Seems to me that sovereignty is a pipe dream without economic independence.
Recognition by the US government ought to be a means to economic independence rather than a means to a handout.
Now, everybody is going to say my blood quantum is too low for me to have an opinion, but I think what most traditionals want is to be left the hell alone.
I sure don't see them taking a lot of interest in tribal government even though you can take it to the bank that candidates always claim to represent them first and foremost.
In the Cherokee Nation, the first rule of "ticket balancing" is you have to have somebody who knows government and economics coupled with somebody who is fluent in Cherokee and can wander though the Cookson Hills and call people by their first names.
I'm wondering if that kind of balanced ticket is so bad if both parties take their roles seriously?
What do the traditionals want from the tribal government in an ideal world? I'm guessing they would like some help dealing with water and sewer problems. I'm guessing that they want some respect for the language should they need to deal with the bureaucracy. As to medical care and education, they want options: access to a doc when really sick and the ability to send their kids to school without being rich.
If anything, I'm betting the traditionals want LESS from tribal government than more assimilated types who are more motivated by the age old American quest for the free lunch.
Given that nobody who is anywhere near traditional wants anything to do with capitalism on the ground, and given that the stuff they do want is not all that expensive, I don't see why it's considered rocket science to satisfy both factions.
I don't think it is rocket science and I don't really think that's the way the Cherokee electorate breaks down--traditional v. not traditional. I think the tribal elections usually turn over more quotidian things and not some grand vision opposed to a different grand vision. That just the packaging for sale to the voters.
