ALASKA NATIVES COMMISSION
JOINT FEDERAL-STATE COMMISSION
ON
POLICIES AND PROGRAMS AFFECTING
ALASKA NATIVES
4000 Old Seward Highway, Suite 100
Anchorage,
Alaska 99503
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Witness List | PDF
Version
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Is there a Nastasia
Marshberg [sic]?
MS. WAHLBERG: Wahlberg.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Wahlberg? Wahlberg, sorry.
(Pause.)
MS. WAHLBERG: Thank you. What I'd like to speak on is, since this issue of tribal sovereignty is a continual question, and my feelings; my -- from my observation, and studies, and examining what it means to be sovereign and be exercising it, what 'I feel and what I'm going to say, I'm not trying to be pompous, but I am exercising my right as a sovereign tribal member. I'm exercising it, because I believe it's working; it's being exercised; and it's working. It's not defined; there's nothing written in there; but I don't see why we have to have the federal government, although it has plenary powers what has been kind of a problem with us in the past, that we don't need to have someone define it for us.
Therefore, I'm speaking as an individual with those tribal sovereign powers; and I realize, for Western civilization, they wouldn't recognize it; but my people would. My people are from the Yup'ik nation area. I'm from Bethel. I believe, as far back as my history -- as far in history I can go back on -- even going back to oral history from stories that I have heard, it's gone back as close to prehistoric times. You know, anthropologists may argue about that, but they're scientific, that's no -- it's kind of irrelevant for me right now. What I'm saying is I really hope you'd recognize this is that the thing is that with our people, we're kindly asking to have this equal status with the state to exercise a style of government that we have a right to. We have that right.
From the beginning of the first intrusion of the Europeans with Columbus, the reason why they entered into treaties were because they were afraid, because they needed this agreement that they would be protected by the Indian tribes within that surrounding area. Okay. As history advanced, and as the population grew, the few changed into something where the tribes were considered being in the way. So the relationship changed, and the treaties were made to put people away into reservations, where that status, it was not the choice of the people.
I -- therefore, I believe, and I'm exercising on those premises; because where the United States could not define it in some past laws, as you might have through Georgia versus Worster (ph.) -- Rooster (ph.) rather; that they defined some degree of relationship -- began to define it; but those are just their definition. That s the federal government's vague beginning of entry of relationship between the tribal people and their government.
I believe that we have that authority to define that; and in recognition of that, that we mandate the Congress on an equal basis and look at it; and ask to have them define ANCSA lands as boundaries defined for Indian country.
There's been some technical quandary over that, you know. Where -- because of the fear of having this governmental sh -- right being shared; state governments have historically tried to boost out tribal governments as in Lower 48. But I'm hoping that, with the 20th Century, and us going into the 21st Century, that we as a human being people, that regardless of our race, and regardless of our positions, that we start getting into a different frame of mind; that we can, if you really do believe in equality, if you do believe in the sharing of government, that people do rule their own govern, that those be honored; that those words be honored.
Don't get so caught up in the little nitty gritty stuff that you guys have to think that, hey, if they get tribal sovereignty, that means, you know, we -- they're going to overpower us. That 's a fear; that 's a continual fear; and what my concern is is as we go along, and as you've heard testimonies all along, people want the right to govern themselves, so they can take care of their own affairs. They have that right. They wane that for their children; they want the future. And once this basic ethic and moral thought is in place, you can argue about the little fine stuff; but I feel that this Commission needs to recognize this stuff. I don' t give this Commission any power or any authority. It has powers to probably to just recognize and expedite some things that the people are working on. They recognize their own tribal sovereignty.
Some examples that I see in exercising our -- the local-option laws that goes in line with the federal line in -- originally where it came from 18 U.S.C.A. 1154a, okay? That, along with the state's local option law that was passed, that's being exercised. The Indian Child Welfare Act is being exercised. Under P.L. 93-638, Indian Self-Determination Act, is being exercised; and contracting of schools is being exercised; although other human services' health services, that's the way the people are trying to exercise their tribal sovereignty; to exercise their right.
And I recognize it; so, therefore, you kn -- you recognize it. I don't -- I can't even ask you to recognize it. I want you to recognize it. I'm just pointing it out to you; and I'm normally an easy-going person; I'm -- but I feel that this is a -- kind of like a technical area. We're walking on areas where you talk about powers. If I believe it, and the people in the villages and regions believe it, they need to say this more. I'm exercising it; therefore, it's alive and well.
And I'd like -- I liked Stan Katchatag’s
language, where when he was talking, he said:
"Join with us."
I believe in his words strongly; and I believe in that type of -- those type of thoughts and words strongly, because, for one, in our past we've tried to work cooperatively. We even ask and stuff; and we've always tried to leave it -- okay -- to the federal government; try to leave it with the state; and it's over there, and it never works out.
It's -- but, I think, there -- with some good intentions, especially with the federal government's part, some good intentions are there; but these have to be recognized within the state of Alaska, that this is a form; we are exercising it. And if there's question over it, just because of ANCSA, then there should be a mandate to Congress and to the Secretary of Interior to define ANCSA lands as boundaries for Indian country -- defined as Indian country, 'cause it --
REPORTER: Off record.
(Tape changed to Tape #5.)
MS. WAHLBERG: Okay, I think that was it.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Okay. Ella, you, have any question or comment?
MS. ANAGIK: I do have a comment, and, I'm sorry, what is your name again?
MS. WAHLBERG: Nastasia Wahlberg.
MS. ANAGIK: Nastasia, from what I hear you saying, that is your voice, you want recognition by this body, or this task force, for tribal councils and their governing powers? Is that the. . .
MS. WAHLBERG: Well, I have to talk from a basis of not
being recognized; because I recognize it. I'm a Yup’ik, and I'm also Alaska
Native, and I'm also Native American, I'm also an indigenous person; and
I'm not asking anybody to recognize it for me. I recognize it, because these
are inherent powers of my people -- of all the Alaska Natives and Native
American people. These are their powers. They don't need to be recognized
by the state and federal. They're already recognized. However, defined or
controlling, either parties to be about it, I want it stated, for the record,
in these hearings that it is so, because the more we speak on it, you see,
and if we leave it up to the federal government to define it for us -- I
heard someone say that we got to ask Secretary of Interior define tribal
sovereignty. No way. No way. We define it, and they deal with it. It's got
to be on a government-to-government basis. That's where the basis is. That's
where the powers are.
And I just wanted to be -- have it stated and recognized for the record that this is the way it is; this is the way it is in our country; whether the federal government or the state does not recognize it or not, this is the way it is. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: I have a question.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Bart, did you have one?
MR. GARBER: No.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: We received a mandate to look into and come up with recommendations on the subject of problems and programs affecting Alaska Natives; and I think the understanding is that there' s a general consensus that there are serious problems: health, education, economic, political; and that the programs which have been devised to address them don't seem to be working very well. And so we are supposed to come up with some wisdom, after listening to everybody, you included. And I know all of us take that very seriously.
And what I hear you saying is we are what we are. We are an ethnic group of indigenous Americans; that we have our own sovereignty; and whether you agree with that, or recognize it, or tip your hat, or fly the flag, we don't care; we know where we are. Don't tell us; don't recognize us.
I respect that. But I want to ask you a very hard question.
What -- as you sit here, what do you perceive to be the role, vis-à-vis Native
Alaskans -- Native American, of either the federal or state government? What
are they supposed to do? Just -- to borrow a phrase from the Reagan/Nixon
years -- benign neglect? Just let you be, and let's go do something else?
MS. WAHLBERG: No, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that to ignore or to let be; but what has happened through history is that whenever Indian tribes progress -- okay? -- there was a -- some education done right in the beginning of the earlier years okay? The Chickasaw and the Cherokee nations started progressing in the education area. First they were separate; first they were behind; but then they start advancing, and they became private. Their education became so far advanced over the pioneers during that time. They were good; and then, because there was some threat -- there was some threat this other tribe, people were more -- becoming more advanced, that they took away those rights. They separated them; put 'em up in reservations; put 'em up in -- separated them. Okay?
A Lockman (ph.) case. There's the Cherokee nation, where -- there -- became
very advanced. They took on what the initial forefathers -- I guess, the White
forefathers were -- had initially wished that they did this, so that they could
become Westernized, and progressive in farming, and all this stuff. Yes, the
Cherokee nation did do that. And the White settlers became threatened by that
progressiveness again and tore that apart. So history, there's been the Determination
Act; there’s been the Daws (ph.) Act; and (indiscernible) -- you know, the Trail
of Tears into a lot of things. Even with the Indian Civil Rights Act, heck, you
didn't have any rights unless you were a citizen; and you weren't a citizen if
you weren't civilized.
We're all considered savages, you know (laughing), so,
you know, what we’re saying is we enter into this -- we need to enter in
this as human. We first recognize our humanness; and back to the old basics.
That's the problem with this forum. The Congress and the Presidential race
now, the people are disillusioned -- a little too much of that; get back
to our humanness first; and then deal with it in good faith. You know, it's--
it's-- there's too much sidetracking.
I'm not sure if I answered your question.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Partially. Well, we'll take it up again some other time, hopefully.
MS. WAHLBERG: Okay.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Do you have any other questions? We thank you. Appreciate your --
MS. WAHLBERG: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: -- testimony. Thank you.
This document was ocr scanned. We have made every
attempt to keep the online document the same as the original,
including the recorder's original misspellings or typos.
