Congress considers fulfilling 200-year-old promise to seat Cherokee Nation delegate | PBS NewsHour

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  kavika  •  2 weeks ago  •  23 comments

By:   PBS NewsHour

Congress considers fulfilling 200-year-old promise to seat Cherokee Nation delegate | PBS NewsHour
The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma is moving a step closer to having a promise fulfilled from nearly 200 years ago that a delegate from the tribe be seated in Congress.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Politics Nov 17, 2022 11:55 AM EST

The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma moved a step closer on Wednesday to having a promise fulfilled from nearly 200 years ago that a delegate from the tribe be seated in Congress.

Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin was among those who testified before the U.S. House Rules Committee, which is the first to examine the prospect of seating a Cherokee delegate in the U.S. House. Hoskin, the elected leader of the 440,000-member tribe, put the effort in motion in 2019 when he nominated Kimberly Teehee, a former adviser to President Barack Obama, to the position. The tribe's governing council then unanimously approved her.

WATCH: Supreme Court hears case challenging who can adopt Indigenous children

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described Thursday's hearing as a "key first step toward identifying what actions must be taken to honor this long-standing promise."

"The House Democratic Caucus will continue to explore a path toward welcoming a delegate from the Cherokee Nation into the people's House," Pelosi said in a statement.

The tribe's right to a delegate is detailed in the Treaty of New Echota signed in 1835, which provided the legal basis for the forced removal of the Cherokee Nation from its ancestral homelands east of the Mississippi River and led to the Trail of Tears, but it has never been exercised. A separate treaty in 1866 affirmed this right, Hoskin said.

"The Cherokee Nation has in fact adhered to our obligations under these treaties. I'm here to ask the United States to do the same," Hoskin told the panel.

Hoskin suggested to the committee that Teehee could be seated as early as this year by way of either a resolution or change in statute, and the committee's chairman, Massachusetts Democratic Rep. James McGovern, and other members supported the idea that it could be accomplished quickly.

"This can and should be done as quickly as possible," McGovern said. "The history of this country is a history of broken promise after broken promise to Native American communities. This cannot be another broken promise."

But McGovern and other committee members, including ranking member Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation, acknowledged there are some questions that need to be resolved, including whether other Native American tribes are afforded similar rights and whether the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma is the proper successor to the tribe that entered into the treaty with the U.S. government.

McGovern said he has been contacted by officials with the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and the Delaware Nation, both of which have separate treaties with the U.S. government that call for some form of representation in Congress. McGovern also noted there also are two other federally recognized bands of Cherokee Indians that argue they should be considered successors to the 1835 treaty: the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians based in North Carolina, both of which reached out to his office.

The UKB selected its own congressional delegate, Oklahoma attorney Victoria Holland, in 2021. Holland said in an interview with The Associated Press that her tribe is a successor to the Cherokee Nation that signed the 1835 treaty, just like the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.

"As such, we have equal rights under all the treaties with the Cherokee people and we should be treated as siblings," Holland said.

Only a few Native Americans serve in Congress, including Cole and U.S. Rep. Markwayne Mullin, a citizen of the Cherokee Nation who was elected earlier this month to the U.S. Senate, where he will become the first Native American in that body in nearly 20 years.

"As a member of the Cherokee Nation, I firmly believe the federal government must honor its trust and treaty responsibilities to Indian Nations," Mullin said in a statement. "We are only as good as our word."

Members of the committee seemed to be in agreement that any delegate from the Cherokee Nation would be similar to five other delegates from the District of Columbia, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. These delegates are assigned to committees and can submit amendments to bills, but cannot vote on the floor for final passage of bills. Puerto Rico is represented by a non-voting resident commissioner who is elected every four years.

By —

Sean Murphy, Associated Press Sean Murphy, Associated Press


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Kavika     2 weeks ago

The Treaty of New Echota is crystal clear on this. As per SCOTUS a treaty is the highest law of the land.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @1    2 weeks ago

The Cherokee violated and annulled the Treaty of New Echota  by rebelling and  supporting the Confederacy in the Civil War.  

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1    2 weeks ago

Nice try but it was re-written in 1866 after the war and the original treaty was reaffirmed.

You might want to read the article so you don't look like a fool.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
1.1.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Kavika @1.1.1    one week ago

Damn, viscous own with details to back it up. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.1.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.1    one week ago

 try but it was re-written in 1866 after the war and the original treaty was reaffirmed.

Let's review so you understand. You don't seem to understand either that basis of the claim for a delegate or the relevant history.   The treaty was signed in 1835 and remained in effect until the Cherokee went to war with the USA to protect their right to own slaves and allied themselves by treaty with the Confederate States of America. After the US defeated the slaveholding Cherokee and CSA, a new treaty was signed. The 1835 Treaty  was not "rewritten" whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean and the Treaty of 1866 makes no mention of a delegate for the Cherokee.   But let's say it somehow survived the rebellion and alliance with the CSA.

The Treaty of  1835 doesn't promise a delegate. It promises that Congress will consider it. The first clue to that might be the recognition that no delegate was seated before the Cherokee went to war with the US to protect slavery.    And when you look at the treaty between the Confederacy and their Cherokee allies, you see what an actual commitment to seat a delegate looks like.  Compare the language and you'll understand why their never was a "promise" to seat anyone. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.4  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.3    one week ago
 ARTICLE 7.
6 New Echota Treaty, 7 Stat. 478, 482, art. 7. That Article reads: 
The Cherokee nation having already made great progress in civilization and deeming it important that every proper and laudable inducement should be offered to their people to improve their condition as well as to guard and secure in the most effectual manner the rights guarantied [sic] to them in this treaty, and with a view to 
inducement should be offered to their people to improve their condition
as well as to guard and secure in the most effectual manner the rights
guarantied to them in this treaty, and with a view to illustrate the liberal
and enlarged policy of the Government of the United States towards
the Indians in their removal beyond the territorial limits of the States,
it is stipulated that they shall be entitled to a delegate in the House of
Representatives of the United States whenever Congress shall make
provision for the same.

ARTICLE 1.

Pretended treaty declared void.

The pretended treaty made with the so-called Confederate States by the Cherokee Nation on the seventh day of October, eighteen hundred and sixty-one, and repudiated by the national council of the Cherokee Nation on the eighteenth day of February, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, is hereby declared to be void.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.5  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1    one week ago

That is incorrect. SCOTUS said treaties are the highest law of the land and the only entity that can abrogate a treaty is the US Congress. They never did so the Treaty was always in effect.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1    one week ago

why do you hate Native Americans?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @1    2 weeks ago

... 200 years late. pathetic...

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Guide
1.2.1  Raven Wing  replied to  devangelical @1.2    one week ago

I'll believe it when I see it happen. Hope I live long enough to see it actually happen.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2  CB     2 weeks ago
Members of the committee seemed to be in agreement that any delegate from the Cherokee Nation would be similar to five other delegates from the District of Columbia, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. These delegates are assigned to committees and can submit amendments to bills, but cannot vote on the floor for final passage of bills. Puerto Rico is represented by a non-voting resident commissioner who is elected every four years.

Is this good enough? Is it "sufficient" for delegates? Is it power? Or just influence?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  CB @2    2 weeks ago

It is good enough from the prior president.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.1  CB   replied to  Kavika @2.1    2 weeks ago

Please elaborate. . . .

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
2.1.2  seeder  Kavika   replied to  CB @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

Sorry, it should read precedent.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.3  CB   replied to  Kavika @2.1.2    2 weeks ago

Understood. :)  We'll see and hope it can exert a proper amount of pressure in the dedicate positions to effect positive change. In any case, more NA voices is a big deal! :)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3  CB     2 weeks ago

Congratulations to Native Americans for rising on the 'radar screen' of politics. Welcome! It's so good to see you all!  BTW, in California, just this morning I watched a 'tribal' Thank you for voting NO on Proposition 27 (Results: California Proposition 27: Voters say no to legalizing sports gambling with revenue going toward social causes).

No on Proposition 26 (California Proposition 26: Voters decline to legalize specific types of gambling on Native American lands).

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  CB @3    2 weeks ago

That is good news.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.1  CB   replied to  Kavika @3.1    one week ago

I agree. It is good news! Yahoos keep telling people to succeed; well, those yahoos need to stand down and let people work out their success stories in time. It is not like those yahoos in other states don't have venues for their services and gaming already!

I am sure they will be back. . .the money in California is just too much of a draw. In two years, high probability more gaming propositions (2.0 version) on the ballot.

By the way, what will the Cherokee delegates be looking to advocate for on a regular basis? They must come prepared with an agenda, no?

It's true. I know little and am willing to learn!

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.2  seeder  Kavika   replied to  CB @3.1.1    one week ago

There will be a number of issues that they will advocate for. The first is probably Tribal Sovereignty the case that is now before SCOTUS, ICWA which is huge and any issue that involves natives.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.3  CB   replied to  Kavika @3.1.2    one week ago

Wonderful. I don't know the acronym ICWA, though.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.4  seeder  Kavika   replied to  CB @3.1.3    one week ago

Indian Child Welfare Act.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
4  Gsquared    2 weeks ago

I hope they get this done during the present Congress, because when the Republicans control they House they will undoubtedly do everything they can to thwart the agreement.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Kavika   replied to  Gsquared @4    2 weeks ago

That is probably correct, but with the underlying proof (treaty) if they do try to top it it will end up in SCOTUS.

 
 

Who is online


Greg Jones
Kavika
arkpdx
SteevieGee
squiggy
LynneA
Ozzwald


22 visitors