# Somewhat stupid vague questions about native Americans **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 1, 2003, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347 "2003-05-01T11:52:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/1 "2003-05-01T11:52:35Z")
Are Native Americans US citizens or not? Could a tribe or tribes with a reservation say "screw this reservation stuff, we want to be part of, say, California’? How would they go about it? If they did, would they still be able to keep the casinos? If they did, would the state have to kick in a bunch of money to egt the schools and hospitals up to state standards? (assuming of course, they are not now) Could Calfiornia, or some other state say ‘we’re not letting them in’? ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/2 "2003-05-01T11:53:56Z")
I understand that they may not want to. Just a ‘what if’? ---
**Author:** ![Ice\_Wolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/dfb087/32.png) [@Ice\_Wolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ice_Wolf)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/3 "2003-05-01T12:04:35Z")
Well, the answer to the bit about citizenship is [yes](http://www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/jb/jazz/citizens_1). All Native Americans were granted citizenship in 1924. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/4 "2003-05-01T16:55:57Z")
It has happened, although not at the will of the tribe involved. In 1954, in keeping with a policy of assimilation of Indian tribes, the U.S. government withdrew recognition of the Menonimee Tribe of Wisconsin and terminated their reservation. After agitation by some of the Menonimee, the tribe and reservation was restored in 1973. From this [Menominee site](http://www.menominee.com/treaty/history.html): > [@](#): > > In 1954 the United States congress enacted the Termination Act, taking away Menominee recognition as Indians and dissolving U.S. trust responsibility. This was done in order to negate all responsibility of congress to Indian Tribes. The tribe no longer existed in the eyes of the U.S. we were no longer Indians by the stroke of a pen. It was at this point that the tribe became subject to State of Wisconsin taxation laws, and fell under many State regulations. > > Prior to termination, the tribe was economically self sufficient having its own electric power plant, telephone company, hospital, and schools. . . . > > At the time of termination, the tribe had 234,000 acres of land. We lost 17,000 acres of land due to the effects of termination. With the stroke of a pen, enacting the termination plan, the tribe was subject to state taxation, which resulted in a $750,000 tax bill each year. The hospital was closed because it could not meet state building codes, where previously it had to meet federal building codes. As the tribe could not afford to maintain or pay the taxes on business ventures and assets, we were forced to sell the phone company, and close the electric power plant. Then our unemployment reached to record levels (the highest in the state). Our ten million dollars saved, was quickly lost, and the tribe was penniless. Shortly after a land sales scheme was forced upon us and the tribe lost 11 spring fed lakes, to create Legend Lake for a tax base. Termination was a social and economic disaster. > > In 1973, the President of the United States of America signed into law the Restoration Act. It was this act which restored the reservation to Federal Status. This was due to a group of Menominee who had worked to restore the tribe. This Act provided for updating tribal enrollment, transfer of tribal assets into Federal trust, development of a new constitution, and the election of a governing body, the Menominee Tribal Legislature. This little experiment went so poorly that I don’t believe it was attempted with other tribes. If a tribe wanted to, it could presumably vote to dissolve itself. This might require assent of the Federal government. Then the reservation, and any casinos or other facilities, would become subject to any relevant state laws and regulations. It’s hard to see this happening, however. ---
**Author:** ![kenibbling\_pin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3be4f8/32.png) [@kenibbling\_pin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenibbling_pin)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/5 "2003-05-01T17:56:34Z")
From Ice Wolf: \>\>Well, the answer to the bit about citizenship is yes. All Native Americans were granted citizenship in 1924.\<\< I thought that had happened alot earlier. But probably just to certain tribes. I read a book on the subject a while back. When the reservations were first created the US government made certain tribes official citizens of the US. The government then decreed (made a law) that the tribe should move to the reservation. If the tribe member said no then they were arrested for breaking the law and forced to go to the reservation. Had they not agreed to be a citizens they could have ignored the government but because they were citizens they could not disobey a federal law. Sneaky. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/6 "2003-05-01T18:24:01Z")
Yes, native Americans are all full American citizens in the eyes of the US government. Any indian can move anywhere, they aren’t restricted to reservations of course. But I don’t see any advantages in a tribe trying to revoke the reservation status of their lands. Tribes already are supposed to get federal money from the BIA, so in theory they don’t need state money. And if they disolved their reservation status, of course all state laws would apply to them, including laws against gambling. The reservation laws have been changed to allow gambling, but state laws mostly haven’t. That’s the only advantage indian casinos have over other casinos. And I’m not sure, but I imagine a tribe would have to get permission from the federal government. After all, the reservations were set up as treaties between the feds and the tribes, I don’t think any state governments were involved. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/7 "2003-05-01T21:06:42Z")
Indian affairs guy checking in. What do you want to know? In the business, we refer to the period from the passage of P.L. 83-280 in 1953 until the Nixon Administration ushered the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act in 1972 as the “[Termination Phase](http://www.nau.edu/natcap/aits11.htm).” And believe me when I say that a lot of tribes heard the federal equivalent of that famous Linda Hamilton line. I know that in the late '50s and early '60s some thirty California tribes alone were nixed from the federal list. Current policy is that any terminated tribes which wish to re-establish their relationship with the federal government may apply to Congress to do so. I think that at this point many of them have. As far as I know, there are no tribes which currently want to end their government-to-government relationship with Washington, D.C. To the contrary, there are well over two hundred fifty organizations which have officially notified the BIA’s Branch of Acknowledgment and Research (BAR) the intent to apply for federal recognition. These entities are not terminated tribes–terminated tribes are specifically prevented from undergoing this process. Instead these are entities which were either once recognized and have since been dropped off the official list (one recent petitioner was dropped from the list due to a clerical error and spent decades trying to rectify the mistake) or were never officially recognized by the feds at all–usually tribes which were resident in the original thirteen states, which is why some of you have noticed these “new” tribes popping up in places like Connecticut. In truth, all petitioners must meet the most stringent criterea in order to be federally recognized, including remaining a social, political, and genealogical entity from the point of first contact. In the case of the Mohegan tribe, for example, first contact was in the 1600s and their petition successfully proved their continuous existence for almost 350 years. BAR has been averaging slightly more than two decisions a year, which means the last poor tribe to give notice can look forward to a theoretical wait of 125 years if nothing is done to fix the process. In practice, it winds up being a much more practical ten to twenty years from notice of intent. If I may make a rather partisan statement based entirely on my years of personal experience, states would like nothing better than to snap up the tribes, their land bases, and their sovereign immunity. In fact, state governments are the very worst and most dangerous enemies that tribes have. When they are not overtly malicious toward tribes, they are often woefully ignorant of the relationship (or more technically, the _lack of a relationship_) which they have with tribes. When states don’t get their way, they litigate, and the collective weight of a thousand tiny victories against tribes is beginning to stress tribal sovereignty to the breaking point. Tribes were generally reserved the very worst territory that could be found for them, which also happens to often contain valuable minerals and other natural resources. Furthermore, it was cheap and convenient to cut highways and railroads through Indian territory, so for awhile in the 1970s and 1980s tribes discovered they could make a killing by offering tax-free gas and convenience store items along their sections of the highway (which _really_ pissed off the states). If a tribe is lucky enough to be located somewhere other than BFE, and its casino operations begin to show a profit, local landowners outside of reservations get ticked because their property taxes rise, while the states simultaneously bitch about the _loss_ of tax revenue on the reservation land which they cannot tax. And there are constant jurisdictional disputes between tribes and states which fail to negotiate cross-deputization law enforcement agreements, water and riparian rights agreements, and sometimes treaty fishing or other arrangements. The states of course tend to use their Congressional delegations (and now the Supreme Court, which was once the best protector of tribal rights) to erode Indian sovereignty in these disputes, and are steadily making progress toward a _de facto_ termination of all tribes nationwide–helped along by a former governor who until just prior to becoming President felt that tribes should be subservient to state law (in direct contravention of two centuries of case law and legislation). No state would ignore the opportunity to accept a termination of tribal status if such an opportunity arose. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/8 "2003-05-01T21:25:41Z")
Well, they are not really sovereign nations, either. They are subject to Federal Law, and of course we handle all their “foriegn” affairs. They used to call such enities “semi-autonomous”. As a similie, would you not say they were similar to each being another US State? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2003, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/9 "2003-05-01T22:41:37Z")
Colibri: You wouldn’t care to quote something that’s not so obviously one-sided about that issue, would you? ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2003, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/10 "2003-05-02T01:06:13Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **DrDeth** : > As a similie, would you not say they were similar to each being another US State? Absolutely. In fact, at one time tribes had an arguably _greater_ level of sovereignty than the states did, as they were not subject to federal law outside of the governing of their foreign affairs as you pointed out. That changed quickly, however. But it’s still “[sovereignty](http://www.usdoj.gov/otj/sovtrb.htm),” even if it’s accorded to a domestic dependent nation. States are also considered under U.S. law to be “sovereign,” in that they are internally autonomous and immune to lawsuits. So, too are tribes, but that sovereignty has been increasingly restricted to not apply to tribal members off the reservation and sometimes even non-tribal members _on_ the reservation, and a hundred other exceptions. It’s a pain in the ass to figure it out, and every two-bit assistant attorney general in the country thinks he or she has an angle they can use to fuck over the Indians. Some of them actually do, too. **Monty** , I can give you a pointer in the right direction anyway. Check [25 CFR 903b.](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/25/903b.html) for the mechanism of the restoration. [Here is a statement](http://www.senate.gov/~judiciary/oldsite/61099rf2.htm) by Senator Russ Feingold about the Menominee Termination: > [@](#): > > In 1954, Congress enacted “termination” legislation eliminating the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin’s federal trust status. At that time, the Menominee Tribe was ill-prepared to function outside of the federal trust system. The Tribe’s lack of readiness became quickly apparent when, upon Termination, the Tribe was plunged into years of severe impoverishment and community turmoil. > > … > > This settlement cannot undo the suffering of the Menominee people. The reservation, the boundaries of which are entirely co-terminous with the boundaries of Menominee County, is acknowledged to still be experiencing some of the most significant levels of poverty and economic dislocation in my entire state. The compensation for the lack of management of forestry and other reservation resources provided in this settlement, though it cannot undo the past, can help the Menominee Nation to seek a bright future. And [here is a statement](http://www.house.gov/markgreen/PRESS/1999/May99News/NRIndianSettle.htm) from Representative Mark Green, noting that the United States had managed to drag out the case for thirty years. Note also that Green’s generous bill still prevents the Menominee from using the settlement money to take any of its alienated land back into trust–and therefore off the state tax rolls. I’m sure the tribe was outraged at that. But that’s what it’s all about in this job: outrage. You wouldn’t believe what we’re doing to our own people, against our own laws, every single day of the year. It’s allowed to happen because we as a collective entity refuse to believe that we did what we did, that we’re doing what we’re doing, and the number on the price tag which such a gross violation of our own laws carries with it. They find us in the right in the courts every week of every year. But you can’t make 'em pay, and often they don’t. I still think it’s fighting the good fight. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2003, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somewhat-stupid-vague-questions-about-native-americans/172347/11 "2003-05-02T01:51:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Monty \* > \*\*Colibri: > > You wouldn’t care to quote something that’s not so obviously one-sided about that issue, would you? \*\* Why? Do your own research. I pointed out it was a Menonimee site. Obviously it’s going to present their own perspective on the issue. My interest, however, was to respond to the OP by showing that the situation he postulated had already ocurred. If you feel the information on the site is inaccurate, or that termination of tribal status and the reservation was good for the Menonimee, go ahead and make your case.