nature take its course. Only when all reservation residents are subject to the same laws as other US citizens, and only when the financial operations they undertake are subject to the same open trade and free market principles we enjoy can the next generation of Native Americans have a real shot at making something of themselves in their own right.

Traditions and culture can be preserved. These are matters of personal belief more than place. America is full of people far from their homeland who continue to live by their ancestral beliefs.

Just consider this- how many of you have a Native American co-worker? And by that I mean someone who looks the part.

These people are invisible in modern society. Enough time has passed for any actively racist oppression to not really matter in the workforce. Native Americans are not in the same unfortunate position as African-Americans are presently on that score.

And so there is no need for the continued protectionism at the enormous expense to the US taxpayer. It is not just your incomes tax dollars paying for this mess. It is also every state and city sales tax that must be higher in states with reservations to account for all the non-taxable revenue on the reservations. And it is also big-time in your cost for heating oil and gasoline given what it costs to transport these items through pipelines that run across reservation territory.

[ThetaPrincess24]

EE-BO, I dont agree with everything you have stated here, but this is one of the best posts I've read on GC in years. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

[Kevin]

EE-BO, I agree with you to an extent. What should Congress do? Can you imagine the backlash, particularly from the incredibly strong NA lobby if the U.S. were to simply repudiate its treaties with the tribes and declare them and their citizens fully subject to the laws of the United States?

I think that scenario makes sense. It's what most other nations with indigenous peoples have done. I just don't think that it's realistic to think that'll happen.

I actually know quite a few native americans -- ones who look the part. I'm in Oklahoma though

[jojapeach]

I'm looking forward to EE-BO's replies. So much insight.

After reading the Lakota statistics, I can support the idea. Anything like this is definitely worth fighting for. I'm sure no one woke up and said, "We'll secede tomorrow with no plans or forethought whatsoever!" The Lakota will just have a long fight ahead of them, regardless of how long or hard or inconvenient (lack of US "benefits") the fight will be.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by Kevin

EE-BO, I agree with you to an extent. What should Congress do? Can you imagine the backlash, particularly from the incredibly strong NA lobby if the U.S. were to simply repudiate its treaties with the tribes and declare them and their citizens fully subject to the laws of the United States?

Thank you Kevin, ThetaPrincess and jojapeach for your kind words. I am no expert on this subject- I just see it as a fascinating societal experiment because it really is unprecedented.

Kevin- the answer to your question is economics.

The Civil War was not about slavery- it was about economic power, and the South happened to derive much of its economic power from slaves.

The War on Terror is not about terrorism- it is about global energy supplies for the next 3-4 decades.

The Native American issue is not about the evil white man discriminating against the "real owners" of America- it is about the unsuccessful side in a battle for ownership trying to do all they can to improve their own economic situation independent of American society.

I don't blame the tribes for gouging oil companies for right of way fees, or for building casinos, or for using some "evil white man" sob story to get all the advantages they can.

This is a tough world- and every one of us should be doing everything we can to better ourselves. I use my personal position all the time to gain advantage- and so should anyone else. I may not like what someone does to get ahead, but I respect it because I do the same thing and because I recognize that all of us have to figure out what our advantage is and use it.

I might want to have someone's advantage removed- for example some of what tribes get away with right now as we are discussing- but I won't begrudge individual people using that advantage while they can. Works in reverse too- there are plently of people in the world who think someone like me was born with an unfair advantage.

Understanding that life is NOT fair is key to applauding a person for taking an unfair advantage while personally feeling that such advantage should not be available in the first place.

In any event- Kevin, the answer to your question is economics (I know, repeating myself.)

1. Cities, Counties and States are always on the lookout for new revenue sources via taxation. As the casinos continue to grow, there will be increasing notice given to all that potentially taxable revenue that would be taxable if it were not for special concessions to Native American tribal governments.

2. As energy prices increase, all US citizens are affected- from the guy making $6 an hour driving to work to the CEO of a major manufacturing plant. This creates great political pressure for government intervention, or at the very least- investigation. The right of way fees that Native American tribes collect from companies running oil and gas pipelines over reservation land is not only huge- but those fees are a key example of a cost that does not add any real value to the underlying product and which could be eliminated with some government intervention. There has been increasing publicity in recent years about these right of way agreements, and this does not ultimately work to the benefit of the tribes because the dollar amounts are so absurd that the average person will not accept the tribal position as valid.

3. While most people won't admit it, they really don't care about Native Americans. The pity play is a tug at the heart strings just like GreenPeace using a picture of a blue-eyed baby seal for their posters. One can care deeply about Native American heritage and its place in US history (I count myself in that group) without buying into the pity play. For a very long time, the "pity play" to gain special treatment was based in very real fact. The reservations can be incredibly impoverished places. The head of a family might own 10,000 acres of land- but often there is little that can be done with it to reap income. In the Southwest, those lands are too barren for extensive agricultural endeavors for example. But as the casinos and right of way revenue makes many tribes worth billions of dollars- the average American facing an ever-growing tax burden is not likely to care too much.

These 3 economic factors are what will conspire to fundamentally change the reservation system in our lifetime. It will not be a pretty process, but neither was the European conquest of this land- or for that matter, any aspect of the long term existence of any given society.

What will make #3 especially important is a game of sheer numbers. The Native American lobbies are considerable and wealthy, but they represent a very small number of people who generally have little interest in mainstream American life.

For now, with the sympathy of many US citizens, those lobbies retain a great deal of power- but in the end it is head count that matters. And politicians will not be swayed by those monied interests when the general populace is against them securing continued economic advantage.

And you know what, if the tribal councils who run the casinos really do act in the best interests of the tribes- things won't be so bad after all. The amount of money they are making is more than enough to ensure the survival of the reservations with the land intact. We are not talking about defenseless poor people- but a proud segment of America that has found a way to secure its financial future.

The real debate is whether that newfound wealth and power has now brought the tribes to a point where they should be treated like any other American citizens, and I say the answer to that is "yes".

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

The Civil War was not about slavery- it was about economic power, and the South happened to derive much of its economic power from slaves.

The War on Terror is not about terrorism- it is about global energy supplies for the next 3-4 decades.

The Native American issue is not about the evil white man discriminating against the "real owners" of America- it is about the unsuccessful side in a battle for ownership trying to do all they can to improve their own economic situation independent of American society.

All gross oversimplifications.

[EE-BO]

Everything is complex if you dig deep into the details.

There is sometimes value in that kind of excavation, but I am a great believer in the importance of the big picture.

I look at this issue from the larger perspective of general economics because that is the force that I think will ultimately define the resolution.

Does not mean that there are not other more subtle issues in play, but I think the history of man proves that these complexities are often lost in the actions taken to placate the loud voice of the powerful.

[ASUADPi]

There are 2 (or it might be 3) casinos in the Maricopa County area. One in Scottsdale, one in the Laveen area (where I live) and one in Casa Grande. Now, the one in near Laveen, I've never been too, but literally 2 miles west of my house Indian Reservation land "begins". It is quite sad to drive down Baseline and see the houses. From the street you can see such dilapitated homes and look like a strong wind will knock them over. But then in the distance you see the "nice" homes. It's quite sad because from those images you can tell and determine that the distribution of wealth from the casinos (which are hugely popular here) isn't being done. It's really quite sad.

I haven't read the article yet, but from the sounds of it, it sounds like they want to "have their cake and eat it too". You can't have it both ways. You can't say on one hand "we don't want to be part of the United States" and then still be able to call yourself a US citizen and reap all the benefits of citizenship.

Question, if they actually win their case and are no longer part of the US, which means they aren't US citizens, wouldn't they in all technicalities be considered illegal immigrants?

[texas*princess]

This may just be that I'm really naiive about it, but if they really want to get off the reservation to make somethng more of themselves, they can right? Or are there rules against it?

One of my coworkers is Native American and she works in an office for a huge corporation. She doesn't participate in her tribe stuff but she says it's OK because she went to college and is making something of herself.

Her boyfriend I believe is also Native American.. he "looks" Native American but lives in the city limits (i.e. not on a reservation) and participates with stuff that his tribe does (cultural and stuff like that). She has told me sooooooo many stories of the tribes using the casino money for things that it wasn't supposed to be used for and how everything is "corrupt" (her word, not mine) and basically a huge mess with them.

She does some volunteer work for a children's home there where basically all the kid's parents there are in jail which is a really really sad situation.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

There are 2 (or it might be 3) casinos in the Maricopa County area. One in Scottsdale, one in the Laveen area (where I live) and one in Casa Grande. Now, the one in near Laveen, I've never been too, but literally 2 miles west of my house Indian Reservation land "begins". It is quite sad to drive down Baseline and see the houses. From the street you can see such dilapitated homes and look like a strong wind will knock them over. But then in the distance you see the "nice" homes. It's quite sad because from those images you can tell and determine that the distribution of wealth from the casinos (which are hugely popular here) isn't being done. It's really quite sad.

I haven't read the article yet, but from the sounds of it, it sounds like they want to "have their cake and eat it too". You can't have it both ways. You can't say on one hand "we don't want to be part of the United States" and then still be able to call yourself a US citizen and reap all the benefits of citizenship.

Question, if they actually win their case and are no longer part of the US, which means they aren't US citizens, wouldn't they in all technicalities be considered illegal immigrants?

They don't want the benefits of being US citizens. They would renounce their US citizenship. Also they would not be living on American soil, but Lakota soil. Also, it isn't automatic, they're not saying anyone who has any Lakota blood will go along with this, so Joe who lives in Chicago and is half or even all Lakota is only a part of this if he so chooses.

Originally Posted by texas*princess

This may just be that I'm really naiive about it, but if they really want to get off the reservation to make somethng more of themselves, they can right? Or are there rules against it?

They don't want to have to leave their land and their home just to "make something" of themselves. And you don't have to leave the reservation to do so. However poverty is such a huge issue and they don't feel like their needs are being appropriately addressed by a government that they've developed a lot of distrust for over hundreds of years. Poverty means you can't just leave to do better. Education that's not adequately reaching AI youth is also a problem [/quote]

One of my coworkers is Native American and she works in an office for a huge corporation. She doesn't participate in her tribe stuff but she says it's OK because she went to college and is making something of herself.

Her boyfriend I believe is also Native American.. he "looks" Native American but lives in the city limits (i.e. not on a reservation) and participates with stuff that his tribe does (cultural and stuff like that). She has told me sooooooo many stories of the tribes using the casino money for things that it wasn't supposed to be used for and how everything is "corrupt" (her word, not mine) and basically a huge mess with them.

She does some volunteer work for a children's home there where basically all the kid's parents there are in jail which is a really really sad situation.

What the Lakota leadership want is for their children to get educated and then come back to help the people, not to say that they don't need to be a part of it because they're better. I don't know what the Lakota's relationship to casinos are, but one experience does not make a good generalization especially considering that there are different tribes and nations.

[Little32]

Ok, so I am late in coming to this, but this is an interesting development.