Mark Trahant: A new standard for the federal-tribal relationship
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- What’s my take away from the White House Tribal Nations Conference? Easy. This is an administration that actually believes the United States government must represent all of the people, including American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Make no mistake: Everything is not perfect between Indian Country and the United States as we close the year 2010. There are lots of legitimate complaints about how the federal government executes its responsibilities towards indigenous people. The list ranges from the failure to fully fund treaty and trust obligations to the problems associated with fixing the government’s own mistakes. (One of my favorite examples of that last point was reported out of a break-out group by Assistant Secretary Larry Echo Hawk. The policy of termination -- the U.S. withdrawal of recognition and support for tribal governments -- was repudiated some forty years ago by President Nixon. Yet laws, such as public law 83-280, an act favoring state jurisdictional authority over tribes, remain in force and on the books.)

Let’s pull back and look at the view from where the eagle’s fly. Then we can see how the Obama administration is busy planting new standards.

President Barrack Obama put it this way: “I said that so long as I held this office, never again would Native Americans be forgotten or ignored. And over the past two years, my administration, working hand in hand with many of you, has strived to keep that promise.”

One promise kept is the reversal of the United States position on the U.N. Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. “The aspirations it affirms -- including the respect for the institutions and rich cultures of Native peoples -- are one we must always seek to fulfill,” the president said.

“But I want to be clear: What matters far more than words -- what matters far more than any resolution or declaration -– are actions to match those words. And that’s what this conference is about ... That’s the standard I expect my administration to be held to.”

The most important part of the Declaration is that simple point. That the United States -- indeed, any government -- must meet the test of actions over words. It’s a moral standard, the proposition that governments agree to do what they said they’d do. And when they don’t? One more avenue to pressure governments to fulfill the promises already made.

There is another, practical application to this international ideal. It affirms the idea that tribal nations have a place in global governance and commerce. Tribes are, in the words of diplomats, part of the “international community.”

On the world stage, in the nation’s discourse, and even in regional and local affairs, the standard is clear: Tribes have a right (if not an obligation) to have their voice heard. Seven cabinet members attended the Tribal Nations Conference and many of those federal agencies are at least going through a process of consultation with tribes.

But beyond the specifics, a year from now the default is now set for the standard of a White House exchange with tribal leaders; the next president -- indeed, all future presidents -- will be pressured to engage in at least a similar, and serious dialogue. (This is exactly how it worked with presidential statements on tribal self-determination. Once it was a big deal, after Presidents Johnson and Nixon. Now it is expected.)

But if the standard for consultation and engagement is high, then what of the standard for execution?

When President Obama reached the podium at the Interior Department last week nearly every person in a seat lifted a cell phone to take a picture. Row after row of glowing screens, capturing that moment.

But that moment is no longer enough. A year ago it was a big deal to meet. And even more so a second year. But a year from now it will only be a big deal if there are success stories that add jobs, improve the health or educational opportunities for young Native Americans.

So what happens next? We need to chart the ideas that were either proposed or promised at the Tribal Nations Conference, then a year from now, tick off what was actually done.

As President Obama said what matters next are the actions needed to match all those words.

Mark Trahant is a writer, speaker and Twitter poet. He is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and lives in Fort Hall, Idaho. Trahant’s new book, “The Last Great Battle of the Indian Wars,” is the story of Sen. Henry Jackson and Forrest Gerard.

Related Stories:
Mark Trahant: Asking President Obama about Indian health care (12/13)
Mark Trahant: Obama administration optimistic for trust reform (11/30)
Mark Trahant: Alaska Natives run a successful political campaign (11/23)
Mark Trahant: Eliminating tax credit will hit Native communities (11/15)
Mark Trahant: Debate on the health care reform law all over again (11/9)
Mark Trahant: We, the American people, are united by our division (11/3)
Mark Trahant: Don't overlook Native vote in the 2010 elections (10/25)
Mark Trahant: Just like everyone else, Americans getting older (10/18)
Mark Trahant: Government creates employment opportunity (10/11)
Mark Trahant: Austerity is the future for government spending (10/4)
Mark Trahant: Indian Country voters should have Obama's back (9/20)
Mark Trahant: Shrinking government and Indian health spending (9/13)
Mark Trahant: Future of Indian health system up to Indian Country (8/30)
Mark Trahant: One year of lessons from the Indian Health Service (8/24)
Mark Trahant: Tribes taking more control of Indian health system (8/16)
Mark Trahant: Just who is an Indian for purposes of health care? (8/9)
Mark Trahant: Tribal Law and Order Act only one part of the picture (8/2)
Mark Trahant: Making the Indian Health Service into 'our' system (7/26)
Mark Trahant: Policy options needed as health reform goes ahead (7/19)
Mark Trahant: Becoming an early adopter for health care reform (7/12)
Mark Trahant: Indian health caught in middle of budget debate (7/6)
Mark Trahant: Community health centers a new funding source (6/28)
Mark Trahant: Expanding oral health access in Indian Country (6/21)
Mark Trahant: Sometimes less is more in health care system (6/14)
Mark Trahant: Indian Country deals with shortage of doctors (6/8)
Mark Trahant: A new debate emerges on health care reform (6/1)
Mark Trahant: Questions about tribes and health reform law (5/24)
Mark Trahant: IHS not threatened by health reform litigation (5/17)
Mark Trahant: An employee's view of Indian Health Service (5/10)
Mark Trahant: Measuring progress of Indian Health Service (5/3)
Mark Trahant: Health care reform brings more jobs to IHS (4/27)
Mark Trahant: IHCIA brings hope for urban Indian health (4/19)
Mark Trahant: Health reform debate to continue for years (4/12)
Mark Trahant: Should Native Americans buy own insurance (4/5)
Mark Trahant: Obama's exciting pick for Medicaid agency (3/30)
Mark Trahant: Delivering promises for Indian health care (3/22)
Mark Trahant: Health care reform vote as a litmus test (3/15)
Mark Trahant: Facebook group gathers IHS war stories (3/8)
Mark Trahant: IHS not mentioned at Blair House summit (3/1)
Mark Trahant: Reaching consensus on Indian health (2/22)
Mark Trahant: Alaska Natives create a model system (2/15)
Mark Trahant: Growing the IHS budget in tough times (2/8)
Mark Trahant: Transparency and Indian Health Service (2/1)
Mark Trahant: Transparency in health care reform bill (1/25)
Mark Trahant: Starting over on Indian health reform bill (1/20)
Mark Trahant: IHS Director Roubideaux on passing IHCIA (1/18)
Mark Trahant: Business model for Indian Health Service (1/12)
Mark Trahant: Some resoluting on Indian tobacco use (1/6)