Native Voice One

Native American Radio Network

Fairness

By

The federal government “rushed” payments of $8 billion to help tribal governments navigate the coronavirus pandemic. 
Only rushed isn’t the right word. It’s way more complicated and disappointing than that.

This is Trahant Reports.
By any measure a payment of $8 billion is not enough to mitigate the economic impact of COVID-19 in Indian Country. 
The economy went from, oh, say, 90 miles an hour to 10 miles an hour in an instant. And revenue across the board pretty much stopped flowing in. But on the expense side of the ledger, payroll and other costs of operations, continued to mount. 
Congress basically appropriated the money without parameters, that was left up to the Treasury Department to figure out. 
The first debate centered on whether Alaska Native corporations qualify as “governments” for the purpose of the tribal government relief funds. That question is now in court and 40 percent of the $8 billion are on hold until there is an answer.
Another question is how many people are citizens of tribes? You would think this would be an easy answer. Nope. The Treasury Department came up with its own definition using figures from federal Housing programs. 
A new policy brief by the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development 

looks at how that data is producing winners and losers in Indian Country.  The bottom line is that Housing data is “clearly not reflective of tribal citizens or tribal needs,” says the study by researchers Randall K.Q. Akee, Eric C. Henson, Miriam R. Jorgensen and Joseph P. Kalt. The housing formula “produces arbitrary and capricious allocations of CARES Act funds across tribes.”

The better alternative: Use tribal enrollment data. The study said: “the case is strong that an appropriate allocation rule would employ the current tribal enrollment figures submitted by tribes to the Treasury Department in mid‐April.”

Some of that data was leaked and that means there is a public test that can track both the formula and the fairness of that allocation.

And, as the study points out, this creates an “inequity” because some tribes are under-represented in the funding while others come out ahead. This creates “conditions that are ripe for extensive and intensive challenges and even litigation.”

One lesson from the pandemic. Indian Country needs a better way to collect and maintain data. We need a better gauge of what we have and what’s needed. Data is much more than a measurement; it’s a method of setting priorities. 

Then this is not new. Think about how data collection has always been a part of the people’s story. We counted on buffalo robes, on belts, or in carvings. The data always has helped tell a larger story.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Data – What’s the Story?

By

The numbers are stark.
Last week Navajo Nation health officials reported six new deaths Friday and 180 new cases of COVID-19. That adds up to 1,590 known coronavirus infections across the Navajo Nation and some 58 deaths.
That topline number places the Navajo Nation at 45 out of 55 states and territories, ahead of ten other jurisdictions. 
What’s the story behind the data? 

This is Trahant Reports.

The state and territory data from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention includes three columns: Column A for the state or territory (which should include tribal nations, by the way); the number of confirmed cases; and the number of deaths. But if you insert a new tab, a filter for population, then the story grows even more significant. 
Welcome to the world of the denominator. As one source put it: ‘‘Physicians lie awake at night worrying about numerators. Epidemiologists lie awake at night worrying about the denominators’
As Indian Country Today’s Jourdan Bennett-Begaye reported “denominators are key” to understanding the big picture of COVID-19 in Indian Country.

What population is counted determines our understanding about how widespread the disease is and where it will go next.

Take the Indian Health Service “service population” at 2,562,000. That means the reported infection rate is 0.08 percent. But if you calculate based on the IHS user population of 1.662 million, then the rate is 0.12 percent. 
But that’s only the reported cases. We know this disease can be without symptoms and we don’t have enough testing to know how many people are really infected,
And that will be a much larger number.z
If you use the World Health Organization framework  and the IHS service population that means we will eventually reach 5,778 cases and 275 deaths. 
But numbers again are different if the 2010 Census with the American Indian and Alaska Native population at 5.2 million is used. Then the Indian health system could expect 12,017.2 cases and 572 deaths. 

But all of that changes if a different denominator is used. The problem here is that we know the Census undercounts Indian Country. We don’t know by how many people, though.

This is when that number is absolutely critical.

 

I am Mark Trahant

Free Press

By

Robert Jumper Cherokee One Feather (One Feather picture)

There is an old question about the role of the media in Indian Country? How free should it be? And what’s the best practice?

This is Trahant Reports.

In the 1820s Cherokee Chief John Ross said a press should be as “free as the breeze.” He really didn’t mean that. When he was faced with a Cherokee Phoenix printing stories that he did not like … he supported a change in leadership and appointed a relative as the paper’s editor.

The Cherokee Nation was under incredible pressure to move West. And tribal leaders debated how that difficult conversation should even occur. On top of that the newspapers in Georgia were clearly on the side of removal. And the state of Georgia made it illegal for the Cherokee Nation to hold an election or even to meet. To make sure that the “news” was one-sided the Georgia Guard dumped the lead type from tribe’s newspaper into a deep well.

This was a terrible time. Make no mistake. And a tough moment to support free press.

Then again … one’s point of view about media — pretty much in any democracy — depends on those moments and which side is getting the favorable coverage. (Or not.)

The Eastern Band of Cherokee recently tried to limit coverage of the tribal council sessions to its own newspaper, the Cherokee One Feather. So reporters from non-Indian organizations were forced to cover the proceedings by watching a video feed.

Travis Long is a tribal citizen who works for the Raleigh News and Observer. He told Indian Country Today that he understood the importance of tribal sovereignty, but that a reporter needs to be inside the council chambers instead of watching it on TV. He compared it to being a sportswriter having to cover a game by only watching it on a screen.

Earlier this month the Eastern Band reversed its policy and reopened the meetings to the press.

Robert Jumper, the editor of the tribal newspaper, the Cherokee One Feather, would do more. He called for a new level of transparency, including an improvement in the way the tribe releases public documents. “An informed citizenry is an essential part of representative government,” he said.

This is a new challenge for tribes in the age of data. How do you make sure that information is reliable … and fast.

Tweets and Facebook posts go out instantly, so it’s critical that a government make sure its releases information grounded in facts.

Tribal leaders, like all politicians, bristle when the press is not perfect. Sometimes quotes are not quite right — and perhaps even out of context. But most of the work, the day to day reporting, is a mechanism to let people know what’s going on. And that remains essential.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

2020 Campaign Vision

By

The race to be the next president of the United States heats up this week.

This is Trahant Reports.

We have heard from Iowa and New Hampshire — two states that are less representative of the country as a whole — and beginning now a lot more voters will weigh in.

Nevada kicks off the next round with a caucus this weekend. Then South Carolina and then more than thirty contests in March. In fact some two-thirds of the Democratic delegates will be allocated before the end of March.

And Donald J. Trump is cruising through the Republican primaries in states where there is even a contest. There is little question that the GOP will renominate the president — so much so that many states have cancelled the primary vote.

In order to win the nomination, a Democrat must earn 1,991 delegates for the first ballot and 2,375 on the second. This is where it gets interesting. Most of the primary elections are proportional. So a candidate may win the state but only earn a couple more delegates than the other candidate. There is also a bonus if a candidate tops 50 percent … and with this many candidates that’s not likely.

There are a couple of scenarios worth considering.

First, Senator Bernie Sanders could run away with it all. He has an army of volunteers in every state and is now the front-runner. There are establishment Democrats who are uncomfortable with a Sanders nomination. They fear the word “Democratic socialist” will turn off voters and put more states in play for President Trump. But, there is no one “moderate” that people agree on. And candidates are not likely to quit the race just on this point. On the other hand, Sanders is bringing new voters into the process. One exit poll showed that in New Hampshire, Sanders had more votes from young people than all of the other candidates combined. The case for Sanders is that he is bringing about generational change, and that this is not an ordinary election.

The second scenario is that a lot of people will win states. Perhaps it will be former Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Amy Klobuchar, Mayor Pete Buttigeg, former Mayor Michael Bloomberg or Tom Steyer. If that happens there is a chance no candidate gets the magic number to win the nomination. If not, it will be up to the convention to come up with a candidate. The last time that happened was 1960 with John F. Kennedy.

Indian Country will get a voice in the days ahead. Some of the caucuses in Nevada will be in tribal communities. And Indian Country Today has invited candidates to Arizona for a conversation with Native journalists. Plus there will be a national debate in Arizona in March.

A little more than a month from now we may have a clearer picture about the 2020 election.

I am Mark Trahant.

Budget Proposal

By

The federal budget for next year is out today. May it rest in peace.

This is Trahant Reports.

Every winter the White House releases a budget for the federal government. The document outlines the president’s priorities in the year ahead. Then Congress pretty much ignores that document and enacts a budget of its own. (And that is true no matter which party runs is in control.)

But even if the budget does not become law, it does open a window into the thinking of any presidential administration.

This budget follows a familiar pattern. It will spend $4.8 trillion and carries a promise to balance the budget within 15 years. But to get there it carries deep spending cuts to domestic programs, an idea that Congress has rejected. It also would spend more money on the military and leave Social Security and Medicare benefits the same.

An election year document. Republicans will like the increase in military spending and Democrats are unhappy with the spending cuts.

Last year it was pretty much the same proposal. Then Congress said no until a deal was reached between the White House and House Democrats. This plan erases that deal by imposing an immediate 5 percent cut to all non-defense spending. Agencies that would be hard hit include a 27 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency, fewer dollars for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 9 percent cut to the Department of Health and Human Services, including the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Protection.  (The agencies charged with figuring out how to treat the coronavirus).

A special concern to Indian Country: The proposal to take $700 billion from Medicaid over the next decade. One way the Trump administration hopes to accomplish that goal is by creating waivers for states to swap program flexibility for less funding. The idea is then states could design programs that would better serve citizens. That’s the theory anyway.

** Extra: The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says: “The proposed waivers are a lose-lose proposition for people with Medicaid and for states. Far from promoting better health outcomes, as the administration has claimed, the waivers would worsen people’s health by taking away coverage and reducing access to care. For states, they would mean greater financial risk, with federal funding cuts most likely to occur during recessions, public health emergencies, and other times when states face high demand for coverage and strain on other parts of their budgets. States taking up the proposed waivers should also expect to face litigation, since the waivers appear to violate federal law in several respects.” **

In recent years the Indian Health Service has been dramatically reshaped by Medicaid spending; it now accounts for funding for one out of four patients. And that’s a conservative figure. It’s likely higher.

In the State of Indian Nations, National Congress of American Indians President Fawn Sharp called the federal budget “incompetent.”

Nothing in the document released today will change that perception.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

State of the Union

By

The impeachment trial is at an end. Does that mean we get back to some sort of business as usual? Not likely.

This is Trahant Reports.

There is so much going on this week. The first votes will be cast for the next president of the United States in Iowa. The current president will give his annual State of the Union speech. And the matter of an impeachment trial in the United States Senate comes to an end with a likely acquittal.

Nearly all of the Republican Senators have voted in a bloc to prevent the calling of witnesses or bringing up additional evidence. That’s a clear signal that the votes will not be there to convict Donald J. Trump of high crimes or misdemeanors. As Tennessee’s Senator Lamar Alexander said, “The question is not whether the president did it, but whether the United States Senate or the American people should decide what to do about what he did.”

Alexander wants the voters, not politicians or even judges, should decide the judgment of Donald Trump beginning with the Iowa vote.

Tribal leaders are in a tricky position here. The country’s deep political divide makes it that much harder to get business done in the federal government. Take a stand for impeachment — and Republicans are mad, including tribal citizens who favor that party. The same is true for Democrats who wanted witnesses — and a different outcome.

One question ahead is how will President Trump respond? That answer will come this week during the State of the Union.

The president could be gracious and contrite and and look for a path that bridges politics. That’s exactly what President Bill Clinton did after he was acquitted. Two hours after his Senate vote, Clinton said he was “profoundly sorry” for his actions.

On Super Bowl Sunday Trump hinted at that course. He said: “We’re really looking to giving a very, very positive message.” And a White House spokesman told the Associated Press that his speech will move on.

“This has been a very partisan process and this is an opportunity for him to unify the country around opportunities for all Americans.”

Then there is another alternative, the one we see often on Twitter. As he recently wrote: “The Radical Left, Do Nothing Democrats, don’t want justice when pushing the Impeachment Hoax, they only want to destabilize the Republican Party so they can do better in the 2020 election …”

And it’s this message that is likely to continue on the campaign trail. The Trump re-election campaign now has a threat and the ideal way to solidify its base. And the evidence for that: Exactly the way Republican Senators were convinced during the impeachment trial. This is a campaign of either, or. Either Trump or the socialism of Bernie Sanders. Expect that message through November.

I am Mark Trahant.

Nation’s census begins in Alaska Native village

By

The once every decade census kicks off this week in the village of Toksook Bay, Alaska. Enumerators will be doing what they can to make sure that every village resident is counted.

This is Trahant Reports.

In Toksook Bay there will be Yupik language translators working with the the Census Bureau to make sure the count goes smoothly. But across the country … that’s a real problem.

Natalie Landreth, a senior attorney for the Native American Rights Fund, told Indian Country Today that “zero dollars” are being spent on language assistance in Alaska. She said Native groups were told that if it was important, they should do it on their own.

And that’s not the only problem with the census.

Indian Country is difficult to count for many reasons: Distrust of government, rural geography, the lack of street addresses, transportation, even WiFi.

Across the country demographers figured the last census reflected an undercount of 4.9 percent for Native Americans and an even higher 8 percent in Alaska.

That literally translates into the loss of millions of dollars for roads, health care, and other essential governmental services.

Landreth said it’s important to remember that the census was not designed to count every American Indian and Alaska Native so it’s “an act of rebellion” when it does occur.  She says: “Make yourself heard because I don’t think they want to hear from you.”

The reason why the census is in the US Constitution is representation. Every ten years the data from the census are used to draw congressional districts and in each state legislative districts. This is an attempt to make sure that every person has a voice.

And we have a long way to go in that category. Previous census reports figure that American Indians and Alaska Natives are about two percent of the population. But representation in Congress (and most state legislatures) is far less.

There are a few states that use data to buck the trend, though. Montana has worked hard to make that happen; American Indians make up 6.7 percent of the state and 7.3 percent of the legislature. That’s rare. Most states have little or no Native voice in its governing body. And Congress is only about three-fourths of one percent.

My grandmother used to tell me about life during the Great Depression. She said my grandfather finally found a job with the Census Bureau. It paid one dollar a day.

She told me:

“We found an old railroad box car and moved there. We lived on beans and potatoes for months and months . . . but at least we had our own home and that was better than living with his mother.”

Then, there are a lot of family stories in the census records. By law the documents are sealed for some seventy years … but after that there is a treasure to be found.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Impeached

By

What’s next in the impeachment process? And, will it force President Trump from office?

This is Trahant Reports.

There have only been three presidents who have been impeached by the House of Representatives. Andrew Johnson in 1868. Bill Clinton in 1998. And now Donald Trump.

Impeachment is only the beginning of the process. The next step will kick in later this week when the House votes to name the managers who will then make a case for conviction.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told ABC’s This Week on Sunday that she will formally send the two articles to the Senate. The speaker hopes the Senate will conduct a formal trial, with witnesses, and due process. “Witnesses with firsthand knowledge of what happened. Documentation, which the President has prevented from coming out to the Congress, as we review this. Now the ball is in their court to either do that or pay a price.”

The impeachment trial is political. It takes two-thirds of that body voting to remove a president from office — and that’s unlikely to happen in a body controlled by Republicans.

But there is a lot of drama ahead. For example what will the rules of the trial be? Will there be witnesses? And when? That ruling will be decided by 51 senators.

Some in the Senate see this as nonsense and want to vote to acquit immediately. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham told Fox News: “All I can say is the impeachment articles are a danger to the presidency, the way they impeached the president is un-American. This trial will end in a matter of days, not weeks and he’s going to be acquitted. I hope every Republican votes to acquit and I hope some Democrats will too.”

The politics of impeachment change depending on the party in the White House. The same arguments about witnesses and process that Republicans once made are now those of the Democrats. And the same is true for the Democrats who in Clinton’s day wanted the process over.

Still there are some differences. One is contrition. Bill Clinton admitted doing wrong. “I am profoundly sorry for all I have done wrong in words and deeds. I never should have misled the country, the Congress, my friends or my family. Quite simply, I gave in to my shame.”

Trump, on the other hand, has said his actions were perfect and the impeachment process itself is corrupt.

Indian Country is in a tough spot when it comes to impeachment. Tribal leaders are representing governments that have a direct relationship with the United States. So that means staying focused on the mechanics of how that works. At the same time tribal leaders are political leaders — with views and concerns about how the United States is led.

One final note: The impeachment trial will not be the end of the process. If the Clinton impeachment is a guide, then, there will be a lot of litigation ahead.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Impeachment

By

Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, D-California. (Photo by Gage Skidmore | Creative Commons)

Republicans and Democrats are divided as hearings begin on Capitol Hill

There is a formality to impeachment. It’s not the same as a hearing, this is a House of Congress debating an indictment. It’s solemn event. And the outcome? Well, there are a lot of possibilities.

This is Trahant Reports.

Adam Schiff, D-California, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said the first hearings will begin next week for an impeachment inquiry for President Donald J. Trump.

The first hearing will be Nov. 13 and the second hearing Nov. 15.

This will be the first public airing of any allegations that rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the standard set in the Constitution for removing a president from office.

We already know how divided the House, and the Senate, is already, divided by party identification. But, that is where we begin, not where we end. After public hearings that, too, could change.

There is an interesting range of opinion in the ranks of Indian Country’s representatives in Congress.

Kansas Rep. Sharice Davids, Ho-Chunk, said she supports the House “taking the first step in the impeachment process.” She said she wants to see the people see the facts for themselves.

That’s middle ground in Washington.

New Mexico Rep. Deb Haaland, Laguna Pueblo, said the president “and his friends continue to enrich themselves and abuse their power while New Mexicans are struggling … meanwhile, the president and his administration stonewall Congress and refuse to cooperate with congressional investigations.” She said back in August “they are impeding the ability of Congress to get to the truth.”

And, on the side of the aisle, Republicans Rep. Tom Cole, Chickasaw, and Markwayne Mullin, Cherokeee, of Oklahoma have been opposed to the very process. Cole said this “is not a fair process, it is not an open process, it is not a transparent process. He said, instead, it’s a “limited, closed process with a pre-ordained outcome.”

Mullin said the impeachment inquiry is an attempt to “undo the last election.”

But any outcome is not certain. Democrats, at least right now, do not have enough votes to remove the president.

Another option that could surface down the road is a public censure of some kind from Congress. This is a tool that has been used more than a dozen times, mostly a reprimand of individual serving in the Congress itself.

Congress has other tools, for example, it could strip the salary and benefits from any federal employee who refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

The public will have a say, too. If past impeachment hearings are an indication — there will be a lot of interest (or disinterest). And members of Congress will hear from voters about whether they think the process is fair or not.

So the next few weeks will be history in the making.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Presidential Candidate: Gov. Bullock

By

Montana Gov. Steve Bullock is a Democrat who is campaigning for his party’s nomination for President of the United States.

This is Trahant Reports.

Last week he visited with Indian Country Today — the first time a presidential candidate has ever visited a tribal newsroom, or in this case, a visit to our studios.

The interview was wide ranging, exploring many of the issues that impact Indian Country.

Start with symbols. Clearly that’s matter in government: A portrait of Andrew Jackson? Or flags from every tribal nation. Bullock said in Montana Capitol “the flags of all of our tribal nations are right next to the U.S. and the Montana flag.”

He said visitors from around the world ask about those flags and then learn from their visit something about tribes and the unique relationship.

Bullock said in Montana it’s important to have Native Americans in government representing offices across the board. This, he said, makes any agency better from the weights and measures’ agency to higher education.

“… And I’ve thought about this at the federal level too. Because everyone of my state agencies has something to do with Native Americans. It has something to do with the tribal nations.”

And speaking of education, if elected to the White House, Gov. Bullock says he would double the amount of funding that Indian education gets every year. And that process would include better consultation with the tribes  so that resources are being dictated properly.

“Nation to Nation consultation must occur. And that’s from everything from environmental action to education. You know, I was asked initially, where’s your plan for Indian country? And I can talk about a whole lot of things that I’d like to do,” such as fixing broken promises or reforms called for by the Commission on Civil Rights. “But if you’re actually going to have a real plan for Indian Country, you can talk about what you want to do as a candidate. But if you’re not actually doing nation-to-nation consultation and saying we build this together, then you probably don’t fully understand or appreciate the importance of making sure a government to government consultation creates a path forward.”

Gov. Bullock is a Democrat in a Republican state. And so he makes the case for working across party lines. He was able to convince a Republican-controlled legislature to continue with the expansion of Medicaid — a policy prescription that could be helpful nationally if the courts strike down the Affordable Care Act (and that Medicaid expansion).

Presidential candidates have expressed a lot of interest in Indian Country voters this campaign season. There was a candidate forum in Iowa this summer that included eleven candidates, including the Montana governor, and organizers are talking about another forum in Nevada.

And Indian Country Today has extended an open invitation  to all of the presidential candidates to visit Arizona for an in-depth interview.

I am Mark Trahant.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use our site, we will assume you have given your consent. Click here to opt-out.