Tribal disenrollment has become a very contentious issue, but it’s not a new trend by any means. It’s a growing trend akin to a modern-day genocide that has “legally” eliminated thousands of Native people across the United States. As sensationalist as that sounds, tribal disenrollment does not just nullify a person’s tribal affiliation, it strips them entirely of their cultural identity.
Although it is true that they will always be native by blood and spirit, they are no longer recognized as being Native American and deemed ineligible to receive the benefits and privileges afforded to enrolled tribal members, such as access to healthcare, housing, tribal schools, various social and educational programs, land allotments, per capita payments as well as tribal and federal educational stipends and grants. However, the greatest loss that comes from this theft of their identity is that it severs the connection that we all have as native people to our community, to our traditions and to each other.
But let’s be honest, the ramifications of disenrollment go beyond just affecting the social, economic and spiritual well-being of those who are facing disenrollment and those who have been disenrolled. It threatens the relationship between tribal leadership and tribal members because it calls into question the fairness and legality of their motives, which is seemingly fueled by greed and political corruption. It threatens the continued economic growth and stability of tribal and native owned business ventures because the negative press surrounding tribes involved in revoking tribal membership en masse may cause investors to second guess or pull their funding. It threatens our federal funding as well as our recognition as tribal entities, since funding and federal/state tribal recognition is often determined by the number of tribal members. What’s worse is that it CAN happen to anyone, at anytime and in any tribe regardless of their blood quantum, ancestral lineage, traditional participation or community standing.
In article 33 of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People states that:
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of their institutions in accordance with their own procedures.
Meaning that it is entirely up to the tribes to decide the criteria and procedures that a person must meet and undergo for tribal membership. State and federal governments still maintain their own criteria for determining who is native, but, when it comes to tribal membership, the tribe has the last word as sovereign nations. Herein lies part of the problem because corrupt tribal leadership has learned to exploit our sovereignty as means of legally justifying this new wave of cultural genocide, which they do by amending tribal constitutions and disputing the accuracy of the original tribal rolls.
In my tribe, our constitution states that to be enrolled you must meet the following requirements:
The membership of the Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians shall consist of the following persons, provided they have not received land or money as an adult by virtue of being enrolled as members of another Indian Tribe:
(a) All persons whose names appear on the official membership roll of the Tribe as of October 14, 1966, and
(b) All persons who are of at least one-eight (1/8) degree Otoe-Missouria Tribal blood.
Dual Enrollment Prohibited. No person who is an enrolled member of another federally recognized tribe or band of Indians shall, at the same time, be a member of the Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians.
This was not always the case. Before our constitution was amended in 2009, an enrollee had to have at least ¼ degree of Otoe-Missouria blood. Many tribes use blood quantum and descendantship to decide membership eligibility, but the use of blood quantum has always been questionable when determining tribal membership. Mainly because tribes can amend the degree of blood required for tribal membership and because every inter-tribal/racial marriage reduces blood quantum; therefore, eventually there will be no one left with the “appropriate” amount of native blood required by federal standards. In the past, tribes lowered the blood quantum to allow for an increase in membership, but now the trend is raising the blood quantum to limit or decrease membership. When this change in policy occurs, individuals as well as entire families that have lived within their tribal communities and whose lineage is undeniable can and are being disenrolled.
Now the issue of tribes disputing the original tribal rolls as grounds of disenrollment is more complicated. The original tribal rolls that tribes use to determine membership are names found on the General Allotment Act (Dawes Act), Durant Roll, or other BIA compiled rolls. There are two major problems with using these rolls to determine descendantship, the first one being that the rolls only show membership within a very limited time frame. Within tribal constitutions, they can specifically base descendantship on a specific year’s roll. For example, the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe’s constitution states that membership shall consist of persons and descendants whose names appear on the rolls taken in 1882, 1883, 1885 and 1891. The second problem with using these base rolls do not accurately reflect tribal membership because they often exclude many key figures in tribal histories. Not to mention that the rolls incorrectly recorded native names, excluded children and members unable to sign due to illness, reluctance, etc.
Take for example the Grand Ronde tribal members facing disenrollment, the grounds for their membership revocation have to do with their ancestor not being listed on the original tribal roll. They are the proud descendants of Tumwalth, the leader of the Wah-lal-la band of Tum-waters. In 1855, he was one of 47 tribal leaders that signed the Willamette Valley Treaty that formed the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde. A year before the tribe was formally recognized, he was executed which explains why he was not included. However, when his descendants enrolled with the tribe, the evidence that they presented to prove their lineage and the prominent role that Tumwalth played within the tribe and it’s formations was valid and they granted citizenship. So the question is, “why, after twenty years, is the tribe revoking their tribal membership when they are not disputing that the descendants of Tumwalth are who they say they are or the role that Tumwalth played in their tribal history?”
Tribes have used external audits to review and amend tribal records and historical documents to weed out the undesirables under the guise of strengthening the bloodline and removing members with no tribal association. Reggie Lewis of the Chukchansi tribe quoted, “You have people who want to be tribal members, where no one knows who they are or where they came from. We are sworn to uphold the Constitution. And basically that’s what we try to do”. Nice try, Mr Lewis. Of the 400 members that have been disenrolled over the last 5 years, many were born and raised on tribal lands. They know their traditions as well as their cultural and familial heritage. In fact, one of the members robbed of her citizenship was one of the last fluent speakers of the Chukchansi language.
The claim that tribes are only trying to strengthen their communities, trying to uphold their tribal constitutions and that it has nothing to do with money is ridiculous. Disenrollment is all about money and control. It is a weapon that corrupt and small-minded tribal leaderships are using to band-aid waning profits from tribal business ventures and to get rid of their political opposition. You don’t see non-per capita tribes revoking the membership of their people en masse, despite the fact their financial conditions are far more dire. You don’t see them pushing their tribes towards extinction because they are too lazy and irresponsible to discuss why profits are declining and too proud to decrease or suspend per capita payments until they are more financially stable. Per capita payments are a blessing and not a right. Preserving the continued existence of our tribes is a priority that should come before continued profit-sharing.
There is no honor or justice in taking away an individual or family’s cultural and spiritual heritage because of political corruption and greed. We have struggled for centuries to protect our heritage and existence against the never-ending threat of cultural genocide by the government and mainstream society. It’s just downright tragic that natives are now being stripped of their cultural identities and land at the hands of their own people. It makes absolutely no sense when you consider the cultural, genealogical, political, and economical implications that terminating a family’s tribal membership will have on current and future generations.
You many think that this will never be an issue you face, but the truth is that it affects us all. The moment that we start amending each other out of existence is the moment that we allow the government and the media power to do the same. The sacrifice that our ancestors made so that we could continue to exist is not honored by allowing the continued genocide of our people.