Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PufPuf23

(9,879 posts)
41. Cobell vs Salazar Settlement - a "win" for the Obama Administration
Mon May 7, 2012, 02:43 PM
May 2012

There is much confusion about the issue of of American Indian Trust lands. People including many American Indians are uninformed or deliberately confused.

The Cobell vs Salazar settlement ended all American Indian claims against the US Federal Government for Indian Trust lands (Reservations and Allotments) sold under the Dawes Act and monies lost by BIA mis-management of natural resources on Indian Trust lands. Cobell vs Salazar calls for $2 billion for Dawes Act sales and $1.4 Billion for decades of mis-management by the DOI/BIA of Indian Trust natural resources (minerals, fossil energy, timber, grazing, etc.) on lands remaining in Indian Trust post Dawes Act .

The settlement was for less than $0.02 on the dollar in economic terms ignoring cultural damage and excludes most American Indians.

Many American Indian leaders and the Obama Administration consider the settlement a "win" rather than a political convenience even though most American Indians are excluded.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobell_v._Salazar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Act

About 100 million acres of Indian Trust lands were sold by the DOI/BIA under the Dawes Act. There are individual Tribes harmed more than the $2 Billion allotted for the entire USA. About 38 million acres of Indian Trust lands remain.

The 100 million acres sold under the Dawes Act and converted to fee simple is land within existing Reservations, terminated Reservations, and Indian Trust lands outside Reservations (Allotments).


From the FAQ at : http://www.cobellsettlement.com/


2. What am I giving up as part of the Settlement?

If the Settlement becomes final, you will give up your right to sue the federal government for the claims being resolved by this Settlement. The specific claims you are giving up against the federal government are described in Section A, paragraphs 14, 15, and 21 of the Settlement Agreement. You will be "releasing" the federal government and all related people as described in Section I of the Settlement Agreement.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

That we were meant to exist as part of nature annabanana May 2012 #1
Yet those "noble savages" still killed off the Megafauna. Odin2005 May 2012 #4
Yep. That said, what was done to them was - at least - in the same league. Posteritatis May 2012 #6
Oh, I agree completely. Odin2005 May 2012 #10
Yet, the concurrent megafauna die-off in Europe is attributed to climate Mabus May 2012 #16
+1 4th law of robotics May 2012 #17
5 paras. Baitball Blogger May 2012 #2
More needs to be done, for sure. Vattel May 2012 #3
K&R. Odin2005 May 2012 #5
A biased result castnet55 May 2012 #7
Uh, Yeah....... alittlelark May 2012 #9
+1 yellerpup May 2012 #12
"Do we as a society continue to pour in millions of dollars as we have in the war on poverty?" bemildred May 2012 #13
Biased, or informed? sofa king May 2012 #19
Cobell vs Salazar Settlement - a "win" for the Obama Administration PufPuf23 May 2012 #41
so we should only pay attention to studies by white people? Enrique May 2012 #32
+1000 n/t ProfessionalLeftist May 2012 #33
K&R DeSwiss May 2012 #8
My favorite. yellerpup May 2012 #11
K&R! countryjake May 2012 #14
Let's give them something big like gigantic valuable tracts of land. limpyhobbler May 2012 #15
Farcical nonsense Ron Obvious May 2012 #18
Gee, are the Nomans in power now? lunatica May 2012 #20
The Normans stayed Ron Obvious May 2012 #21
LOL! lunatica May 2012 #22
Thanks Ron Obvious May 2012 #23
Did the King of England treat with the Normans? sofa king May 2012 #24
What difference does it make? Ron Obvious May 2012 #25
I've heard of Kennewick man, have you heard of the Ainu? azurnoir May 2012 #27
I've heard of them... Ron Obvious May 2012 #31
Yes, but few of them promised to pay for it. sofa king May 2012 #34
Did the Norman King treat with the English? ieoeja May 2012 #42
here is the difference -assimilation in fact the very form of English you now speak and write in is azurnoir May 2012 #29
Of course Ron Obvious May 2012 #30
Assimilation is not a legal defense for the U.S. sofa king May 2012 #35
OK Ron Obvious May 2012 #36
Yep, even the term "Indian" is contentious. sofa king May 2012 #38
Very informative Ron Obvious May 2012 #39
Is Ghadaffy still listed on the board of human rights commission ? may3rd May 2012 #26
Resistance is futile? AnOhioan May 2012 #37
The Firesign Theatre used this as one of the core themes in one of their best albums slackmaster May 2012 #28
i can sort of see where..... rppper May 2012 #40
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. must heal native peo...»Reply #41