dbp@dataio.UUCP (Dave Pellerin) (07/03/84)
**** Hmmm... With independence day looming, normally quite sane people are flocking to the local indian reservations to purchase illegal (under WA state law) fireworks. Apparently, fireworks made illegal by state law are not illegal on the reservations, because the reserva- tions are under FEDERAL juristisction. If state laws do not apply on the reservations, are other activities allowed such as: Casino Gambling? Prostitution? Abortion? If these activities are NOT allowed, who has made them illegal; tribal governments? The feds? I'm not trying to fan flames, but if the federal gov. is making the laws under which the indians must live, without the approval of the state governments, -****>>> insert opinion here <<<****- Does anyone care to comment????? !uw-beaver!teltone!dataio!dbp
sunny@sun.uucp (Sunny Kirsten) (07/07/84)
Greetings:
Morally speaking, there are no U.S. OR State laws which apply on any
Indian Reservation, and the least we can do for Indians is allow them what
little soverignty they have left over the few pieces of this continent which
we *didn't* steal from them. Few are the treaties Uncle Sam made with the
Indian Nations which he did not subsequently abrogate. Off the reservation,
they have to abide by all the local laws, but on their reservations they are
truly in their own soverign nations. The fact that Uncle Sam manages to
exert Federal Law over same would seem dubious at best.
{ucbvax|decvax|ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Sunny Kirsten of Sun Microsystems)dee@cca.UUCP (07/07/84)
I think Mr. Kirsten overstates the sovereignty that Indian reservations
have or ought to have. The US Government is not going to let the Indians
violate basic constitutional rights of non-Indian US citizens.
--
+ Donald E. Eastlake, III
ARPA: dee@CCA-UNIX usenet: {decvax,linus}!cca!deeron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (07/09/84)
This is the situation that happened in South Africa. The government decided to appease some of the natives and give them total control of some desolate area. What happened is that they turned it in to an entertainment center that puts Las Vegas to shame. It stands out even more when you realize how morally straight the rest of South Africa is. -Ron
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (07/09/84)
Amusingly enough, in most states where there are reservations, there is also an overlaid state and municipal authority. Where I grew up (Montana) there was the Flathead Reservation (actually called that on roadsigns, even though its real name is the Salish Nation). However, it is overlaid upon Flathead County and two other counties. Members of the tribe (there are <30 who can claim more than 1/4 blood) are requited to have licenses to use county/state roads, must pay taxes for the use of county or city utilities, and so on. However, tribal roads are restricted to ONLY the members of the tribe and their guests. They have their own licensing authority (very informal). The federal regulations upon the tribe are (or were) mediated by the agents of the Interior Department, Bureau of Indian Affairs. At least, this was where they used to be. I dunno what the current authority is. They treat the nations as (conquered) client states. Autonomy is limited to specific areas, negotiated years ago with any given individual nation. Strangely enough, to recieve all of the federal payments which the tribe recieves for the use of/purchase of tribal lands, tribal members MUST remain on the reservation. This is a tribal rule, which changes depending on how the tribal judges decide to administer it. The regulation apparently has to exist because of a ruling by the BIA. Interesting setup. Not particularly fair to anyone. Hutch
sunny@sun.uucp (Sunny Kirsten) (07/11/84)
Greetings: > I think Mr. Kirsten overstates the sovereignty that Indian reservations > have or ought to have. The US Government is not going to let the Indians > violate basic constitutional rights of non-Indian US citizens. I believe that I was only suggesting that Indian reservations ought to have sovereignty over themselves. I also believe that I nowhere suggested that the Indians ought to be able to violate the rights of any US citizens. You seem to have made some other assumptions: My name is Sunny, not Mr. {ucbvax|decvax|ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Sunny Kirsten of Sun Microsystems)
nrh@inmet.UUCP (07/14/84)
#R:dataio:-15400:inmet:16000010:000:1481 inmet!nrh Jul 12 19:36:00 1984 My father is handling PR (Public Relations) for the Miami Indians of Oklahoma, a tribe of 1,260, most of whom live in poverty. They want to establish trust lands on a small parcel of land in a Cleveland, Ohio, suburb. The area is part of the aboriginal homelands of the Miami Tribe. When it was announced that the tribe intended to establish a high-stakes bingo game on the land, charitable bingo operators protested loudly, saying the Indian game would put theirs out of business because there are no restrictions on Indian bingo, while charitable games are tightly controlled by the state. The Catholic Diocese in Cleveland charged that the Indians would create unfair competition and said that the Indians should not be allowed to play by different rules. The Indians responded that the Catholic Church plays by different rules from other organizations in that they don't pay taxes, and pointed out that the laws governing the Indians have been used to cheat the Indians, steal their land, and deny them opportunities for 200 years. Now that they have found a way to use those same laws to their advantage, there is great gnashing of teeth by the white men. The Ohio Attorney General thinks the Indians should be state controlled. The Indians are not about to accept state compounding of the historical unfairness of federal control. The lawyer for the Tribe said in a recent radio interview: "The biggest mistake the white men ever made was educating the Indians."