Saturday, September 22, 2007

Reading Minds

We met on Friday regarding the Special Constitutional Election. There wasn’t a whole lot to talk about, other than that we need to make clear to members what exactly is going on. For the second time in three weeks, I was told that we were off the ball somewhat in terms of educating members on this whole thing. I could help but roll my eyes at that comment, because up until now, just doing anything on this topic, whether a letter, article, or announcement even, has been a chore, a painstaking task of building consensus on an issue in which there would never be any consensus. We’ve never had the full support of Council on this, and about the only way we would ever arrive at consensus would be to bring in new Council members. It has been that difficult.
I’ve been trying to get a grip on what exactly has happened in the last week, especially regarding enrollment. Most of Council seems pretty calm and okay with what is taking place. All we are doing now is waiting, waiting for the BIA to give us the green light and clarify a few major points, one being whether the registration process would need to commence anew, the other a simple date for the election. Whether there is some sort of plan ready to take off once we get those answers I can’t exactly say. I was never privy to the apparent discussions that took place prior to the hasty decision last week. Had not somebody else pointed out that we still had Q & A sessions scheduled next week, I can’t help but wonder if those would have ever been caught at all.
Although I am only a fraction of the way through Barack Obama’s book “The Audacity of Hope”, there is already one passage that sticks out. He points out that those in positions of power rarely feel the real consequences of their decisions. I can’t think of a truer notion right now. In communicating with a number of people who’ve waited since 1999 on this issue, the sudden change in plans is apparently sickening. One person I spoke with said she felt like throwing up when word got to her about the change in plans last week. It has been gut-wrenching and stressful, and could grow to be more so later on.
All of that of course makes me wonder how this might have been handled had some of us on Council been directly affected by the whole enrollment mess. What if our kids had gotten the letters notifying of pending dis-enrollment? What if we were the ones whose membership hinged on the election that likely takes place in a few months? I can think of a few more what-ifs.
I’ve been trying to gauge how some of my co-workers feel about all this, to be specific what spurred the decision to change things up. While two Council members have been, to their credit, fairly clear on how they feel, some of the others just seem to be going with the flow, following the lead of those who feel more strongly about the issue, especially the definition of Grand Ronde blood. It seems, quite honestly, that the decision to separate that portion of the amendment was made specifically so that section would fail. Why that would be I can once again only speculate, but my hunches are pretty strong right now. I could always ask, really, but something tells me getting a truthful response is highly unlikely.
It’s times like these that I wish I could read minds. So we wait. Business continues for us. For some Tribal members and families, things might never again be the same.

5 comments:

Unknown said...

Honestly Chris,
I would like to hear why people are opposed to this definition. Also to why they are for the proposed definition.

Unknown said...

I want to thank you Chris. You arew keeping all of us members informed as to some of what goes on over there and knowing you will not be on the councils, Most Favorite List too. I hope thru all this we as members understand what we are fighting. I have been talking to as many members as I can to listen and to READ all the things we can to learn more. I hope that we can get all members who can vote to actually vote next election as I feel this is going to help us all or return us to the old days and we need all members to get involved and to vote. We will not be able to blame anyone but ourselves if we don't work together to vote for a council we can all feel comfortable with in letting them take care and manage our inheritence. I appreciate your honesty Chris and hope to see it through all the years you are on council.
Thanks. Vonnie

Unknown said...

Sorry about my misspelled words, tried to fix them but hit publish instead, oh well you all get the gist of my words.
Vonnie

Jennifer O'Neal said...

Chris,

If possible, I know you are busy, but can you please clarify or describe what it means if the Grand Ronde blood amendment fails? I am very, very, very confused!!!Any information would be greatly appreciated. I too am so disappointed that this is happening. This is only going to make members more confused. Help! I need clarification! Also, can you define what Grand Ronde blood is? So I guess since I am mostly Chinook I am not really Grand Ronde. The Tribe basically used me to get their numbers in the beginning for Restoration but now they don't want me. I can't help it, but this is how I feel.

Jennifer

Chris Mercier said...

Yetiva,

I can't really speak as to why some people are opposed to the proposed definition of Grand Ronde blood. My guess is they feel we shouldn't allow blood from other tribes. It could also be that they see the blood as being diluted later on. Heck it could be that some see it as a threat to future generations of their family. I'm really not sure, that is the hint I got from one person at the Public Hearing. Some also seem to see the proposed definition as not being historically accurate.
From my perspective, a lot of the issue is split families, and two of the three proposed amendments would help many of those, though not all.

Jennifer,

If the proposed definition of Grand Ronde blood fails to pass during the election, then about 15-20% of the 300 or so people who would be eligible to enroll would not be able to do so. Also, I believe that would mean we have to disenroll those 35 kids. Before anyone spreads that, please let me confirm when I return to the office next week. I would like to be sure.
As far as defining Grand Ronde blood, well, that is in the Constitution. That is the simple answer. The more complicated answer is that people will have differing definitions of what it should be, historically accurate or not.
Sometimes this whole enrollment thing reminds me of the national debate on immigration. I know there are some huge differences, but I see parallels. It's kind of like defining what is an "american". I know some people have differing notions of what is a "real" american, and so it is with Grand Ronde blood.

Chris