Transcripts

text | pdf |

---

[TRIBAL SONG] SPEAKER: The following are interviews with Sioux Indian spokesmen on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. An important election will take place there for tribal chairman Thursday, February 7. Although part 2 of this program tomorrow will explore in detail some of the issues represented by that election, you will hear many election references today in this hour. So intermixed are these issues with problems on Pine Ridge that really it is impossible to talk about the reservation without talking about this imminent political contest.

Thursday, Oglala Sioux voters will cast their handwritten ballots into large wooden boxes in all of the nine voting districts on this 5,000 square mile tract of treaty land in southwestern South Dakota. They will be voting for either incumbent chairman, Richard Wilson, or his challenger. Russell Means, The American Indian Movement leader currently on trial in St Paul for charges stemming from the Wounded Knee occupation last year.

Means won the January 22 primary election. Wilson placed second. There were 13 candidates in that runoff election. But it was clear to everyone there was but one central issue, the Wounded Knee occupation. And so it was when the hand-counted ballots were tallied, Wilson and Means, arch foes on opposite sides of the controversial occupation, had surfaced from the 13 to face each other head on in the general election February 7.

Whatever perspective is taken on the seizure of Wounded Knee last year, one thing is clear, the occupation didn't happen in a vacuum. And it may be helpful during this hour to look at Wounded Knee in the context of land and church problems on the reservation, to look at the Indian Reorganization Act, which drastically changed Indian political life when first it was instituted 40 years ago, and to look at the 1868 Fort Laramie treaty, which in many respects is act overturned, and finally, to explore the two-fold trust system, which reservation Indians as wards of the federal government are subject to.

[TRIBAL SONG]

Like many Indians on this reservation, Gerald One Feather feels strongly about the issue of land alienation. He has been active for 10 years in tribal politics, including a two-year term from 1970 to 1972 as tribal chairman. During these 10 years, one feather says, the reservation has gotten smaller as more and more landowners have sold their property.

One Feather was the highest vote getter behind Russell Means and Richard Wilson in the primary race here. He and other candidates eliminated in this primary now control votes, which he feels can tip the upcoming general election either to means or to Wilson. One Feather says he will sound out his constituency and then begin caucusing with other candidates for a decision to support one candidate or the other in the February 7 election.

Means and Wilson will be vying for the $15,000 a year Chairman's post, an all powerful post which carries the control of most of the jobs and money on Pine Ridge, as well as, in the opinion of many, the control of the police and the courts. One Feather sees the problem in supporting either candidate within the context of a land dichotomy on this reservation. Generally speaking, it is the fullblood Indian who owns most of the reservation land. Mixed bloods have few land allotments, but are in the majority, and thus control the votes which can elect a tribal chairman.

Since the institution of the Indian Reorganization Act, or the Howard Wheeler Act in 1934, a dualistic system has thus been present on the reservation. Tribal government has seen 20 two-year administrations under the Indian Reorganization Act in the last 40 years, and has become very much a spoils system for the tribal council in power. Most of the $20 million in federal monies coming into the reservation comes in through the tribal council itself.

With limited exceptions, these funds cannot affect the minority Indian, the full blood, who is the majority landowner. His allotments or those of his ancestors predate 1934. In fact, they stemmed from the land distribution set out in the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. However, the IRA, as it's known on the reservation, 40 years ago, abolished the cultural system here of traditional Chiefs and headsmen, whose political power was land based.

And so there's kind of a catch-22 at work here politically. Without land, there is no reservation. The land, though, is owned by families of treaty recipients from 106 years ago. Political power now rests with the landless. Their numbers control the tribal council system set up 40 years ago. Landowners have their property in direct trust with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the BIA. They can receive no monies to improve it from the tribal council, which receives all of the federal improvement funds from separate agencies like OYO, HEW, and HUD.

The landowners who believe most strongly in treaty rights are the poorest Indians. The landless, the mixed bloods, rely on the ever changing spoil system of the tribal administration. They tend to be the best off. Gerald One Feather sees this dualism on the reservation as the real problem in the coming election.

According to One Feather, Wilson has not represented the full bloods, and he's done little to help the mixed bloods, at least those not directly rewarded by supporting him. Means, an advocate of strict application of treaty rights, which were designed originally for Indian landowners, may have trouble helping full bloods, whose land is in trust directly with Washington and thus cannot benefit from the tribal council system, which the aim leader seeks to head. One Feather answered questions recently by way of exploring some of these problems.

Of the 14,000 Indians who live on the Pine Ridge reservation, who are the poorest?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: I think the poorest people are the people that have land and have no resources to use their land holdings, which in turn have a high value appraised to it. But these people don't have the same opportunities for their own individual development.

SPEAKER: The tribal elective system, which was set up in 1934. Who benefits by that, the 10,000 landless Indians on Pine Ridge or the 4,000 landowners?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, throughout history, it's been people who do not have any lands. You can't see the development on individual owned lands at all, because they simply don't have the resources and technical know-how, because technical know-how is all at the tribe and nothing is at the disposal of individual Indians.

SPEAKER: There are something like two million acres in all on the Pine Ridge Reservation. 1.5 million acres are owned by the minority, the 4,000 landowners whom you have described as land poor. With all that land, why are they so poor?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: I think they're so poor because the lack of resources, financial, the organizational know-how to be able to confront the commercial and private establishment where resources is available. So basically, there is no spokesman that can really speak in their behalf in dealing with their particular problem.

SPEAKER: In the old days, that is before 1934 when tribal government was instituted, who were the spokesmen then?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: At that time, the spokesmen were people that were conscientiously or informally selected by what we call [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH], is the kinship group. And they represent their kinship group as far as problems affecting them.

SPEAKER: On what basis were these men selected?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: These were selected on the basis of their ability to be able to speak for the people and be able to represent them and be able to act in their best interest.

SPEAKER: Were these the men that the 1868 treaty calls traditional Chiefs and headsmen?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: These are traditional headsmen, right? These people were representative of their own group, and who would speak in their behalf.

SPEAKER: What happened to them after the institution of the Indian Reorganization Act in 1934?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: These people after 1934, then they were elected on a democratically processed elections and therefore a new selection, a new system of selecting these people has emerged, and that is to have to declare themselves and be voted upon the entire population.

SPEAKER: What happened to those who were traditional Chiefs and headsmen? Did they then run for offices in a tribal-wide election, or were they not interested?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Many of them were not interested in this kind of-- maybe their tribe one or twice but they just pretty much remained to their geographic areas.

SPEAKER: So now in 1974 on the Pine Ridge reservation, you have a dualistic system, those who still hold to the old ways of the traditional Chiefs and headsmen, those being the landowners who are so poor, and then secondly, those who recognize their leaders through the tribal council system.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Yeah, this is true. We somehow have a dual leadership system establish informally or recognized and not recognized kinds of leaders.

SPEAKER: Where does the $20 million in federal monies which come into the reservation, where does that go? Which group receives that, the land poor, the 4,000, or those who are landless, the 10,000?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, most of the money, it really affects the tribal government one way or the other. And very, very little of this money affects what you might call the land poor Indians.

SPEAKER: Why can't the land poor Indians, those who own so many acres here, why can't they get money for leases, for example, to white ranchers who own about-- or rather lease about 90% of the Pine Ridge Reservation land?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: The problem is complex here, I think, because many times the individual Indians really have no spokesmen to represent their interests in the bargaining of their property. So many times as the bureau, as a trustee, would make those decisions.

SPEAKER: So in other words, the individual landowner who wishes to lease his land must get the OK directly from Washington, from the Bureau of Indian Affairs?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, they'll have to get their OK from the Bureau of Indian Affairs or representative of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. But as far as if they don't act, then, this representative would act in their behalf as a trustee.

SPEAKER: This representative is not a member then of the tribal council system in the village of Pine Ridge. So the individual landowner would not go through the tribal council here, but go directly through the bureau?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Yes, they will have to deal directly with the bureau, not with the tribe.

SPEAKER: Who is the tribal council then speak for?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, they speak for the people that are affected by the tribal government. And theoretically, I suppose they represent all of the people on a reservation. But in terms of economic development, of course, we have this legal relationship that has to be considered for economic development.

SPEAKER: If the land poor own 1.5 million acres, where did the other half a million acres that comprises the Pine Ridge Reservation come from?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: The other half million is land that was bought by the tribe in the last 40 years.

SPEAKER: Bought from those who owned the land who were in the minority group?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Yeah, they were bought from people who were willing to sell their interest. And the tribe simply became a buyer of those lands.

SPEAKER: Is this half a million acres now owned by the tribe in general, and therefore everyone theoretically owns part of it communally?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Yeah, this is true. Every tribal member has a share in the tribal trust.

SPEAKER: Can he draw money against that?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: No, not at this time.

SPEAKER: Would it be fair to say then that the individual landowner, one who has inherited land from his ancestors, who owned the property before 1934, would it be fair to say that he then has no way really of profiting from the land that he now owns?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, I think the question is simply what is available or, you know, just to find out what he's got to begin with. And, even if he cannot get access to that kind of technical assistance, you know, I don't know how he can see what can be done with it.

SPEAKER: Well, if HUD works here on the reservation and building housing, why can't HUD build houses on the individual landowners property?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, I think the individual landowners property, again, I think the Bureau has preempted that, you know, by being the trustee for this landowner. And therefore, the Bureau has to probably concur in the other federal agency placing property on the individual's land.

SPEAKER: Well, this sounds like a lot of bureaucratic red tape. You have two federal agencies, housing and urban development, and then the Interior Department, and these seem to be in conflict here when it comes down to the individual Indian landowner in his attempt to improve his own property, which he has been allotted throughout any number of years.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, this is true. I mean, this is the whole dichotomy of federal bureaucracy and the Indian. And, you know, I think we have something like 11 major agencies on the reservation, so. And I'm pretty sure there's HUD, but there's several other agencies that deal with individual Indian. And each one is cross purpose duplication or lack of jurisdiction or, you know. I mean, we've got all these problems compounding each other as far as the individual Indian is concerned.

And the problem has always been finding a spokesman who would speak the interest of this group of people. And yet I think there the whole basis for the reservation. Because the land is there and as long as the land is there, you got a reservation. If there is no land, there is no reservation, as simple as that.

SPEAKER: And the reservation land is mostly controlled by the minority of the Indian people, the 4,000 out of the 14,000.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, yes, I think there's a minority of the people that own the greatest share of this reservation.

SPEAKER: How many parties to a commercial transaction would there be for the individual landowner if he wanted to go to a bank and secure a loan upon his property for, for example, buying livestock? How many parties would there be to that transaction?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Be himself, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the commercial lending agency, they have to somehow reach a consensus on all the legalities that's involved. Because the Bureau is the trustee, and he's the trustee for the property, and the individual is going to have to be able to consent to the payments or whatever is negotiated. The bank is willing to loan the money and then the trustee is going to have to figure out a way for repayment if the individual doesn't pay because they're responsible for it.

SPEAKER: So the government is a co-signer and then is left paying the bank if the individual cannot.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Yes, they become responsible for it. And of course, when you borrow from another federal agency, of course, you got to federal agencies, again, involved in this thing, so now it's--

SPEAKER: Is this what makes banks reluctant to lend money to individual Indian landowners?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: This is true, yeah. They're simply our red tape.

SPEAKER: If such a loan were secured, the tribal council then would have nothing to say, would not be a party at all to that transaction.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: No, they're not. They're not having nothing to do with that transaction.

SPEAKER: You've said that the individual landowners, the minority, the 4,000, here on Pine Ridge are mostly full bloods, and that those who are in the tribal council representation, or at least most directly affected by the tribal council, are mixed bloods. Would that be an accurate representation of the dichotomy?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, most of the landowners are full bloods because that's all we had at one time. You know, when the allotments were begun and finished, most of the allotments were full bloods.

SPEAKER: So in 1934, everyone on the reservation was a landowner?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: True, everybody had the land in 1934. But since then, there's more landless type Indians.

SPEAKER: What part does the lack of land play in terms of Indian identity?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, I think it has a lot to do with identity in a way that land is a part of a man's relationship with the universe and Earth and so forth. And that he is a part of that piece of soil, you know. And of course, that's basically, this is, of course, a great deal of his identity lies. Part of it is simply not able to establish what constituted being an Indian and the roles and, you know, social things that has to go into it. And the problem of the full blood is simply that there's just too much frustration and so forth in being what they are. Because they can't seem to advance themselves.

SPEAKER: Well, here you stand now, coming in third in the primary election with a large block of votes, which possibly could swing the general election either to Russell Means or Richard Wilson. What kind of a dilemma are you in?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, I'm right in the middle. And I know a lot of decisions are going to have to be considered before I make a choice what I'm going to do.

SPEAKER: If you placed your votes with the tribal council system, which has existed already, do you feel that you would just be supporting a system during the last two years, which really hasn't worked, to bring the two groups, the mixed bloods, the full bloods, the landless, the landowners, together?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, this is the one the problems that has certainly manifested in the last two years. And of course, on the other hand, like, again, I mean, we do have problems for lack of dealing with the other side. And so I really don't know what's the best way to advance my constituency. Because I suppose what I am doing is having some kind of coccus among the leadership that I represent and see what they want to do, you know, how they want to deal with this situation. Because I feel that I'm merely a spokesman for a group of people that are caught in the middle.

SPEAKER: Russell Means has said that through the treaty, he would like to help this group of landowners. And yet by being elected president or chairman of the tribal council, he is being elected in a system that was designed, was it not, for the landless?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: This is true. I mean, he's elected a position that has nothing to do with the trust responsibility.

SPEAKER: The trust responsibility being the individual landowners.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Right, the individual landowners. So I mean, I don't know how he's going to do it, because it's difficult to do it even as a chairman like the chairman of the tribe. Because here you're preempting a relationship between individual and federal government. And I know many people might say, well, he's not going to speak for me, you know. My relationship is with the superintendent, for instance, you know.

SPEAKER: That being an individual landowner or a [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH]?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Right. Well, the superintendent said, well, I'll deal with that individual and not tribal council will have no jurisdiction how I deal with that individual.

SPEAKER: So there seems to be a real paradox here. Many of the landowners supported Richard-- or rather Russell Means. And yet as tribal chairman, he's in another system, and apparently unable now to help those landowners.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Well, this is true. And this is the experience that these people got to-- either they're going to have to either realize it or they're going to have to experience it if they don't realize. I think this is part of the mass education has to occur. And I think this is what's happening.

SPEAKER: Do you think you'd have-- that a tribal chairman would have any political clout to try to bring the landowners and the landless together, perhaps in a new system, possibly through a referendum that would dispose of the Indian Reorganization Act that set up tribal government, and bring them together with a new system?

GERALD ONE FEATHER: I don't know. Again, like I said, I mean, the person is going to have to be able to unite at least segments of the population, you know, through his charisma, leadership, or whatever it might be. And he should be able to not only lead, but he should be able to think in terms of what's good for the group. And I mean, I think this is going to have to take a great deal of ability on one part to do it.

SPEAKER: On the local level, he would be dealing with the emotionalism and the polarity which has existed between the Wilson supporters and the AIM camp. On the other hand, he would have to deal with a lot of federal red tape with a lot of bureaucratic red tape.

GERALD ONE FEATHER: Yeah, certainly this is true. I mean, there's a great deal of that. And like I said, it means. And I think the language has a lot to do with because, you know, we forget about the language because many of these people, they might not understand English, but you get to a certain level of speaking the language and it gets beyond their understanding also.

And they rely on the Lakota language a great deal. You know, some 80% of the population are still bilingual. But they're rather speak the Lakota language. And neither Russell or Wilson speak Lakota. So I don't know where this is going to wind up. I mean, this adds fuel to the problem already in existence.

[TRIBAL SONG]

SPEAKER: Johnson Holy Rock, the fourth highest vote getter in the primary election, was twice past president of the Oglala Sioux tribe. After his unsuccessful bid, January 22 for the tribe's highest office, he returned to his 4,000 acre cattle ranch a few miles from the village of Pine Ridge to work with his livestock and attend to his duties as district representative of the council, an office he will now give up in April when the new administration is inaugurated.

Last fall, he addressed a [? Birchite ?] convention in Minneapolis on the subject of the Wounded Knee rebellion and strongly condemned the American Indian Movement. He insists, however, that he is not a member of the Birch Society. Holy Rock was a child in 1934 when the passage of the Indian Reorganization Act established the tribal elective system which exists today. His father, he says, voted against the act because he believed in the old Indian form of self-government by traditional Chiefs and headsmen.

The Sioux treaty council, which existed prior to 1934, in which the IRA abolished, fiercely opposed the establishment of the tribal council system. However, perhaps misunderstanding the American Democratic process, the treaty council registered its disfavor by boycotting the referendum. Through the urging of the old chiefs, many Indians simply did not vote. Tribal government passed, and Washington recognized only the new political system, a system modeled after its own.

Holy rock is proud of his Sioux heritage. His grandfather was an Oglala warrior who shared in the defeat of Custer at Little Bighorn. But Holy Rock feels that Indian militancy is a thing of the 19th century. The following is excerpted from a recent conversation with Johnson Holy Rock.

Do you think that Marlon Brando has Communist leanings?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: This has been brought out over the years through news medias where they have intimated this. He has been involved in all of these militant activities. So that perhaps based upon the statements that have been printed about his activities, that there is some reason to believe that there may be some tie up somewhere. The tie up would really been brought out publicly.

SPEAKER: You mean a tie up between Brando and the Communist Party?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: Yes.

SPEAKER: Of course, Angela Davis, and in fact, Marlon Brando never did get inside of the village of Wounded Knee, did they? I believe they were both evicted from the reservation, or at least that's true of Angela Davis.

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: Well, no, I think Brando was stopped and turned around at Martin, I believe. But Angela Davis left at the roadblock, but as it was later brought out, that someone got her in on horseback. So she was there. She went into the occupation area on a borrowed horse. And I don't know who guided her in, but someone guided her in.

SPEAKER: Do you feel that her presence in wounded knee, if in fact, she did go in, and the presence of newsmen from Communist countries indicates that the occupation by the American Indian Movement was Communist supported?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: This is a feeling in the local area that there the confrontation was generated by the Communist Party or an affiliated group, but that the interest was not really-- their Interest was not really for the social political welfare of Indian people. That feeling was that the Indian was being used as a front for these activities.

That it was changing from the urban areas and seeming to come into rural areas, and especially the Indian people, because the Occupy a sort of a romantic figure in American history, the dashing warrior on horseback riding into the sunset and so forth and so on, so that it represents, the Indian represents a vehicle that can be put to use, and perhaps are promoting the whole area of unrest, which has been a general picture of the whole United States for the last several years, in the colleges, in the cities, and now out here.

SPEAKER: So you feel that the occupation of Wounded Knee is just part of a larger pattern of militancy on the campuses and in the urban areas of the country, all of which have had Communist support and have been promoted by the communists?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: A very good possibility that this is not because the Indian has been so long downtrodden, because if there were, why wait 100 years to let the Indian reach that state of affairs before coming to the rescue, so to speak, and to become so concerned about the Indian that they would show so much interest in what concerns your Indian.

SPEAKER: You're talking now about the Communist Party?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: Yes. If there was real, genuine, and sincere interest in the plight of the Indian, why wait over 100 years to even pay a visit to an Indian reservation. Why wait until a violent atmosphere was created before coming here.

SPEAKER: Well, if the Communist Party did support and perhaps even initiate the occupation of Wounded knee, as you've indicated, why did they wait this long? Why did they wait until 1973 to support the American Indian?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: Perhaps until 1973, a force that can be the vehicle to effectuate this sort of atmosphere did not exist because the Indian as a characteristic of the Indian is a quiet dignity. Because the militancy of the Indian, traditional Indian, was laid aside when they made the treaty. They sincerely believed that they laid down their arms and that there was going to be peace and all the agreements was going to be abided by so that the feeling of militancy was laid to rest. It was forgotten.

And all these years nothing happened until this force began to organize and reach proportions where they were beginning to-- it was a vehicle. And the unrest that was in the colleges and the educational institutions and the urban areas as one stopped and another began according to news media over the years have indicated that all of these activities was part of a greater activity, as it often been referred to as a vast conspiracy.

SPEAKER: A conspiracy by whom?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: By the Communist Party or groups affiliated with them.

SPEAKER: Do you feel that Dennis Banks and Russell Means are members of the Communist Party?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: I don't know. I can't say that they are. But with their seeming intelligence, if they are letting themselves be used in this manner, I think it would be a great disservice to their own people who they claim they are doing all these things to help.

SPEAKER: So if Banks and Means are not communists, you feel that they are dupes of the Communist Party?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: A good possibility.

SPEAKER: What do you think will happen now with the coming election? If Means is elected tribal chairman here on the Pine Ridge Reservation, do you look for the greater evidence of the Communist Party here on the reservation?

JOHNSON HOLY ROCK: It would remain to be seen because ever since the General Allotment Act went into effect, the act of March 2, 1889, and they began to make the Indian become an individual, where they had been used to going around in groups or in bands. And it began to individualize them to fall more in line with the intent of the Constitution of the United States, the social and political structure of the nation.

But what is happening now and what according to Means this platform is that he wants everybody to participate in co-ops. In other words, there will be a return to group activity, co-ops, or lifestyle co-ops, or other types of economic co-ops. A return to a common use of Indian land base, which is completely a reversal from what has been followed by the people of the Oglala Sioux tribe.

And the Bureau of Indian Affairs, they had co-ops, they had cattle associations, they had truck gardening groups, they had community farm attempts. But every one of them failed. Because the wedge had been driven in, I think, too deeply between the members of the tribe where the work of individualizing the Indian people have been very well done so that to return to a community sort of effort has failed over the years, time and time again. And to believe that a return to that type of economic endeavor is going to succeed this time, it would seem to me a foolish venture.

[TRIBAL SONG]

SPEAKER: Hobart Keith is a 51-year-old professional artist. For the last two years, he has been one of the 20 district councilmen of the Oglala Sioux tribe, of which Richard Wilson is chairman. Keith was one of 11 other candidates eliminated in the tribal primary election against incumbent Wilson. He has strong feelings about what he says were festering reservation conditions which surfaced in last year's takeover of Wounded Knee. Keith feels one of these is the presence of Christian missionaries on Pine Ridge.

Churches, along with white ranchers, in the Sioux language wasi'chu ranchers, according to Keith, have stolen most of the reservation land from the Sioux people. Another issue is what Keith terms the runaway corruption of the Bureau of Indian Affairs at the local level, a siphoning off of federal funds which come down to the Oglala tribal council, but which don't seem to get down to the people at the grass roots level.

Although not a member of the American Indian movement, Keith describes the blow up at Wounded Knee as inevitable. If, he says, it wasn't Means or Banks, it would have been someone else. It was a boil, says Keith, that had to be lanced.

Recently at his home in Pine Ridge, the tribal headquarters of the tribe, where cheap, new cluster housing contrasts the more usual tarpaper shacks of the Oglalas, Keith replied to questions.

Mr Keith, as a council member of the Oglala Sioux tribe, how do you respond to the charges which, for example, the American Indian Movement has made that the current administration of Richard Wilson is a corrupt one? And if it is corrupt, how is it corrupt?

HOBART KEITH: Just briefly, for example, the purchase of $200,000 worth of trailers for Cedar pass tribal enterprise, the council was not consulted. It was called a routine measure. The purchase of what is now the courthouse for $33,000, the council was not consulted. Say as tribal station wagon was purchased without the knowledge of the council. Which should be, I think-- I think there's a resolution somewhere, anything over $500 is supposed to have the OK of the tribal council, if I'm not mistaken.

But they take too many liberties. And during this Wounded Knee thing, half of the Council either didn't care or they were in sympathy with Wilson, and the other half who might object were afraid of what became known as the goon squad, you see, afraid of being beaten up. And they weren't really pushed hard enough. And, you know, you pushed people hard enough, long enough, they'll turn on you, just like the French Revolution.

Now, getting back to this religious thing here in town or in the reservation, Napoleon, in my opinion, made a mistake when he took all the land away from the papacy or the Vatican or the Catholic Church or the Pope or whoever had the deeds to it. He let the churches stay there. He should have taken the churches, too, while he's at it. And during that French Revolution like that Marie Antoinette says, they have no bread, let them eat cake.

You know, that kind of thing, it exists everywhere. It's here. It's the big fish eat the little fish, you know. And the reason I want to be chairman, I think, is I want a fish in a big pond. The minnows are here, the fingerlings up at Aberdeen, and the whoppers down in Washington, DC, I'd like to talk to that Congress. I know that for a whole afternoon I can hold them spellbound. And I say that with all candor, modesty, and humility.

SPEAKER: If you were talking to that Congress in Washington, would you be telling them about the fact that the tribal council itself was not consulted and that the expenses and the purchases that you've mentioned were done without the OK of the overall Council?

HOBART KEITH: Those are minor things. And there's other bigger things which have happened over the history. There used to be when they freighted with freight wagons here, one guy was in with the superintendent and all he'd do is have a half a load of flour and he'd drive between here and Crawford, Nebraska, with that flour. And I suppose when it got to be a little buggy while he unloaded it, see, but he got paid for each trip, you see. There's all sorts of shenanigans that went on with crooked superintendents and so forth.

See, they said their preachers first, you see. And then they sent the army. And then they came in marseilles, you see. Now, the Mormons came through here over 100 years ago. And they caused the death of Chief Conquering Bear and several other braves over an old skinny cow that would never have made it over the Rocky Mountains into Salt Lake City.

The chief tried to settle the thing with some valuable horses worth maybe 100 times more than a cow. But the old Mormon wouldn't stand still for it. He got the army down on the band of Indians when the old cow went through the just down on the Platte River and went through the village there, why, these young Indian Skylark young boys harassed her and rode her and everything and killed her, see. And just by playing rough.

Well, they got the army out there and a shot was fired, and the Old Chief got killed. And the Mormons never returned till just about 15 years ago. Now they're here with doing their bit to civilize us as it were, you see. They used to send their women. But they don't do that anymore, I don't know why. But I think it's they want to convert me, and I was a young, single fellow, they could do it easier with sending their pretty women.

SPEAKER: If you are elected tribal chairman, do you think it would be possible to do away and to stop the tribal corruption? Or do you think that the corruption goes to the very heart of the system?

HOBART KEITH: Well, then I'd be mounted on a tiger and I would do my best to ride it. And the only solution would be is to go to Washington DC, where the power is, and show these things to different senators with printed literature. Pick some of the best thinkers here on the reservation to put this thing together and show them why and how it doesn't work, and why the thing doesn't work.

And it has to be done on the Washington level. You can't do anything here locally because it's a stacked deck all the way through. The establishment's ingrained here to hold you suspended in a sort of what do they call that? The Catholics call it limbo. And be a good Indian, and get in your little hitched ghetto house, and pay your rent, and don't rock the boat. And we'll take care of you, and you'll be in a welfare state, and keep out of the white man's way. And let him have all the grass, and let him dig for the oil and the new gas that's under there, whatever is under our reservation that they want. And the reason they brought this instant ghetto thing in here.

I chaired the housing authority for four years and I tried to get these houses split far apart. But then the Chicago office had control and they said the cost factor was holding it up over a period of 40 years, paying off one of these things, as you might say. It's a tribal enterprise, see. And we pay rent here, then after 40 years, to make a long story short, while the tribe is supposed to own these houses, you see.

SPEAKER: If the corruption cannot be stopped on the local level, do you believe in the abolition of the Bureau of Indian Affairs?

HOBART KEITH: No. By treaty, you cannot expel the Bureau of Indian Affairs. They're here to do a job, but they don't do it. And the churches are-- You see, the AIM people did what the churches refused to do. They saw what was wrong. They tried to teach people what's right and wrong. And they saw all of this corruption, but they'd keep silent, you see, and hold their hands and tell you to pray, you see.

It got to the point like was it Virgil The Roman said, spare the humble and cast down the proud. I mean, these proud, wasi'chu ranchers have to go. Like Glover there, he-- Burton Glover. He drives a big Cadillac. And I got that old second hand Cadillac out there just to impress people that they can't browbeat me down on the price of a painting, you know. Most Indians paintings, they get a six-pack or the equivalent for them. I get them more than that, you know. I'm a spoiled Indian.

[TRIBAL SONG]

SPEAKER: Richard Wilson has been chairman of the Oglala tribe for two years. During his first year in office, members of the 20 man tribal council, assisted by the Oglala Sioux civil rights organization, brought impeachment proceedings against him for misuse of tribal funds and for maintenance of a vigilante group known on the reservation as the goon squad, an organization which his opponents have contended has terrorized political enemies.

The impeachment effort was unsuccessful. And Wilson has constantly pointed to the takeover of Wounded Knee as evidence of AIM violence, and denounced its occupiers as outside agitators, criminal renegades who have imposed their wishes on the Oglala people.

Following his January 22 defeat in the Oglala primary, Wilson responded to questions in his Chairman's office in the village of Pine Ridge, where ballots have indicated his greatest strength lies.

Do you think that the lines are drawn between you then as a candidate from growing out of the elective system, which was born here in 1934, the Indian Reorganization Act, I think also known as the Howard Wheeler Act, and Russell Means, who is a treaty candidate, is that a fair comparison?

RICHARD WILSON: No, I don't think it's a comparison at all. We're operating under an act of Congress. Russell Means is not going to change that. Congress is going to have to change it. Or we as the voting people can change it by referendum, subject, of course, to the approval of the Interior Department.

SPEAKER: Last year during the occupation, there were hundreds of newsmen here from around the country, and perhaps some from around the world. With very few exceptions, most of these were white newsmen. Do you feel that all the newsmen covered the events here, treated the issues fairly, that the problems here on the reservation did come out during the occupation?

RICHARD WILSON: No, I don't think the news media treated the incident fairly. The whole thing was staged by the American Indian Movement. I had 10 different news conferences and not one of them was printed or shown. They didn't get the side of the government here. All they had was AIM's gripes. And we know there's a lot of changes that's got to be made in our Constitution [INAUDIBLE].

We know where we're not able to serve our people like we would like to, but we're limited funds. It's very difficult to get money. Bureau of Indian Affairs has probably some of the biggest rip offs there are. I'd like to think that I'm probably one of the most militant candidates or chairman there is in this area, but I am not connected with the American Indian Movement. In no way. Nor do I intend to be.

SPEAKER: Could you respond to some of the charges which have been made and have been in the newspapers regarding the corruption of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Washington, and then some people say right down to the local level here in your administration during the last couple of years.

RICHARD WILSON: Well, I think every group that loses will charge the winning side with corruption. You just heard my treasurer say they're auditing some of our enterprises now. We've got auditors running out of our ears around here. Well, the audit reports will prove we're not corrupt. Insofar as the Bureau is concerned, I think they're a big rip off, yes. Their administrative end of it is such that the reservation Indians are not getting the dollars that Congress is appropriating for them.

SPEAKER: How much of the federal dollar coming into the reservation actually reaches the people?

RICHARD WILSON: Oh, I'd say around 10%.

SPEAKER: Around $0.1? Is part of the problem in getting money in here that there are two classes of people, those who own land, and those who do not own land, and the land owners are in the minority and the landless are in the majority. Is that a problem in getting money through the tribal council to those who are in a trust relationship with the government, those who own land?

RICHARD WILSON: It's always a problem to get money from the government. If you're running a glorified welfare program and just handing out paychecks like OYO is around here, well, you're going to have trouble getting money, because of the top heavy administrative end of any program that comes out of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. That's what I'm saying about the Bureau, they're a big bunch of rip offs.

SPEAKER: What I was pointing to or asking about was the fact that if you are a landowner here on the reservation, with all the federal bureaucracy and the red tape, it's impossible, is it not, to get, for example, HUD money to improve your land, because this is simply another department? Am I reading that correctly?

RICHARD WILSON: Yes, that's right. Many of our Indians have land here that they'd like to be living on and operating, either a small ranching enterprise, or farming, or whatever it may be, but we are unable to secure the funds for them.

SPEAKER: So do you have a situation here where those who owned the land turn out to be the poorest people on the reservation?

RICHARD WILSON: Just about, yes. You know, the leasing system that we're operating under has to be revised, and we know it, and we have to do it quickly.

SPEAKER: I understand that something like 80% or 90% of the land here is leased to white ranchers on the reservation. Is that alienation of land an issue in the coming election?

RICHARD WILSON: Well, I'll correct your figures. There are about 40% of the land here on the reservation is leased to non-Indians, but I don't think that it's alienating anything. We need that element of non-Indians.

SPEAKER: One of the pledges that Russell Means has made, if elected, is to eliminate a lot of the white people here on the reservation. How realistic is that?

RICHARD WILSON: Oh, he's going to have trouble doing it. Many of these non-Indians that are operating on the reservation is probably the sole income of many of our Indian people who own that land. And I think he's completely unrealistic by wanting to run them off. Because where are we going to secure the funds to release that back as a tribe or as individuals. Until such time as we can raise the money, then I think he's just picking for anything out of the blue.

SPEAKER: What do you think Russell Means would do if he were elected tribal chairman here on Pine Ridge?

RICHARD WILSON: Well, I think it would be a complete disaster. He's already saying publicly that he's going to do away with tribal government and the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the non-Indians operators and the mixed bloods. And you do away with all of them, you don't have nothing. That's why I say it would be a disaster.

[TRIBAL SONG]

SPEAKER: Russell Means, an Oglala Sioux from the reservation town of Porcupine, recently appeared at a grass roots campaign rally in the village of Batesland, about 35 miles away. He recorded this conversation.

RUSSELL MEANS: We are going to force the United States of America to recognize our treaty rights. And we'll do that by working through Fulbright's Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill with Senator Abourezk and through the United Nations by securing support from countries such as Sweden, Japan, West Germany, and others.

SPEAKER: Let me break in here, how realistic do you think it would be that you could get foreign aid into the United States. In the past, foreign aid has always gone out of the United States.

RUSSELL MEANS: I'm not talking about foreign aid from the United States. We don't want to have anything to do with the United States. We want our independence. But we hope to do it over the round table, through negotiations, instead of the United States hiding behind their tanks and armored personnel carriers. We prefer negotiations.

But the point is, is that we have already got unofficial support from specific countries I'm not at liberty to name at this point. And negotiations are still going on with these countries in terms of their support for us in the United Nations. Now, the government on January 8 released to the press the White House response to our Bill of particulars pertaining to the 1868 suit treaty. That response by the White House more than ascertain, legally ascertained the sovereignty of the Oglala Sioux people. That sovereignty then makes us eligible to deal with foreign countries around the world.

SPEAKER: How so? How does it do that?

RUSSELL MEANS: By establishing our sovereignty. Sovereignty is when a country is dealing not as a colony or a state or a commonwealth, but we're dealing actually as nation with nation. The government response to our Bill of particulars ascertains that they are dealing with us as a nation.

SPEAKER: I read that January 8 White House response and it seemed to say that the 1868 treaty is, in fact, still in effect, with some exceptions. And one of the exceptions they mentioned was the right of federal Marshals to come into Wounded Knee as they did last spring during the occupation.

RUSSELL MEANS: Of course, that was a response by the Justice Department. The White House turned it over to the Justice Department. And naturally, the Justice Department is going to defend their invasion of Pine Ridge Reservation. However, right now, I have three lawyers, all experienced in treaty rights and the legalities of treaties, working on that White House response. And hopefully within the week, we will be able to present to the press our response to the White House and their false implications, false claims that they have, in fact, fulfilled the treaty and overcompensated the Lakota Nation.

[TRIBAL SONG]

SPEAKER: Tomorrow, Tuesday at noon, we'll hear more from candidates Russell Means and Richard Wilson, as well as from others whose feelings about Thursday's election are both strong and vocal. In addition, we'll look at the village of Wounded Knee from the inside nearly one full year after the inception of the dramatic takeover.

[TRIBAL SONG]