Study shows voter discrimination

RAPID CITY, S.D. – American Indians are participating in local, state and
federal elections in larger numbers than in the past.

Native “get out the vote” campaigns have cropped up all over the country;
and in Washington state and South Dakota, the American Indian vote has
proven influential to congressional offices.

A study on the electoral process as it affects Indian country, jointly
developed by the National Congress of American Indians and the Native
American Rights Fund, found that some efforts at voter education were
unsuccessful while others were very successful, and that not all of Indian
country preferred the candidates who were elected.

Party preference remains constant in Indian country, with more voters
leaning on the Democratic side, but overall it is the candidate that is
important. If a candidate or officeholder can deliver for Indian country,
the support will be there if the candidate has a record of support for
American Indian issues, the study noted.

“Further, in such cases where a candidate has a consistent record of
hostility towards issues of importance to Native voters, a strong showing
of electoral opposition from Native voters can almost be assured,” the
study stated.

To back up the idea that Indian country is not bound by political parties,
Jesse Claussen, Oglala Lakota, organizer of LaCreek Civil Rights Committee
in Martin, S.D., said people were Oglala first, then Democrat or
Republican.

The village of Martin, the seat of Bennett County located adjacent to the
Pine Ridge Reservation, has been sued for allegedly improperly drawing
precinct lines that effectively would keep American Indians out of control
of city or county offices, the plaintiffs in that case assert.

Of the six American Indian candidates who ran in the Bennett County
Democratic primary, three were elected to move on to the general election
to fill seats on the county commission. Within one week, the Democratic
chairman in the county solicited people to run against them on the
Independent ticket, said Craig Dillon, Oglala tribal councilman and LaCreek
Civil Rights Committee member.

Claussen said when he went into the districts to talk about voting, many
people didn’t know about the politics.

“When you don’t have a loaf of bread, it doesn’t matter who is in office,”
he said.

To keep American Indians involved in the political process, the
reauthorization of the 1965 Voting Rights Act has to be approved by
Congress, witnesses told the Lawyer’s Committee of the U.S. Commission of
the Voting Rights Act.

Section V, by which the state of South Dakota is required to abide, covers
two counties: Todd and Shannon. Todd County is home to the Rosebud
Reservation and the Pine Ridge Reservation is located in Shannon County.

Section V requires that any changes in the voting laws or regulations must
be pre-cleared by the Department of Justice before implementation. South
Dakota had more than 3,000 laws and regulations extending back 30 years
that had not been pre-cleared.

When Quiver v. Charles Mix County was filed to stop the state from passing
a law that would allow counties to redistrict anytime with the governor’s
approval, the state submitted past laws for pre-clearance.

The Department of Justice has approved more than 2,300 laws and regulations
so far, according to Secretary of State Chris Nelson. “Not one of the laws
that were not filed were retrogressed,” he said. So why is there a need for
Section V of the VRA?

Because of “Boneshirt one, two and three, and the conduct of the attorney
general,” said attorney Patrick Duffy. Duffy has tried every voting rights
case in South Dakota in recent years.

The state argument in the Boneshirt v. Hazeltine case was that American
Indians didn’t care to vote anyway, he said.

He also questioned the witnesses about the language section of the VRA that
requires interpreters in S.D. and other states. The state is in opposition
to reauthorization of Section V and the language requirement.

Adele Enright, county auditor for Dewey County on the Cheyenne River Sioux
Reservation, said that people questioned the expense of hiring
interpreters, as very few people needed the service.

It has taken legal action to force South Dakota to change its district
lines to allow the American Indian population to participate in the
political process. One district – which, according to a federal court
ruling, is in violation of the VRA – packed the populations of two
reservations into that district allowing for only three state legislators.

The successful, but on appeal, lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of a
long list of plaintiffs in Boneshirt creates two districts where the
American Indian voter will have a majority.

American Indians comprise 10 percent of the population of South Dakota, and
four of the state’s legislators are American Indian.

In Montana, with a similar population breakdown, eight legislators
represent Indian country. Montana created eight districts with an American
Indian majority population.

“Native leaders and activists in Montana are quick to point out that the
seeds of any electoral success experienced in 2004 were planted with much
attention and hard work years before,” the NARF study stated.

Education is an essential element to successful voter turnouts, panel
witnesses told the VRA committee. For example, many American Indians have
never voted in non-tribal elections due to the misperception, in some
cases, that getting involved in other than tribal political affairs will
reduce the sovereignty of the tribe.

Participating in the process is just hitting home on Pine Ridge, Dillon
said.

“Younger people now will get out and vote. It’s okay to be an Indian and
vote. More young people are getting involved; they are having discussions
with candidates, state, federal and tribal,” he said.

All witnesses said without the VRA and amendments Indian country will be
set back many years in the political process. If intimidation is allowed,
more American Indians will withdraw from the process, they said.

Without the VRA and Section V, the state will not have any need to
accommodate the American Indian community, witnesses agreed.

During the hearing it was determined that South Dakota was a hostile state
racially, thus the motive behine disenfran-chisement of the American Indian
population.

“The state is playing the race card. There is a whole deck of race cards
waiting to be played.

“I can’t believe the political structure of this state is so committed to
freeze out such a small group of people,” Duffy said.