Abemaki News and interesting things

[Okwes]

An excellent way of explaining the Abenaki Reality


Thank you Senator Illuzzi and Committee members for listening to me
speak today;

My name is Judy Dow. I am an Abenaki member of the Vermont Commission
on Native American Affairs from the Winooski group of Abenaki family
bands in the Burlington, Colchester and Winooski area. I am an
educator who teaches students of all ages about Native struggles in
today's world. I work for a National Indian Organization called
Oyate. I travel all over Indian Country teaching on Reservations and
in Urban Indian communities. I was the recipient of the Governors
Heritage Award for outstanding Educator in 2004. I have seen what is
happening in Vermont happen in many other places – Lateral oppression.

The commission members were chosen in a fair process which included
applying for the position and an Interviewing process with Jane
Lendway, State Historical Preservation Officer and Susanne Young
Legal council for the Governor. I believe there were over 150
applicants- and all were allowed to apply. Final approval was given
by the Governor.

The Commission has worked to develop a fair and transparent process
that would follow the intent of S117 and be as inclusive as possible.
This is an all Indian Commission including five Abenaki
representatives. We have developed a democratic procedure that would
give tribes and family bands the opportunity to apply for recognition
and would also give Abenaki artists not connected to a tribe or band
an opportunity to apply to a recognized band or tribe for a non-
member card for the purpose of selling their art, in accordance with
the Federal Indian Arts and Crafts Law. During this process of
developing the procedure and bill our proposed procedures were posted
on our internet web site for well over a year.

It has been the historical way of the Abenaki to have family bands.
Centralized tribes were not part of our life ways but merely a
construct developed for Indian groups to abide by the rules of the
colonizer. I have for you a list of quotes from historians that
explain through time what a family band was and still is for the
Abenaki. The point these historians are trying to make is that it is
the Abenaki life way to exist in family bands; it is the non-Indian
way to categorize Abenaki into tribes. However some Abenaki may
choose to follow this path today.

As Abenakis and other Native American people all across the region
know, there are many family bands of Missisquoi and Koasek who are
their own independent groups, who do not regard April St. Francis
Merrill or Nancy Millette as their leaders. This is not merely
disagreement and factionalism, but is typical of how our indigenous
social system has always functioned. As Abenaki members of this
commission, we understand that recognizing one family band as the
true "tribe" would mean the disempowerment and disenfranchisement of
their and our relatives. I, for one, am not willing to participate in
that kind of "recognition" process. Recognizing only two "tribes"
will open the door to repeat the mistakes of many other states. To
give recognition to two tribes only gives them prestige, control and
raises them to a level of power over the other Abenaki Family bands
that excludes any families that don't want to accept their authority.
Have you asked yourselves why these two tribes do not want to go
through the process the Governor-appointed all Indian committee has
developed?

To attach a proposal to recognize two tribes totally contradicts what
the commission has worked so hard at for the last 1 ½ years. You have
made a leap of faith assuming that April St. Francis Merrill from
Missisquoi and Nancy Millette from Koasek are the only "two
traditional tribes" in this state and that they represent all that
claim to be from Missisquoi and Koasek. To claim that a group is a
traditional tribe in any state they must first show that their
traditional homeland is in this state and second show that they are
connected to this traditional tribe. Of course this is not to say
that the Abenaki do not recognize the people of Missisquoi or Koasek
as Abenaki. What it does say however is that we are all now on a
level playing field. Shouldn't we have an equal, fair and transparent
procedure to identify who our people are?

No special or privileged opportunities should be given to a tribe
that is not given to any other Abenaki group in Vermont. They must
all show connection to the land and connection to kin. A sense of
place is one of the most important things when identifying a group of
Indians. And of course this can be said to be true for every Abenaki
member of the commission. We have also not had the opportunity to go
through a process that proves who we are.

My point here in explaining all this to you is not in any way to
discredit any of these people as being Abenaki, but rather to educate
you to the fact that you have been dragged into Abenaki politics that
the Governor-appointed Indian commission has been listening to and
investigating for almost two years now. April and Nancy's groups are
not the majority of Abenaki people in Vermont. It would be utterly
unfair, and illegal under existing U.S. Indian policy, to recognize
any group as an Indian tribe simply on their word.

The playing field is now level. Do you want to change this equality
and give power to just two groups contributing to the erasure of the
Abenaki of Vermont their history and recognition? All Abenaki have a
piece of the history. Putting each puzzle piece together will tell a
complete history of our people. Allowing two groups to tell the
Abenaki history erases the history of others. The artisans currently
being pursued by The IACB do not belong to either Missisquoi or
Koasek and it is questionable whether recognition of these two bands
would be a fix for this problem. The commission has voted unanimously
to submit this bill and our procedure because the majority of Abenaki
People living in Vermont have voiced their opinions to us over the
last year and half and they feel it is the most fair and just way to
proceed.

As we have stated in a previous letter to this committee it is not
the intent of the commission or the majority of people we represent
and who are your constituents to accept an add-on bill that totally
contradicts a fair and transparent procedure. Nor do we support any
bill that is not true to the original bill that we put forward.

Thank you
Judy Dow

[Okwes]

Not only does April St. Francis Merrill and Nancy Millette have an
attachment to the VCNAA bill amendment draft proposal to S.117, but
they have prepared their own bill separate from the Vermont Comission
on Native American Affairs draft proposal to Bill S.117. So... if the
VCNAA Commission pulls their draft proposal amendment (which they
won't) April & Nancy will be ready to go forward with their bill.

Any one now think this isn't a "hijacking" of the already established
Vt. Governor appointed Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs
by these two supposed leaders? Does anyone now not think that Nancy
Millette (self proclamed Koasek) and April St. Francis-Merill (self
proclaimed Missisquoi) aren't attempting to deceitfully circumvent
the 1 and a 1/2 years of blood, sweat and tears of an obvious
impartial transparent and responsible VCNAA and their efforts?

And Nancy Millette even hung up on me tonight when I asked her to
SHOW me please, the evidence that she or any of her group is a Coos
Abenaki descendant. SHOW me how their groups history
connects....historically speaking.....1764 to 1947 is a huge leap to
be making without anything in between.

I honestly don't think she has any evidence. Or she would show it.

If she'd show me, then I would cease and desist.

Oh well, she hung up on me. Go figure.

Douglas Lloyd Buchholz

[Okwes]

Differing opinions may stall proposed Native recognition amendment
Written by Jedd Kettler
Friday, 29 February 2008
MONTPELIER: Without some compromise, two differing proposals could
well spell the end of hopes to address concerns this year with
Vermont’s current Native recognition law before the end of the current
legislative session.

The cutoff point for proposed legislation to move from one state
legislative body to another - “crossover” - is March 14.

Sen. Vince Illuzzi - who has championed State recognition for
Vermont’s Abenaki in the past and has worked this year to move forward
a fix to the current State law - cautioned this week that without
compromise soon, there is little chance of legislative action to fix
gaps in Vermont’s law before the end of the biennium.

Illuzzi’s Senate Economic Development Committee will hear testimony
tomorrow, Friday, Feb. 29. The hearing starts at 10 a.m. in Room 10 of
the Statehouse. Without agreement, a solution will most likely have to
wait until a future session, he said on Monday.

“What I’ve said to them is that we cannot pass a bill that upsets as
many as it pleases,” Illuzzi said. “Everybody’s got their positions
and they’re well-reasoned, and I respect their positions ... Right
now, it’s up to the different groups to come to some consensus.”

One current proposal is based on the work of the Vermont Commission on
Native American Affairs, which has been reworked by Illuzzi and
legislative council. This proposed amendment would establish a process
and criteria by which tribes and bands in Vermont would apply for
State recognition to allow artists and craftspeople to label their
work as Native.

The other was proposed by leaders from the St. Francis/Sokoki Band of
Missisquoi Abenaki and the Koesek Traditional Band of Abenaki as an
addition to the VCNAA’s proposal. In addition to the criteria and
process laid out by the VCNAA, this would recognize specifically the
St. Francis/Sokoki and the Koesek bands and grant each band two
members on the VCNAA.

On Monday, Feb. 25, the VCNAA reiterated their support for the current
criteria and process amendment, but not other additions.

Commissioners wrote a letter to Illuzzi on Monday, stating, “The
(VCNAA) has been working for almost two years to figure out how S.117
can help all Abenaki people ... It is our goal to have a fair and
transparent process for all Abenaki people to follow. We do not want
to be part of any bill that will exclude people from having a choice
and an opportunity to apply.”

Chief April St. Francis-Merrill of the St. Francis/Sokoki band said
this week that the proposal she and members of the Koesek band have
put forward simply adds onto the VCNAA proposal by specifically
recognizing the two longest-standing bands in Native Abenaki homelands.

These groups deserve direct recognition both within the amendment and
on the VCNAA, she said. Like the St. Francis/Sokoki, the Koeseks are a
group in a historical homeland - along the Connecticut River - and
they should be recognized as such, St. Francis-Merrill said.

The St. Francis band, centered in Swanton, led the fight for Abenaki
rights and recognition in the State since the late 1960s and early
1970s, long before other current bands were formed, she added.

“The State spent a lot of money trying to discredit the Missisquoi,
and did they spend any money discrediting any of these other groups?”
St. Francis-Merrill said. “I feel the Missisquoi St. Francis/Sokoki
has already bent over backwards to document ourselves to the State.
We’ve had to prove that since we’ve been dealing with the State in the
early ‘70s.”

VCNAA Chairman Mark Mitchell said this week that the Commission has
worked hard to keep an open process since beginning work on the arts
and crafts recognition issue nearly two years ago.

“We support an open process for all to participate. This (VCNAA)
proposal is our solution to a complicated issue,” Mitchell said.
“We’ve looked at it as an open process and it’s certainly an important
issue ... I respect everyone’s opinion and I understand their
frustration ... Can the community rally around consensus before that
point?”

State recognition is distinctly different from the federal recognition
that establishes a tribe as a sovereign entity and in some cases has
led to casinos in other states. There are currently no Vermont groups
seeking federal recognition.