Wow! Quite an education for me! Thanks. Peter On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams < ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
The Thompson text, already submitted and so beyond recall, only refers to employment data from Nunavut, and that only from 2001.
For those not familiar with the administrative law scope of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND), the term "Indian" refers to Status Indians defined by the Indian Act of 1951, subsequently modified by the Constitution Act of 1982, and subsequently modified, extending Indian Status to Indian Women who previously lost that Indian Status upon contracting marriage to a non-Indian, by amendment in 1985. The scope of DIAND is modernly this larger class of Status Indians, First Nations (governments with which the Crown entered into treaties, e.g., the Numbered Treaties), Inuit (not restricted to the Inuit population of Nunavut) and Metis.
For those not familiar with the administrative law scope of the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (DoI, BIA), the term "Indian" refers to Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and their citizens, Native Alaskans and Native Hawi'ians. The form of "Federal Recognition" consists of Treaty Tribes, Indian Territory Tribes (extinguished between the Oklahoma Statehood Act and the Principal Chiefs Act), post-1870 unratified Treaty Tribes, Native Corporations formed under Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Native Hawi'ians, and modern Executive, Congressional and Judicial Acts, Public Laws, and Rulings establishing, or re-establishing, government to government relationships, e.g., the Maine Land Claims Settlement Acts of 1980 and 1995.
While territorially large, the Inuit population of Nunuvut comprise a less than half of the total Inuit population (Greenland and Russia excluded), and less than 0.5% of the First Nation, Metis, and Inuit population claimed by Canada, and only one of the 630 Native Governments with government-to-government relations with the Government of Canada. Another 566 Native Governments have government-to-government relations with the Government of the United States.
Personally, I'd prefer to offer greater detail, as the decision to revise the eligibility criteria of the Fellowship Program may be referred to the Board and Corporation Counsel, and as it would, if entertained, alter the status quo, be subject to critical review by parties interested in restricting the existing distribution of travel support to the North American Region to NARALO's Chair, its Secretary, and an occasional additional person. Interests in regional under-representation could come from regional resident for-profit or governmental participants, or from others with a property interest in a finite share of the status quo distribution of travel support that may be reduced if the Fellowship Program eligibility rule were modified.
I would also, and this was an issue over which there is a history of difference, address the fact that the larger Indigenous Language populations in the United States are those speaking Nahuatl, Maya, Mixtec and Zapotec, and who do not fall within the administrative law scope of the BIA, but cannot be presumed to have no interest in access to the internet, or that their interest is met elsewhere.
Authorship has responsibilities, for style, tone, intent, and misplaced commas. There is no one right way to plead the case that a rule intended to benefit a class or a category has unintended, but curable consequences.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
-- Peter T. Knight, Ph.D. Estrategista de e-Transformação +55 (21) 3576-7674 Rio Escritório +55 (21) 2522-9167 Rio Fax, Res. +55 (21) 7519-9033 Rio Celular (capacitado para Viber) +1 (202) 281-4144 US mobile http://br.linkedin.com/in/petertknight Skype: <minhoco2005>