Anyone with a fleeting knowledge of
the troubled history of the White Earth Reservation in northern
Minnesota will understand that questions over the legitimacy of
tribal membership and leadership, along with the more recent
controversy of absentee voting, are at the core of more than a
century of internal conflict. It is, perhaps, a tribute to the public
relations skills of White Earth Chair Erma Vizenor that she has been
able to push through a constitution in violation of the one, under
which she governs entirely by mail-in ballots with provisions to open
reservation enrollment to anyone with remote tribal ancestry, to the
universal acclaim of reporters, academics and activists who should
know better.
It was reported in the Fargo
Forum the day before the election that 2,000 ballot requests had
been received and sent out over the course of a month, fairly typical
of White Earth election turnouts. But when the ballots were being
tabulated, the vote count had suddenly nearly doubled in the course
of one day, to 3,492. None of the press reports the following day
took note of this mysterious spike, though some suggested the
higher-than-average turnout was evidence of heightened interest in
the historic election. If so, one would be hard pressed to find
evidence of it in the sparsely-attended public meetings, at which the
vast majority of attendees expressing an opinion spoke out against
the draft constitution. Social media sites such as the White Earth’s
Voice for a Nation reflected broad and deep opposition to the
proposed constitution.
Since taking office without benefit
of election in 1996 in the wake of her predecessor’s conviction for
financial and (absentee) vote fraud, Vizenor lost the reservation
vote in 1998, but won a special absentee election after the ballots
were seized. She was defeated for reelection as secretary treasurer
in 2002, but came back to win election as chairman in 2004, despite
losing the reservation vote to convicted former chairman Darrell
(Chip) Wadena. She won reelection handily in 2008 and set out to
rewrite the constitution, only to be delayed by an unexpectedly
determined opposition movement. Last year, she again lost the
reservation vote, but her absentee vote total was so high that she
received 55 percent of the overall vote in the primary and thus did
not have to compete in the general election.
Beyond the issue of potential fraud
(it was proven that in previous elections votes were cast in the name
of deceased tribal members), many White Earth residents complain that
their elections are often decided by those who will not have to live
under the consequences of their choice. An imperfect analogy would be
if Minnesota elections were open to all former citizens of the state,
then expanded to include all future descendants of anyone who had
lived in the state. Minnesotans would undoubtedly feel
disenfranchised and frustrated by their inability to campaign for
change with such a far-flung electorate with little personal stake in
the outcome.
But even this analogy fails to
consider the cultural consequences to an Anishinaabe Ojibwe people
subjected to one and one-half centuries of coercive assimilation
policies. Nor does it consider the effects upon the other five
reservations of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, who have been
politically united for more than a century and share a common
constitution and mutual interest in Ansihinaabe treaty rights,
cultural integrity and tribal land. There was no authorization for
the vote by tribal referendum or approval by the MCT Tribal Executive
Committee (made up of two representatives from each reservation), the
two constitutionally prescribed means of amending the tribal
constitution.
An acquaintance of mine informed me
in the wake of the constitutional balloting that he became an Indian
that morning. After I congratulated him on his racial makeover, he
explained that his father was a White Earth descendant and he was now
eligible for tribal membership. While I was dubious about the
benefits he anticipated receiving from the new policy, he pointed out
that his friend who was a White Earth descendant had obtained a
$200,000 tribal home mortgage. With neo-Natives such as this lining
up to become reservation enrollees, it is likely that the Anishinaabe
of White Earth will soon become a minority in their own tribe, as
membership is expected to double or even triple under the new
constitution.
Marvin Manypenny, one of the leaders
of the MCT constitutional reform movement that arose from
then-chairman Wadena’s support for the controversial White Earth Land
Settlement Act, said implementation of the constitution would be the
death knell for the tribe and would expand and institutionalize the
dictatorial powers of the reservation government.
“If the TEC approves this, it will
have a domino effect. It’ll totally dismantle the tribe and people
won’t have anything to say about it,” Manypenny said. “What
[Vizenor]’s doing is asserting absolute power.”
When the proposed White Earth Nation
Constitution was first unveiled in 2009, it prompted tribal members
to petition under the existing constitution for the recall of its
architect, White Earth Reservation Business Committee (RBC) Chair
Erma Vizenor. After the first petition, requiring the signatures of
one-fifth of resident members, was rejected for allegedly
insufficient verification of tribal identity, tribal members
petitioned a second time complete with enrollment numbers.
Under the tribal constitution such a
petition requires a removal by the five-member RBC or an up or down
recall vote by the reservation electorate. The RBC chose simply to
disregard the petition and forcibly suppress a protest encampment
reviving the name and tactics of Camp Justice, a movement that
Vizenor joined as a springboard to political office. It went on to
enact a Prohibited Conduct Code banning tribal members from
exercising First Amendment rights (incorporated into the MCT
Constitution) of assembly, protest and free speech and subjecting
them to one-year jail terms, which had been the maximum tribal court
sentence under the federal Indian Civil Rights Act until the Indian
Law and Order Act of 2010 expanded tribal sentencing authority to
three years for a single offense and up to nine years for multiple
counts.
White Earth was one of the most
notorious victims of the late-19th century federal Indian allotment
policy, by which tribes were divested of some three-fourths of their
lands reserved under international treaties with the United States.
In the case of White Earth, the bulk of individual reservation
allotments were wrongfully issued by U.S. agents to so-called
mixed-bloods, then swindled from them – and others designated as
such by racist eugenicists – under legislation sponsored by
Minnesota politicians with intimate ties to the powerful lumber
industry.
In contemporary terms, the political
struggle within White Earth dates back to at least 1905, when
hereditary chief Charles Wright petitioned the U.S. on behalf of the
so-called full-bloods to purge from tribal membership rolls a coterie
of mixed-bloods who subsequently tried to establish themselves as the
political leaders and economic brokers of the Minnesota Chippewa and
their land. After an initial administrative victory for the
full-bloods, federal courts ruled that tribal citizens could not be
stripped of their dubious membership rights.
The issue remains a sensitive one a
century later, complicated further by erroneous blood-quantum
formulas devised by the U.S. government and the more liberal
Anishinaabe reckoning by social and cultural affiliation. Many tribal
members have expressed sympathy with families who wish to enroll
their children below the established blood quantum formula and argued
for different methods of addressing the issue. The extensive Wright
petition files indicate that there was a process, by which
individuals who wished to join the Anishinaabe community could be
accepted by councils of the people if satisfied with their loyalty
and adherence to cultural norms. Other criteria, such as knowledge of
the language, culture and history of the tribe might also be employed
to ensure that the motives of would-be adoptees are sincere.
If history has shown that it is
exceedingly difficult to remove individuals from tribal rolls, the
new constitution would make itself virtually beyond reform or
revocation. In order to amend the constitution, a two-thirds vote
would be required, but to even get such a referendum on the ballot a
more onerous threshold of 30 percent of eligible voters would also be
needed. The record turnout in the Nov. 19 constitutional ballot, if
shown to be valid, would not have met the 30 percent mark of existing
White Earth members, soon to be doubled or tripled. Furthermore, the
White Earth Nation constitution would close the door on any
grassroots attempt to recall elected officials, requiring signatures
of two-thirds of all eligible voters, an order of magnitude more than
have ever voted in tribal elections.
Manypenny said the Bureau of Indian
Affairs has declined requests by tribal members to uphold their
constitutional rights, despite its assigned role in the
constitutional amendment process. Similarly, Manypenny said, the
Tribal Executive Committee of the MCT, which claims the exclusive
right to interpret the tribal constitution, has refused efforts to
put the issue on the agenda of its last two meetings.
“We’re going to be totally
decimated by those wannabes,” Manypenny said. “We’re like a voice
crying in the wilderness and we have nowhere to turn.”
But for the first time in more than
two decades, the grassroots Anishinaabe have an attorney on their
side. Frank Bibeau, a White Earth enrollee who was twice removed by
force from his position as tribal attorney for the Leech Lake MCT
reservation due to power shifts in the governing RBC, has
independently challenged the constitutional election in tribal court
and characterized the White Earth vote as a hoax.
“The people have to understand
what their rights and powers are and no one wants to let them to do
that because in the Third World, the way you stay in power is to keep
people poor, divided and ignorant. And we have that everywhere on our
reservations,” Bibeau said in a radio interview. “I believe under
the constitution that what we would have to do is have a referendum
and I think the referendum should have two questions: Do we go
forward as one Minnesota Chippewa Tribe as we have been, as one large
group, or are we going to go in six different directions … If we’re
all going to go in one direction, then we have to act like one tribe.
And if we’re going to have one tribe, then I think we have to have
something like a constitutional convention.”
Jeff Armstrong served as interim
editor for The Circle from 1994-95. His articles have appeared in
Counterpunch, High Plains Reader, Indigenous Policy Journal, News
From Indian Country and other publications.