Ana Radelat at the Connecticut Mirror –
The Schaghicoke Tribal Nation has hired former U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman – who once fought against the tribe’s efforts to win federal recognition – to help them sue the state over a gambling law that allows only the state’s two gaming tribes to open a new casino…
Continue reading: http://ctmirror.org/2016/03/07/schaghticokes-hire-lieberman-to-help-sue-state-over-casino-law/
HARTFORD — The chief of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation said Monday that his state-recognized Indian tribe is working with gambling giant MGM Resorts to fight the state’s plan for opening a third casino in Connecticut.
Continue reading: http://www.courant.com/business/hc-mgm-schaghticoke-casino-20160307-story.html
Richard Velky, chief of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, stands in his hometown of Bridgeport in a 2005 Courant file photo. The federal government issued new standards this week for Native American tribes to gain recognition. (Richard Messina)
From Gregory B. Hladky in the Hartford Courant:
…Richard Velky, chief of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, issued a statement saying the new rules approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs “betrays the trust” between the federal government and the tribe.
“The Schaghticoke Tribal Nation will not be deterred by the grave omissions and errors” in the new federal rules announced Monday, Velky said…
From Ana Radelat at the CT Mirror
Washington – Kevin Washburn, the head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, hinted Wednesday he may have eliminated a provision in new tribal recognition rules that would stymie efforts by several Connecticut tribes to seek federal status.
Connecticut state and local officials are concerned that recognition of those tribes could lead to land claims and new Indian casinos and affect a slot machine revenue-sharing agreement between the state and the Mashantucket Pequots and Mohegans, two federally recognized tribes with casinos in Connecticut.
“Ultimately, what we’ve been hearing is that the provision may be unconstitutional and even illegal,” Washburn said at a hearing on his proposal Wednesday before the Indian affairs panel of the House Natural Resources Committee.
He was referring to a provision he included in his proposed regulations that a tribe’s application be subject to the approval of those who have previously opposed their bids.
Washburn said he had included what has been called a “third-party veto” in his proposed changes to the recognition process “to give people who fought recognition also some equity” in the process.
But he said that it proved problematic.
“The provision may be indefensible in court,” he said.
The Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation of North Stonington, the Golden Hill Paugussett Nation of Bridgeport and the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation of Kent, which have been denied recognition for years, would be given a second chance by the new rules, but would be stymied by a “third-party veto.” . . .
By Ana Radelat for The CT Mirror
Washington — The administration of Gov. Dannel Malloy has asked the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to scrap proposed rule changes the state believes could lead to recognition of additional Indian tribes in Connecticut.
The BIA has been considering the rule changes for months. The state says the changes could open the door to large land claims and expanded Indian gaming in Connecticut. Yet Kevin Washburn, Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs, has said he’s determined to fix what he’s called a “broken” federal recognition process.
The federal tribal recognition rules in place require a tribe to prove its continuous community and political authority since first contact with European settlers. Washburn’s proposal would change that to allow a petitioning tribe to demonstrate it has maintained a state reservation since 1934. Washburn‘s new regulation would also allow tribes that have been denied recognition to apply again. . .
Click here to continue reading.
By Edward J. McDonnell III for Indian Country Today Media Network
A genteel genocide continues apace in Connecticut; not of a people, but of a long, proud heritage. The Schaghticoke Tribal Nation gained federal recognition in 2004 after 25 years of struggle.
Strident opponents exacted a heavy price: less-than-ideal financial backing from an investor seeking to build a third casino in Connecticut. Federal recognition and plans to construct an entertainment facility in Bridgeport only redoubled the state’s century-old campaign to exterminate the Schaghticokes.
Connecticut’s public leaders placed private agendas ahead of public fairness by browbeating the U.S. Department of the Interior into revoking that recognition last October.
Natives had better stand together with the Schaghticokes – emulating the recent show of solidarity by the gracious tribal council chairman of the Mashpee Wampanoag – lest other hard-won sovereignties suffer similar overthrows.
In this case, appealing news copy of old-line Yankees defeating “ragtag” minions of casino thugs hid the real wrongdoing. . .
Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2006/05/17/connecticuts-campaign-exterminate-schaghticokes-117672
Take a look at what went down in the Republican-American the other day: Tribal_chief_on_a_mission_for_his_heritage
By Gale Courey Toensing
. . . Around 100 people attending a public session on the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ proposed new rules for federal recognition broke into spontaneous applause when Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation Chairman Dennis Jenkins spoke against a controversial provision that would allow certain third parties to veto a tribe’s ability to re-petition for federal status.
“This [proposal] is not only morally reprehensible; it is also arbitrary and capricious and not in accordance with the laws of the United States. … It is the worst kind of modern day genocide,” Jenkins said, as the crowd cheered, whooped and whistled . . .
By George Brennan, Cape Cod Online
. . . Many of the public comments, which can be made through Sept. 30 on the proposed changes, centered on a regulation that would require third parties — state governments or opponents of a tribe being federally recognized — to consent for a tribe to re-petition once it’s been denied acknowledgement.
“We encourage third-party participation so everyone can be heard,” Washburn said.
But tribe leaders bristled at Washburn’s comments about it being the “American way” and that applications were denied “fair and square.”
“I don’t look at this as resubmitting. I look at it as restoring what was rightfully ours,” said Richard Velky, chairman of the Schaghticoke Tribe of Connecticut, to cheers from the audience.
Velky represented one of three Connecticut tribes at the forum that have been denied acknowledgment by the BIA.
Steven Austin, an anthropologist who has worked for the BIA and for tribes, said states like Connecticut wield more power than the tribes. Eastern Pequots and the Schaghticoke both received positive “proposed findings” only to have them overturned by political opposition because state leaders don’t want more Indian casinos in Connecticut, he said.
“If people want to oppose Indian gaming, let them oppose Indian gaming,” Austin said. “Federal acknowledgement is about so much more.”
William Guy, sagamore with the Pokanoket Nation, said the regulations put the burden on the wrong people. “Why do we have to prove to you who we are?”
Read more: http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140730/NEWS/407300346
By Ana Radelat, The Connecticut Mirror
. . . After receiving a flurry of appeals from the Malloy administration, the state’s congressional delegation and mayors and selectmen from a number of Connecticut towns, the BIA has agreed to extend for 60 days a public comment period on the tribal recognition proposal. The old deadline was Aug. 1, the new one is Sept. 30. State leaders need the time to fully press their case to the BIA .
Meanwhile, one tribe has threatened to sue the BIA if it shuts them out of a proposed new regulation that would ease the federal recognition process for many of the nation’s tribes. Others are appealing to the BIA on the basis of history and what they say is justice.
“The BIA failed to consider the long, oppressive history of the state of Connecticut,” wrote Kathleen Sebastian Dring, an elder of the Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation of North Stonington, in her comments to the agency.
This was the second time the state has been able to influence the BIA. In May, the agency gave state politicians a big win with a modification to its recognition proposal. The decision infuriated the three Connecticut tribes trying to win recognition — the Eastern Pequot, the Golden Hill Paugussett of Colchester and Trumbull, and the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation of Kent.
The modification would allow those who have previously fought against their recognition to veto any new application for recognition.
“Third-party consent requiring for re-petitioning appears to be in response to concerns Connecticut raised about the discussion draft,” Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen wrote in a memo about the proposed regulation, which will be finalized after the public comment period ends.
Yet the Malloy administration and others opposed to federal recognition of these tribes are concerned about lawsuits against the BIA, fearing that the “veto provision” is unconstitutional. Jepsen said likely lawsuits over the provision would mean “Connecticut may not be able to rely on the proposed rule to protect its interests.”
“Under the present regulations, a previously denied petitioner may not repetition. That prohibition should remain the same,” Jepsen wrote.
What rattled the Malloy administration were the public comments submitted by Chief Richard Velky of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, who told the BIA that giving third parties the right to object to new petitions for federal acknowledgement “does not, I believe, comport with the due process and equal protection principles of our Constitution.”
“Nor does the U.S. Constitution provide that a state and its political subdivisions may exercise an absolute veto over the exercise of constitutional authority vested exclusively in the United States government,” Velky wrote . . .
Read more: http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-ctm-indian-affairs-regulation-20140729,0,6642225,full.story
