Rhetoric, and doesn't slightly describe my position. Increased representation, (appropriate) self-determination, and "appropriate" funding to jump start their economies (until they become financially independant enough to support themselves). Nothing else was said, but many other statements were extrapolated.
Nope, the original arguments were to "clarify" Native Americans unique legal status under law. Many members were under the "impression" that the law did not distinguish between "indigenous nations" and "regular citizens" of the United States. However, the law does "state" that they are "separate legal entities with in the United States of America and not obliged directly under state and federal law". It did not "describe" representation which I have said several times, but clearly you have not read (very typical for you in responding to a post which you disagree with).
What was said, is that the current status of Native American representation is at best "unclear" and they often get "underrepresented" by their "supposed representatives". They border a very "in between" place in the law. And no one has "bothered" to find out "how" exactly Native Americans will be best "represented". Native "nations" are "not" a part of the state so it makes no sense to "share" representation when their representation clearly differs from that of their neighboring state. As it were now, they are not "directly" represented, and many "requests" to their representatives are often ignored or remain unheard. And there has been rhetoric slugged around, but no clarification of how Natives will currently be represented.
How will natives get "actual" direct representation? It is clear that the current system of government is failing to do the job and failing to meet the needs of the local people. The BIA is a corrupt institution, and local representatives for the vast majority of the time don’t listen to the Native people. It is clear that “representation” will be better in the hands of the locals instead of the federal and or state government. Several nations have delegated the "right" of local representation in the national arena to "nations which exists in their borders". This is "certainly" not something which is new, as people here seem to suggest.
Last edited:
