West Valley Summer

For years I have been saying that I would be sure to take pictures of the wheat and other grains during the summer. The West Willamette Valley turns into fields of gold everywhere, and then sadly, at least for aesthetics, it is all harvested. But for a few weeks every year, the place is truly golden.

Political evolution, again

I got the first actual campaign letter today of the season. At least, it was the first for me. Even then, it wasn't really addressed to me, but to the person whose mail I am charged with taking care of. You get the picture.
Anyway, it wasn't really a letter, but a postcard. The card didn't really get into much depth, or issues, or really anything of substance, preferring to focus on the gold and purple logo and three-word slogan that have become nearly ubiquitous the last three years. I suspect that is mostly because the senders of the postcard, since the point was to ask you to vote for all three of the candidates whose names are listed, must be very confident that by now they have solid name-brand recognition, which isn't beyond reason as the Wisdom, Integrity, Family party have really dominated the last two Council elections. Indeed, by the end of the summer, I may end up being the only non-Wisdom, Integrity, Family party Tribal Council member left. I'm not going to lie, that is not a prospect which makes me optimistic, even giving the benefit of the doubt to some of this party's members alongside whom I work.
In looking on Grand Ronde On-Line I could see last night that my brother finally posted an introduction of his political action committee, the Grand Ronde for Open and Honest Leadership. Obviously, that was not news to me, having known about it for months, but for some reason the idea of a formal party I find on some levels encouraging, and even exciting. I really have no interest in being a political Last of the Mohicans, so seeing that help might be on the way, uncertain though it might be this year, is kind of a relief. But even more importantly, as the Tribe continues to grow financially, meaning the stakes in Council elections are higher, I am happy to see the first vestiges of a watchdog organization growing, because the more that we can make our electoral process based on issues and in the case of incumbents voting records, the better off our Tribe will be. I am genuinely hoping that others will agree.
I anticipate that there will probably be an attack or two lobbed against the PAC, though when or where that will come is not really certain, it seems that political attacks recently have usually come in public Council meetings, the infamous Leno letter notwithstanding. I could be wrong, maybe there won't be any attacks at all. But based upon the underground anti-ABC/PPP campaign that I've had to witness the last three years, it still might be safer to assume some sort of smear strategy will be waged. And why not? If a strategy works I would expect people to stick to it.
The real question is how effective will the PAC be? In reality we have kind of witnessed a similar occurrence before, in the Grand Ronde Voices Across America, the only other group I remember who would send out questionnaires to candidates and make those available to any interested parties. That was effective, as the three years I followed that process every year at least one of their endorsees was elected. Whether they regret endorsing some of the candidates they did might be another issue, but I do remember looking forward to reading the candidates' responses to questionnaires, as they were more informative than most campaign letters. There seemed to be a truly interested group of Tribal members back then and maybe, just maybe, this PAC is the kind of thing that will stir them.
I do know this. When I look at the Wisdom, Integrity, Family party letters of the last two years and many of their endorsers, a good deal of those people are not people who I see perusing Grand Ronde On-Line very often, much less this blog. Yet some, when I've spoken with them, seem pretty certain about why they are supporting those candidates that they do, which has made me immensely curious as to what gets discussed at their Sunday meetings in Sheridan, and what it is about me, as well as Angie Blackwell, Buddy West, Kathleen Tom, and Wink Soderberg, that incites such a strong desire to see the Council cleaned of our presence. I probably will never know, even though some of their supporters, or at least individuals who attended their meetings, clearly like me and one or two of them have even gone so far as to repeat what has been said about me and others at those meetings. The likely truth is that many of their supporters just know and like them on a personal level, and they just flat-out don't like me, Angie, Buddy, Wink, or Kathleen, and never will, which for many voters is reason enough to cast their ballots the way they do. I don't obsess over the idea, but more than anything it just makes eager to see more transparency in the selection process and political rallies of any perceived political groups in our Tribe. Republicans and Democrats both hold public conventions this summer, in fact they are televised. Voters get to see and hear what gets said and done at the rallies of both the party they support and the party they oppose. That's the way it should be.
The PAC, I think, is a step in that direction, one that was taken before but is happening all over again. I am glad.

Swiftcanoeing

Wednesday night meetings have become, I think, regular. Now I am perfectly aware that by our Tribal laws we are required to hold them twice per month, so to use the word “regular” in historical context is kind of redundant. Of course they’ve always been regular, duh!

But what I really mean is that Wednesday night meetings have come to mirror different American social institutions, like book clubs, bowling leagues, organized pick-up games down at the local parks, etc. They have come to feature the same cast of characters, many of whom show up early, converse, and at times even plot attacks. In our job because you are privvy to so much information that most people aren’t, when we convene the meetings a quick scan of faces in the crowd can often predict what will be brought up under Other Business and by who. There are a handful of people whose mere presence at the meeting immediately sets my mind racing, because while the reasons aren’t always obvious, I fully expect them to attack somebody, once in a while me. Sadly, that new instinct has been born of experience.

The July 2 meeting was close to being that kind of meeting, with the exception that there would not necessarily be people lining up to attack me, but they would be there to attack the anonymous person who had mailed out a letter that was basically an indictment of our Tribal Vice-Chair and his family. Who spoke, and what they said, I could have just about scripted out myself ahead of time. And it was hard to bite my tongue, because there is a certain word we have in English that is used to describe the act of doing the same things that we denounce, usually unawares, and if there were some magical way to convert this into oil, what happened Wednesday night could have solved our nation’s fuel crisis. I am exaggerating of course, but you get the point. In thinking of the names of those present that night, I could probably come up with half a dozen or so that had at one point been attached to some sort of negative political letter, which goes to show that many of us still rarely equate our actions with that which we despise. Even from my college days, I remember being taught the psychological theory of cognitive dissonance.

What I find most ironic about the whole situation is that Monday night I had watched a special news story on CNN about John McCain and his military service. Evidently General Wesley Clark, an Obama supporter, had made some remarks about how that McCain being shot down in a plane during Vietnam didn’t automatically qualify him to be president. I understand what Clark was trying to say, but he might have chosen his words more carefully. The McCain camp was outraged by the comments, and as would be expected sent an emissary to respond, a fellow Vietnam veteran who interviewed for the piece. To this day I will never understand why the McCain campaign, in this story, would send one of the leaders of the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth to denounce perceived attacks on McCain’s military service, and the reporter covering th story obviously picked up on the same thing. Not surprisingly, the McCain rep felt there were sharp differences between this present debacle and what happened to John Kerry in 2004…

I spoke briefly and vaguely toward this Wednesday night, noting that when first elected I always believed that politics in Indian Country would and should be different than mainstream, especially presidential politics. But they aren’t, and I pointed out that there were people in the audience who had spat on the now-infamous Leno-family letter but who had applauded when attacks were made at me, or Angie Blackwell, or Kathleen Tom. If we are serious about changing the politics, I told people, the practice of turning a blind eye to attacks on those we don’t like or support politically and acting indignant when we or those in our group are on the receiving end needs to end. We need to make this kind of crap unacceptable regardless of who it happens to.

My improvised speech drew applause, though that did little to satisfy me. Only the future will show if all the grandstanding Wednesday night was legitimate and sincere, or just that, grandstanding. I have no choice but to wait and see.

Up for Grabs

First off, I must admit to being somewhat surprised at the number of candidates who chose to throw their respective hats into the Tribal Council election ring this year. There were 13 in all, including a couple of past Council members, a few long-time community members with some name recognition, and individuals who at one point were members of the handful of publicized coalitions but appear to be going it alone. Lastly, there were those whose aspirations are either very recent or very private, meaning the longshots.
After being in the community on and off for little more than a decade, there are very few people who have chosen to run that I haven't heard of. That has changed quite a bit. When I worked at the "Smoke Signals" there were tons of back issues at my fingertips, especially the annual Candidates' Statements issue. Over time I became familiar with the elections of the past, and they never really seemed to have reached the present level until about 2000 or so, when if memory serves correctly, a grand total of 23 people ran for Council. Most years, there were always a handful of people who I had never heard of, and one run once or twice before disappearing.
The number of people running has dwindled in recent years chiefly, I suspect, because of the precedents set with the ABC/PPP and WIF group efforts. Since 2004, I can't really say that anybody has gotten elected without drawing upon the constituencies of one of those two groups. This year there is even another group that is trying what is probably the most formalized effort to be attempted yet. All of which makes this year so darn interesting. There appear to be a number of "independents" in 2008, that is candidates who come in not having made any sort of public allegiance to any one camp, which makes me wonder if the whole group/slate concept is dying out or a number of would-be Council members are in for a rude awakening. As always, time gets to tell us.
What I am really curious to see if we will witness an issue-driven election season or a personality driven one. Will one group continue their trend of dominating the elections or are the membership really ready to open a new if unclear chapter in recent history, and in turn go not with the old guard? I can't wait to see. Personally, I'd rather see an uncertain but potentially positive direction rather than a definite negative one.

Head Start again

I realize that this has no real relevance to the issues of the annual National Indian Head Start Directors Association, in fact I probably mentioned this last year, but if you are a red-blooded American male, nowhere outside of a bachelorette party will you see a greater ratio of women to men. I suppose that would have its plusses and minuses, meaning it levels out. But I still can't help but let people know, because when you are one of the rare guys, it's kind of hard not to notice, or have pointed out to you.
If there is a greater ratio, then it is the ratio of non-Tribal leaders to Tribal leaders. Being one of only ten or so elected leaders amongst a conference of a couple hundred at least, one can't help but feel like a celebrity of sorts. Our name tags are decorated with a bold red ribbon stating "Tribal Leader" in gold lettering, equaling if not being more eye catching than the actual NIHSDA Board members themselves, who sport black ribbons with gold. During the opening proceedings, we are given special recognition, igniting the trend.
Unfortunately, I can only speculate on why we are treated so specially. My personal guess is that Indian Head Start programs have been lost in the shuffle of tribes, especially since the inception of Indian gaming, which has brought a whole slew of other issues that tend to interest the general public more. But Indian Head Start has been around a lot longer, before I was born even. Some might contend it touches lives much more than the benefits of Indian gaming, though such a contention would take decades to prove or disprove.
What I do know for certain is that those involved in Head Start take the job very seriously, almost singlemindedly. This could very well be the only conference I've attended regarding Tribes where the topic of Indian gaming was not even brought up in any of the workshops or speeches, ever. People here are very concerned with the welfare of future generations of Indian children. To them, it really is the future of Indian Country, and they might have a point.
In that regard I am often lost in some of the discussions, not having children nor any real background in early childhood education. I realize that needs to be remedied. At times it seems kind of odd that I am the Council member who has chosen to be involved with our Head Start when I am the only one without any children. According to one director from a Tribe in California, that is not entirely unusual; their Council liaison is also single and childless.
According to our last Federal review, Grand Ronde has a very well-run Head Start program, and that reputation seems to have preceeded us. As luck would have it our name gets peppered throughout the conference. We pay and host a feast at the Chinook Longhouse in Ridgefield, close to the conference at the Jantzen Beach Red Lion in northern Portland. Once again I am called upon to be acknowledged as the Grand Ronde messenger, though I say nothing. Really, our drummers and dancers steal the show, as well as the Ridgefield Wildlife Refugee, which I've known only in the winter, and is quite beautiful in summer.
Our veterans act as color guard during the opening ceremony, and our chinuk pre-school immersion students the closing song earlier today. I can't help but feel a little flush of pride for our tribe. Multiple people thank me for the dinner, and one director asks me if she could come over to see our immersion program. We've made an impression.
Twice I get called over to meetings reserved for Tribal leaders. They would like us to speak out at the upcoming consultations on the Head Start Reauthorization Act. They like having the directors and teachers speak and submit testimony, but once again, it seems to carry a lot more weight when coming from a Tribal leader. I suppose that opportunity will come.

Town Halls

I love debates, and for that matter, debating. That is not to say that there aren't times when debating wears me down. Nothing irks me more than a debate or argument where a person, deliberately or not, gets way off topic or chooses to confuse the issue, which I think sometimes happens more often in Grand Ronde than it should. But overall, if the participants in a debate know their stuff, are eager to win the debate based on the merits of their argument as opposed drawing applause from the audience (if there is one) or getting a rise out of the opposition, to see clear arguments laid out is for me kind of cool. I love seeing individuals making passionate arguments about what they believe in.
Watching the primary debates during this year's U.S. Presidential primaries was for me some of the most revealing episodes I've seen during any election. Admittedly, I only glanced at the Republican ones compared to how I followed the Democratic debates. But what I got from both is that these debates were a pretty good method of culling the wannabes from the real contenders. You could tell which individuals from both parties were really cut out to lead their devoted factions, and dare I say actually occupy the White House.
I must admit to being somewhat surprised by Barack Obama's refusal to meet John McCain for all those proposed Town Hall-style meetings. "Surprised" might not actually be the word, but rather "disappointed" because I've enjoyed what I have seen televised during this Presidential season. Plus I think you should never back down from a challenge put forth by your opponent, especially when the stakes are about as high as they get in this country. But, that's just me.
When I ran for Tribal Council in 2004, along with Buddy West and Angie Blackwell, we held a number of our own Town Hall meetings, in Eugene, Portland, Grand Ronde, Warm Springs, and even La Center. Sometimes the turnout was low, but other times we had some packed rooms, on one occasion almost nobody but complete strangers to me. They were however, concerned and gave up a couple of hours during a weekend to come and listen to our spiels. I am not sure how much of an impact those meetings had on the overall election, as we all were elected rather easily, but what I do know is that the following year in 2005 there must have been at least 12 or so of those meetings held. A number of them were part of the PPP campaign that helped elect Kathleen Tom and Wink Soderberg, the others were organized and attended by individuals who, quite honestly, seemed to be mimicking what we did in 2004.
What I can't quite understand is why those meetings died out after those two years. Did people just lose interest or did the brains behind the meetings hang up their hats? I can't really say. It might be both.
I write all this because today a Tribal Council Record of Instruction was brought forward to basically axe the Candidates' Forum this year in Grand Ronde. I am not entirely clear on the thinking behind this, but it just doesn't seem right. Granted, attendance at the annual Candidates Forum has hardly been encouraging, but I thought last year we had a pretty decent turnout, even though it was a Thursday night. And the fact that candidates were not actually allowed to debate each other seems to have been a common though legitimate gripe.
It could all be a ruse, just a one-year deal to get through what might be a tough election. If what I've been told is true, then there are definitely one or two people running for Council this year who the last thing they would want is to be asked questions, especially about the past. Sometimes the best way to avoid a situation is to eliminate it altogether. Truth is I don't know. I can only guess. The real issue though is, am I the only one who will miss it?

Fair Time

During our Public Affairs update last Wednesday, an interesting issue came up. I am not sure if anybody has noticed, but the "Tilixam Wawa", which used to come out monthly, is suddenly being published much less frequently. That issue we discussed was of course whether or not to have one last issue before the election, as between setting a deadline, laying out the actual issue, and sending it off to the printers we would be pushing close to the election period, and somewhere, it seems in some people's minds, it is written that anybody who is a candidate for election should not appear in any Tribal publication lest that present an unfair advantage.
It was pretty clear from the update that a couple of Council members at least remembered, and were upset by, the fact that I appeared on the front page of the "Smoke Signals" during the election. In their view, the supposed policy that prohibited appearance of candidates had "gone out the window" with my photo from the signing of our Hunting & Fishing Rights proclamation. Whether that meant incumbents are now free to use the publications for campaigning or they were just venting I don't know. What I do know is that is does raise a legitimate question about how Council members can use what is supposed to be a tool for communication to the membership.
At the January General Council meeting, Angie Blackwell raised the new (and oddly unwritten) policy of Council censorship of the "Wawa", and she, as well as myself and Buddy West, were basically accused by a sitting Council member of using the publication for campaigning. That accusation would be repeated at the February General Council meeting specifically targeting me. Now the person lobbing the accusation has pretty much made it known who on Council they are loyal to, and who they would work to help un-elect. But that does not take away from the legitimacy of the topic, and I write this in the context of observing that a fellow Council member who has been less than diligent about submitting articles to the "Wawa" is intent on getting one in during this final stretch. I suppose they must be given the benefit of the doubt, because I think we have to be fair and open-minded in all this. On one hand this Council member could be re-elected and suddenly realize that communication is important, and try to have an article of pertinence in every issue, a practice I've tried to make habit. Conversely, they could just make every article a lead-in to their campaign, in which case it really could be construed as abuse of resources. We'll just have to wait and see.
I wonder though, what would be a fair and equitable policy, and more importantly, who would be charged with enforcing it. Statistically, incumbents on average usually have a clear advantage, provided they aren't lame ducks. Getting excessive coverage and a free platform for their candidacy only adds to the advantage, in fact, if the governing body controls all avenues of communication, they could virtually drown out the hopes of any challengers; they could practically render any opposition invisible by omission. If you read about government-controlled press in foreign countries, particularly those who would have the outside world believe they are a democracy, that is often how regimes stay in power.
The Federal Communications Commission actually has laws regarding that kind of behavior, especially with radio and television. They are informally called "Fair Airtime" rules. A broadcasting station can get in trouble for refusing access to a candidate. Unfortunately, we don't have an FCC in Grand Ronde, and I don't see one being formed any time soon.
Supposedly we are to have a meeting to discuss developing a policy. I am not sure what we'll do. Complete control of anything is never readily relinquished.