A Season of Neglect for Native People

A Season of Neglect for Native People

In Iowa and New Hampshire this week, voters began the momentous process of picking nominees for president.

As the list of leading contenders narrows, now is a good time to examine where the leading presidential candidates stand on issues of interest to Native people.

To that end, yours truly scoured the Internet to find any information about where those top candidates stand on Native issues. I certainly don't consider this a comprehensive examination of this topic, and I welcome any information about what candidates have said about Indians.

First, who do I consider the leading candidates? Based on results from the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary: Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards for the Democrats; Sen. John McCain, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republicans.

Here's my executive summary:

This campaign season, Clinton is the only leading candidate of either party who appears to have addressed Native issues in any significant manner. Speaking via satellite to those gathered Nov. 17 for the National Congress of American Indians' annual convention in Denver, Clinton expressed support for a host of Native issues.

Beyond that, Obama is the only other candidate who appears to be expressing support for Native issues (albeit through his Web site). None of the Republican candidates, save for McCain during his 2000 race for the Republican nomination, have even come close to addressing Native issues.

Here's a rundown of what I found:

• Clinton: Speaking to NCAI conference attendees in November, she lamented the current administration's lack of respect for Native people and promised a sea change in Native people's favor should she be elected. "I believe it's time for a new beginning. It's time for our governments to work together, as partners again, like we used to. As president, I will restore that partnership and renew our shared mission to lift up our families and build the future our children, grandchildren and future generations deserve." She also promised that, if elected, she would restore a tribal government liaison position within the White House and governmental affairs office, a position created by her husband, Bill Clinton, and ended by his predecessor, George W. Bush. On her Web site, Hillary Clinton expresses support for initiatives to bring more women and minorities into the math, science and engineering professions, initiatives that presumably would benefit Natives. She also says she would increase amounts for Pell grants - grants that often benefit Native college students.

• Obama: On his Web site, the senator offers a section called "First Americans for Obama." While scant on specific proposals, that section offers this: "Perhaps more so than any populations, American Indians are painfully aware of the need for change. Tribes have experienced firsthand the lack of progress under prior administrations."

• Edwards: The former senator has offered little to no significant expressions of support for Native people.

• McCain: More so than almost any other candidate (save perhaps for Clinton), McCain has proven himself interested in and supportive of a variety of Native issues as a U.S. senator. The former chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, McCain was the only candidate to attend the NCAI's national convention in Palm Springs, Calif., in October 1999. Regarded highly by tribes in his own state while a senator, McCain helped steer a Senate resolution that never got passed apologizing to Native people for their historical mistreatment by the U.S. government. However, McCain also co-sponsored the controversial 1996 Navajo-Hopi Relocation Act that led to the forced removal of some 321 Navajo homes from the Black Mesa in Arizona.

• Huckabee: He has not mentioned any significant support for Native people.

• Romney: He has not mentioned any significant support for Native people.

Other candidates, including Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico and U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, certainly have expressed support for Native causes. In fact, as governor of a state populated heavily by Native people, Richardson is considered by many to be Indian's greatest ally among the presidential candidates.

Of course, no presidential candidate has ever won the nomination based on his or her support for Native issues. But it is important, I believe, for candidates to at least educate himself or herself on issues important to Native voters, people who enjoy a unique relationship with the U.S. government as sovereign nations.

This campaign season, the candidate who certainly has expressed the most support for Native people is Clinton, though many would say McCain commands a greater grasp of Native issues than even Clinton.

Regardless, the lack of any significant interest in courting Native voters by the candidates this campaign season is disappointing.

We can only hope that, as those candidates move to states with larger Native populations, they will become inspired to seek the votes of this country's first inhabitants.

Kevin Abourezk, Oglala Lakota, is a reporter and editor at the Lincoln (Neb.) Journal Star. He is a reznet assignment editor and teaches reporting at the Freedom Forum's American Indian Journalism Institute.

To send Kevin Abourezk a message please click here

While I agree that

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2008-01-12 17:46.

While I agree that Democratic candidates like Richardson, Kucinich, & Gavel are supporters of Native issues, I don't think it would be effective for Native people to vote for these candidates when they clearly are not in a position to be nominated. Even if these candidates were to express their intent tommorrow to choose a Native running mate when nominated, in the end, it won't matter because they won't be nominated. They are all trailing badly in the polls and predications indicate that they won't be able to catch either Obama or Clinton. How can these candidates implement their plans on Native issues if they can't even get the DNC nomination?

As far as the Prez on the Rez debate goes, I think Kalyn Free and INDN's List made a huge mistake mounting a public attack against the top Democratic candidates, like Clinton, when each failed to attend the Prez on the Rez debate. (See Indian Country Today article, 05/31/07, wherein Free is quoted as saying "I'm both disappointed and astonished that Senator Clinton has turned her back on American Indians"). Perhaps out of spite for being snubbed, she felt that it was okay to go so far as to proclaim that "Native Americans support Bill Richardson" (see community blog comment on Bill Richardson for President website) and went on to explain why. She was so quick to throw her support behind Richardson only to find out, like the rest of us, that he'd taken himself out of the race. How does throwing one's support behind a candidate like Richardson while simutaeneously opposing a top Democrat candidate like Clinton supposed to help Indian Country? I completely support the work that Kalyn Free does, but I think she stuck her foot in her mouth when she prematurely expressed her opinions about the candidates when doing so did nothing to help Indian Country get a electable candidate they like into office.

We really should take the time and do some research about the the top three Democrat candidates (Obama, Clinton, & Edwards) and decide which of the three would best be supportive of Native issues AND would be a more effective president overall. I personally don't think the Republican candidates are electable, but to be fair, the same amount of research on the top three Republicans should be done, too. After having done my reading and listening, I believe Obama would do a much better job than Clinton...

LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2008-01-12 15:10.

AS ALWAYS, WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS AS NATIVES AND SOMETIMES THIS IS WHAT ACTUALLY HURTS US. BELIEVE ME, I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED WHEN GOV. RICHARDSON DROPPED OUT. COME ON NOW, WE ARE A THRIVING PEOPLE WITH ALL THESE GAMING REVENUE. INDIAN CASINOS COMBINED DID BETTER THAN THE LAS VEGAS CASINOS. SHOULDN'T WE HAVE RAISED MONEY FROM OUR INDIAN CASINOS AND RAISE MONEY OURSELVES TO SUPPORT GOV. RICHARSON? HE WAS THE ONLY ONE WILLING TO APPOINT A NATIVE TO CABINET LEVEL TO OVERSEE INDIAN AFFAIRS. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POSITION AND IT WOULD HAVE GIVEN ONE OF OUR PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP OVERCOME THE BARRIERS SET IN PLACE TO KEEP US FROM SUCCEEDING. IT TAKES MONEY TO WIN ELECTIONS AND WITH ALL THE POWER PLAYERS, UNIONS, ORGANIZATIONS POURING MONEY INTO CLINTON AND OBAMA, WHAT DID WE EXPECT? HONESTLY, IN POLITICS NO ONE WINS BECAUSE IT IS ALL ABOUT WHO CAN WE PERSUADE TO PASS LAWS OR FAVORS. BUT I TRULY BELIEVED IN GOV RICHARDSON AND I SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE AND I SET BACK LIKE MOST OF US DO SO MY GOAL IS TO INFORM NATIVES OF THEIR POWER TO INFLUENCE ELECTIONS AND THEY SHOULD BE WILLING TO GO ALL OUT FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE CANDIDATES. PS. I WAS A CLINTON SUPPORTER UNTIL I SAW HER IN PERSON. SHE APPOINTED A HISPANIC AND BLACK COUNCIL FOR HER CAMPAIGN BUT SHE NEVER MENTIONED THE FIRST AMERICANS AND SHE REFUSED TO GO TO PREZ ON THE REZ. COME ON SHE HAD THE MEANS, BUT SHE WASN'T GOING TO GET ANYMORE MONEY BUT IF SHE WINS, HEY THE VOTERS SPOKE!!! AND JUST A REMINDER, 40 OR SO MILLIONS DOLLARS IS DONATED BY VARIOUS TRIBES FOR CAMPAIGNS BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN NOTHING. GOOD LUCK TO YOU ALL BECAUSE WE ARE CONTINUALLY BECOMING NON EXISTENT TO ALL LEVELS OF GOVENMENTS EVEN OUR TRIBAL ONES. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY FOR THEMSELVES. PEACE!

Neglected or simply quiet

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2008-01-12 06:17.

I agree with Kevin's comments but would add this. Indian Gaming has gone from a few bingo halls here and there to a multi-billion dollar business controlled by non-Indian gaming interests. In all that, our so called "leadership" has decided not to invest any of those gains to fund American Indian media and establish a much needed free and fair tribal press. Instead, they have inflated their salaries to gross proportions, disenrolled tribal members to increase per capita payments,and slung money around like drunken sailors on a binge. Tens of millions went to Repuglycan interests through J. Abramaoff who called these self-same "leaders" foul and racist names. So, instead of admitting their mistakes, establishing transparency in Indian gaming, they whined to Congress. Political candidates will not hear us until our colective tribal leadership cleans up their act about corruption, scandal, and failure to break ties with the white gaming industry. Just my two cents.

Huckabee raised money against Indian candidate

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2008-01-11 19:19.

Inn 2006 Gov. Huckabee came to Oklahoma and campaigned against democrat Scott Bighorse who was running for an open seat in the state legislature. The seat is in Osage County on the Osage Reservation. His opponent tried to paint Bighorse as someone trying to take over the county and tax all white people. Huckabee came in and raised money for the anti Indian. He also poked fun at Oklahomans for opposing Arkansas letting waste from chickens and pigs from flowing into Oklahoma waters.
By the by, Bighorse won.

No one running seems to care that much at this point

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2008-01-11 19:12.

To be honest Gov. Bill Richardson was head and shoulders above any of the other candidates.
You would be hard pressed to consider Hilary's record as being the best. I wouldn't say Obama has a sterling record on Indian affairs. And Edwards is too tight with the unions to look our way.

Neither could be bothered to come to Prez on the Rez. In these tight races and the election heading west, I bet at least one of them will have wished they took the time to go after the Indian vote.

No, Hilary has no record and she had a whole year to agree to show up for one hour in California to meet with Indians. Obama had the same opportunity and both recieved invitations a year in advance.

Boy, if we let candidates get away with sending tapes or satellite messages then we deserve just what we get. No website page, or well meaning set of principles extolling their respect for Indians is ever going to be good enough again. We deserve an audience with the those who would be president.

They need to stare us in the face and tell us why we should vote for them. Until that day, none of them deserve any support for doing most from the least efforts.

Neglect? Only if you allow yourself to be neglected.

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2008-01-11 15:06.

I don't think neglect is the correct term for this season. I see a prime time for people of color, minority's, and change. The options this season are full of qualified candidates who have experience and passion that has surpassed our last election cycles. I would suggest that voters do more research by utilizing a number of sites that allow them to assess candidates stances on Healthcare, Immigration, Homeland Security, Globalization, Education, Government reform, Poverty, Stem cell research and other issues. www.gogopher.com or http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html
I would also suggest that we take a proactive measure and ask our friends, neighbors and others if they are registered so that the voting power of Natives is realized in the coming election. http://www.rockthevote.com/ has resources for every state. Print out a form for your state and carry it with you, when you see a friend pass it on to them. Also, "He has not mentioned any significant support for Native people" I am not for sure where the venue the author was researching, I plan on doing a bit more research to inform my decisions, so please I urge other voters to do the same.
-Wahlesah S. Dick

Kevin Abourezek

Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 2008-01-11 11:04.

Osiyo hello in Cherokee I am a unenrolled Cherokee African American Non Freedman white woman from Cleveland Ohio. I'm a registered Democrat. I loved Kevin 's article yet he failed to mention that last year Indinz list founded by Kayln Free Choctaw nation of Okalahoma and the Morongo band of Mission Indians held the first ever Democatic Debate called Prez on the Rez out of all the Democrats that were invited to come to praticipate in this incredable debate with tribal nation leaders from the four corners of the US Governor Bill Richardson who has since dropped out of the presidential race as of Yesterday, Congressman Dennis Kucenich sorry for the misspelling and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel said yes to the debate. Senators Clinton , Senator Obama, Mr.Edwards Senator Dodd who has since dropped out of the presidential race and Senator Biden who also dropped out of the presidential race all turned down the opportunity to debate and answer questions From Native Americans and Alaskan Natives. which tell me that the only people that are worth thinking about voting for Democratic wise are Govenor Richardson who is still on the ballot on 43 states see c-span .org for Govenor Richardson's resgination speech Mr. Gravel and Mr Kucenich.
if you would like to see Prez on the Rez google prez on the rez or go to Indianz list.org.for more information. as for me I am Voting for Gov Richardson I am determined to make sure that someone from the state of Ohio who is a Gov Bill Richardson for president supporter goes to the Democatic national Convention in Denver. and also I am a member of Indianz list thise views reflect my own and not that of Ms.Free or of Indianz list.wa'do thank you in cherokee.ps No matter if you are a Democrat , Repblican or Independent and sorry for the shouting REGISTER TO VOTE AND VOTE LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR!

Reznet

Blogs » Red Clout