Editorial paints deceptive picture of Oklahoma

Speaking of collusion, a recent editorial in the largest paper in Oklahoma served up a jolting piece the other day. In an editorial posted on May 6, a writer pointed to the traveling and collecting of one James Anaya, an indigenous rights observer for the United Nations. He was in the Sooner State, presumably because a state with 38 federally recognized tribes has its fair share dealing with indigenous people.

Anaya was on hand in Tulsa to meet with leaders of various Indian tribes and take notes on the position of its Native people in regards to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As such, he was curious to see what our input was, to inquire if any issues were of interest to us, did we find a place for improvement at some level, etc.

It was pointed out that Anaya had done similar work for indigenous people in places like Suriname, Chile and Guatemala. It was likewise pointed out that the tribes here in Oklahoma could not possibly be compared to indigenous peoples in other parts of the world. Seriously?

Besides wondering why our indigenous club card wasn’t mailed out yet, I read on.  The implication was that somehow Indians in Oklahoma had forsaken their indigenous standing unlike the rest of the world. So I looked it up. The meaning of indigenous is originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native, in essence.

This eye-opening editorial allowed that living in Oklahoma was a lot better than it used to be. A side step over the past fifty years of history, to be sure. Through our gaming funds we now “enjoyed access to the halls of power through lobbying efforts and personal ties.”  This is a loaded statement, implying much more than makes any tribal leader comfortable I’m guessing.

This new and improved relationship with the State of Oklahoma was made possible by the generous hearts of state voters who approved State Question 714 in 2004, laying the groundwork for state-to-tribal compacts based on gaming tribes’ Class III revenues.  In a market worth $3.23 billion, that’s a right cozy relationship.

To be fair, after gaming compacts arrived, things did change for us in Indian Country. More members of the Oklahoma state legislature acknowledged their tribal affiliations, pumping up the membership in the Native American Caucus to 17. Many of those members felt free to come out of the Native closet, so to speak, and acknowledge their Indian heritage.

It was noted that if or when a dispute arose among tribes and states (think water here), “tribal governments are hardly being run over.” But that is not what Anaya is doing in Oklahoma. He’s getting feedback from us, because regardless of how the tribes here bought respectability in state politics (is there any other way?), a platform for bettering their stance may be next.  It is the intent of a position report Anaya will file with The United Nations to make a public note of our assertions.

In this case, where the wind comes sweeping down the Plains, the state’s slip is showing.  For some reason, state representatives get nervous having their approach to sovereign negotiations questioned/examined/exposed. The editorial thinkers assume mixing in other entities like treaty monitoring bodies or commissions that safeguard human rights would complicate the status quo here. This is telling.

We are informed, if you read editorials, that the state admits Indians “got the short end of the stick at times in our nation’s history.” I must have missed the part where the tribes got a fair shake--either historically, socially or economically. Oklahoma’s belt is notched for the times that tribes were taken advantage of on a parked car date.  It goes on:

Things have changed for Indians in Oklahoma (as per the editorial). Could it be improved negotiations between state and tribal officials regarding sovereign issues? No, the reason given is that “American Indian culture is a foundation of mainstream Oklahoma culture.” Reading between the lines, we vibe that they are us and we are them.

Furthermore, letting international “busybodies” tinker with the strong relationship between “neighbors,” is admonished.  In an almost too obvious fashion, this editorial pantomime is clear: Indigenous rights belong to the rest of the world, but not to Oklahoma.  Please, Mr. Anaya, make note that Oklahoma’s indigenous voice belongs at the United Nations Human Rights Council table.



S.E. Ruckman is a citizen of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes in Anadarko, Okla. She graduated from the University of Oklahoma’s School of Journalism and has written for the Tulsa World and is currently a special contributor to the Native American Times. She is a freelance writer who is based in Oklahoma.