Editorial and Opinion Page
Editorially Speaking
The Question for Mike Mclntyre: What
Business have you sot in our Business???
Congressional Candidate Mike Mclntyre has confirmed, in print, what we
said last week. He knows nothing about Lumbees. In the October 21 issue of
the News and Observer (Raleigh), it says: "Mclntyre said he has always
supported Lumbec recognition, but can't support the bill Rose introduced
because it lists LRDA as the governing body: A second entity, the Lumbee
Tribal Council, is challenging LRDA in court for the right to govern the
Lumbee tribe."
And then Mike said: "Once that conflict is resolved I'll introduce a Lumbee
recognition bill."
On Sunday, in the same new spaper Mike is given credit for this: "Mclntyre
said that ifelixted, he will introduce a bill for Lumbee recognition. But first,
he said, the tribe must achieve unity within its own ranks."
Come on. Mike, either you have always supported recognition, or you will
support it when we Lumbees all think and act the way you think we should.
Our recognition has nothing to do with internal alTairs, Indian business,
or who the government is. The issue of recognition for us is a matter of what
is morally rights You introduce a recognition bill or support the one already
in the House, if you're elected, because it is the right thing to do. If you knew
anything about Indian business, you would know that even when we are
federally recognized, some of us will remain Baptist, some will remain
Methodists, and some of us will continue in the traditional way. We
editorially ask you, Mike, what business have you got in our business?
We believe that you have always supported recognition. You come from
a county with a long history of whites who recognize Lumbees as Indians. We
have been discriminated against because of it. We have share cropped the
farm land because of it. Yes! Mike you, have, in our opinion, alvyays
recognized us as Indians. Now, it seems you want to tell us how we are to
behave. We ask you again: what business have you got in our business?
If you were mprc informed about the Lumbee tribe, although you're only
ten miles from Pembroke, you would know that in 1984 the Lumbee people,
by referendum, voted to allow LRDA to serve as interim government for the
purposes of federal recognition. In 1992, Mike, we the Lumbee people, voted
again on our own constitution to govern ourselves. I don't recall, Mike, that
you voted either on the 1984 referendum or on the 1992 Constitution. Why?
Could it be tliat it was none of your business? What has changed. Our
"internal affairs" were none of your business then. And it remains none of
your business. Do you believe in democracy. Mike? Or do you presume to
take it upon yourself to decide what is best for us? Our advise to you is this.
Continue to campaign and if federal recognition is the right thing to support,
then do it for the right reason. And if you are not going to support it, assuming
you're elected, then be courageous enough to say so. Don't play games with
us. And don't insult our intelligence. The conflict between LRDA and the
tribal council is a matter in the courts. Let the court decide. That's the
democratic way. You arc an attorney. You should know that when an issue
is in court, it should be decided in the courts. After the courts have decided.
We will still disagree on some issues. That is our right and none of your
business. When it comes to our government, let us decide. That's the
democratic way. And that issue also is none of your business.
Unity in the ranks, you say? When did you become an expert at unifying?
Was the Democratic party unified when you attacked Rose Marie LowryTowsend
in the primary? Are you whites unified? Do you all believe the same
things? Have the same philosophy? Do you all have the same mind set on
all issues? We are not a herd of sheep. We do not all move in the same
direction. There are over 40,000 of us. That means that we have over 40,000
minds. We think individually, as you all do. Unity? Shall weall driveFords?
Shall we all attend the same church? Belong to the same social clubs? The
same political party? Exactly what do you mean by unity in the ranks? Unity
of Indians, Mike, is a figment of the white man's imagination. It is an excuse
you all use to avoid doing what you know is right. Federal recognition,
again, is a distinct and separate issue from any "internal conflicts" in the
tribe. Unity, you say? Unify your own people, your own political party and
then talk to us about unity. Let us assure you, we are unified. We all
recognize a "cop-out" no matter how well disguised you think it is.
Our recognition is a matter of principle... .Be honest about it. Support
it or don't support it. But don't hide behind a smoke screen of unity in the
tribe. We won'Lbuy that or be fooled by your lame excuses. We are
convinced that if federal recognition meant placing us on a reservation
whereby we could be "fenced in" and kept in our proper places (as you I
perceive that place tobe), you would wholeheartedly and enthusiastically
support that, no matter how much conflict in the tribe you thought there
was. Webelievethatanyprogresswemakeasatribemakesyouandsome
of your associates nervous We believe that true unity of Indians at the
polling places, which you've seen before, scares thebejabbers out of you. *
Perhaps that is why you did not call Lowry-Townscnd and ask for her *
support. Maybe you assumed, as one of your associates has been rumored
to say, that the "Indians will vote the right way." You are correct in that
assumption. Some of us will vote right. Some of us will vote against you!
We suggest thatyou attend to YOURbusiness and we will handle ours?
Aftcrall, we have survived for over five hundred years in spite of people '
of your mentality who insist that we be the kind of Indians you want us '
to be. There's one thing you could have learned from Charlie Rose since ;
your desire to replace him in Congress. He introduced "the Lumbee Billover
and over again because, apparently, he felt that it was long overdue; '
and he kept his nose out of the ainairs of the tribe. Or perhaps it was a good
political football to ensure that he kept the Indian vote. Nevertheless, he
knew that our government was our decision. When the time comes, we
will decide. Until that time, again we ask you: what business have you got
in our business? __JL_
f The Way I See It 1
by Dr. Dean Chavers, President
Native Americas Scholarship Fuad
Albuquerqne, NM J
LLL)
(c) copyright, 1996
INDIAN COLLEGE ENROLLMENTS
ARE 1NFLA TED
There arc more untruths, halftruths,
misstatements of fact, and
misunderstandings about Indian college
enrollments than anything else
except about Indian gaming, 1 think.
(Let's talk about gamingncxt month.)
These lies and distortions hurt.
, They hurt in both diffctt afid'lttdircct
ways.'Ohesample'. IfPW&l','as a
Member of the Advisory Panel on
Minority Concerns of The College
Board. I was the only person of 18 to
vote against release of racial and
ethnic data of SAT test takers to the
public.
Mv reason: I knew release of this
information would hurt Indian
people. There arc too many
Wannabes. That is, too many nonIndian
people want to be Indians,
and pretend they arc Indians, distorting
data collection by the colleges,
the U.S. Census, and other agencies.
Sure enough, two years later the
"Los Angeles Times" reported (12/
19/83) that "Only Asian students
a nd Native Americans attend college
at rales greater than their numbers in
the general population. Native Americans
represent 0.6% of the nation's
population and 0.7% of higher-education
enrollment..."
Nothingcould be further from the
truth. The fact is. Native people have
.alwaysbeen under represented in the
collcgcsofCalifornia. The data which
includes anyone claiming to be Indian
greatly distort the "facts."
We learned that the Financial Aid
proposal for Cal Slate Hay ward,
where I was teaching in 1974. had
reported there were 153 Indians on
the campus. At the next meeting with
students, we made up a list of all the
onesweknew; itcameto 13. Thusthe
Financial Aid proposal was 1176%
too high!
When The College Board got its
first report of the ethnic data in 1982
or 1983,1 played"! told you so" with
George Hanford, the President. I
greatly admire George, for a variety
of reasons. But I still disagree with
him and the Panel for releasing the
Indian data, r1 i.- v
When I looked at the tables, showing
breakdowns of Indian students,
they were alarming. The 1980 Census
showed that Indian families had
made $12,000 on the average. The
ethnic data showed them with
$23,000.
The data also^reportcd that most
of the al leged Indians taking the SAT
were located in Pennsylvania, Maryland,
New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana. Illinois,
and other nearby states. Since
Indians have almost been wiped out
of these states, I told George and the
Panel "These arc some funny Indians.
They make twice as much money
as real Indians. And they live in
places where it is hard to find an
Indian."
Then, fouryearsago, in 1992, the
New York Times reported, using
similar wrong"data" from the U.S.
Department ofEducalion, that "about
103,000 Indians were enrolled in
college in 1990 ..."The truth is that
only about 55,000 Indians were enrolled
in college. The rest of the
103,000 were wannabes.
So the results arc insidious and
indirect. The results seem to indicate
that Indians are over represented in
college enrollments. In fact, Indians
arc under represented in college enrollments.
Only 17% of Indian high school
graduates are going on to college,
according to BIA figures, totals from
tribes, and totals from other sources.
The BIA figures are more accurate
than the Census or Education figures,
because the BIA only counts
people who are one-quarter or more
Indian, and enrolled in a tribe.
To take another example: About
the same time we were compiling the
numbers for call State Hayward,
Wanda Doty and Carter Blue Clark "
were doing the same thing for Cal
Slate Long Beach. The Financial Aid
proposal at CSLB had staled that 470
Indian students were enrolled on that
campus.
When Wanda and Carter finished
their census, they found only 70 stuidents.
Thus the Financial Aid numbers
were 671% too high!
In 1979,1 cross-checked the numbers
for a variety of colleges with the
data reported in the "Chronicle of
Higher Education". I found that the
data reported by the colleges through
the Higher Education General Information
Survey (HEGIS) were on the
average 100% too high.
The way 1 cross choked them was
to contact the Indian faculty persons
on a couple of dozen campuses to get
their total Indian student enrollments,
then compare their totals with the
totals in the "Chronicle". The range
of inflation was from 25% to 300%.
The overall inflation factor was almost
exactly 100%.
Alexander Astin in a book a few
years later on minorities in higher
education reported that the inflation
factor overestimating the numbers of
Indian college students was about
33% too high. 1 had alerted Sandy a
few years earlier. He apparently did
not want to believe the full extent of
the inflation.
I invite anyone who doubts the
accuracy of what I did to repeat it, or
to use any other method they choose.
They will find that Indian college
enrollment figures as reported by
federal and state governments are
way too high.
What none of the reports so far
i ndicalc either is that the dropout rate
for Indian college students is over
80%. We have data at the Native
American Scholarship Fund from 22
college and university programs
showing dropout rates. They range
from a high of 93% for one college
with a huge Indian enrollment to a
low of 12%for one of the Ivy Leagues.
pply four of the 22 have dropouts
ratcsbclow 50%. and at least two of
these have small enrollment totals.
The 11 with the highest rates, ranging
from 1,000 to 1.500 Indian students
pcrycar. Thcirovcrall dropout
rate is 81%.
The seven colleges with rates between
50% and 68% have moderatesi/.cd
total enrollments. Thus it appears
that the colleges with the largest
Indian enrollments have the highest
dropout rates.
If we look at the two figures in
terms of production of graduates, it is
clear that Indians arc never going to
catch up to the general population in
terms of college graduates. In the
U.S., 80% of students finish high
school. 40% go on to college, and
54% of them graduate in six years.
Thus 17.3% of them are earning
college degrees'.
For Indians, only 50% finish high
school. 17% go on to college, and
only 19% of them graduate. Thus
only 1.6% of Indians are earning
college degrees. The discrepancy is
huge. Non-Indians arc earning 10.8
degrees for every Indian who earns a
degree. ,
At this rate, Indians will continue
to be under represented in the profes
and in all other fields forever. We
will have non-Indians running our
schools, our roads, our courts, our
social services, our hospitals, our
colleges, our casinos, and our businesses
forever.
It is this reason that I have decided
to devote my life to promoting the
highest quality education for Indian
students. We have to develop sys
students ready for college,
and systems at the colleges to retain
them once they are enrolled.
More and more people in Indian
Country are starting to realize this
reality. Unfortunately, not enough Of
them are moving fast enough to upgrade
their high schools, their scholarship
programs, their internships,
and the other systems which impact
on college enrollment and gradua
r -.' M '>><
The Democratic Party in Robeson
County, especially, has proven time ,
and time again that it is the party of 1
oppression.
Let's Create History
November 5th |
|
VOTE FOR I
BILL CASTER, I
Republican Candidate for the Seventh >:
Congressional District 5
Paid for by Rev. James D. Dial >
V P*
_ _ ^ - ;
"HAPPY HEARTS" OF
ROBESON, HOKE, AND SCOTLAND COUNTIES-DISTRICT 87
WELCOME "ALL PEOPLE" TO A
"GOSPEL-THANKSGIVING CELEBRATION"
; . FOR
THE HONORABLE FRANCES MCARTHUR CUMMINGS
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1996 - 3:00 P.M.
W. H. KNUCKLES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CAFETERIA
1520 SOUTH MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. DRIVE
LUMBERTON, NORTH CAROLINA
SPONSORED BV
I /*m \ n
MCKEITHAN JONES - ROWLAND, NC ALFRED DIAL - PEMBROKE, NC
ADMISSION AND DELICIOUS REFRESHMENTS ARE "FREE"
FREE FINANCIAL HEAVENLY BLESSINGS?
($200; $150; $50 PLUS OTHER GIFTS)
\A Thinking About >
I^e Car Loans Lately? J ~^|
? >?l
Give Some Thought To This ...
New Car Loans '7.75%
Our 36 month new car loan from
*7.75% puts you in the driers seal.
You'll find our hassle free service a
pleasant alternative to the haggling
that goes on in the dealer showroom.
And think of negotiating power you'll
have when you have money in hand.
*
With your loan pre-approved, you
can really wheel and deal when you
(Ind the car oI your dreams. So stop
in today and ask how our new car
loans ran put you in touch with the
car of your dreams.
-o.
I#
5 LUMBEE
K 1 GUARANTY
<?X* BANK ?"""
twwf FDIC
PEMBROKE LUMBERTON ST. PAULS
HOKE MILLS MAXTON ROWLAND RED SPRINGS
R.il#* !??? (! on .tutomatK: cJrAli from l umbf* Guaranty Bank rhtc'kftV) .Kcogntr
Oth*r rnfn? Hart .11 fl%