The year was 2008, and the political landscape was charged with the energy of a presidential election. Senator Barack Obama, then a rising star from Illinois, found himself navigating a complex issue that underscored the delicate balance between federal power, tribal sovereignty, and historical injustices. At the heart of the matter was H.R. 2824, a proposed piece of legislation that threatened to disrupt the government-to-government relationship with the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. The central conflict revolved around the "Cherokee Freedmen," descendants of enslaved people once owned by members of the Cherokee Nation, and their ongoing dispute over tribal membership rights. This intricate situation drew Senator Obama into a position where he had to articulate his stance on tribal sovereignty, treaty obligations, and the role of the federal government in internal tribal affairs.
The controversy surrounding the Cherokee Freedmen was not new. It was a legacy of the Civil War and the subsequent treaties that sought to integrate formerly enslaved people into Native American nations. The Cherokee Nation, like other tribes in the region, had a history of both slave ownership and internal debates about the rights and status of the Freedmen within their community. In modern times, this issue manifested as a dispute over tribal membership, with the Freedmen arguing for their inclusion based on historical treaties and principles of equality, while some members of the Cherokee Nation raised questions about blood quantum and cultural identity.
Representative Diane Watson, a Democrat from California and a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), introduced H.R. 2824 as a means of pressuring the Cherokee Nation to grant full tribal membership to the Freedmen. The bill aimed to withhold federal funding and benefits from the Cherokee Nation until they acceded to this demand. This approach, however, raised serious concerns about the potential for congressional overreach and the erosion of tribal self-determination.
On March 13, 2008, a letter signed by 35 members of the Congressional Black Caucus was sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. This letter declared that the CBC members would actively oppose the passage of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) unless it included a provision specifically targeting the Cherokee Nation. This provision would deny the Cherokee Nation any federal benefits or funding until they extended tribal membership to the Freedmen. Notably absent from the list of signatures was that of Senator Barack Obama.
This action by the CBC sparked concerns within the Native American community. Questions began to surface about whether a potential Obama presidency would support efforts to undermine tribal governments’ rights to determine their own membership. The implications of such federal intervention were deeply troubling, as it threatened to revive historical patterns of paternalism and disregard for tribal sovereignty.
In response to these concerns, Senator Obama’s campaign issued a clear statement outlining his position on H.R. 2824 and the broader issue of tribal sovereignty. The statement emphasized the importance of allowing tribes to resolve their own internal disputes without undue federal interference.
"Tribal sovereignty must mean that the place to resolve intertribal disputes is the tribe itself," Obama stated. He drew upon historical lessons, highlighting the "tragic results" of past federal interventions in tribal affairs. He specifically mentioned policies such as Allotment and Termination, which were born out of misguided attempts to second-guess Native communities and ultimately led to devastating consequences for tribal lands, cultures, and self-governance. Obama made it clear that he did not want to continue this legacy of federal overreach. The Obama Upholds Rights of Cherokees, All Native American Tribes.
Regarding the specific issue of the Cherokee Freedmen, Senator Obama acknowledged that he was opposed to unwarranted tribal disenrollment. However, he maintained that congressional interference was not the appropriate solution at that time. He pointed out that the Cherokee Nation was already addressing the issue through both tribal and federal courts.
"Discrimination anywhere is intolerable, but the Cherokee are dealing with this issue in both tribal and federal courts," Obama stated. He emphasized that the rights of the Cherokee Freedmen were currently protected by an injunction, ensuring their access to programs while the litigation was pending. He reiterated his opposition to efforts to undermine these legal processes and impose a congressional solution, stating, "Tribes have a right to be self-governing, and we need to respect that, even if we disagree, which I do in this case. We must have restraint in asserting federal power in such circumstances."
Senator Obama also reiterated his support for fulfilling the government’s treaty obligations to tribes. He recognized that the Cherokee Freedmen issue highlighted the larger problem of unfulfilled promises made by the federal government to Native American tribes. These treaty obligations, he argued, were not merely handouts but rather compensation for the millions of acres of land relinquished by tribes over the course of history. The Obama Upholds Rights of Cherokees, All Native American Tribes.
Obama understood that the federal government owed a legal and moral obligation to tribes to provide healthcare, education, and other essential services. This commitment reflected his understanding of the historical injustices and ongoing disparities faced by Native American communities.
While Senator Obama’s words provided reassurance to some in the Native American community, others remained cautious, wanting to see concrete actions to back up his promises. To assess the candidates’ genuine interest in Native American issues, they were encouraged to research the websites of Clinton, Obama, and McCain. The findings revealed a stark contrast. While Clinton and McCain’s websites lacked specific links or information dedicated to Native American peoples or issues, Senator Obama’s campaign website featured a prominent link to a dedicated page for "First Americans" at www.tribes.barackobama.com.
Further investigation into the candidates’ campaign teams revealed that Senator Obama had a Native American Community Outreach Coordinator and a 30-member Tribal Steering Committee. In contrast, if Clinton and McCain had a Native American presence on their campaign teams, it was not readily apparent. This visible commitment to engaging with Native American communities set Obama apart from his rivals. The Obama Upholds Rights of Cherokees, All Native American Tribes.
Senator Obama’s opposition to Diane Watson’s legislation was not without its critics. It undoubtedly caused friction with those members of the Congressional Black Caucus who sided with the Cherokee Freedmen. However, Obama appeared to be no stranger to disagreements with the CBC.
In the previous year, TheHill.com reported on the CBC’s anger with Obama for rejecting an invitation to debate on Fox News. The report also noted that "Obama has irked fellow CBC members by failing to respond to a request made early last year that he host a fundraiser for the Black Caucus’ political action committee (PAC). [Senator Hillary] Clinton received a similar invitation and quickly followed through by headlining a CBC PAC fundraiser in March of 2006."
This strained relationship may explain why the CBC chose Hillary Clinton, rather than Barack Obama, as the Guest Speaker at their 37th Annual Legislative Conference. The Washington Times speculated that this decision indicated a quiet endorsement of Clinton’s presidential bid by the CBC.
The situation highlighted the complex dynamics within the Democratic Party and the challenges of balancing diverse interests and perspectives. It also underscored the importance of looking beyond surface-level alliances and examining the substance of each candidate’s positions on issues of critical importance to Native American communities.
The episode involving H.R. 2824 and the Cherokee Freedmen demonstrated Senator Obama’s commitment to upholding tribal sovereignty and respecting the right of tribes to self-governance. While he acknowledged the importance of addressing discrimination and injustice, he firmly believed that the best approach was to support tribal efforts to resolve internal disputes within their own legal and political frameworks. This position, while not without its detractors, reflected a nuanced understanding of the complexities of tribal sovereignty and the potential pitfalls of federal overreach. Obama Upholds Rights of Cherokees, All Native American Tribes.