I dont exactly understand the relationship all North American Indian tribes have the U.S. Government, treaties vary. I am familiar with the Sandia Pueblo Reservation here in New Mexico, it is much like our situation and they are one of six tribes that have signed the same (HEARTH) pact with the U.S. government. It all deserves more investigation. But what I want to point out because I believe it is necessary for us to understand that the HEARTH Act is ... the President’s commitment to strengthen the government-to-government relationship with Indian Country. This is Government to Government relationship and control. A “benefit” for tribal states, I suppose, is less opposition from the BIA and more streamline process from the tribal government for property to be leased for residential and business interest. The leases are still subjugated to review by the BIA. But Leases are just that, temporary use of property no actual ownership is applied. So, as a leased residential or business property a time limit is applied and when the time runs out you are off the property or out of a business. But the other supposed benefit is the tribal government determines the length and use of the long-term lease. Understand, ownership is what makes free-enterprise successful. HEARTH is just the U.S. government loosening their oversight through the BIA and granting the tribal government more authority to control the use of property. It was probably created for the highest paid casino level employee to get a long term lease of property from the tribe where they work so they could build their mansion or as they say it is for the TRIBAL GOVERNMENT to entice private businesses and residents by offering extraordinarily long leases to live and do business on reservation land so the tribal government can sustain itself by taxation or lease fees. This will not change the economic environment of tribal states because the freedom of ownership is not applied. Tribal states need to allow ownership to experience “free-enterprise” at its best. This is all still government controlled economics, federal or tribal. This means tribal elected officials could lease property on the Reservation to whoever they want for a price, the BIA is less likely to investigate or hinder the process, and it just makes the potential for corruption from tribal officials higher because they are more bureaucratically protected. Dividend revenue that should belong to tribal members from all this property capital will continue to be used for the endless demand of public services on the reservation. To me, this is lessening the “economic advantage” tribal members could have in a free-enterprise environment because the tribal government will lease the business and residential “angles” that a “privately” owned membership corporation can exploit. I’m just talking business. ~fred Upon one-time approval of these tribal regulations by the Department of the Interior, tribes have the authority to process land leases without Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approval, greatly expediting the approval of leases for homes and small businesses in Indian Country...Chairman Barrett. This is a step in the right direction for tribal self-governance and will empower tribal governments to take greater control of their land.
Posted on: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 05:06:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015