http://www.lakotajournal.com
Aug.2-9, 2002
Black Hills claims settlement revisited
By Tim Giago (Nanwica Kciji)
© 2002 Lakota Journal
This Nation's mass media seldom revisits issues important to the Indian
people. That is unless it borders on controversy.
In 1922 the tribes of the Great Sioux Nation filed a lawsuit for monetary
compensation for the loss by an Act of Congress of their Sacred Paha Sapa
(Black Hills). On through the years the lawsuit was divided into two suits,
Docket 74B, the Black Hills, and Docket 74A, other lands taken east of the
Missouri River.
As of this week the money held in trust by the United States Government for
Docket 74B is $623,968,858 million. The money allocated for Docket 74A is
$88,435,465 million. This brings the total monetary award owed to the Sioux
Nation to $712,404,323 million.
Stanley Looking Elk was chairman of the Oglala Sioux Tribe in 1980 when the
awards were made. Norman Wilson was president of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe.
Most of the Indian people who were a part of the original lawsuit have long
since left this earth. In fact, Looking Elk wasn't even born as yet when the
suit was first filed.
When the suit was originally filed, it was all about monetary compensation.
As it evolved over the next 58 years, it became more focused on the return of
land. Thirty years ago when a Sioux man or woman owed a debt they would say,
"Toksa, (by and by or before long) when I get my Black Hills money." Now it
is "The Black Hills are not for sale."
The gist of the two lawsuits can be complicated, but in its brief version the
Sioux Nation was awarded $105 million for the Black Hills and $40 million for
the lands east of the Missouri River. That was 22 years ago and the interest
has brought these two claims to the amounts listed above. The "Black Hills
are not for sale" camp has prevailed and the tribes of the Great Sioux Nation
have refused to accept the settlement money.
Gregg Bourland is chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. He was a rookie
chairman when he attended a meeting held by all of the other chairmen of the
other tribes of the Great Sioux Nation. The chairmen voted to have Bourland
"watch over" the settlement money. Bourland said, "I was pretty green at the
time and later I realized that I was being thrown to the wolves."
He said, "It was as if the other chairmen were afraid to even look at the
subject. It was as if it was taboo to even talk about the monetary
settlement. It was like that deranged aunt or uncle you hide in the basement.
It seemed like everyone was afraid they would get out someday."
Bourland said the settlement needed all of the tribal leaders to act as
watchdogs. "The Department of the Interior took that money and drew money out
for themselves. They put it into ready cash securities such as overnight
deposits in banks and in short term treasury bills. It drew as little as 1.5
percent interest," Bourland said.
He believes that if it had been invested wisely in the high interest, long
term treasury notes of the 1980s, the money would now be in excess of $1
billion. Bourland quickly added, "That doesn't mean that the tribes would
accept the monetary settlement, it simply means they would watch over it and
see that it was invested wisely."
The crux of this idea is based on the fact that the tribes did file for a
return of a portion of the Black Hills under the Bradley Bill (Senator Bill
Bradley, D-NJ) in the 1980s. The prime mover behind the Bill was a young
Lakota man named Gerald Clifford. Unfortunately, a non-Indian named Phil
Stevens (a retired millionaire) claiming to be Sioux from California
attempted to introduce a Bill of his own and muddied the waters enough that
Bradley withdrew his sponsorship and the Bradley Bill died a quiet death.
Clifford died last year of cancer.
Under the Bradley Bill the tribes of the Great Sioux Nation would get 1.3
million acres of the 7.5 million acres returned to them. The 1.3 million
acres would be strictly U. S. National Forest Service land. No
municipalities, no state owned land, no private land or no federal monument
lands would have been threatened. Of course, the local media played it to the
hilt. "Sioux seek return of the Black Hills" was a common headline. This
frightened a lot of non-Indians even though the headline was clearly wrong.
Sentiment did turn against the Indians.
The point Bourland stresses is that if the Sioux did get land returned to
them, the monetary settlement could then be accepted and used to make
improvements, etc., on the lands that were returned. That is why he believes
it is so important to "watchdog" how the money is being invested.
In the meantime, South Dakota's elected officials and the federal government
itself believes that all claims to the land were extinguished when the money
was awarded. In a way its like telling the Indians, "Here is money for your
house and whether you want to sell it or not, here is the money and the house
is now ours."
As I said earlier, most of the Indians involved in the original lawsuit are
now dead. Many who were around when the monetary settlement was made in 1980
are also dead. They never got to enjoy the money or the return of the land.
This nation's media made a lot of noise about the settlement when it was
first decreed, but little has been printed since.
One still hears, "Toksa, when I get my Black Hills money" bandied about, but
it is said more in the way of a joke these days. And the people of the Great
Sioux Nation continue to be the poorest of the poor in America.
(c) Lakota Journal 2002
www.lakotajournal.com/Notes.htm
home : mission statement : contact : site map : search : store : links
DLN coalition : DLN issues : DLN nation : related issues Any reprints are under the Fair Use doctrine of international copyright law : See http://www.dlncoalition.org/fair_use.htm.
|
