Questions That Must be Asked After the Hearing.

Partial view of panelists at Senate Hearing

The hearing on Capitol Hill regarding provisions on the Reconstruction Treaties between the United States and Oklahoma tribes occurred on Wednesday July 27th, I had the honor of being placed on the list of attendees for the hearing in the Dirksen Building, and was able to be present. As a descendant of Choctaw Freedmen, I was particularly interested in statements from both  Choctaw and Chickasaw representatives, since those two nations signed the same exact treaty. In addition, after a full year since the Chief of the Choctaw Nation reached out to Freedmen descendants in his open letter, and after attempts to reach back to him, with no response, this was definitely of interest. Since the hearing, several questions have emerged for me. 

1) Chief Batton wrote an open letter last year regarding citzenship for Choctaw Freedmen descendants.
And now a year after his letter was published, it was disappointing that he did not attend the hearing where he could have met some of the very the people about whom his letter was speaking. And had he attended, he could have met some of the people who have reached back out to him. In his absence, the Legal counsel of the nation was sent to speak. We had hoped to meet him, shake his hand, but were met with icy stares from a man that  we shortly learned was the spokesman from the Choctaw Nation. No handshake, no courteous nod, but a cold stare and no interaction. Question: Was the obvious distance kept a sign of true disdain for Freedmen descendants? Was the sentiment expressed in the open letter from the Chief a year ago not truly sincere? If it was, what are the mechanisms in place so that we can engage, or has the thought simply been discarded?

2) Several weeks ago, when a call was made to the Choctaw Nation to ask questions with one of the staffers with whom a cordial relationship had been established, the caller was told that lawyers had advised the staffer not to engage with the Freedman caller.  Question: Has the tribe now "lawyered up" in anticipation of a possible adversial legal action coming from Freedmen descendants? Although  no lawsuits have emerged against any officials in the Choctaw Nation are lawyers now in place for in preparation for a lawsuit?

3) Prior to the panelists taking their seats at the hearing, there was informal mixing and mingling and brief cordialities with handshakes and polite greetings among those in attendance. No such niceties came from Choctaw nor Chickasaw representatives. Question: Was there a directive from Durant, or Ada, not to engage in any way with anyone? Are Freedmen descendants viewed as "enemies" of the Choctaw Nation, instead of people who are  part of the nation's history? Are descendants of Choctaw Freedmen viewed as threats to tribal sovereignty? How is this so? 

4) The Legal counsel from the Nation stated that whatever the resolution regarding Freedmen that it would not hurt the Choctaw people by affecting tribal sovereignty. Question: Do descendants of Freedmen pose any kind of physical threat to the people--of whom we are a part? Do descendants of Freedmen pose a threat of any kind to the sovereignty of the Choctaw Nation? If so, how does the nation not recognize the fact that we do have a "shared history" as Chief Batton said a year ago, and how is there no realization that Choctaw Freedmen are also Choctaw people?

5) When the United States ratified the 14th Amendment to the constitution granting citzenship to the former slaves, there was no requirement that slaves have the blood of the slave owner. Yet looking at tribal history with decades of enslavement, many  had "blood" ties that were overlooked. Question: Do you not consider those raised in your space, living the same lifestyle and customs and culture, also one of you?  Or does their dominant obvious racial distinction justify your saying that they are not Choctaw? If those who were enslaved in your nation were Choctaw slaves, and then became Choctaw Freedmen, are they not Choctaw people as well once freed? Does your humanity not allow you to recognize others who are among your own people? Or are you so hardened in anti-black sentiments, that once freed there was no further use and suddenly my ancestors were discarded like refuse?  Is that really the way a nation acts?  One day they belonged to you and the next day they were tossed?  Is that what being among the Chahta Proud is?

6) The Choctaw representative said "this is not about race, it is about blood." However, when numerous Freedmen who had blood (see Equity Case 7071) was filed over 100 years ago, almost 2000 Choctaw and Chickasaw Freedmen sought to be transferred to the Blood Roll, because they had Chickasaw fathers. Suddendly both tribes relied on a false "tradition" of being matriarchal. When the mother was black---their Choctaw blood of their children did not matter and they were recorded as having zero blood on the roll that you now use as your base roll for citizenship. Is this because the roll refused to record the Choctaw blood of the Freedmen children? Likewise with Chickasaw, if their mother was black, then the Chickasaw blood of their children did not matter.  However--- these Freedmen HAD Choctaw and Chickasaw fathers---thus they had the blood. QUESTION: How can descendants of those with Chickasaw fathers and black mothers be treated differently than those with Chickasaw fathers and white mothers? Is blood not blood?  Or does it not count if the blood stems from a formerly enslaved woman?  Do you not see this inequity? Do you not see that this is ALL ABOUT RACE? And if that is what you call "sovereignty" then it is clearly about race, no matter what you say.

It is anticipated that now that the sentiments expressed a  year ago by the principal chief if they were once sincere, have now been rescinded and he and others have been advised to now avoid contact with Freedmen descendants, a people who have never posed a threat nor shown disrespect towards him nor to others in their office.

It is hoped that someday that the Choctaw Nation and the Chickasaw Nation will put down their shield of fear and drop the security blanket of sovereignty, using it to keep a portion of their people isolated and at distance. 

No one from the community of Freedmen descendants is an enemy of the Choctaw people, and likewise for the Chickasaw people. Hopefully someday, the need to hide behind a host of "interpretations" of the words of the treaty, will cease. The need to send lawyers to justfiy racially based misdeeds with clever explanations crafted by legal wordsmiths should end, to allow officials to tend to greater needs of the community. The blanket of sovereignty should not be used as a code word equivalent to that of "state's rights" from the racist old south that meant--they felt a "right" to mistreat people of African descent anyway they chose. Clearly both nations are better than this. And furthermore---Freedmen are not a class of outsiders trying to force our way into a foreign place.

We have a shared history, a shared culture and a shared identity.

The Plight of the Oklahoma Freedmen Told in Congress Again

 

Images from the 2021 Hearing on Capitol Hill

Last year a hearing occurred on Capitol Hill about language pertaining to the Freedmen in the Indian Housing Bill. At issue. was language included in the Indian Housing Bill (NAHASDA) that included mention of the  Freedmen descendants from the Five Tribes. Several individuals from the Freedman community were present at that hearing on July 27, 2021.

Now in 2022, exactly a year later, another hearing pertaining to the Freedmen will occur, and this time the hearing is entitled, "Oversight Hearing on Select Provisions of the 1866 Reconstruction Treaties between the United States and Oklahoma Tribes."

In light of the upcoming meetings on Capitol Hill there is much discussion about the true nature of the hearing, when tribal officials from the Five Tribes will collectively have 25 minutes to tell their story of how they have responded to Freedmen issues. Only one person, Marilyn Vann, a Cherokee citizen who also has Freedmen ancestors, has been invited and she will have only 5 minutes to speak on behalf of Freedmen from all five tribes.

For Choctaw Freedmen coming from one of the five tribal communities, we have 1/5th the opportunity to have our story told. Since the Cherokee Nation now allows descendants of Freedmen to enroll as full citizens, only four groups will have to be addressed by Ms. Vann.

Many questions arise:

1) Why is the "tribal" side can be given 5 times more time, while the Freedmen side has so little time?

2) Are Freedmen being treated as one large group and our own unique tribal affililations be put together because of the commonality of race or color?

3) Because "Freedmen" descendants are being viewed as one large body, is that why only one speaker from the community was invited to speak?

4) Is there any explanable reason that no Freedmen from the ignored Freedmen communities were included in the planning calls?

5) What is the process by which Congress can efficiently address issues pertaining to Freedmen from each group? 

6) Is the unique tribal history of each Freedman community being viewed collectively while each tribal community among the 574 Federally Recognized tribes are seen from their own unique cultural base?

7) Is the collective anti-black raced based policy practiced by the former slave holding tribes the reason why the Freedmen from the same tribes are viewed simply as one large group and treated as such in this hearing?

The questions can go on and on. But there might be a more understandable explanation of this egregious omission of additional voices from the Freedmen descendant community. Many leaders from both Congress to the tribal capitols, have no knowledge of this history in regards to Freedmen in their nations.

For example, when officials from the tribe say, "The Freedmen were forced on us." They do not understand that people freed from bondage did not force themseles on the auction block into a Chickasaw or Choctaw chattel slavery status.

One also hears statements such as "We have done right by the Freedmen already when they got land." Lands were allotted by the Dawes Allotment process and not through any generosity of the tribe. In addition, Choctaws and Chickasaws gave themselves 8 times more land stacking the odds against the Freedmen whose lands did not have the same protections.

Additional Historical Facts about Choctaw & Chickasaw Freedmen:

* Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations signed the same Reconstruction Treaty in April of 1866 in Fort Smith.

* Both nations agreed to end slavery and to extend citzenship to their former slaves. 

* In 1873, the Chickasaw Nation initiated a process for citizenship but it stopped and their abrogation of the treaty was never addressed by the US Congress leaving former slaves of that nation without a country until Oklahoma statehood.

* In the Choctaw Nation it would be 19 years before citizenship would be extended to them in 1885.  Many of the elder ex-slaves died before ever having citizenship in any nation extended to them.

* In 1882Chickasaw Freedmen wrote an eloquent Memorial to Congress adressing their plight, where they had no rights of suffrage, no schools for their children, and no legal standing of any kind recognized in tribal courts.

*Chickasaw Freedmen were never adopted into the Chickasaw Nation, had no rights and were not entitled to any interest in the $300,000 set aside for the benefit of the Freedmen, which was held in trust.

*In the late 1890s, Henry Cutchlow, a Freedman ran for office in the Choctaw Nation. He was elected by vote, but prevented from taking his seat on the council as the council did not want a man with African blood to sit and participate.

*Choctaw and Chickasaw Freedmen were given 40 acres in the Dawes Allotment process, but those declared to be "by blood" as well as inter-married whites---received 320 acres. Having 1/8th of the land given to fellow Choctaws, the Freedmen of the same nation were relegated to second class status.

In Recent Years 

*In 1983 the Choctaw Nation altered their own constitution following the steps of nearby Creeks to put in the "blood only" requirement for citizenship. Aware that the Dawes commissioners ignored those former slaves who had a blood tie, and dismissed the physical tie that all of the Freedmen had to the nation detemined by slavery that they practiced and from which they benefitted.

*Several Choctaw Freedmen descendants have applied to the Choctaw Nation over the years to met only with denial, based on the fact that their ancestors did not have the right blood or as they will say, their names were "not on the blood roll." Does their blood truly make them a disposable people?  This needs to be addressed.

*In 2021 Choctaw Chief Batton wrote an Open Letter regarding an initiative to be launched to explore the possibility of citienship for descendants of Choctaw Freedmen. This instilled a spirit of optimism among the community of Freedmen descendants and dozens submitted letters and reached out to the chief in response. To this date, not one has received a letter of any kind from the chief or  his representatitves, nor had the opportunity to meet him although he said he looked forward to discussions about our share history.

Last year, Freedmen descendants from all Five Tribes were represented at the 2021 hearing listening to the statements. Many sat directly behind the speakers at the hearing listening closely to their statements.

Freedmen seated behind presenters at 2021 Capitol Hill hearing.

Afterwards, many of those in attendance were able to engage with each other, some meeting for the first time fellow Freedmen descendants from each of the Five Tribes. This was the first time in history that such a gathering had occurred. Several had traveled from multiple states to represent their own ties to the Five Tribes. 

Freedmen Descendants from Choctaw, Chickasaw,
Creek and Seminole communities were pesent at 2021 hearing.

At this time, the Choctaw Freedmen now watch as another hearing will occur on Capitol Hill addressing issues that could affect them. No voices from the Choctaw Freedmen community of descendants have been included but thankfully, I shall be there in attendance for the hearing. I have submitted a statement to be a part of the official record and am hoping that we are closer to having our story told and understood.