Federal Indian Policy and the Fulfillment of the Trust Responsibility for Disaster Management in Indian Country

2022 ◽  
pp. 89-106
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Cordova
2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 617-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dean J. Kotlowski

Ronald Reagan's contribution to federal Indian policy proved mixed. Remarks by members of his administration recalled the heyday of termination, and Reagan's budget cuts fell hard on Native Americans. Reagan also played to non-Indian backlash by supporting legislation that restricted tribal rights to file claims on land disputes. Still, the administration continued the policy of tribal self-determination, begun under Richard M. Nixon. Reagan signed legislation to restore the Klamaths to federal trust responsibility, to help tribes ““contract out”” to run many federal services themselves, and to recognize and regulate gaming on Indian reservations. Most importantly, Reagan affirmed ““government to government”” relationships between the federal government, states, and tribes. Federal Indian policy mirrored other aspects of U.S. politics in the 1980s, including reductions in domestic spending, white reaction against minority civil rights gains, and the extolling of entrepreneurship. But the administration's ability, and even its willingness, to reverse the trend toward tribal self-determination proved limited.


2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-188
Author(s):  
Boyd Cothran

Abstract This article considers the event of a single year, 1873, to explain how President Ulysses S. Grant’s federal Indian policy led to the Indian wars of the late nineteenth century. Some historians have argued that Grant’s so-called Peace Policy failed due to systemic mismanagement and corruption; others have suggested it was due to administrative incompetence or ambivalence, while still others have accused the administration of cynicism in its approach to Indigenous affairs. This article argues that the Peace Policy reflected the unresolved tensions inherent in the era’s zeitgeist and that it failed to usher in a lasting peace because it did not account for the enmeshed reality of life in the American West where the boundaries and borders between Indian reservations and settler communities were entangled to say the least. The article begins with a detailed consideration of the Grant administration’s Indian policy as articulated by Francis Amasa Walker in the winter of 1872–73. Largely overlooked by historians of post–Civil War Indian policy, Walker was an influential thinker in his day whose policy recommendations emphasized the moral necessity of proprietary individualism and racial segregation on isolated reservations. The article then turns to the unfolding drama of the Modoc War (1872–73) to explore why the federal government abandoned the project of peacefully incorporating Indigenous people into the body politic, leading to a harsher and more militant approach to Indian affairs. By focusing on the nexus of ideas and events as they played out at this critical historical juncture, this article argues that the Modoc War was the precipitating event that marked the end of Grant’s so-called Peace Policy and the resumption of the Indian wars in the decades following the Civil War.


1986 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary D. Sandefur

This article examines interstate migration and labor force participation among White, American Indian and intermarried Indian/White couples. The results show that endogamous American Indian couples are much less likely to change states of residence than are the other two groups of couples. The effect of interstate migration on labor force participation does not vary across the three groups of couples. The implications of these results for the assimilation and internal colonial models of race relations and for federal Indian policy are discussed.


2017 ◽  
pp. 47-69
Author(s):  
Rupert Costo ◽  
Benjamin Reifel ◽  
Kenneth R. Philp ◽  
Dave Warren ◽  
Alfonso Ortiz

Author(s):  
Józef Jaskulski

Józef Jaskulski examines Broken Arrow and Drum Beat, considering the perspective that the latter perpetuates the very Native American stereotypes that the former attempted to amend. He links these two narratives through a contrastive analysis of their respective Native American protagonists: firstly, the noble, articulate Cochise and the obstinate, inarticulate Modoc, Captain Jack; secondly, the female characters of Sonseeahray and Toby. Though it is easy to discard Drum Beat as an essentialist step back in Hollywood’s century-long struggle with the so-called ‘Indian problem’, Jaskulski suggests that Drum Beat serves as a latent supplement to Broken Arrow, which can be read as an important document of Hollywood’s conflicted sentiments toward Native Americans in the late-Truman/early-Eisenhower eras. In particular, reflecting a critique of the major about-face in Federal Indian Policy during the 1940s.


1982 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 189 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Anthony Long ◽  
Leroy Little Bear ◽  
Menno Boldt

1985 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 444
Author(s):  
Robert H. Keller ◽  
Sandra L. Cadwalader ◽  
Vine Deloria

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document