Motion to Instruct Conferees on S. 2062, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2007

MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON S. 2062, NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ASSISTANCE AND SELF-DETERMINATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007 -- (Extensions of Remarks - July 25, 2008)

SPEECH OF
HON. TOM COLE
OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
THURSDAY, JULY 17, 2008

* Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate the remarks of my colleague from Massachusetts, as the only Native American currently serving in this Congress, I would like to clarify a few of his assertions.

* As you know, the Federal Government's relationship with Indian tribes over the first couple hundred years of our history was tragic. Continually, it was the policy of the Federal Government to not only exclude Indians from American society through broken treaties, but also to completely eradicate their culture. It would be nothing short of a tragedy for this Congress to carry on that policy.

* During the early 19th century, the Cherokee did hold slaves, like thousands of other individuals throughout America at the time. Of course, there is no justification for such a barbaric practice. When the U.S. Government forced the tribe to relocate on the Trail of Tears, to Oklahoma in the 1830s, many slaves accompanied the Cherokees on this journey. After the Civil War, though the Government did not sign any official treaties with the Confederacy, the Federal Government did sign a Treaty with the Cherokee Nation. The Treaty of 1866 states that all the Freedmen and their descendants should retain the rights of Native Cherokees. At no point did this treaty use ``citizenship'' as the fulfillment of that provision. However, the important point is that the Cherokees honored this treaty and even exceeded the terms by amending their Constitution of 1866 to grant Freedmen, members of other tribes and inter-married whites tribal citizenship. The Cherokee have not failed to keep their part of the bargain.

* Even so, Mr. Speaker, this 1866 treaty, which my colleague from Massachusetts insists the Cherokee have broken, was actually broken by the United States several times. For example, the Curtis Act of 1898, The Five Tribes Act, The Dawes Act, and the Enabling Act of the State of Oklahoma all violated the Federal Government's side of the Treaty of 1866. More significantly, however, this Treaty was once again rendered moot, in 1902 when Congress passed a law that fully changed the nature of tribal citizenship in its entirety and eliminated tribal citizenship across the board. Furthermore, the Dawes Commission, which was assigned to change tribal land into Indian allotment land removed the Freedmen from the Cherokee, but still gave them separate allotment land.

* When the Cherokee Nation decided to reconstitute itself in 1975, it did so with a new Constitution and a new vision to return to its roots--a family of descendants of Indians. The Cherokee could make this decision because they were unconstrained by the Article IX obligation of the past. It was now up to the Cherokees to begin an era of Federal policy that promoted self-determination under the leadership of President Richard Nixon.

* Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the courts have continually recognized that one of an Indian tribe's most basic powers is the authority to determine its own citizenship, for they are independent political authorities. That being said, the Cherokee have one of the smallest blood quantum requirements in Indian Country. To be a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, an individual has to simply prove that they have only one Indian ancestor on the Dawes Rolls of 1906. To that end, the Cherokees are one of the most racially diverse tribes in the Nation, with thousands of African-American members. Because of the pending court litigation, the Cherokee have allowed the Freedmen to retain the benefits of tribal membership and have even hired genealogists to assist this group in finding an ancestor on the Dawes Rolls.

* Mr. Speaker, it disturbs me that some in this Congress would accuse this tribe of breaking a treaty that was made long before the Federal Government eliminated the Cherokees as a tribe altogether. Their story, like most tribes throughout the Nation, is one of astonishing perseverance and determination. To limit Federal funding on the grounds that the Cherokees have supposedly broken a treaty that was in fact abrogated by official Government policy is absolute ridiculous. Congress should allow this issue to be settled in tribal and Federal court. It should not impose opinions on the Cherokee Nation. To do so violates tribal sovereignty, ignores history, and misuses and abuses legislative authority. The Cherokees have not broken their treaties with the United States. It is the United States that has consistently violated its treaties with the Cherokee Nation.

Source