Nice save: Maneuver by Boren buys tribe time

The Oklahoman Editorial
Published: September 11, 2007

REP. Mel Watt, a Democrat from North Carolina, is the latest to wade into the affairs of the Cherokee Nation, following the lead of California Democrat Diane Watson. Thank goodness for a little moderation from our own Rep. Dan Boren, who often finds himself at odds with the more progressive members of his party.

Watson's been raising a ruckus about a March vote in which Cherokees voted to change the tribe's constitution to limit membership to those who have Cherokee blood. Doing so would exclude about 2,800 descendants of "freedmen,” or slaves once owned by Cherokees. Watson sought to have all the tribe's federal funding — about $300 million — cut off until this wrong was righted.

Last week Watt, who like Watson and the freedmen is black, gained approval of an amendment that would deny federal housing assistance to the tribe. Watt and Watson each contend the tribe is violating an 1866 treaty with the United States, which is only a tad ironic considering how many times the U.S. government has broken treaties with tribes through the years.

Boren brought a little common sense to the discussion with an amendment to let the tribe continue to receive the federal housing funds until the matter is settled in court. (After the March vote, a tribal court said the freedmen descendants may remain on the tribal rolls pending adjudication of the case, something the grandstanders in Congress apparently fail to realize or recognize.)

Boren pointed out that "in this country, we have a judicial process in place that should be honored before Congress steps in to act.” His concern about Congress' meddling is on target, as is that of a Cherokee official who worries about Congress punishing tribes "on a whim” whenever it disagrees with something they do.

Toolbar sponsored by: David Stanley Ford
Bookmark and Share





Comments

Leave a comment. Log in below or sign up (it's free).

   
Has everyone forgotten that the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court ruled the Freedmen were Citizens. But... the Chief didn't like that decision so he had several citizens carry around petitions calling for a vote to ammend the constitution. Now, he is pushing to let the courts decide again?!?!?!
Vicki, Chelsea
Vicki, Chelsea - Sep 18, 2007 12:09 PM
Report: Offensive language
Well, why don't we toss out all treaties!!! If the government is so EVIL, I say eliminate the estimated 300 million dollars in federal funding the Cherokee Nation gladly excepts each year. No more of my tax dollars for this nonsense!!! The Cherokee Aryan Nation needs to fend for themselves just like any other AMERICAN CITIZEN!!!
K, Muskogee - Sep 12, 2007 6:38 PM
Report: Offensive language
I think most tribes signed treaties under duress anyway,
they had little choice back then; all they knew was
that they was being removed from their homelands and
had no idea the struggles they would go thru.
So nothing new that today some Congressional leaders
want to punish a tribe under the guise of "racism" and breaking a treaty they didn't write in the first place.
Thanks to Boren for bringing a little sense to this issue.
Mae, Okemah - Sep 11, 2007 2:17 PM
Report: Offensive language
The treaty of 1866 was largely punishment for the participation of some, not all, of the Indians in the Civil War. This treaty was forced on the Tribes and the Tribes were forced to cede some of their lands. I like your comment "a tad ironic."
Margaret, Holdenville - Sep 11, 2007 7:00 AM
Report: Offensive language