Native American rights - federal government

Question 1

Did the federal government improve the rights of Native Americans?

Answer 1

Certainly until the 1930s, and New Deal, they did not support the rights.
Possibly it was only from 1969 and Nixon’s presidency that they did anything for self-determination.
Instead they tried to assimilate Native Americans.

Question 2

What is Manifest Destiny?

Answer 2

The land in the West was seen as representing America’s freedom.
Through legislation the government encouraged its settlement, bringing white settlers into contact and conflict with Native Americans.

Question 3

How did Manifest Destiny cause railways?

Answer 3

Their belief encouraged the government to make grants of land that cut across the great plains, where many Native Americans lived, to rail companies.
The 1862 Pacific Railway Act allowed companies to take sufficient materials for the building of the line from the land.
Granted 155 million acres of land, depriving Indians of large land.

Question 4

How did Native Americans occupying land conflict with Manifest Destiny?

Answer 4

It prevented the White Americans from occupying the whole continent.

Question 5

How did the structure of the tribes conflict with Manifest Destiny?

Answer 5

It meant they had some self-determination, and their tribal laws meant that they were not subject to the full law of the country.

Question 6

How did the Nomadic lifestyle conflict with Manifest Destiny?

Answer 6

The lifestyle of following the buffalo herds contrasted with the permanent settlements that the new European settlers had established.

Question 7

How did religious practices conflict with Manifest Destiny?

Answer 7

The stark differences and use of hallucinatory drugs during tribal ceremonies caused them to be seen as savages who needed to be controlled and ‘Americanised’.
This meant converting them to Christianity, educating them and providing them with permanent land to farm.

Question 8

What is the Reservation Policy 1871-87?

Answer 8

Aimed to end their nomadic life and separate them from the buffalo.
Allowed control and prevented them from leaving the reservations.
It would also be easier to educate them and remove tribal customs.
Called them ‘wards of the state’ who did not have civil rights.

Question 9

How did Reservation policy worsen?

Answer 9

After 1871 the Native Americans lost the right of treaties.
The government pursued more aggressive assimilation, encouraged by Manifest Destiny.
This meant if the government required the land they were unwilling to negotiate for it - without consultation.

Question 10

Why did Allotment Policy come about?

Answer 10

The defeat of Custer in Little Bighorn made some politicians realise that the unrest was due to reservation policy.
There was a growing recognition that the policy had failed to accomplish assimilation.
This led to a change in the way the government sought to bring it about.

Question 11

What is Allotment Policy 1887-1934?

Answer 11

Through the Dawes Act of 1887, where reservation lands were divided into homesteads.
Supporters hoped it would improve conditions, but it did nothing for civil rights.
It continued to ignore the tribal nature, and to destroy it.

Question 12

How did Allotment Policy improve Native American rights?

Answer 12

Native Americans were given land, and after 25 years could own it, having full citizenship and therefore rights.
But Native Americans didn’t want this.
Even if they did want this, in practice it meant little as they were discriminated against.

Question 13

What is the evaluation of the Allotment policy?

Answer 13

Native American position worsened because they were in basically the same position, except the tribes were more broken up, which made it harder to preserve tribal culture and tradition.
It was a clear indication the government either didn’t understand their wishes or didn’t want to understand them.

Question 14

Why did Termination policy happen?

Answer 14

The change in policy under the New Deal was short lived and ended in 1953.
The government realised that previous policies didn’t bring about assimilation.
The lands on which many of the Native Americans lived were wanted by mining and forestry companies, so the government gave the Indian citizens rights.

Question 15

What is Termination Policy 1953-69?

Answer 15

It ended the recognition of Native American tribes and saw proposals to end the reservation system.
Native Americans were encouraged to relocate by offering them accommodation and help to find work.
But this meant a loss of lands and further disintegration of remaining tribal life.

Question 16

How did the economy impact government support?

Answer 16

During times of economic decline and when the government faced competing claims for revenue, support declined further.

Question 17

What was the impact of the economy in 1865?

Answer 17

During the civil war government spending increased, so the amount of aid sent to Native Americans on reservations decreased.
Additionally, the officials responsible for ensuring the aid were corrupt.

Question 18

What was the impact of the economy in 1880s?

Answer 18

Meat subsidies to the Sioux were stopped because the government had other financial demands in the time of economic decline.
It was the tribes lives, not only civil rights, that were not protected.

Question 19

What was the impact of the economy during WW2?

Answer 19

A similar situation due to spending on the war effort meant the reversal of the gains made under the New Deal.
Native Americans still on reservations found financial resources were relocated to the war.
This was worsened at the end of the war when Japanese Americans were forcibly moved to live on reservations alongside Native Americans.

Question 20

What was the impact of the economy during the 1980s?

Answer 20

The lack of available funds and the attitude of Reagan limited the gains made under Nixon and Ford.
The programmes they introduced depended on federal funding, but this was reduced.
This was further reinforced by Reagans belief in Native Capitalism.

Question 21

How did the New Deal counter the idea of the economy impacting support?

Answer 21

The changes brought by the New Deal challenged the assumption that poor economic conditions were a significant factor in the unwillingness of the government to support rights, and instead suggested the attitude of presidents and individuals was more important.
The 1930s depression was the worst time for the economy, but the first time that Native American civil rights were advanced.

Question 22

What did the New Deal do?

Answer 22

John Collier advanced civil rights, but it was also due to the president, who appointed him as commissioner for Indian affairs.
It appeared that there was a change in government policy as the Wheeler-Howard Act helped to preserve culture and gave them the right to manage their land and mineral assets, and to establish a more secure economic basis for the reservations.

Question 23

How was the New Deal limited?

Answer 23

The original proposals were modified so that assimilation, not separation, was pursued.
The improvements were therefore designed to convince the Indians of the benefits of assimilation.
So overall, the policy did not see a change, but did end Allotment policy, even if they couldn’t be independent.

Question 24

What did President Johnson do?

Answer 24

The change in attitude to Native Americans was encouraged by a realisation that their conditions and opportunities were the worst of any group.
Johnson referred to them as the ‘forgotten Americans’ March 1968 and set out a programme to promote self-help and respect.

Question 25

What was Nixon’s attitude to Native Americans?

Answer 25

July 1970, Nixon criticised the treatment of Native Americans, to congress.
He attacked the federal programmes designed to help them, but which had been dominated by white officials.
He attacked termination policy, which had failed to improve the lives and ended many lives instead.

Question 26

How did educational provision increase?

Answer 26

1972 Indian Education act increased the amount of money available for Native American schools, even on reservations, and continued for further presidents.

Question 27

What reform did Nixon introduce?

Answer 27

Some Native American nations regained recognition and rights, which allowed them access to courts where they could seek redress for their lost rights.
The pledge to restore lost lands was put into practice with the return of lands to the Makah, Taos Pueblo and Yakama Indians.

Question 28

What is the Bureau of Indian Affairs?

Answer 28

As part of Nixon’s reform:
Native American Louis Bruce jr was appointed commissioner for Indian affairs and a policy of affirmative action was pursued in the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
It controlled the money for their developments, and was responsible for the education and the reservations.

Question 29

What was the legislation passed under Ford?

Answer 29

The Indian Self-determination act 1975 allowed tribes to take responsibility for their own education, health and social service provision. Federal funding was provided for these programmes and so there was a further move towards self-sufficiency.
The Indian Education Assistance Act 1975 allowed Native Americans to have much greater involvement in their children’s educational process.

Question 30

What was the legislation passed under Carter?

Answer 30

The Native American Religious Freedom Act 1978 gave Native Americans the right to follow their traditional religion and use both their sacred objects and rituals.
The Indian Child Welfare Act 1978 attempted to regulate the forced removal of Native American children from their families. Social workers had often viewed Native American practices as neglect and therefore had still been taking children away.

Question 31

What is the significance of the federal government on Native Americans?

Answer 31

Although their economic situation worsened, assimilation was abandoned by 1992 and replaced with self-determination, with government funding.
The greatest change was in 1970-78, and so saw the greatest improvement.
This suggests the attitude of the presidents to Native Americans was crucial in the developments of rights.

Question 32

What was the supreme court action during westward expansion?

Answer 32

The federal government made numerous treaties where each time the Native Americans had given away more land.
Sometimes land was given up in return for other land, but it was usually smaller in size and less suitable.
The government often broke the treaties to satisfy the desires of settlers and the needs of railway companies, and determined to impose assimilation.

Question 33

What challenges were there to government policy through the courts?

Answer 33

1902, the Cherokees challenged Congress’ right to deny them their rights.
1903, Lone Wolf - a Kiowa Chief, vs Hitchcock, challenged the right to ignore a treaty signed in 1867 and lose million of acres of land.
The court upheld this and allowed the government to take away even more land.

Question 34

What is United States vs Sandoval 1913?

Answer 34

The Court ruled that the Pueblo people were wards of the state and therefore had no rights of land ownership, causing them to lose most of their land in 1921, as they were seen as incapable of managing it.

Question 35

How did the Supreme Courts remove land?

Answer 35

The Court said that tribal consent to alter the treaties would hurt the Native Americans and they should assume that Congress would act to preserve their needs.
90% of the land allocated to them was lost.
The Native Americans could appeal only to Congress over land disputes.

Question 36

How did the State Supreme Courts hinder rights?

Answer 36

They held back rights in the early period, particularly when Native Americans challenged the West states who refused to extend the vote to them that was guaranteed by the 1924 act.
The states were able to secure the upholding of their decisions and impose a range of voting qualifications to exclude them.

Question 37

What are the victories in the courts?

Answer 37

In the later period, there was a change in the federal and state supreme courts that reflected the change in US society.
There were a number of victories for Native Americans, although progress was still slow.

Question 38

What was the Arizona Supreme Court victory?

Answer 38

In 1948, Indians Frank Harrison and Harry Austin of the Mohawk-Apache tribe challenged voting rights.
The county recorder Laveen refused to allow them to register to vote.
This was successfully challenge due to the NCAI and ACLU.
However other states still restricted voting rights.

Question 39

What is the National Congress of American Indians?

Answer 39

The NCAI was formed in 1944, and was a number of pressure groups that was important in extending the rights of Native Americans.
It involved ordinary Native Americans in the struggle to stop the end of reservations and intergrate them into society so they were no longer funded by the taxpayer.
It was mostly involved in legal battles of discrimination.
The first sign of uniting and organising a protest movement.

Question 40

What is the Native American Rights Fund?

Answer 40

The NARF put pressure on the supreme courts to protect culture and way of life.
Included reinstated terminated tribes, restoring tribal sovereignty and lands, hunting and fishing rights, the right to vote and worship freely, and the proper burial of ancestral remains.

Question 41

What is the Oneida Court decision?

Answer 41

Oneida v Oneida and Madison Countries, New York 1974.
They brought the case to sue for the return of their lands.
The court ruled in favour of the tribe.
This resulted in an increase in the number of actions taken by tribes to regain lands.

Question 42

What is Fisher v Montana 1976?

Answer 42

Native American children had been forcibly removed from the family in ‘Americanisation policy’.
The court ruled that in future tribal courts would decide on adoption.
This was a further move towards the recognition of tribal courts.

Question 43

What is United states v Sioux nation 1980?

Answer 43

Ruled that the Sioux were entitled to significant compensation for the loss of their lands.
This encouraged others to pursue this for lost land in the Black Hills of Dakota.
Sioux were awarded $17.5million and another $106 million in interest charges.
They rejected the compensation and preferred the return of their land.

Question 44

What is Seminole Tribe v Butterworth 1982?

Answer 44

The Supreme court gave them the right to establish gambling enterprises on tribal land.
This was against state law, but this ruled that Native Americans had their own rights on their own land.

Question 45

What is Charrier v Bell 1986?

Answer 45

The court ruled that remains dug from burial grounds in Luisiana belonged to Native Americans.
States passed laws which protected Native American burial grounds.