Yes or No

In all honesty, what I am writing now might not make a difference. Furthermore, I’ve been told by sources far from being authorities that a person in my position should maintain some sort of neutrality in this matter. I didn’t agree with that months and years ago, and I don’t agree with it now.
I plan on voting “yes” for two of the amendments proposed right now. Admittedly I am somewhat split on how to vote for amendment “A”, as I can see both sides of the issue. But in regards to “B” and “C”, I will vote “yes” on both of them with little if any hesitation.
I have a confession to make here. Years ago, as far back as 2002, maybe even earlier, I could not have given a rip about this issue. A lot of the catchphrases that are being tossed around these days by people who oppose the amendments, and boy have I heard a lot of them, really summed up how I felt. You know “Ah, they just wanna enroll for the money!” or “They had sixteen years to get enrolled (1983-1999), where were they before the casino opened?” and on and on and on. To this day, I can see why people might actually by into that line of thinking, because from a cold-blooded, unfeeling objective point of view, some of those arguments kind of make sense. I can’t honestly say that there aren’t people who want to enroll for the benefits. On the other hand, it often seems that much of the opposition is grounded in similar sentiments, i.e. people oppose it because they fear a dip in their benefits.
What changed my own mind was getting to know a lot of the people who have been adversely affected by the 1999 amendments. Noticed I used the word “people”, because that is what they are. They are families, with children, in fact some of them are children, and what they really want is fairness. I am personally not affected by the proposed amendment. Unless I have a child with another Tribal member, the blood ends at my grandchildren, regardless of how this Constitutional election goes. But I am affected by the 1999 amendment because I have seen a lot of the heartache, division, and ultimately sadness that change had, especially among people who are now good friends.
There are times when I really believe that in order to understand a person’s perspective and feelings you really have to be them, or find some way to magically put yourself in their shoes (or should I say moccasins). Movies and books have been crafted about that subject and there have been many days I wish it were possible, if not for myself at least others. I’ve done my best to try and imagine what it must be like to be one of those parents who has the split siblings. How do they handle that situation, do they wait until the kids come of age and have “the talk”? Do they make them split the trust fund? How do they explain to these kids how this situation arose? I’ve tried my best to visualize myself being part of those families and the feeling, assuming it is close to the real thing, is hardly fun.
A Tribal member who spoke at the December General Council meeting provided what I think was one of the clearest explanations of the problem. He simply said that his Tribal ID card showed “x” amount of blood, and that his kids should have half of that. If their quantum is at least 1/16th, they should be Tribal members. It should be that simple. Unfortunately, under our present requirements, that is hardly the way things go.
I am not going to lie and say that the wording in the amendments is perfect and would solve every single injustice regarding Tribal enrollment. But it is a step in the right direction. Most importantly, I don’t know if or when we will ever have the opportunity to vote on this again. That is why I plan on making the most of it, and hoping for change that counts.