Republican Resolution’S Meaning Distorted, Exploited
L et me be crystal clear: The Washington State Republican Party has no intention, now or in the future, to seek the end of tribal sovereignty. Period!
A resolution concerning tribal government which passed in the final hours of the state GOP convention last month in Spokane has been so misrepresented by the news media, it has nearly taken on a life of its own. These reports have completely misrepresented the views and the principles of the Washington State Republican Party and have unfairly attempted to paint our party as racist and anti-Indian. Let me assure all Washingtonians nothing could be farther from the truth.
What is the truth?
John Fleming, a Skagit County delegate to the state convention, submitted a resolution calling for “termination of all such non-Republican forms of government on Indian reservations.” In this particular resolution, the intent of the word “Republican,” as understood by the platform committee (but misunderstood by the tribes and news media), refers to having the quality of a Republic, which is defined as “a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.” Its the kind of government we have here in the United States.
As reservation resident, Fleming finds, however, that it’s not the kind of government that is recognized on Indian reservations. He finds himself being treated differently than tribe members, effectively being discriminated against. He is denied certain unalienable rights (as in, among others, certain voting rights) while being required to maintain certain responsibilities, such as paying taxes.
”Taxation without representation” is a phrase that comes to mind. Thus, he has attempted to highlight this disparity and change this situation through one of the few avenues available to him, given his inability to vote or hold office on the reservation.
The tribe, backed by other Native American groups, has told us in effect, “that’s tough.” We are told those are the rules and if Fleming doesn’t like it, he can move.
Discrimination is a terrible thing. It is terrible when practiced toward a member of a minority but it is no less terrible when practiced by anyone else. What would the response be, for example, if Congress passed a parallel law denying Native Americans living outside a reservation the right to vote? Would it be OK if we told Native Americans what Fleming has been told, “Tough; If you don’t like it, move back to your reservations”? The outcry would no doubt reverberate throughout the United States as citizens rightfully and justifiably sought to overturn such an injustice.
Our founding fathers wrote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Why then are they not self-evident on reservations?
This was the intent of the platform committee when it presented this resolution to guarantee the constitutional rights of all citizens are respected, protected and preserved.
In retrospect, it’s easy to see how this resolution could be misunderstood. It certainly could have been better written to clarify our intent. But the resolution was put through on the last day of the convention with 28 other resolutions in front of a very tired platform committee that had labored long hours on many other very difficult issues. The resolution was approved with little discussion after one of the committee members, a Native American himself, explained the intent and recommended its passage. Furthermore, resolutions are statements of concern over issues that have, in many cases, directly impacted individuals, as in the case of Fleming. Resolutions do not carry the same weight or influence as a “plank.” This resolution was not a plank in the party platform.
One of my first actions as the new GOP state party chairman was to implement a minority outreach program. For too long, our party views have been unfairly misrepresented to minorities. We recently completed one of the best and most positive Republican conventions in state history. Yet some leftist reporters chose to latch on to one resolution and misrepresent its intent in an effort to drum up more stories and stir up an outcry among the tribes against the Republican Party.
For those who choose to refer to the actual resolution, the truth becomes obvious. Nothing in the resolution calls for the abolition of reservations. Nothing calls for the end of tribal sovereignty and nothing calls for an end of tribal government. This resolution only intends to reassert the constitutionally guaranteed rights of all United States citizens.
The Washington State Republican Party has worked well in the past with the tribes and has every intention of continuing to do so in the future. Reasonable people should be allowed to disagree. But in the end, we seek to work together for the betterment of all.