Experience vs. Talent

As is often the case, while I type up this blog post, the television blares on in front of me. In the past I’ve typed away to the likes of American Idol, or the assorted sitcoms that populate nighttime T.V. Tonight though is a little bit different. On a rare occasion I’ve set the channel on MSNBC in order to tune in to the Democratic Candidates Debate in Ohio, my support and like of Barack Obama a secret to nobody.
I’ve probably said uncountable times that Tribal politics more than most people would admit has come to mirror mainstream politics, and this whole primary, not just within the Democratic Party but in the Republican race as well, has only served to confirm my belief. Whether that is because certain parallels exist across most democracies or because politicians have learned to hit the same notes that appeal to a broad constituency and are generally universal is hard to say. Either way, I’ve noticed a practice being thrown out there of separating experience and talent/hope/optimism/education that has become somewhat personal for me. You are especially seeing this within the Democratic primary, as Hillary Clinton constantly touts her 30 or so years of experience, although John McCain is doing so as well.
This is personal for me because it was an issue that I’ve faced for a number of years now, and especially after first being elected Tribal Chair in late 2006. A notable elder of the Tribe blasted me in my first meeting as Chair, noting that I was “just a baby” during Restoration, and that this somehow impaired my ability to do the job. It was not easy to take, especially publicly. Quite often, I think, comments about being too young are mired in the same vein of thinking as inexperience. They could be one and the same; youth equals inexperience to some people.
Entering my fourth year as a Council member, I realize fully the value of experience. True to what some might tell you, experience is irreplaceable, and with very few substitutes. It sure makes a big difference when typing up a resume or filling out a job application. In politics, though, it's a little different. Experience is also one of the most misleading resume points that a person can possess, especially if a person’s breadth of experience has been more characterized by failure and ineptitude as opposed to success. Sometimes, depending on what lies ahead, experience is far from being enough.
I go on this little rant because it has become a theme during the Presidential primaries, and because it has become more frequent in Council discussions, enough to make me sigh and roll my eyes and think of better days. Over the last two weeks, especially, as we are dealing with a situation that I’d assumed experience would have made for better preparations. But therein lies one of the major flaws with experience: it creates within some people the belief that they really are prepared for anything, that time put into a certain job has amounted to unflinching wisdom and innate ability to never be wrong.
I expect “experience” to be major selling point for at least one candidate during this year’s Council elections. Will anybody bother to ask about the specifics of that “experience”? As Barack Obama has pointed out in his debates with Hillary Clinton, experience as campaigned on usually is a glossed-over version of what happened where successes are handpicked and highlighted and generally presented as being the norm of the experience. Sometimes the best form of experience is actual failure, although I don’t expect too many politicians to ever use those anecdotes.
There is something to be said for talent and fresh ideas, even of the raw variety. It doesn’t always equate to new faces, but at the very least new ideas and hopefully a new way of doing things. I was told once or twice that the difference between an optimist and a pessimist is that a pessimist usually has better information. There is sadly more truth to that than I like to admit. But I’m not ready to sell optimism down the river just yet.
For one, I believe that given the choice of talent and experience it is best to take talent, which usually represents upside. Experience is often safer. But once in a while, the right combination of experience and talent come along, the kind that knows that while anything is possible, not everything is probable, and experience allows a person to know which is which.
That is my philosophical rant for the day.

Camera Happy

Okay, so maybe I am just looking to post anything here, since I haven't had much time to write these past two weeks. Either way, I love Oregon and the seasons. These photos were taken less than three weeks apart. One was a snow day, the other a balmy 61 degree Sunday before President's Day. Yes, that is Mt. Hood, far as I know. For some readers here, snow is probably no big deal. But in the Willamette Valley, you kind of have to get out there and enjoy it. The snow seldom lasts very long.

What It Means

Right now, I am trying not to be overly obsessed with the Constitutional election. Last night I received the call, the news was not good, and upon hanging up settled down on the couch in front of my fireplace and hit the play button. The film I watched was “3:10 to Yuma”, with Russell Crowe and Christian Bale, two of my favorite actors, if anybody is interested. Back in 1996 I took a film class at the University of New Orleans, and the original “3:10 to Yuma” was one of the flicks we dissected, starring then Glenn Ford and Van Heflin. Appropriately, both versions deal heavily in psychology, which fit my neurotic mood after getting such depressing news.
I awoke this morning at 5:00 a.m., earlier than usual, and with less than 6 hours of sleep. My mind simply would not let go. For some reason a racing mind means a sleepless body. That was the case.
It is tempting right now to say something like “It’s hard to make sense of this mess!” The reality though is that it all makes perfect sense. Most Tribal members who cared to vote on this issue wanted change. In fact, if you average out the three percentages of amendments A, B, and C—78%, 60%, and 55%, what you get is somewhere in the mid-60 percentile region, which is a lopsided in any kind of election. But the old two-thirds majority requirement of our Constitution, that is matters the most.
The real question that people need to be asking themselves now is simply “Is that it?” Is it end of story, game over, etc.? Personally, I can’t quite buy that right now, for the simple reason that even the least successful of the amendments, Part C, at 55% is the kind of percentage anybody would take in their cause. I’m sure any of the presidential candidates right now would like that kind of percentage, as would anybody running for Council even. To say the “the people have spoken” or anything like that would not carry much weight because, once again, most who voted wanted change. Had the membership rejected the amendments, say 70% to 30%, I wouldn’t even be bothering writing this post. What could I say? But that isn’t what happened, and that’s what is so frustrating right now.
Given the circumstances, the amendments fared quite well. The neglected effort to clear up misconceptions about the enrollment issue by Tribal leadership, which I know includes me but my criticism still stands, could have very well been the difference in this election. I will always believe that the half-hearted effort put forth in all this was far from innocent.
I guess what I’m left with right now is “What next?” Does the issue simply die, or do the results speak to future opportunities? My own hunch is the latter, but then again I haven’t devoted the last nine years of my life to this issue as some people have. What I’m feeling right now is mild in comparison, no doubt.

Spare Time Again

As I sit here and write this little posting, one of my favorite shows, “Anthony Bourdain’s No Reservations” on the Travel Channel, is ending. For those of you not familiar with this program, Bourdain is a famous chef who is very snide, but creative and funny too. He has made a career out of traveling, eating, drinking liquor, and basically making it all into weekly television show. I had first heard of Bourdain in 2000 when he released a book titled “Kitchen Confidential” which supposedly revealed a number of trade secrets. Honestly, I’ve never read his book, but after watching his old show on the Food Network, “A Cook’s Tour”, he caught my attention. His job right now is basically my dream job.
The episode this week he traveled to New Orleans, and chose to focus on the rebuilding efforts, zeroing in on the resurrected restaurant industry, one that has been hit especially hard since Katrina. A food show in New Orleans would have to have a small cameo by Emeril LaGass, which it does. But that is hardly the highlight. Perhaps the most interesting moment comes from the anecdote of one owner who related and flashed photos of the disgusting remains of foodstuffs that would occupy the pantry and walk-in freezers of his former restaurant. Funny how I would never even think about something like that.
I would recommend “No Reservations” for anybody who likes travel, humor and food. It’s on a few times per week on the Travel Channel. Monday nights are the new episodes.

“No Country for Old Men” (2007)

I can’t really say that any movie by the Coen brothers has ever disappointed me. Once in a while they may go overboard with the token eccentricities, but usually the films the two brothers make are solid. I haven’t read Cormac McCarthy’s book with the same title, but after seeing this film his books can be expected to join my list.
“No Country” is different from the Coen brothers’ other films because it is unusually dark, and with much less humor and quirkiness then usual. Josh Brolin plays kind of an average joe, though a Vietnam vet, who stumbles upon a drug scene circa 1980 while hunting and finds corpses and a ton of cash. He takes the money of course and ends up being chased across Texas by a hitman played by Spanish actor Javier Bardem, who in turn ends up being pursued by sheriff Tommy Lee Jones and (briefly) bounty hunter Woody Harrelson. This is really a study in characters, as Brolin is clearly in over his head and Jones is mystified at how explicably violent this whole case becomes. Bardem is so twisted, psychotic, mellow and quiet that that you end up chuckling during a couple of scenes because he is just plain wrong in the head and there is something sickly amusing about his character.
I would not be surprised if this movie won an Oscar for Best Picture, and Bardem won for Best Supporting Actor. Admittedly though, this movie is not for everybody. But if you like something different, here you go.

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.

Winter Gathering

The Chinooks really like to do things up every January at their annual gathering. Today was the second straight year I've made my way up to Ridgefield, Washington to partake. Eventually, I hope we get the chance to have such a plankhouse. Although you can't really tell from the photos, it was darn cold, hence the fires.

The final shot is a basket of wapato, a traditional food that tastes rather starchy when cooked, like potatoes. The bulbs were available for anybody who wanted to take one home and plant it.

I Got a Name

I presently sit as the Tribe’s delegate to the Mid-Willamette Valley Council of Governments. In order to save some breath we generally refer to the body as COG, pronounced the way you would expect. The COG has been going strong for more than 50 years now. Its main function, really, is providing a chance for all the local governments—cities, towns, counties, school districts, tribes—to net work with one another. You never know what partnerships are out there. The COG also provides help to these bodies, like grants or consulting services, but those usually go to the governments that are more strapped for cash than others. The dues that each body pays depends on population. Grand Ronde’s is one of the lowest.
Not only am I the delegate but now my position includes that of Chair of the Executive Board. Last year I was Vice-Chair. Four of us rotate the position. Next year I will be a regular old board member.
Networking is important with so many disparate governments clustered together in the Willamette Valley. The various jurisdictions have a lot to offer one another, like help in projects, letters of support for eachother when asking for further funding, etc. Overall, I enjoy working with the COG, even though the Tribe probably doesn’t benefit from the Council the way it might have during the “poor” days, prior to Spirit Mountain Casino. The only thing I never really get used to is that there appears to be a visible age difference between not only me and the rest of the Executive Board, but the whole Council of Governments. I still get remarks about my “youth”, as if doing what I am doing at 32 is some sort of precedent. A couple of people still act as if they don’t quite know how to interact with me, the perceived generation gap possibly meaning I speak a different language.
At our last meeting in December, we had a guest speaker. He was from the League of Oregon Cities, and his topic was one that ended up being more fascinating as his presentation continued. That topic was recalls, and the focus was throughout Oregon over the years.
What I learned is that recalls are quite common within small communities. Willamina recalled its mayor a few years back. The city of Tualatin, if I remember correctly, recalled their own mayor two months ago. Carlton, a town only seven miles from where I live, just engaged in a failed recall effort on its mayor, a very smart woman who happens to be one of the other three people who sits on the COG Executive Board with me.
I asked our speaker about recalls in tribes. Everybody laughs as the only instant he can refer to was in Grand Ronde. Evidently he had been out at the Tribe some years ago and remembered a sign or booth being set up, might have been during pow wow. I chuckle because I am pretty sure I remember which one he is talking about.
Recalls, I learn, seldom succeed. A lot of that is because the rules for actually successfully making a recall happen are pretty tight. In addition, recalls cost money, and distract people. Ironically though, on some levels the recalls do succeed. Recalls are often one chapter of what is essentially political warfare being waged on an individual or group of people. Although I don’t remember the percentages off-hand, quite a few targets of recalls sometimes resign or don’t seek another term. The targets usually just get sick of the constant harassment, bullying, and/or bickering and give up entirely. The intent of the recall, to get rid of a public official, holds true.
I can remember when the recall effort was launched against my fellow COG Board member. It was emotionally draining for her, not to mention stressful. Above all it was personal, because there was nothing that I know of that she did within the course of her job which merited a recall. She is a person, with a name and life, same as anybody else.
When I think back on what happened during my swearing-in ceremony in September, and how much that angered me, questions start forming in my mind as to what else might be in store for me over the next three years. I often reflect on what Ed Pearsall had to endure his final 18 months. Not only did he have a recall effort launched against him, but there were a handful of Tribal members who looked to have made a hobby of harassing him, and heck that was just non-Council people. If ever there was a public effort to make somebody in Grand Ronde miserable, it was what was done to poor Ed back in 2002 and 2003. Often, this effort looked so scripted as well.
It takes a certain type to do this job. I would have a hard time giving up, as some people did according to the recall study. But there is no doubt that doing this job will age me somewhat.
Maybe if flecks of grey start appearing in my beard, and wrinkles upon my brow, the “young” comments will cease.