Tribal Employee

Feds ignore President Obama and disrespect Navajo Nation in nun murder case

2009-11-11T23:28:00.025-07:00

This is a disappointment. The FBI and federal courts simply have no respect for tribal government. Why can't the FBI go through the proper tribal process to get Reehahlio Carroll, the guy accused of killing the nun? It's not like the tribe is telling the FBI no. The tribe is telling the FBI to go through the proper tribal process of getting the criminal suspect. (Read story: FBI Yet To Gain Custody Of Alleged Nun Killer) The proper tribal process is to get a tribal extradition order. Instead, the FBIs run to the federal judge to obtain a federal court order. President Obama declares that the United States is in a nation-to-nation relationship with the Navajo Nation and other tribal nations:

"The United States has a unique legal and political relationship with Indian tribal governments, established through and confirmed by the Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, executive orders, and judicial decisions. In recognition of that special relationship, pursuant to Executive Order 13175 of November 6, 2000, executive departments and agencies (agencies) are charged with engaging in regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal officials in the development of Federal policies that have tribal implications, and are responsible for strengthening the government-to-government relationship between the United States and Indian tribes." Opening lines to President Obama's MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES (Nov. 5, 2009)

So why doesn't the FBI, which is part of the federal executive branch that President Obama heads, respect their leader's directive? It's because of bullying such as this that the US gets an unpopular image. UNM Dean Kevin Washburn's public safety argument that the person is a danger to the public also does not fly considering that the suspect is in tribal jail. He's not in the community. Chief Prosecutor Bernadine Martin is a very brave woman to stand her ground in upholding Navajo Nation law.

President Shirley's response to being put on leave

2009-10-27T15:59:00.002-06:00

This is politics at its worse - or the ugly side of politics. One comment though: This is Vice-President Shelly's time under the public light. His performance now will have a great bearing on whether or not people will vote for him if he decides to run for President in the next presidential election.

Navajo President Joe Shirley, Jr., disappointed with council action
to place him on leave, attributes it to his government reform effort

By GEORGE HARDEEN, Office of the President & Vice President, Navajo Nation

WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. – Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr., said Monday that he is disappointed in the Navajo Nation Council’s action to place him on administrative leave and that he is still waiting to be informed of the specific allegations against him.

“They’re really hurting the Navajo Nation,” President Shirley said following the council’s vote. “In this case, 36,000 voters put me in office and 48 council delegates decided to put me on leave without telling me or the people the specific reasons why.”

“I wasn’t informed what the allegations are, I don’t know what the allegations are, and I still don’t know what it’s all about,” President Shirley said. “No one has bothered to share that with me.”

On Monday, the council voted 48-to-22, with 18 not voting, to place the President on administrative leave with pay and to refer reports on OnSat Communications and Biochemical Decontamination Systems Manufacturing Co. to Navajo Nation Attorney General Louis Denetsosie. The attorney general is expected to determine within 60 days whether hiring a special prosecutor is necessary.

President Shirley noted that neither OnSat CEO Dave Stephens nor former Navajo Nation Telecommunications Regulatory Office Director Ernest Franklin, who are also accused of wrongdoing, have been charged, prosecuted or convicted of any improprieties.

The resolution to place the President on leave passed after an amendment to remove Navajo Nation Vice President Ben Shelly’s name from it was approved.

The Vice President said the council’s action will go through its normal course of certification to enable an investigation to proceed. He will remain Vice President while temporarily assuming the duties and functions of President Shirley in his absence during his administrative leave.

“The people elected President Shirley and I,” Vice President Shelly said. “It is our responsibility and our duty, now incumbent upon me, to ensure government, services to the Nation continue. The executive branch of the Navajo government resumes with no disruption.”

Despite the council’s denial, President Shirley said it appears irrefutable that the action is in retaliation for his efforts to seek an initiative election to reduce the council from 88 to 24 delegates, and to allow the president line item veto authority.

“In this case, we’ve been trying to give the Navajo people the opportunity to be more involved in their government through the government reform initiatives, and the council does this without telling the people or me why,” he said. “All that’s out there is hearsay. Something is wrong with this process, and I don’t think it’s right.”

He said more than 33,000 people signed petitions to give Navajo voters a chance to decide on the initiatives but that the effort has run into continual resistance and stalling from the council since May 2008.

A review of the chronology of events since President Shirley announced the Presidential Initiative on Government Reform shows that both the council and the Speaker’s office have opposed the initiatives with statements and legal action since they were first announced.

“Just because the President makes a huge intimidating move, it doesn’t necessarily mean the legislators will accept,” the May 1, 2008, Gallup Independent reported Speaker Morgan as saying on. “That’s democracy.”

“If this is what it takes to get there, to give the people the chance to decide what their government looks like, then this is what it takes,” President Shirley said. “I certainly believe I’ll be exonerated. We’ve got nothing to hide. I’m just very sorry this has happened. I’m still the president. The vice president will do the best of his ability in the meantime.”

On April 29, 2008, the President presented two initiatives to the Navajo Election Administration; one seeking to reduce the council from 88 to 24 delegates, and the second to establish presidential line item veto authority.

The President has said the initiatives are necessary to bring greater accountability, efficiency and effectiveness to the council because it repeatedly waives the Navajo Nation Appropriations Act, repeatedly drains the Undesignated Unreserved Fund over the objections of the Navajo Office of Management and Budget, and recklessly allocates money for questionable discretionary funding.

Two efficiency reports commissioned by the council corroborate the President’s assertions.

A 2001 report, titled Lawmaking and Oversight Efficiency Study; Increasing the Efficiency of the Navajo Nation Council and Standing Committees, measured the council’s effectiveness against other state, county and city governments. It found examples of inefficiency, high costs, and a lack of delegate preparation, but expressed doubt that delegates would make the necessary changes to bring greater efficiency to their lawmaking process, or that they would implement its recommendations.

Among the areas identified as needing improvement were delegate professionalism, meeting attendance and tardiness, committee assignments based on expertise, and the publication of voting and attendance records.

“The likelihood that the current delegates would vote for such changes, however, is doubtful,” concluded ETD Environmental Consulting of Flagstaff, Ariz., the report’s author. “The unwillingness of delegates to change their attitude towards their responsibilities may be the number one barrier to more effective and efficient lawmaking on the Nation.”

A second 2005 study, titled, Final Report to the Navajo Nation Council Subcommittee on Legislative Branch Effectiveness, recommended that the council re-evaluate how it oversees the Executive Branch.

“Delegation of decision-making authority to the Executive Branch and its respective agencies would allow the council and its legislative committees to focus more exclusively on policy development and would preserve the balance of power that a three-branch government provides,” wrote the authors, the National Conference of State Legislatures and its subcontractors JVA Consulting and Mark Fleming. “Many of the administrative actions considered by the Navajo Nation Council are functions more appropriately handled by the administrative agencies within the executive branch and should be delegated accordingly.”

The 2005 report said the council should refrain from micro-managing.

On May 12, 2008, Chief Legislative Counsel Frank Seanez wrote an opposing legal opinion to an opinion issued by Attorney General Louis Denetsosie. Mr. Denetsosie had said a simple majority applied to the initiative election rather than a super- majority which applied to a referendum election.

In his opposing opinion, Mr. Seanez accused the attorney general of being biased.

On May 19, 2008, the Speaker filed objections to the sufficiency of the initiative petitions with the Office of Hearings and Appeals. His objections were denied.

In June 2008, the Speaker asked the President to “talk things out” in the spirit of k’e, compromise and harmony to seek government reform through legislation, and halt the Presidential initiatives. The President agreed, including dropping line item veto authority, and an agreement was signed on August 13, 2008.

However, the Speaker failed to carry through with his end of the agreement to see that legislation was introduced to reduce the council to 44 delegates. When the press inquired why, he office said only that it was because of a “technicality.”

In November 2008, after the Petition Initiative Committee submitted its completed petitions, the Navajo Election Administration – which is under the Speaker’s office – found them to have insufficient signatures but refused to allow the Petition Committee the opportunity to review them.

The Petition Committee sought a hearing from the Office of Hearing and Appeals. However, after a six-month delay in appointing a hearing officer, the committee sought relief from the Navajo Nation Supreme Court. The high court appointed District Court Judge Carol Perry as hearing officer.

On June 25, 2009, Judge Perry ordered an initiative election to occur within six months after Chief Legislative Counsel Frank Seanez stipulated, based upon the election administration’s recalculation, that the Petition Committee had collected enough valid signatures.

The Office of Legislative Counsel appealed Judge Perry’s order, which was denied when the Navajo Nation Supreme Court affirmed the order to hold the election within six months.

However, in its decision the high court also chastised the Navajo Election Administration’s lawyer – Ron Haven of the Office of the Legislative Counsel – for unprofessional conduct in what it called an attempt to apply political pressure to find in favor of his client, the election administration, at the risk of the council not confirming two probationary justices as permanent justices.

The court noted the paradox that the lawyer for the election administration is also the lawyer for the council, which would be directly affected in structure and authority should the initiatives pass. It said that although the NEA is an independent entity, it answers only to the council and the Speaker’s office.

“To allow elected officials to supervise the regulatory entity that administers elections and certifies petitions raises the likelihood of impartiality, abuses of power and corruption,” the court said. “It is critical that the NEA be a neutral body independent of the politics of the elected branches of government to ensure public faith in the petition verification process.”

At the same time, the court also found that the Initiative Petition Committee had operated in good faith and that it followed the rules as best it could, given the lack of clear directives.

On Sept. 10, 2009, President Shirley made a personal appeal to the Navajo Board of Election Supervisors to set an election date. On Sept. 18, the board set the election for Dec. 15.

On Oct. 20, the council voted against placing legislation on its fall agenda to pay for the special election. To date, the council has not considered the issue and has not appropriated funding for the election to occur.

Navajo President put on leave

2009-10-26T16:04:00.002-06:00

The word is that the Council placed President Joe Shirley on leave and the police have closed the roads anticipating a riot. Anyone in Window Rock, is that true?

Navajo Government Forum Debate

2009-10-24T09:49:00.002-06:00

Navajo Government Forum Debate with President Shirley and Council Delegates Leonard Tsosie, Jonathan Nez, & Kee Allen Begay at ASU Law School, Oct. 28th @ 5:30 PM.

Hopefully, this debate can be made available for the reservation Navajos to hear (on radio)and/or see (on tv or internet).

Abusing the sacred

2009-10-15T16:20:00.008-06:00

We should not play around with ceremonies. They can kill people. One should not try to be someone they were not intended to be. This story about two newagers dying in a sweatlodge in Sedona sounds like a story about ma’ii. Yee yah. Bahadzid.

Read:
Authorities puzzled by deaths at Sedona-area sweat lodge
Taliman: Selling the sacred

Speaking out against child sexual abuse

2009-09-30T15:30:00.030-06:00

Photo by Mike Carroll/Navajo Hopi Observer

This article was several weeks back, but the issue is very important. There is ALOT of child sexual abuse occurring on the Navajo reservation. A lot of it goes unreported because the victims live in fear and shame and there is no confidence in the Navajo criminal justice system. Our Navajo Social Services are also so runned into the ground that Social Services is ineffective and these child sexual offenders easily fall through the cracks. In this article, Kaylynn May Bahe bravely promotes public awareness of the issue. As with the assimilation of Navajos, most Navajos turn the other way when they hear about child sexual abuse. The Navajo People need to someway come together to raise awareness of the issue and to put the predators behind bars. I think it’s a hard task considering that Navajos are assimilating into American society which glamorizes and capitalizes on youth and sex. These are reasons why the federal government passed the Adam Walsh Act which is requiring the Navajo Nation and other tribes to publish its list of child sexual offenders. (Read tribal resolution) I heard that the Navajo list of child sexual offenders will be published on a website sometimes in the future. Currently, only the states publish their registered sex offenders online. (Arizona, New Mexico, Utah)

'It shouldn't hurt to be a child'
Wells Mahkee Jr., The Observer
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Navajo Hopi Observer

Former victim promotes awareness of child sexual assault

PHOENIX, Ariz. - Most people probably don't believe in divine intervention, but in the case of Kaylynn May Bahe, it may have been what saved her.

In 2003, Bahe was walking from a friend's house in south Phoenix one night around midnight. For whatever reason, she paused to tie her shoelaces - which she usually just tucked into her shoes - adjusted her belt and tied her hair back. She was walking to her aunt's house nearby when an unknown male assailant attempted to rape her. Fortunately, she was able to fend off her attacker and seek help, crediting the minor adjustments she made to her clothing for saving her from a sexual assault.

Even before this attack, Bahe (Navajo/Hopi) had already been giving serious thought about raising awareness against child sexual assault (CSA). Having been sexually assaulted in her early teens by an uncle, she didn't know where to turn for help. Her own mother - a past victim of sexual abuse herself - wouldn't listen to her and evaded the issue. Reflecting on this, Bahe stated, "To me, it seemed like she didn't care."

Even Bahe's grandmother would say, "Don't talk about that. It's not nice to talk about that."

According to national statistics, it is estimated that at least two in 10 girls (and one in 10 boys) are sexually abused by the time they are 13-years-old. By the time they reach 18, one in four girls (and one in six boys) are sexually abused. Even more alarming is the fact that 30-40 percent of CSA victims are assaulted by family members.

Bahe partly attributes instances of CSA to influence from outside cultures, as well as cultural stigmas within both Navajo and Hopi culture. She stated, "[The perpetrators] are not right in their mind because they don't know who they are or who they want to be."

Regarding the victims, Bahe stated, "They're [too] afraid to tell anyone."

She recalls, "I tried to tell people, but they are so [closed minded] and afraid about, 'Oh, this is against the law.' People get so offended by it and don't talk about it."

Now at 25, Bahe has taken it upon herself to become an advocate and supporter for those who feel helpless and feel like they have nowhere to turn.

"I hated feeling miserable all the time," she said. "I wish I could have told someone or that someone would have listened to me."

Bahe explained that not having anyone to turn to made her feel like she was climbing a never-ending hill. For that reason, she vowed to be there for other sexual assault victims, stating defiantly, "I'm gonna take a bulldozer and flatten the whole [hill] out."

It wasn't until a female cousin came forward and told Bahe that she had been sexually assaulted by the same uncle who assaulted her that she found the strength to encourage her cousin to seek help.

"You have to stop him," Bahe told her cousin.

Bahe stated that this experience strengthened and enlightened her.

As a result, Bahe turned to the popular forum of MySpace to further promote awareness of CSA and to provide a means for CSA victims to seek help. On MySpace, Bahe makes herself available to CSA victims under the surname "Miss Turquoise." She attributes her use of this name to the fact that for over 3,000 years, turquoise has been used by many cultures as talismans of "good things," such as guidance, protection, friendship and security.

Since the launch of her MySpace page, she has been contacted anonymously by 25 sexual assault victims, including one who had been sexually assaulted at a family gathering by her own brother-in-law. The victim, who was older than Bahe, sought advice on what to do. Bahe recalled the moment and alluded to the fear and shame that many sexual assault victims feel.

"We all feel like a little kid," she said. "[But] it's okay to be scared because it's natural and we're only human."

Bahe feels that her work in advocating for CSA victims is only just beginning. One of her ultimate goals is to develop a listing of sexual offenders on Indian reservations.

"[That way,] we can be aware of who it is in our [neighborhoods] that we have so that we can be safe," Bahe said.

Another goal is to make more statistics specific to Native American populations available so that people would be more aware of how prevalent CSA is in Native communities. Yet another goal is to create flyers for distribution in area schools so that students know that they always have somewhere to turn.

Bahe acknowledged that the usual attitude of most people is to "sweep it under the rug" and ignore it, but that for her, coming out and telling people about what happened to her was a means of personal salvation. Although her mother wasn't helpful or supportive, Bahe said, "I just had to tell her ... it had to be said in order for me to get over it."

Bahe strongly encouraged CSA victims not to be afraid.

"It doesn't matter what culture you come from. [Child sexual assault] shouldn't be a taboo. It's your safety. If you love your family and you love your children, you should let people know who does this type of stuff. You've got to love yourself and learn how to forgive. Otherwise, you won't be able to move on and be as strong as you are," Bahe said.

"Once you tell somebody ... they are afraid of you because they know that you're not afraid to tell. Once someone knows that you won't tolerate it, they won't come near you anymore," she concluded.

Bahe would like to acknowledge supporters of this cause, including Max's Body Shop, located at 2742 E. Route 66 in Flagstaff.

If you or someone you know is a victim of CSA, contact "Miss Turquoise" at www.myspace.com/kaylynn_bahe for more resources and additional information on CSA, or call 1-888-SOS-CHILD.

Question about council reduction vote

2009-09-24T10:55:00.011-06:00

In December 2009, the Navajo registered voters will vote on whether or not the Navajo council should be reduced from 88 to 25. On one hand, those who support reducing the council say that reducing the council is a step towards reforming our government. In other words, reducing the council will make our government better. On the other hand, those supporting the status quo say that reducing the council does not necessarily make the government better. These two opposing arguments raise a critical question that should be answered before the Navajo people vote: If the ballot to reduce the Navajo council passes, how are we going to decrease the number from 88 to 25? Put another way, what method do we use to decrease the Navajo council? This is important because there are several ways to decrease the numbers. How the numbers are decreased will have an impact on whether our government is improved or not.

For example, one way to decrease the number of council delegates is to let President Shirley decide. If this should be the method of decreasing the size of the Navajo Council, then there will probably be little reform because President Shirley will probably allow only those council delegates that support him to remain. This probably would not improve the Navajo government operations, but it would still be one method of decreasing the council delegates.

Another method of decreasing the council delegates is to screen current council delegates by heigntening the standards to be a council delegate. For example, currently, there is no education requirement to be a council delegate. The only qualification to be a council delegate is tribal enrollment and 25 years of age. However, if this standard is increased to a bachelor's degree, then those with only a high school level education would be screened out. We can contemplate other requirements such as a Navajo culture and fluency requirement, a non-criminal background requirement, etc. This will probably improve our government because a more educated, traditional council with no criminal backgrounds will be better qualified to make critical decisions. For example, an educated council will be more informed when they make critical decisions such as whether the tribe should apply for a $500 million loan. Heigntening the standards to be a council delegate is a method of decreasing the council size just as valid as the first method mentioned. However, the second method will likely improve government operations more than the first method.

As these examples show, we need to know what method will be used to decrease the number of council delegates should that measure pass. We need to ask this question so that we vote as informed voters.

Read related entry - Braindrain on the Navajo reservation.

Fading Navajo culture

2009-09-24T10:05:00.009-06:00

Navajos are assimilating at a high rate such that Navajo ceremonies are becoming more extinct. Examples of extinct Navajo ceremonies are Nehosdzaanji (Earth way) and Nilooji (Hail way). Many of us don't even speak Dine anymore. If Navajos do nothing, then there will be no more culture in about three more generations. Navajo culture will be confused with pan-Indian culture like pow-wow and Native American Church. Even though the article below was written ten years ago, alot of the points made are still applicable today. I show the article for awareness. The program that the article is talking about is Navajo Traditional Apprenticeship Project with the The Navajo Nation Office of Dine Culture, Language, and Community Service.

Navajo Nation Hopes to Revive Traditional Medicine
Los Angeles Times
By ALISA BLACKWOOD, ASSOCIATED PRESS
July 11, 1999

PHOENIX — For years, the wind, water, earth and sacred traditions were all the Navajos believed they needed to prevent illness and heal themselves spiritually and physically.

That was before the development of Western medical technology, before the number of Navajo medicine men began to decline and before young Navajos began to discredit their own traditions.

Now, through a pilot project aimed at training young people in traditional Navajo healing methods, the Navajo Nation hopes to revive the health care system they say works best for them--and to save the ceremonies from extinction.

The Navajo Traditional Apprenticeship Program, implemented in December, chose seven applicants to train with traditional ceremonial practitioners--medicine men--and take on the closely guarded knowledge handed down only through family and clan members.

The survival of the medicine man is vital if Navajo language and culture are to survive, said Alfred Yazzie, a Navajo language instructor at Arizona State University.

"Medicine men are, for the most part, the people who hold all the teachings and spiritual aspects of the community," Yazzie said. "They still hold a lot of the history--undocumented history."

Learning the ceremonies is a difficult and lengthy process. Depending on the ceremonies learned, training can take up to 10 years. And because ceremonies are not taped or written down, they must be learned orally.

As an incentive, the program awards a monthly $300 stipend to apprentices and $350 to teaching practitioners. It may not seem like much, but time is running out.

Eddie Tso, the program's director, said six traditional ceremonies are almost extinct and will be the primary focus in the apprentice program. Not many Navajos with the knowledge remain, he said.

"If we don't do anything about it, and look back in 20 years there won't be any ceremonies left," Tso said.

There are about 34 traditional ceremonies left in all, he said, with only a handful of medicine men left to perform them and a growing Navajo population. The Navajo Nation sprawls across remote areas of Arizona, Utah and New Mexico.

"When there are less doctors, how are you going to maintain a balance of wellness?" Tso said. "The Navajo people still rely on these ceremonies today for their health care and their mental care as well."

Supporters of the program are hoping to boost the number of medicine men, despite an apparent lack of interest from Navajo youth that is blamed, at least in part, on the integration of Western ideas.

Yazzie said Navajo ceremonies were condemned in the past by Western educational and religious communities.

A lot of young people didn't see the need to follow in those footsteps [of Navajo ceremonies] because they were told they were no longer needed."

That has caused young Navajos to stray from the community's traditional healing methods, said state Sen. Jack Jackson, also a Navajo.

"[Western education] made us ashamed of our way of life," Jackson said. "Our ceremony was classified as superstitious, taboo. Therefore, our younger people sort of look down on these ceremonies."

The solution, Jackson says, is for the state to treat the Navajo health care system as equal to Western medical health care.

"What we have to do is give our traditional ceremonies a higher level of dignity--give these medicine men names equivalent to doctors," he said.

In 1980, the Tribal Council turned down a request to charter the medicine man's association, saying that Navajo ceremonies were a religion and that it wouldn't be proper to mix church and state, Jackson said.

Jackson argues that although the ceremonies are spiritual in nature, it is important to distinguish that they are part of the Navajos' actual health care system and not a religion.

"Spirituality is the teaching that you exist within the universe with Mother Earth and Father Sky," he explained. "Many of our older people live to be 100 years old and never went to a hospital. They live by the laws of the universe.

"The whole universe is sacred--wind, water, air, plants, animals and you, yourself . . . that's missing in Western education. And that's why we have all these corrections centers. The penitentiaries are full."

If the Navajo Nation continues to lose the knowledge and tradition only their medicine men possess, Yazzie said, there could be a serious cultural impact. "We now have the social ills that most media have written about, and my belief is that we have to grasp what tradition still means," he said. "If we lose that, there will be a higher degree of a feeling of hopelessness."

Navajo place names video

2009-09-23T13:28:00.005-06:00

Here's another Youtube video on Navajo place names. watch video

Navajo Stretching

2009-09-23T13:23:00.004-06:00

This is a cool video on Youtube about stretching.

Navajo Nation gets grant for jails

2009-09-23T07:58:00.002-06:00

Bravo to Hope McDonald Lonetree and the Public Safety Committee. They have been requesting from Congress monies to build jail facilities on the Navajo reservation. The Navajo Nation has been awarded grants to build jails in Tuba City, Kayenta, and Ramah. Once the jails are built, then hopefully we can feel a little safer from all the Navajo criminals running loose and endangering the public. Currently, the Navajo jails are comparable to Mexican jails; Very runned-down and in need of repair. Some jails are outright unsanitary and dangerous. (Read more)

Navajo Election on Two Initiatives set for Dec. 15

2009-09-22T14:58:00.001-06:00

The Navajo Nation Board of Election Supervisors has set December 15, 2009 as election day on the two initiatives to reduce the Council from 88 to 24 and the line item veto on budget legislations for the President.

Closing Native Ceremonies To Non-Natives

2009-08-20T08:45:00.006-06:00

Be nice to people and people take advantage. That has been story of the Indian and the White Man. Indians were nice to the White People at the first Thanksgiving allowing the White People to survive with a little land. The White People took advantage and bullied the Indian out of all the lands and its resources. Now Indians are on small reservations that the American government claims. The story below is another one of these stories. It's about religion and spirituality and how the Hopi and Pueblo have closed their ceremonies from the non-Native. I feel the question is: Given that man says "give me, give me, give me", when will Mother Earth have no more to give?

Native Sun Editorial: Stealing religious beliefs

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

The following editorial appeared in The Native Sun News, August 19, 2009.

The Hopi Tribe, an extremely traditional Native Nation, has decided not to allow non-Indians into one of their sacred ceremonies because non-Indians, in the past few years, have been guilty of taking illegal photographs, recording the ceremony on cell phone cameras, and showing a decided lack of respect for the traditions and ceremonial practices of the Tribe.

The ceremony, known as the Snake Dance, is held annually at the alternate Hopi villages of Mishongnovi and Shungopavi. The Hopi participants include prayers for rain in the ceremony.

Mishongnovi village administrator, Robert Mahkewa Jr., said the ceremony will be closed to non-Indians this year because of the lack of respect for the ceremonies have grown worse over the years.

It has long been a custom of most of the tribes of the Pueblo Nations to exclude non-Indians from their ceremonies. Several years ago when a plane carrying a news photographer from the Santa Fe New Mexican newspaper flew over a sacred ceremony taking place on one of the Pueblo’s and took photos the Tribe sued the paper and won.

Over the years the many of the Sacred Ceremonies of the Lakota/Dakota/Nakota people have been invaded by non-Indians and pretenders who learned just enough to be dangerous. Some of these individuals took what little they learned, returned to their homelands, and began to hold ceremonies. They almost always took the name of the wicasa wakan who conducted the ceremony they attended and pointed to them as their teacher/mentors and used their names to charge money for the phony ceremonies they conducted.

The Sun Dance, one of the most sacred ceremonies of the tribes of the Great Sioux Nation, is too often attended by non-Indians. When did this start to happen? The settlers took almost everything from the Indian people and now they also want to take their ceremonies? Is it only the elders who recall that the spiritual practices of their ancestors were condemned by the United States government at the behest of the Christian church leaders? Many tribes had to take their traditional spirituality underground in order to preserve it. That is one of the reason many of the Pueblo Nations still keep their religious ceremonies secret and why no non-Indians are allowed. They practiced their spiritual ceremonies in secret for a good reason: they needed to keep it secret in order for it to survive. And they became so good at concealing the ceremonies from the prying eyes of those who had condemned it that even after the Freedom of Religion Act was passed by Congress; they decided to still keep their ceremonies to themselves.

Therefore it is strange that the spiritual practices of the people of the Great Sioux Nation are put on display in Florida, Arizona, New Mexico, California and even in New York State. There are inipi, yuwipi, Sun Dance, and hanblecheya ceremonies held all over the United States conducted by shaman with no knowledge of the language or of the deep meaning of the ceremonies. They have turned the sacred ceremonies of the Sioux people into sideshows for the viewing and enjoyment of anyone willing to pay for them.

At one time an affiliation of Holy Men was started to stop the theft of the ceremonies and to protect it from those who would use them in a false way to make money. We haven’t heard of this association for awhile and if they are still in existence, they need to step forward and continue the job they started because things grow worse with each passing year.

We often hear people bragging about just having gone to a Sun Dance. In the old days people didn’t talk about such things. Anyone bragging about getting pierced at a Sun Dance did not deserve the honor. And just as bad, different Christian religious groups are trying to incorporate the spiritual practices of the Sioux people (and of other tribes) into their own Christian beliefs. The very Churches that tried to destroy the Indian religious practices are now stealing them from the oyate. They seem to think that if they work a few of the Indian spiritual beliefs into their Christian routines it will attract more Indian converts. And, believe it or not, it seems to be working.

The true spiritual practices of the Indian people are not for non-Indians and they are not for sale. It is high time that tribal governments and spiritual leaders spoke out about this bizarre circumstance that causes non-Indians to think they can usurp and own the religious ceremonies of the Indian people. This goes double for the Christian ministers who feel they can weave without penalty, the spiritual practices and beliefs of the Indian people into their own Bible thumping beliefs. They are messing with things over which they do not have a clue and it will come back to bite them.

We have seen photos taken at the Sun Dance and photos taken of the Hopi Snake Dance, a practice that is in direct violation of all the beliefs of the Sioux and the Hopi. This illegal practice must come to an end or it will be the destruction of these religious beliefs.

The Hopi and the Pueblo Indians of the Southwest have the right idea. Indian spirituality is for Indians only. We had these beliefs and ceremonies long before the white settlers brought their Bible across the ocean and they withstood all of the assaults by the Church to destroy them. It is high time the Indian people took them back and closed their ceremonies to outsiders.

Related Stories:
Hopi Tribe closes ceremony to non-Indians (8/14)

Navajo Supreme Court upholds OHA decision in Council-reduction case

2009-08-03T07:10:00.008-06:00

The Navajo Supreme Court upheld the OHA decision favoring Joe Shirley's efforts to have the people vote to reduce the Navajo Council. (Read opinion) The Navajo people will be voting on two issues within six months: To reduce the council size to 24 and for the President to have line-item veto power. The basis of the OHA decision was the Fundamental Laws of Dine allowing the people to decide fundamental questions regarding the structure of their own government. It looks like some members of the Navajo Council are retaliating against the Navajo courts' use of the Fundamental Laws of Dine by introducing legislation to repeal the Fundamental Laws of Dine because it has been "misunderstood, misinterpreted, and misapplied". The Navajo Council seems to be saying that using the Fundamental Laws of Dine to recognize the Navajo people's right to decide fundamental questions about the shape of their government is a misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and misapplication of the Fundamental Laws of Dine. That does not make sense. Even if the Fundamental Laws of Dine are repealed, the Navajo government would revert to bilagana principles which state the same thing: the people have the power to decide fundamental questions regarding the structure of their own government. That's democracy.

Read article: Navajo Nation Supreme Court affirms final judgment ordering election on council reduction, line item veto.

Proposed Legislation Repealing Fundamental Law Tabled

2009-07-27T15:18:00.022-06:00

The controversy continues. In response to the decision by the Office of Hearings and Appeals ruling in favor of the Navajo People to vote on the reduction of the Navajo Nation Council, members of the Navajo Nation Council introduced legislation to repeal the Fundamental Laws of Dine. The proposed legislation states:

"G. The Navajo Nation finds that the legislative enactment entitled the Foundation of Dine, Dine Law and Dine Government, as codified at 1 NNC 201-206, has been misunderstood, misinterpreted, and misapplied by many in the Navajo Nation government such that the beauty of the Dine Life Way itself has been cast a critical and controversial shadow that was never intended by the Navajo Nation Council's legislative enactment and codification of the Foundation of Dine, Dine Law and Dine Government, as codified at 1 NNC 201-206".

The Navajo Council tabled the proposed legislation in the Summer July 2009 session. The proposed legislation will be reconsidered for the Winter session.

The proposed legislation seems to say that the Navajo Council is repealing this law because this law is being used against the Navajo Council, which it was never meant to be used in that manner. It is very important that the Navajo people be informed of these developments and that the Navajo people take a stance on the issues. What is at stake here is whether the Navajo government should reinforce the traditional Navajo culture as the culture is fading away among ourselves and our youth. Should politics be a reason why our government does not support our culture and identity as Navajo? Should the Navajo people not be allowed to decide their own government? These are important questions for the future of the Navajo Nation.

In the mean time, we wait to see what the Navajo Supreme Court says about the appeal of the Office of Hearing and Appeals decision.

Read related articles:
Measure tabled to repeal tribe fundamental law
Navajo Nation Council completes final day of 2009 Summer Session

Read proposed law:
Page 1

Page 2

Page 3

Page 9

Page 10

(NOTE: These pages from the proposed legislation is being provided to inform the public. Pages 4-8 are omitted: They contain cross-out provisions of the Fundamental Laws of Dine.)

Office of Hearing and Appeals decides Council-reduction case in favor of Shirley

2009-07-16T11:11:00.022-06:00

Hearing Officer/Judge Perry entered an order deciding in favor of Joe Shirley's efforts to have the people vote to reduce the Navajo Council. Joe Shirley is working to put two ballots issues before the people: To reduce the council size to 24 and for the President to have line-item veto power. Judge Perry's opinions has already been appealed to the Navajo Supreme Court. The information for oral arguments is posted:

Navajo Nation Supreme Court Oral Argument -- Oral argument in In the Matter of the Navajo Election Administration's Determination of Insufficiency Regarding Two Petitions Filed by the Navajo Nation President, Dr. Joe Shirley, Jr., the Navajo Election Administration, Appellant, v. Dr. Joe Shirley, Jr., Designated Representative for the Initiative Petition Committee, Appellee, SC-CV-28-09 will be held at the Navajo Nation Museum in Window Rock. This is an appeal of a decision of the Office of Hearings and Appeals. Ron Haven, Window Rock, Navajo Nation, for Appellant; and Albert Hale, Window Rock, Navajo Nation, for the Appellee. Oral argument is scheduled for 1 pm on July 27,2009 at the Navajo Nation Museum in Window Rock.

In a First, Navajos to Vote on Their Power Structure
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: July 4, 2009

FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. (AP) — Navajo voters have never had much of a say in how their modern government was shaped. But that may soon change, after a tribal judge cleared the way for a special election on a restructuring that could alter the balance of power on the sprawling reservation.

The government structure was forced upon Navajo voters 86 years ago and was reorganized under three branches without their consent.

Maybe Navajos “will have a greater sense of ownership in the government than they now have,” said Dale Mason, who teaches Navajo government at the University of New Mexico, Gallup.

In 1923, the federal government created the Tribal Council to sign off on oil and gas leases. Before that, Navajos largely governed themselves. Small bands were led by headmen, or naataanii, who came together only in times of crisis to solve problems that extended beyond their communities.

Even if such a meeting, called a naachid, resulted in a decision to act, no Navajo was bound to comply.

With the discovery of oil on the reservation in 1922, the federal government needed an entity to deal with for leasing matters. It appointed three Navajos to a business council, but soon realized that the group needed to be more representative and expanded it to include delegates from across the reservation.

Navajos did not fight the creation of a centralized government or smaller political units in the early 1920s because the idea was not new to them, said David Wilkins, author of “The Navajo Political Experience.”

“It’s just putting a name to what has always been in existence, even if it wasn’t always known to a larger society,” said Mr. Wilkins, a professor of American Indian studies at the University of Minnesota.

When the federal government took a boilerplate constitution to tribes across the country in the mid-1930s, it gave Navajos an opportunity to vote on their government structure. Many tribes accepted the document, but Navajos rejected it. Later efforts to establish a constitution also failed.

More than 50 years later, the council reorganized the tribal government under three branches but has never asked Navajos to ratify the changes.

The Navajo Nation is the country’s largest Indian reservation at 27,000 square miles in Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Its population of 300,000 is second only to the Cherokee Nation.

Over the years, the size of the Tribal Council grew to 88 members. Navajos now elect their leaders, but Mr. Wilkins points out that the government still lacks legitimacy because it was not created by Navajos and they have not sanctioned its existence.

Voting on the measures, which would cut the Tribal Council membership by more than half and give the president line-item veto authority, “would come close to that,” Mr. Wilkins said.

A tribal hearing officer ruled that the initiatives could go forward after a legal fight between the Navajo president, Joe Shirley Jr., and the Tribal Council speaker, Lawrence Morgan. An election was ordered held within six months, but an appeal is planned.

Reducing the Tribal Council has seemingly captured the interest of Navajos more so than the line-item veto. Mr. Shirley said it would fulfill the wishes of Navajos who voted in a 2000 referendum for a council of 24. The change was not enacted because the measure required a majority vote in each of the 110 Navajo chapters.

Mr. Shirley said he was hopeful a line-item veto would curtail spending by delegates, who have voted to give themselves gold rings, and drain tribal funds meant for capital improvements and for tribal employee raises.

Mr. Morgan maintains that fewer delegates would mean less representation for chapters, particularly those that already share a delegate. Any money saved on delegates’ pay would be needed to hire additional staff members and pay for travel to more chapters, said Joshua Lavar Butler, a spokesman for Mr. Morgan.

Mr. Butler declined to comment on the line-item veto.

Miya Francis, 25, who is from the small reservation town of Lupton, Ariz., said she believed that reducing the council might force delegates to pay more attention to their communities and advocate for them.

“We hardly see our council delegates here within the area,” Ms. Francis said. “The only time we see them is when it comes to having regular and chapter meetings, and the only reason they come here is because they get paid for it.”

Julie A. Livingston, a Navajo voter in the Church Rock, N.M., chapter, said her community was well represented in the tribal capital of Window Rock, Ariz. Ms. Livingston said reducing the council would only stretch delegates thinner.

“I don’t know if each chapter will be represented well,” she said. “Their needs are all different.”

Mr. Mason, the Navajo government instructor, said that he did not see a gain or loss in reducing the council and that the number of delegates did not determine what level of representation the communities would receive.

The people’s view, Mr. Mason said, is “that the council is incompetent, that they benefit themselves and not the people; that’s where the point of conflict is.”

The legislative branch arguably is the most powerful of the three branches, and the passage of the initiatives might tip the balance of power to the president, Mr. Mason said.

Related article: Council: Not so fast on reducing our numbers.

Navajos save Bashas'

2009-06-10T10:09:00.005-06:00

Tuba City Bashas' (by Tom Zoellner)

During the economic slowdown, a lot of American businesses are cutting down. The Bashas’ supermarkets are no exception. However, the supermarkets that are located within the Navajo reservation are not in the list of stores being closed. In a previous blog entry, I mentioned how Bashas monopolized the Navajo reservation. It looks like here that the Navajos maybe saving Bashas’ during this economic slowdown. The article also shows some history on how Bashas’ extended its chain to the Navajo reservation.

Reservation Bashas’ spared
By Adam Klawonn · June 9, 2009
The Zonie Report

Thanks to the economic slowdown, Bashas’ Supermarkets, headquartered in Chandler, recently announced it would be closing five of its stores statewide. Left untouched, though, are the set of five stores located on Arizona’s American Indian reservations, which are part of the Bashas’ “Dine Market” subset.

That a corporate chain grocery happens to serve historically isolated and neglected communities happens to be one of the state’s more interesting economic stories. It is also, in my view, another reason to believe in local ownership of iconic state institutions instead of the absentee model which has served Arizona quite poorly in recent years (Chase Bank, Pulte, Gannett, et. al.).

An argument might be made that injecting a Western grocery, with all of its crappy processed food, is another means of destruction of a traditional way of life (and diet) on the reservation. But the counter-argument holds that consumer choice should play a role there just as it does everywhere else. Whichever stance you take, the relationship between Bashas’ and the tribe – especially the Navajo – has been largely a content one for the last thirty years.

The Dine Markets got started in 1980 after the tribal council of the Navajo Nation wrote CEO Eddie Basha Jr., asking him to consider opening a store in Chinle. Basha, who would later mount a campaign for governor in 1992, was a descendant of a Lebanese shopkeeper who had migrated to an Arizona mining camp in 1910. Basha was immediately intrigued with the possibility, checked on distribution requirements, and then called the tribal council that same day.

“Hi, my name is Eddie Basha,” he said, according to the trade magazine Arizona Food Industry Journal. “I’m from Bashas’ Markets and I’d like to be your grocer.”

Today there are Dine Markets in Chinle, Window Rock, Tuba City, Kayenta, Pinion, Crownpoint, N.M., and Dilkon. More than 95 percent of the employees are said to speak Navajo.

Customer tastes and preferences vary slightly from other Arizona grocery stores, reports the trade journal. The markets sell a disproportionate amount of mutton, as well as Folgers coffee and Spam. Large bags of Blue Bird flour – long a staple in Navajo households – also do well. Even though the Dine cluster is far away from the company’s nucleus in the Valley, the stores are apparently doing well enough to avoid being shuttered.

Bashas’ spokeswoman Kristy Nied declined to discuss finances or even indicate whether the stores were a net moneymaker. The company is privately held, so there are no SEC filings to inspect. For now, though, the Dine Markets are staying.

Racism stinks!

2009-06-04T11:16:00.006-06:00

This is a video clip about the Navajo Nation's Human Rights Commission. I agree with their concerns. Why just two weeks ago, a waitor in Page and another in Farmington serve me second after another non-Indian customer even though I was there first. Racism stinks! See video.

Update

2009-06-04T10:04:00.004-06:00

Time to update this site. It's been a looooonnnnnnnggggg vacation. I've cleaned up this site and alot of articles have been removed. I left up some of the more interesting and substantial articles.

The Assimilation of Native Americans

2009-02-17T07:00:00.000-07:00

This is a good article whose message should resonate in Indian Country, including the Navajo reservation, as a reminder that we hold the power to choose whether we are going to become completely, partially, or not assimilated at all.

Only families can halt the breakdown of Native culture
COMPASS: Other points of view
By RENEE CROW
Anchorage Daily News
Published: February 1st, 2009 07:35 PM
Last Modified: February 1st, 2009 07:35 PM

In the past the American school system and the church could and should be blamed for the loss of our Alaska cultures, but times have changed greatly. Today we are able to make choices about the languages our children are taught in with the variety of bilingual programs offered. We are able to home school our children or choose what high school they attend. There has never been a better or more important time for parents and community members to be an integral part of our children's education and life.

What is killing our Native cultures is not our schools but the breakdown of our families.

When we choose to speak English to our children instead of our own language, we are choosing to allow our language to die.

When we allow our children to watch hours of television or play video games instead of sharing our stories, we allow our culture to die.

When we choose to buy meat at the stores instead of trapping, hunting and fishing with our children, we fail to teach them how.

When we buy Doritos and frozen pizza instead of gathering eggs or berries, we hurt our culture.

When we buy a hat from the store instead of sewing one, we fail to teach our children.

When we go to bingo instead of playing our traditional games with our children, we fail.

While unfortunately prejudice still occurs, the days of Native peoples no longer having a say over their lives is long over. I am not a victim as my grandparents and parents were. No one can tell me that I do not belong or that my Native ways are inferior.

Every day I have choices: choices to stay sober, to not watch hours of TV or not to gamble. I have the choice to love my children and spend important time with them, to oversee their education, to teach them my culture's traditions and values.

We are hurting ourselves if we continue to see ourselves as victims. The truth is that our children need us to be part of their lives, to guide their thoughts and dreams. Our children need us to teach them our language, our culture, our traditions and values. All of these are too precious to trust to others to teach or allow to be taken from us.

It is true that the curriculum doesn't reflect Native ways -- and it shouldn't.

Schools have always been about teaching skills that families don't. In states like Michigan, where hunting is also valued, the schools do not teach how to be a successful hunter. It is taught by the family. When reading, writing and math are taught to our children it does not hurt them but adds to the fullness of their lives, giving them opportunities within their villages as well as outside to succeed.

Presently I cannot tell where my children will choose to live or what occupations they may have, but I want them to have the options to be successful in their choices.

Many teachers would define success not as a college education but as a person who is happy, living healthy, and contributing to their community in a positive way. For the most part, I believe that schools are doing their part to help our children. But when our communities continue to have the highest rates of alcoholism, neglect, sexual assault and suicide, I have to question whether we as families are doing our part. These things that hurt our children happen in homes, not in schools. It is best for our children that we look for solutions rather than pointing fingers.
------
Renee Crow is Aleut, raised on St. Paul Island. Now living in Bethel, she is the mother of four and has taught in the Lower Kuskokwim Region for 15 years.

Congress to decide Navajo-New Mexico water settlement bill

2008-11-19T20:54:00.001-07:00

Navajo water settlement included in lands bill
Indianz.com
Monday, November 17, 2008

A bill to settle the water rights of the Navajo Nation is included in a major water and public lands bill that could be considered by the lame-duck Congress.

The bill resolves the tribe's claims on the San Juan River in New Mexico. It authorizes 600,000 acre-feet of water per year for the tribe as well as a water pipeline in the eastern part of the state.

The water and public lands bill, S.3213, may or may not come up during the session due to a hold by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), a member of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee.

Advice for Navajo Water Rights Journalists

2008-11-19T20:53:00.005-07:00

This article comes out at a time when the U.S. Congress is considering a law that includes approving the water rights settlement agreement between the Navajo Nation and the State of New Mexico.

A stinking corpse: US deceit and theft of Navajo water right
Written by Brenda Norrell
Monday, 17 November 2008 14:25

Today I received one of the most important documents that I've ever received as a journalist in Indian country. It details the loss of Navajo water rights, the role of non-Indian attorneys and how uninformed non-Indian journalists come to Indian country and follow the mandates of those they believe to be the "good guys." Too often, the "good guys" are actually driven by politics and personal motives.

The document is "Navajo Water Rights: Truths and Betrayals," written in response to an article published in High Country News and Navajo Times, written by Matt Jenkins.

Among the authors of "Navajo Water Rights: Truths and Betrayals," is Former Navajo Chairman Peter MacDonald.Many years ago, in the 1990s, I was a stringer for Associated Press and covered federal courts. During the federal trial of Former Navajo Chairman Peter MacDonald, I realized that the US government would stop at nothing to remove him from office and put him in prison. "Why?" I asked a Navajo businessman, during a court recess in Prescott, Arizona. "Was it about oil and gas, or coal?" No, the Navajo businessman said. "It is about the water."

Now, a decade and a half later, I read and understand the importance of Navajo water to the United States, in this document. Navajo water and the electric power made with it, light up the Southwest cities. While the people of the Southwest light up, water their lawns and golf courses and turn on their water faucets, many Navajos haul their water and read by lantern light.
It is a long and corrupt history of US colonialism and deceit, a history with truths now being revealed like maggots on a rotting corpse. From the formation of the Navajo Tribal Council, as it was called then, to sign energy leases in the early Twentieth Century, to the current day machinations to usurp Navajo water rights and resources, the ploys of the United States government and its agents is a long and nauseating history of deceit, which includes the murderous legacy of the Long Walk.

Read for yourself, "Navajo Water Rights: Truths and Betrayals." Water attorneys will gain a great deal from the analysis of Indian water rights. Hopefully, journalists and editors will discover red flags and avoid condescending and inaccurate articles in the future. As George Orwell said, "In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Thanks to all of you out there devoted to this revolutionary act of truth-telling.

Navajo Water Right: Truths and Betrayals

2008-11-19T20:52:00.009-07:00

Here's some frank advice by past Navajo leaders for our current Navajos leaders on a controversial topic, Navajo water rights. The past Navajo leaders' advice is to remove the influence of attorney Stanley Pollack and Dr. John Leeper from the Navajo government.

NAVAJO WATER RIGHTS: TRUTHS & BETRAYALS

A Spring 2008 Response to Matt Jenkins' article in High Country News and Navajo Times

By: Max Goldtooth, Peter MacDonald, and Ron Milford
Joined by: Milton Bluehouse, Sr., former Navajo Nation President; James Henderson, Jr., former Arizona State Senator; and Wallace Hanley, former Navajo Water Code Administrator

A Navajo family views Glen Canyon Dam, on the Colorado River in Arizona, from the Navajo Reservation side of the River, in this parody of Norman Rockwell's famous, and telling, painting from the 1960s.

[Max Goldtooth is a Biomedical Engineering Technician, medicine man, and community organizer. Peter MacDonald is a semi-retired consultant and former Chairman of the Navajo Nation Council. Ron Milford is a Civil Engineer and community organizer.]

In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell.

Featured in the March 17, 2008, issue of High Country News (HCN) and in the April 16
issue of the Navajo Times (the Times) was a Navajo water rights-related article by HCN’s Matt Jenkins titled "Seeking the Water Jackpot."

Letters to the HCN editor by concerned readers, like "Felice," who wrote on 3/23/08, said things such as "I agree that Matt Jenkins did seem to have a bias against the grassroots Dine folks ... ." Felice and like-minded reviewers of HCN and the Times do not know the half of it, which is why we wrote this reply.

Navajos’ Massive Unemployment

Jenkins opens his article by describing the deplorable condition of our infrastructure, including our roads, and our unemployment. He correctly said that unemployment is routinely at about 50%, and it has surged to 67%.

The unemployment rate for Arizona, as we begin writing, is 4%. For the U.S. it is around 4.8%. During America's "Great Depression" of the 1930s, it averaged 17%.

The routine Navajo unemployment rate is therefore 1,150% higher than Arizona's, almost 1,000% higher than the U.S. at large and almost 200% higher than the U.S. average during the Great Depression.

Jenkins' condescending article suggests that Navajos should accept the state of things and the "drinking water" or, more correctly, the faucet water, focus that Navajo Nation water lawyer Stanley Pollack and his Navajo Water Rights Commission are mostly limiting their Arizona/Utah efforts to. The New Mexico settlement has similar and other serious limitations.

Having faucet water, avowedly important, nonetheless remains a minimalist start, e.g., every urban U.S. ghetto has faucet water. Also, economist and Indian law expert, Erik Jensen, has recently observed that "Substantial economic development in Indian Country will not occur without significant infusions of outside apital ... ." Navajo, the largest tribe in North America, requires not a "significant" but an epic infusion of capital—the Navajo Nation is the size of West Virginia. The single major source for this desperately needed, anti-poverty, and pro-employment capital rests in the Navajo Nation's water rights; including sovereign authority over rights, long-denied agricultural rights, and full compensation for waived and lost rights.

Pollack and the Water Commission have failed to even pose the question, “What will the last 30% of Navajos on the Nation, who still lack running water, have when the faucet water arrives?” In the absence of an immense infusion of capital, they’ll have the same 50% unemployment rate that prevails on the Nation now. Plus, without full rights, and the full compensation due for the valuable rights and priority dates waived and lost by Pollack and his Commission, Navajo will still have no sustainable way to maintain its economy or infrastructure like, say, Arizona does. What the Navajo Nation needs is something like the water and related values we already supply to Arizona; which has the fastest growth of any state in the U.S.

CAP, the Page Power Plant, and the Navajo Cost

The Central Arizona Project (CAP) canal is designed to deliver, on average, 1.5 million acre feet of water annually (equivalent to 1.5 million football fields a foot deep) from the Colorado River diversion point at Lake Havasu to the Phoenix and Tucson regions. Without the CAP, which began operations in the '80s, Arizona would have none of today's growth. The CAP canal runs over 330 miles to Phoenix and Tucson. The market value of the CAP water is perhaps $30 billion dollars. But it’s worth more than that because without the water, Arizona would fall into chaos and start to depopulate. The Navajo Nation makes Arizona’s CAP-dependent growth possible. Here's how.

Navajo coal mined on Black Mesa goes by train to the Navajo Generating Station near Page, Arizona. The coal is burned to create steam from Navajo water taken out of the Colorado River at Lake Powell. That steam generates electricity at the plant.

The volume of Navajo water used annually in the plant is about 33,000 acre feet. During the past 30 plus years, the total Navajo water used is about 1,000,000 acre feet. At today’s lease prices, that is over $1 billion worth of water, for which Navajo has never received a penny; though the surrounding states acknowledged the water is part of the Navajos’ share of the Colorado River. Pollack failed to tell the Navajo leaders this or the Page Plant's role in CAP.

Another truth about the Page Plant is that the Navajo Nation does not get the electric power generated at the Plant. The power serves the Southwest. And, almost 1/4 of it is dedicated to pumping Colorado River water (which we have been denied to date) through the CAP canal.

Therefore, some 23.7% of the Page Plant electricity goes southwest through power lines across the Reservation and on to the CAP pumps, starting at Lake Havasu, to push Colorado River water 336 miles up hill to central and southern Arizona.

Thus, resources from a people with widespread poverty are used to fuel America’s leading growth state—Arizona. Social economists refer to this kind of thing as colonialism and even economic racism. Also, half of Glen Canyon Dam, at Page, was placed on Navajo land. The power generated goes elsewhere. We get no continuing payments for the land, and none for our water that generates power at the dam. And, to date, we can only look at Lake Powell.

Jenkins Pre-planned Bias

We are a mixed group politically—Democrat, Republican, and Independent. Although our opinions may often differ, what we have most in common are that we support full Navajo water rights, and we each were directly or indirectly belittled by Jenkins' article—about which the several of us who were interviewed had advance notice of its pre-planned prejudice.

We had received a "heads-up" that Jenkins, Water Commissioner Lena Fowler, her husband and Anglo journalist George Hardeen (a Jenkins connection and contributor to HCN, as well as the media man for the Navajo President), Stanley Pollack, Pollack's operative and Anglo engineer and Nation employee John Leeper, Ph. D., and others supported the idea for the subversive Jenkins article.

We consider Pollack and Leeper as the thoroughly informed deceivers. The others, and most Navajo leaders, are caught up in their deceptions. Jenkins, however, must bear sole responsibility for his acquired role of private propagandist and agent of oppression.

Nonetheless, each of us who was interviewed determined to allow Jenkins to speak with us in the hope that either our heads-up information was incorrect, or the aberrant influence of Pollack et al. on Jenkins would be overcome by the truth. We were mistaken.

Jenkins' Reservation Visit

Jenkins was biased from the beginning. He was uninterested and occasionally rude when we separately suggested he consider sources which expose Pollack's strategies of delay, deception, misinformation, non-information, rights reduction, rights minimization, and sovereignty cutbacks. Below are two typical examples of Jenkins' unfairness.

First, as an enticement to provide him what he was angling for, Jenkins promised us he would definitely send a pre-publication draft of his article so we could comment and note corrections. He never sent us a copy, but tribal government conferees advised us he did send a pre-publication copy to Pollack, Fowler, and Hardeen.

Second, Jenkins bothered to mention such irrelevant trivia as his observation of Fowler's "vaguely sexy set of crow's feet at the corners of her eyes." Yet he did not report on the extensive credibility of the man who originally helped us expose what was happening on the Navajo Nation. What Jenkins condescendingly said was that the man "was a guy named Jack Utter, another bilagaana who is a hydrologist (for the Navajo Nation)." Jenkins continued with, "Utter is animated by the thrill of conspiracy, and he keeps a copy of Paolo Friere's anti-imperialist screed Pedagogy of the Oppressed -which largely draws its inspiration from the British colonization of India - close at hand." That was it.

Jenkins made some gross misrepresentations that go to his own credibility. First, Dr. Utter did not have a copy of the late Paolo Friere's book "close at hand." We know he used to own a copy, but it went missing two years ago. Second, the book does not draw anything "from the British colonization of India," as Jenkins declared. They are not mentioned in Friere's book. Jenkins obviously has not read or researched the book, and falsely represented it. Pedagogy of the Oppressed, used in hundreds of universities throughout America as part of their diversity curricula, focuses on the poverty-stricken population of South America, including the Indians.

We are aware that what upsets people like Pollack, Leeper, and now Jenkins the most is that we and other Navajo grassroots advocates, who see through these deceivers, are not unread, unthinking, uncaring, or uncommitted.

More Than Just "a guy"

Compare, if you will, the following description of Dr. Jack Utter, set down by those of us who know him, with Jenkins' portrayal and determine for yourself if Jenkins concealed from readers cogent information about the man on whose credibility much of the early grassroots argument turned.

Jack Utter, Ph. D., J. D., age 57, has a Bachelor of Science in Agriculture, including irrigated agriculture. He also has a Master of Science in Watershed Management. His Doctor of Philosophy is in Forest Resource Management, with a specialization in wild river management. He completed his law degree in 2007.

Jack is a widely-known Indian-Country author, educator, and lecturer. Annually, he presents several nationally publicized seminars on Indian law, including water law. Additionally, Jack's wife is Navajo. He has two Navajo step-children, now in college, and he has hundreds of supportive Navajo in-laws throughout the Navajo Nation. His loyalty to his Navajo family, his in-laws, and the Navajo people is unquestionable.

Moreover, in the early 1990s Jack worked as a water rights negotiator for the Yavapai-Prescott Tribe of Arizona, among whom his step-daughters have blood relatives. He served as a member of the Yavapai-Prescott team that successfully took the Tribe's water rights settlement through Congress in 1994.

It is apparent to us that Jenkins, who we made sure had access to all the information presented in this section, purposely withheld it from his readership.

A Small Part of the Pollack Story

Delay. Water law lawyers Monroe Price and Gary Weatherford, as far back as 1976, published the following law review statement. "Often, non-Indians simply postpone the resolution of Indian rights, hoping they will disappear or that courts will not interfere with a developed pattern of resource reliance (by non-Indians)."

Pollack started work for the Navajo Nation in 1985. It took him 20 years to get a single water rights settlement proposal before Congress; and, then, it was only in one of three states in which the Nation is located. Pollack has been here for over 20 years, yet he only began to timely move forward on broader Navajo water rights after grassroots protests in 2000-2001.Unfortunately for the Navajo people, Pollack’s efforts remain two decades behind. His delay could not have been worse; with war, drought, economic downturns, and climate change now on America's and the world's front burners. These troubles were not front-and-center for Pollack's first 15 years. If he were in the U.S. military all this time, and had served America the way he has “served” the Navajos, he would have been court martialed long ago.

Minimizing Indian water rights. In early 2002, Pollack persuaded the Navajo Council to endorse a 2001 Arizona Supreme Court case which had a few positive aspects, but which ran contrary to federal Indian law. The Council never read the case, and he never read it to them, but he did say it was "a huge win" for the Navajo Nation. He never told them the case calls for taking "a minimalist approach to," Indian water rights. We have asked various Council delegates since if they endorse minimizing Indian rights. Each answered "no." When told of what Pollack did, they look down and say their hands are tied.

Treaties. The Navajo Nation has two treaties with the United States; 1849 and 1868. None of the 22 Arizona tribes, except Navajo, has a treaty with the U.S. Of the 23 New Mexico tribes, only Navajo, Mescalero, and Ute have treaties. Thus, Southwest treaties are important for the few tribes who have them. But, only a handful of Navajos even know there is an 1849 Navajo-U.S. Treaty. The Treaties were not even mentioned in the original San Juan Settlement that Pollack told the Council to approve. It was not until grassroots people pressed the issue that the Council was told of the 1849 Treaty, and the two Treaties were mentioned in the Settlement.
But, the 1849 Treaty is not used for water rights, and the 1868 Treaty is employed in a primarily token way. Additionally, the Nation received no specific compensation for reduction of its very valuable Treaty rights.

Furthermore, under a 1990s New Mexico court case, language found in the 1849 Navajo Treaty, and copied verbatim in the Mescalero Apache Tribe's 1852 Treaty, was ruled to give the Mescaleros an 1852 water right. The New Mexico courts, relying on the federal "Canons of Construction," found "in favor of the Indians." Thus, Navajo has an exceptional chance of establishing an 1849 water right for some lands in New Mexico. And this could be pressed in negotiations as precedent for certain rights in Arizona. But, Pollack effectively tossed the Treaty out, and garnered no compensation in specific return. And, he did not tell the Navajo Council or
the Water Commission about the Treaty or the favorable New Mexico case. Who would deny a tribe their treaties, their best friend or their worst enemy?

Waiver of the Canons of Construction. The federal "Canons of Construction," or rules of legal interpretation on Indian issues, are over 170 years old and are embodied in the 1849 Navajo-U.S. Treaty; which, again, was effectively tossed out of the San Juan Settlement. As noted, the New Mexico courts have strongly endorsed the Canons. These court-made rules generally require that treaties, agreements, statutes, and executive orders be liberally construed in favor of Indian tribes; and ambiguities be resolved in favor of tribes.

The San Juan Settlement throws out the Canons of Construction. Unfortunately, the Navajo Council never heard of the Canons until after the Canons were discarded in some obscure Settlement language. Only after James Henderson discovered this and complained did the Council first learn there was such a thing as the Canons of Construction. Pollack then had a memo sent to the Council that effectively said to leave things as they are and, "there's no guarantee a court would apply the Canons to a future Settlement issue anyway." But, with the Settlement as written, now there is a guarantee that the Canons will never be applied, since they have been waived. This uncompensated waiver sets an onerous precedent—and is grossly unfair to the other 566 federally recognized tribes—while our leaders fail to act.

"Senior" water rights. Pollack told the Navajo Council and Commission that, in the San Juan Settlement, Navajo has senior water rights. The truth is that the proposed Settlement language subordinates nearly all Navajo water rights by saying the Navajo Nation will not use its rights in a way that interferes with anyone else's. The true meaning of "senior" rights is that when you have them, you can use them before junior rights to the full extent of your own. Pollack should have been honest with the Council on this, and should have obtained just compensation for forfeiting senior rights, if the Council agreed.

Use it or lose it. Pollack and Leeper for years have told the Navajo Council, Water Commission, and citizens at public meetings that "use it or lose it" applies to Indian reserved water rights. That is completely false. Indian reserved rights are not lost by non-use. But, Pollack and Leeper told this to Navajos so the latter will agree to reduced or minimized claims because of a Navajo history of relatively low water use, especially in Arizona and Utah, due to poverty, a lack of infrastructure and capital, and more than a century of mass government discrimination in favor of non-Indian water projects.

Fowler and her fellow Commissioners have also unwittingly spouted this "use-it-or-loseit" theme at many public meetings. That is, until Fowler was supplied last summer with 18 legal citations to the contrary. Two of these were even taken from legal seminars Pollack gave off the Reservation. When speaking to non-Navajo lawyers off the Reservation, he gives a different story because he cannot get away with all the falsehoods he spreads here. Thus, Pollack correctly said the following, off the Reservation. "Indian water rights are reserved. These rights ... are not lost through non-use." (1999. Emphasis added.) "Reserved rights exist regardless of whether water has been used by an Indian Tribe. Reserved rights are not lost by non-use or state doctrines of abandonment or forfeiture." (2000. Emphasis added.)

Additionally, after Pollack was exposed on this issue, Fowler had to acknowledge at a public meeting that reserved rights are, by legal definition, not lost by non-use.

However, when faced with the reality that Pollack and Leeper had caused the Commission to spread serious falsehoods, and rather than bring these two men to task, Fowler chose to save face and help organize the Jenkins article; thus doing a great disservice to our people.

The upper Colorado River waiver. Pollack told the Navajo Council and Water Commission that the waiver of Navajo water rights on the upper Colorado River in 1969for 50 years was valid. It is not. The waiver was achieved through documented deceptions, coercions, and falsehoods presented to an uninformed Council. It is therefore void. He also, for years, told our people that upper Colorado River basin water in Lake Powell could not be used in the Lower Basin. That too is false. Even now, the State of Utah, which had agreed decades ago not to use upper basin water in the lower, is moving ahead to do it anyway. Readers can look for themselves on the Internet for the "Lake Powell Pipeline Project."

Allottee's water rights. The future water rights of the New Mexico Navajo land allottees were folded into the Navajo Nation's. The land allottees had no proper notice and were not given an informed opportunity to be heard, i.e., their constitutional rights of due process were essentially violated. The Navajo Nation does not control water rights appurtenant to the checkerboard allotments in N.M., which are outside the Reservation. Some 3,000 or more allotments, with perhaps 30,000 Navajo owners, are in the San Juan Basin. The checkerboard allottees' rights, on allotments taken from the public domain, are independent of the Navajo
Nation's.

Reduced San Juan Settlement volumes and values. Randomly ask a Navajo Council member how much of the San Juan River Navajo is getting in the proposed Settlement, and they'll say, "Pollack told us 1/2 the River." That volume is incorrect. One half would be roughly 750,000 acre feet, or at least $10 billion worth of rights. The actual rights volume is about 325,000 acre feet. The difference in value between the larger and the smaller figures is roughly $6 billion. What the Council delegates do not understand is that Pollack confined the Navajo Nation to claiming about one half of the roughly one half of the River that was assigned to New Mexico in a non-Indian agreement from the 1940s that the Navajo Nation was never party to. All our ongoing settlements have complications. But, in each, Pollack and Leeper surrender Navajo rights and opportunities they've hidden from our leaders.

In addition, in 1962, the Navajo Nation gave up rights to 110,000 acre feet of San Juan River water that is now pumped under the Continental Divide to the middle Rio Grande River Basin. That volume of rights in the middle Rio Grande, at today's prices, is worth about $3 billion. That is $1.5 billion dollars more than the rough cost of the proposed Settlement. In other words, in light of all this, the Navajos have already more than paid for the Settlement, as well as the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP), in what they have given up. This is a powerful negotiating point that justifies full and fair compensation for what was and is being given up. But, Pollack did not inform the Navajo leadership of these values and the reduced Settlement volumes described. Too, the Jenkins article noted a San Juan Settlement volume of about 325,000 acre feet. The Times published the article. The Times later published a Settlement-related article, declaring the River Settlement volume to be about 600,000 acre feet. That’s near 100% more than HCN or the New Mexico media report, but the Times, like the Council and the Commission, failed to question the discrepancy because the 600,000 plus figure is the on-Reservation muddled story that Pollack and Leeper give.

Water values. Several years ago we reported to the Council that the value of Southwest region water rights was, conservatively, at least $1,000 per acre foot. Pollack told them we were either lying or crazy. Within a year Navajo’s NIIP water was professionally appraised at approximately $15,000 per acre foot. Now, regional surface water values generally fall between $10,000 and $55,000 per acre foot—the latter in Santa Fe. But, unfortunately, only we have challenged Pollack for this proven falsehood.

The Winter's Doctrine. The centennial of the "Winter's Doctrine" of Indian reserved water rights is being celebrated this year, but Pollack essentially waived the doctrine in the San Juan Settlement, and is doing the same in Arizona and Utah while our leaders ignore it.

The Water Rights Commission

Pollack is, in essence, telling the Water Commission and Council that Navajo cannot even claim the greater rights it was expected to for decades. And, he gets deceived Commissioners, like Fowler, to work against their people's rights; while they are rewarded with the power, prestige, travel, and additional advantages that go along with a leadership position.

Fowler and the other Commissioners were unaware the original proposal to create the Commission came from the grassroots group Dine Sovereignty Defense Association, or "DSDA." The idea was derived from Montana's Reserved Rights Commission. DSDA refined their model to serve as a people's commission, separate from Pollack’s manipulation, and urged the Council to pursue it. They did, but Pollack and Leeper, and several Council Delegates (who they had in their pockets), intervened and stole the Commission from the people. Now the Commission's education and decision-making are controlled by and/or filtered through Pollack. They have effectively become his misled pawns, and thus frequent spokespersons for outside interests.

Tribal Patriotism

Jenkins' article mocks us for having feelings of patriotism for our own people. Even in the 1890s, one of the most anti-Indian decades in history, an Interior Department publication recognized that tribal members "owe immediate allegiance to their ... tribes."

We think Sitting Bull, the assassinated Lakota leader, may have said it best for us. "Is it wrong for me to love my own? Is it wicked that my skin is red? Because I am (an Indian); ... because I would die for … my people?" Feelings similar to these are behind the irony that American Indians have perpetually had the highest rate of U.S. military service of any ethnic group. Indians protect America because it is their homeland. Peter MacDonald, for example, honorably served as a Navajo Code Talker in the U.S. Marine Corps during World War II. Milton Bluehouse, too, served honorably in the Army, both stateside and in Europe. Also, James Henderson is an honorably discharged and wounded combat veteran of the Viet Nam war.

This is why Jenkins' referring to Navajos, like ourselves, as "insurgents" is so offensive to us—who are peacefully struggling for our people's rights. All of us have relatives who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Max and Ron have children who served there against real "insurgents." These veterans have done this sacrifice while Pollack, Fowler, and the others childishly support Jenkins' insult to us, our families' veterans, and the veterans of numerous other Navajo patriot families. Despite this disrespect, we will continue with the great respect we have for the service and sacrifice of all our veterans. We also say shame on you to Jenkins and his coschemers. We further ask him and similar interlopers to kindly keep their anti-Navajo propaganda to themselves.

Fabricated Sympathy for Pollack

This was a goal of Jenkins. Ron had written an opinion in the Times in December that, among other things, called for investigations into potential ethics violations by Pollack and other Navajo Nation attorneys who may knowingly join in his subversive efforts.

Also, we are not insensitive to the fate of millions of Jews during the Holocaust, as Jenkins suggested. The opposite is true. One of our group, in fact, counseled with a regional Rabbi after we learned Pollack was Jewish. This was done because we could not understand how Pollack could carry out his oppressive policies against our people. The Holocaust explanations from the Rabbi made our hearts weep, and reminded us of how many of our ancestors, and those of other Southwestern tribes, were treated so inhumanely by first Spain, then Mexico, and finally America in the 19th century. But the Rabbi advised us not to apply any sympathy to Pollack. The Rabbi described a personal disappointment that Pollack was Jewish, because of Pollack's deceptions. And, it was the Rabbi who gave us this quote, “The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a great lie than to a small one.”

The Boyden Syndrome

In the late 1940s a lawyer named John Boyden came to the Navajo Nation seeking employment for his Utah law firm. Navajo was full up. Boyden went on to Hopi, where he was hired in 1951. Law professor Charles Wilkinson explains in his 1990s book Fire on the Plateau that Boyden planned to, in effect, take over the Hopi government. He succeeded, by getting "progressive" Hopis to outvote "traditionals," and then pushed development of Black Mesa coal and Hopi acceptance of the Peabody Coal Company lease.

Boyden obtained approval of the lease without truthfully informing the Hopi Council on the lease's value, or that of scarce water resources. He also never disclosed whether he had ties to Peabody. However, he did negotiate a groundwater lease, "on behalf of Hopi," whereby the Tribe would receive from Peabody a "laughable" (Wilkinson’s term) $1.67 for every acre foot (326,000 gallons) of pristine N-Aquifer water used to slurry Peabody's coal through a pipeline from Black Mesa. The pipeline went to a Laughlin, Nevada, power plant roughly 300 miles to
the west.

Boyden, the deceived Hopi Council, and Peabody always vehemently denied that Boyden ever represented Peabody, but rumors (much less strong than Pollack’s identifiable deceptions) persisted. Boyden died in 1980, and his papers went to the University of Utah. Wilkinson and a researcher gained access to those papers in the 1990s. They discovered an entire file on Boyden's secret work for Peabody. Wilkinson's researcher remarked to Wilkinson about the Peabody materials, "I can't even begin to tell you how bad it is." Wilkinson himself, after going over the file, said "it was a sickening, depressing experience."

Hopi and Navajo coal and water was, and is, wanted by the American Southwest and its boosters for a great buildup of this part of the "sun belt." The vast majority of the benefits have not gone to the tribes but to outside interests.

Navajo tribal member and attorney, Sharon Noel, who was a Navajo Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyer and later chief of staff for President Kelsey Begaye, recognized a kind of Boyden syndrome at work on Navajo before she was forced out by the Pollack faction. She went public with some of this in the Gallup Independent on July 30, 2002. Noel said about the Navajo DOJ, where Pollack works, "DOJ is more about being obstructionist and placing barriers in front of long-standing problems (such as water rights) than it is about seeking remedies on behalf of the Dine people ... . Somebody is making money off the continued suffering of the people." She went on to say about Navajo water rights, "The more I read the more astounded I became, ... I learned our Colorado River water rights claim is huge." Noel was a casualty of telling the truth.

We are confident, however, that in the coming decades the names Boyden and Pollack will be commonly spoken about in the same breath, along with those in Navajo government who helped Pollack achieve his ill ends, whether they were deceived or not.

Navajo leaders are currently embarrassed about the loss of $4.7 million to a con man they made a deal with for an on-Reservation project. It turns out the man had a three-year gap in employment history. No one bothered to ask about it. After the fraud became apparent, the employment gap was found to exist because the man had been in prison for another fraudulent scheme. Now, Navajo leaders admit “the signs were there.” Unfortunately, the “gaps” in Pollack’s handling of water rights have been dealt with same way; they’ve been ignored. “The signs are there,” too. But not in over 20 years has there been a fully open and honest presentation to the Navajo leadership and people on water rights potentials, the law, treaty rights, Winters rights, sovereign control values, water values, waiver values, etc.

Conclusion

It is important for the Navajo People to know that they have inalienable rights not to have to cower before the states and outside interests, like Pollack effectively causes our leaders to do. Even a high-ranking Navajo lawyer confided to one of our group, some time ago, that dealing with powerful White corporate, state, and federal lawyers and politicians is far too daunting for him, so he turns a blind eye to Pollack.

The Navajo Nation can rid itself of Pollack and Leeper, and withdraw the proposed San Juan Settlement and make corrections. And, it can re-direct the Arizona and Utah settlements away from the current weakened approach. Furthermore, like non-Indian interests, the Navajo Nation can "maximize all rights at all times and at all places," and begin negotiations from there. We can maintain this philosophy of strength while remaining reasonable, logical, and determined to negotiate the best settlements possible for our people. Among other tribes and non-Indian
interests the motto is “Never give up anything without getting something in exchange;” while Navajo gives away $billions in value.

This happens partly because colonialism and racism have multi-generational impacts on affected peoples. There is the observable or disguised despotism of the colonist and racist, and the learned and degrading submission of the oppressed. But we believe these negatives can be overcome.

At the very end of his article, Jenkins quotes Pollack talking about the grassroots people. Pollack says, "You know? They're like, "Well, shit. Why do we have this guy here? I want to be a millionaire."

No, the grassroots patriots for the Navajo Nation only want it to survive, to gain access to full rights, to receive just compensation for waived and lost rights, to have decent infrastructure, and to reduce the devastating unemployment rate at least down to Great Depression levels. This kind of far-better future would be an astounding achievement—one which Pollack and his supporters, like Jenkins, are sabotaging.

Navajo Gaming Story

2008-11-19T20:43:00.004-07:00

This article summarizes some of the Dine Bahane' and the historical Long Walk. It's a good reminder to Navajos considering that the Navajo Nation's first casino has opened this week despite the Navajo people's vote against gaming.

Navajo Stories of Gaming
Arizona Republic
November 16, 2008

According to Navajo legends, the first humans and all creatures came from different worlds below.

Navajos received life skills from the Holy People, who taught them to live in harmony with nature. They were given a designated home, Dine bi Keyah (Navajo Land), surrounded by Four Sacred Mountains.

Wagering plays a noteworthy role in Navajo history and lore. Below are versions of two legends and a key historic moment, all influenced by gambling.

Evil Gambler

Navajo legend tells about one of the ancients, a man named Noqoilpi, who was so skilled at gambling that he was nicknamed "One-Who-Wins-You."

According to "Stories of Traditional Navajo Life and Culture," those who bet against the wizard always lost, and most wound up as slaves hauling rock slabs from a limestone quarry.

One day, Noqoilpi's honest twin brother came to visit. The oppressed people, who knew that a sibling could bring reverse magic, saw an opportunity to overcome the wizard's power. They pressed for the brothers to have a race and gave secret tips to the visitor.

The brothers competed in the "shinny match," where contestants run to a pair of trees and climb to the top. The one who shinnied up first would win his sibling's family, slaves and other possessions.

During the race, Noqoilpi resorted to old tricks, firing a witch missile at his brother, to no avail. Near the finish line, visiting brother was warned by Horned Toad that one tree was strong and the other weak. He raced to climb the sturdy oak while One-Who-Wins-You shinnied up the cane reed tree, which toppled under his weight. The wizard lost, and the liberated people felt no sympathy, calling out for him to be tied to a holy arrow and shot into space.

The Long Walk

In September 1861, U.S. soldiers and the Indians around Fort Fauntleroy in New Mexico gathered for a series of horse races. The site, now Fort Wingate, is several miles southeast of the new Firerock Casino.

An account by Martha Quillen describes how Chief Manuelito's horse faltered and veered off the track in the final race because someone had cut the halter. The Navajos demanded a rematch, but the judges, all soldiers, refused.

The ensuing violence was recorded by Capt. Nicholas Holt: "The Navahos, squaws and children ran in all directions and were shot and bayoneted. ... I saw a soldier murdering two little children and a woman; I ran up as quick as I could but could not get there soon enough to prevent him from killing the two innocent children. ... Meanwhile, the colonel had given orders to the officer of the day to have the artillery brought out to open upon the Indians. The sergeant in charge of the mountain howitzers pretended not to understand the order given, for he considered it an unlawful order."

With Kit Carson as a guide, the Army launched a scorched-earth campaign against the Navajos that eventually led to the roundup of about 10,000 Indians, one-third of whom died during the infamous Long Walk to Bosque Redondo.

The Shoe Game

Long ago, animals of the daytime competed against their nocturnal counterparts to determine whether humans should live in a world of darkness or of light.

The game, or ceremony, is known as Keshjee: Team A buries four shoes in sand, one containing a ball made from yucca. Team B uses a cedar stick to select which shoe contains the hidden ball. They take turns hiding and seeking until one team has collected 102 yucca stems used to keep score.

In the animals' wager, Coyote switched sides when it appeared his team was losing. Owl hid the ball beneath his wing and was forever blinded in daylight as a penalty.

Keshjee is still played in early winter, with lessons of teamwork, loyalty and fairness conveyed in dozens of songs.

But the original contest between animals lasted until sunrise, when both sides realized that creatures have no power over the cycles of sun and moon.

Auto Dealerships and Navajos

2008-10-30T14:05:00.010-06:00

They say that the Navajo Nation is about the size of the state of West Virginia. It is wide open dusty land. It is covered by a network of paved roads owned by the state and federal governments. There are also a lot of dirt roads where pave roads fall short.

Now Navajos live in communities. Many Navajos also live in the remote boondocks. All these Navajos need food and goods to live. These food and goods are available primarily in the stores which are located in bigger communities like Chinle, or in the bordertowns, like Gallup. To obtain these food and goods which are necessary to life, Navajos need durable vehicles to get goods. Navajos also need vehicles for other reasons: to heard sheep, to haul water, etc.

Most Navajos who live on the reservation are uneducated. I would not be surprised if the average education of reservation Navajos is less than the high school level. Most Navajos who are educated, i.e. college-educated, have left the reservation (to get educated) and never returned. Thus most reservation Navajos have little education. They do not understand some basic things that other Americans understand such as buying a vehicle. A lot of those who do purchase vehicles also don’t speak English. How do you effectively communicate with this situation?

American entrepreneurs look for opportunity to make money. The automobile industry is no different. They are like sharks. Where there is a profit to be made, they’ll be there. That is the case with auto dealers and Navajos. Auto dealers take advantage of uneducated people like reservation Navajos to make the most profit they can make. That is the reason a lot of auto dealers, such as Ford and Chevy target Navajos. That’s also the reason Bashas and Walmart compete for Navajo business (because Navajos have that need and most Navajos are not educated).

Because Navajos need vehicles for transportation, many uneducated Navajos fall prey to the deceptive tactics of auto dealers and loan companies. As a result, many auto dealers, finance companies, and other businesses cheat a lot of Navajos. That is the reason there is a lot of ads for vehicles, predatory loans, a lot of which results in repossessions.

Because of this situation, it is important that Navajos understand the car buying process. The article below shows how to avoid some of the most common tricks used by the auto dealers. I thinks it's important issue. It is important that we understand how vehicle-purchasing works so we won't be cheated out. It is important that we understand what “financing means", or what “dealer invoice price” is, or how “zero down” affects you. If you know of uneducated Navajos who want to purchase a vehicle, help them understand these terms.

7 ways dealers make you pay extra
Winning strategies for playing the car-buying game to win.
ConsumerReport.org
October 30, 2008

Your goal is to get the best car at the best price. The dealers goal should be to help you do this, but too often its simply to make as much profit as they can. As a smart shopper, you need to know the common strategies that dealerships use to pad their bottom line--from tricky negotiating tactics to trying to sell you unnecessary extras--and how to avoid playing their game. Consumer Reports auto-test staff, which buys more than 50 vehicles a year, has had hundreds of dealership experiences. Following are some of the most common things you could encounter and CRs advice on how to avoid falling prey to them.

1. Mixing negotiations. Salespeople like to combine the vehicle price, trade-in, and/or financing negotiation, often asking you what you can afford to pay per month. This gives them more latitude to provide a favorable figure in one area while inflating figures in other areas. In the end, this could cost you more overall.

Avoid this trap by negotiating one thing at a time, starting with the price of the car. Approach this as if you were paying cash, with no trade-in. To get the best deal, you should go in with a starting price thats based not on the vehicles sticker price but on how much the dealer paid for it. The dealer invoice price is commonly available on Web sites and in pricing guides, but that isnt necessarily what the dealer paid. Behind-the-scenes bonuses, such as dealer incentives and holdbacks, give the dealer more profit margin--sometimes thousands of dollars--which gives you more room to haggle. To help, Consumer Reports New Car Price Reports (available via ConsumerReports.org) includes the CR Bottom Line Price, which is the dealer invoice minus any incentives, holdbacks, or rebates. A reasonable starting price is 4 to 8 percent over the CR Bottom Line Price, depending on how much demand there is for the model.

Make it clear to the salesperson that you want the lowest possible markup over your starting price, and that youll visit other dealerships selling the same vehicle and will buy from the one with the best price.

Once youve settled on a price, discuss financing and any trade-in separately. This makes it easier to get the best deal at every step of the transaction.

2. 0 down, 0 interest, 0 payments for one year. This may sound good, but there are downsides that can cost you money. After the first year, you still owe all the monthly payments youve delayed, often at a higher-than-necessary interest rate. In short, you end up owing much more than the sticker price on a vehicle that is now a used car.

Consider this kind of deal carefully. No down payment, for instance, means youll have to finance more, which makes the monthly payments higher and increases the amount you pay in interest over the life of the loan. Be sure you know what the interest rate will be after the first year, and compare with rates that are currently available. Keep in mind that many buyers dont qualify for zero-percent loans and other low rates. Knowing the current rates can also help you avoid being talked into a rate thats higher than what you could get elsewhere.

3. The leasing game. Many leasing customers assume that the monthly payment the salesperson quotes is a nonnegotiable figure. Thats not true. The figure is often based on a vehicles sticker price with no discount, and can be negotiated just as if you were buying the car. In fact, to keep the transaction simple, you can negotiate the vehicle price before mentioning that you want to lease.

Other negotiable lease items include the down payment, annual mileage limit, and purchase-option price. Just as when buying, you can have dealers compete against each other, giving your business to the one that offers you the best deal.

4. Financing and your credit score. Dealers like to arrange the financing for your vehicle because it gives them another source of profit. But the interest rate they offer may be higher than you could get elsewhere. Dont make financing a purchase-time decision. Before visiting the dealership, make sure you know how youll pay for the vehicle. Call ahead to find out what the dealers rate is, and compare it with what you could get from banks, credit unions, or other lending institutions. If you are preapproved for a loan, you can keep the financial arrangements out of the negotiations.

Remember that your credit score will affect what interest rate youre offered, so its good to know it in advance. Ideally, check your credit score a couple months before buying the car so that you have time to correct any errors in your report.

Knowing your credit score can also protect you if a disreputable dealer tries to give you a higher interest rate than you deserve. Any score over 700 should ensure you the lowest rates. A report with a credit score costs $15 or less at each of the major credit bureaus: Equifax, www.equifax.com, 800-685-1111; Experian, www.experian.com, 888-397-3742; and TransUnion, www.transunion.com, 800-888-4213.

5. Loading on the options. Salespeople will sometimes try to make up for a low price on a vehicle by talking you into a lot of optional equipment. Do your homework, so you know what options you want and which you can live without. Many options are available separately, but others can only be bought as part of a package. Consider these carefully. Option packages can make you pay for features you dont need to get a few you want. Its best to choose a vehicle trim level that gives you most of the options you want, then add other options separately. If a model doesnt have the features at the price you want, consider another.

Remember that you can negotiate the price of options. Various Web sites and Consumer Reports New Car Price Reports give you dealer invoice price for all available options.

6. Extras you dont need. Another profit source for dealers is extras such as rustproofing, fabric protection, paint sealant, and etching your Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) on windows to deter thieves. Sometimes, these types of charges will simply appear on your bill of sale without anyone having mentioned them to you. Dont waste your money. What could cost the dealer about $90 can cost you $1,000 or more.

Vehicle bodies are already treated to protect against rust. Upholstery is typically treated at the factory, or you can do it yourself with a can of spray-on fabric protectant. Paint sealants and waxes are available for under $15 at any auto-parts store or supermarket. Some states do require dealers to offer VIN etching, but none require that you buy it from them. If you want VIN etching, you can do it yourself with a $25 kit.

Dealer prep fees--such as checking tire pressure--should be included in the purchase price, not listed as extras. If these items are on your bill of sale, refuse to pay for them.

7. The question of extended warranties. At some point in the buying process, the dealerships financing manager will try to sell you an extended warranty, which can cost hundreds of dollars. Consumer Reports does not recommend buying an extended warranty unless you plan on keeping a trouble-prone vehicle for an extended time after the original warranty runs out. Most manufacturer warranties are sufficient, with bumper-to-bumper coverage of at least three years or 36,000 miles and powertrain coverage thats often longer. If you want an extended warranty, ones offered by the auto manufacturer are typically better than those offered by third-party companies.

Some disreputable dealers may tell you that you must buy an extended warranty because the bank requires it. In fact, lenders typically dont require it, and making you pay for one under these pretenses is illegal in some states.