And now:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: fyi. katiuska hanohano. >From: "Donna M. Ralstin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: sovernspeakout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [sovernspeakout] Bush -in NY -says State shld be supreme over >Indians/Ind land---(fwd) >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 07:21:53 -0700 (PDT) > > > >Donna M. Ralstin >http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dralstin/ > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:12:17 -0400 (EDT) >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Bush -in NY -says State shld be supreme over Indians/Ind >land---duuuh!!! > >Subj: [kekuttokaunta] Politics >Date: 10/12/99 11:53:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ted Burton) > >Forwarded from: > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >George Bush: state law should reign > >Bush comment on Indian issues draws comment > >The GOP presidential contender says he considers state law supreme. > >By Michelle Breidenbach > >A 22-word comment on Native American issues >earned presidential candidate George W. Bush support from some >Central New York landowners and annoyed some Native Americans. > >While admitting he knew little about Indian land claims in New York, >Bush had this to say during a campaign stop Monday in Syracuse: "My >view is that state law reigns supreme when it comes to the Indians, >whether it be gambling or any other issue." > >Bush would not elaborate on his position Tuesday, leaving his >statement open to interpretation. His press secretary, Mindy Tucker, >said she thought New York's Indian land claims had been thrown out of >court. > >Oneida Indian spokesman Mark Emery said Bush is clearly ill-informed >on Indian sovereignty and federal law. > >"The treaties, the Supreme Court, the Constitution and federal law >are crystal clear on this," Emery said. "The federal government has >the authority." > >HoSoNoGeDeh, a member of the Seneca Indian Nation, said Americans >must have forgotten the agreements they made when they signed >treaties with the Iroquois people centuries ago. > >"Our government has an agreement with the United States," he said. >"This agreement is long-standing in the federal court and through >federal treaty." > >The U.S. Justice Department has filed lawsuits against Madison, >Oneida, Seneca and Cayuga counties, backing separate Indian claims to >land the state purchased illegally in the 18th and 19th centuries. >The federal government and the Indians argued together that the state >broke federal law when it purchased the land without federal approval. > >Even land claim opponents acknowledged the federal government has an >obligation to uphold when it comes to Native American rights. But >they also saw Bush's comment as a clear stance against Indian >sovereignty - a concept some non-Indian landowners vehemently oppose. > >If Bush is saying the federal government should not allow hundreds of >Indian nations to exist as sovereign nations within the United >States, that fits Upstate Citizens for Equality's platform, Utica >lawyer Leon Koziol said. > >The 8,000-member citizens group believes Native Americans should >abandon sovereignty and assimilate into non-Indian culture. > >"I'm very much elated to hear he's making that kind of statement, and >I would imagine he's going to get a lot of support from landowners >here in Central New York," Koziol said. > >He said the federal government, by taking sides, has served only to >complicate the issue and to anger residents. > >"I think the federal government's intervention has caused most of the >problems in the area," Koziol said. "I'm pleased to see Bush is >taking that stand and, hopefully, he will be influential in pulling >the federal government out of the land claim." > >Vernon Supervisor Roman Wilczak acknowledged that the federal Bureau >of Indian Affairs has an obligation to the Indians, but, he said, the >United States has been negligent in handling the land claims in >Central New York. > >"I think the United States government should stick to federal law, >and the only one that can deal with this matter is the state," he >said. > >The federal government has already given the states some rights to >negotiate with Indians, Koziol said. For example, the states can >negotiate gaming compacts, and states have the power to force Indian >nations to collect sales taxes on gasoline and cigarettes, he said. > >The federal government should also allow the states to negotiate >issues such as Indian police powers and real estate tax policies, >which have become confused because the United States recognizes >Indian nations as sovereign, Koziol said. > >Indian negotiations are nothing new to Bush, who, as governor of >Texas, has launched a campaign against Indian gaming in his state. >The state of Texas filed a lawsuit in federal court last week to shut >down the Speaking Rock casino, owned by the Tiguas Indians, the >Dallas Morning News reported. > >Bush-Lite Made with Less Leadership, Less Experience, & More Right-Wing >Flavor > >October 8, 1999 Bush's Native Intelligence? > >Forget about George W. Bush's faux split with Dick Armey and Tom >DeLay. The real fight is between Bush and James Madison. Campaigning >in New York this week, the five-year Texas governor tried to answer >one question about local Indian issues, saying, "My view is that >state law reigns supreme when it comes to the Indians, whether it be >gambling or any other issue." [Syracuse Post-Standard, 10/6/99 > >With that comment, Bush contradicted over 200 years of constitutional >law. The Supreme Court, the Constitution and innumerable court >decisions make it clear that United State's unique relationship with >Indian tribes is defined by the tribes and the federal government >(which Bush claims he's ready to lead), not the states. > >George W. Bush vs. James Madison Bush thinks the states have >authority over Indian tribes. Who disagrees with him? Indian tribes: >"The treaties, the Supreme Court, the Constitution and federal law >are crystal clear on this. The federal government has the authority." >-- Oneida Indian spokesman Mark Emery. > >The Supreme Court: "With the adoption of the Constitution, Indian >relations became the exclusive province of federal law." County of >Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation, 470 U.S. 226,2342; 105 S. Ct. 1245, >1251 (1985) (citing Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Pet. 515, 561 (1832)) > >The Constitution: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 gives the Congress >plenary power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among >the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." > >Maybe Armey or DeLay will let Bush borrow one of those copies of the >Constitution that they carry around in their pockets. Unsurprisingly, >Bush "would not elaborate on his position Tuesday, leaving his >statement open to interpretation." [Breidenbach, Syracuse >Post-Standard, 10/6/99 > >Authorized and Paid for by the Democratic National Committee for >changes or for more information, contact: > >Rick Hess Democratic National Committee [EMAIL PROTECTED] 202/863-7168 > >=============================================== Kenneth Bobroff Asst. >Professor University of New Mexico Law School 1117 Stanford NE >Albuquerque, NM 87131 > >Nawa. > >Ted > ======<><><>======<><><>======<><><>======<><><>======<><><> > > Reprinted under the Fair Use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine of international copyright law. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
