Paul Ryan’s legacy includes ‘big ideas’ such as a voucher for Indian health

Paul-Ryan-in-Norfolk-Virginia
House Speaker Paul Ryan said he will not run for re-election. His legacy includes a massive spending while calling for smaller government. (Photo by Vince Schilling / Indian Country Today)

 

Mark Trahant / Indian Country Today

Paul Ryan came to Washington to blow up Washington. He was first elected to represent his Wisconsin district at 28 years old. He campaigned over his career for a federal government that should shrink dramatically, spend far less, that taxes should be low, and the Republicans should be the party of big ideas.

Ryan announced Wednesday he will not run for re-election. He says he will complete his term as Speaker, but that’s not certain. He likely will face pressure to step down early, so another Republican can lead the party’s team into the November election. (More than forty Republicans have already announced their retirement contributing to the story about a coming Democratic wave.)

The Speaker leaves behind a different kind of legacy. He did get his tax cuts and substantial changes in the regulatory framework. But he also delivered more federal spending than ever. The deficit will hit $804 billion this year (a jump of 21 percent in a single year) and exceed $1 trillion by 2020. And, a new report by the Congressional Budget Office, says that a decade from now the total debt will be larger than the entire economy. “That amount is far greater than the debt in any year since just after World War II,” the CBO said Monday.

53651-home-cover.png

The problem for Ryan, like Speaker John Boehner before him, is that the Republican majority is nearly ungovernable. The only way for Congress to function, to actually pass a budget, is to build a coalition that includes most Republicans, some Democrats, and work with a similar coalition in the Senate. That often means spending more money. That’s not the Congress — and the party of big ideas — that Ryan once had imagined.

And President Donald J. Trump has made that process worse. He caters to the bloc in Congress that cares little about actually governing. Chaos is fine. Big ideas, not so much.

Ryan proposed a major reform of government in 2010 long before he was elected Speaker of the House. It had his big ideas: Replace Medicare with direct payments to seniors who then could buy their own health insurance; turn Medicaid into a block grant to states; end employer-based health insurance; and dramatically cut government and taxes. There was no support for that plan.

Unknown-2.jpeg

Then two years ago, as a new speaker, Ryan unveiled another plan for reshaping government. “A Better Way” included a reform of the Indian Health Service by “giving choices to American Indians.” His big idea was to have the government issue vouchers for Indian health, outside the system. “Not only will this give American Indians more choice in where they receive care,” the Ryan plan promised. “It will challenge Indian health facilities to provide the best care possible to American Indians.”

And of course that voucher system would have cost less. The Ryan plan also included a provision for a Native American Health Savings Account so individual tribal members could buy their own health care services  (Never mind a treaty sanctioned right.)

The basic premise of Ryan’s plan was that poverty is a problem because of government programs, thus, shrink the government, and poverty will go away. He told National Public Radio: “Let’s break up the welfare monopoly, instead of having just the welfare agency at the county level give people their benefits, which they basically rubber-stamp. … They don’t actually treat the person. Let other providers also provide these full-scale wraparound benefits. Let the Catholic Church do it. Let Lutheran social services. Let America Works, a for-profit agency that’s good at this.”

This is not a new idea; it was the same logic in the 1940s when Republican complained then that the Bureau of Indian Affairs was responsible for poverty, horrible living conditions, and general mismanagement. The solution over the next decade was the idea of “freeing the Indians” by terminating the federal responsibility, Termination. And a hundred and nine tribes were terminated, representing some 12,500 tribal members, and the end result was poverty conditions that were far worse.

That’s likely what would have happened again had Ryan’s “choice” approach to Indian health became law.

Ryan’s, “A Better Way,” once again called for turning Medicaid over to the states. “Instead of shackling states with more mandates, our plan empowers states to design Medicaid programs that best meet their needs, which will help reduce costs and improve care for our most vulnerable citizens.”

Medicaid has become a significant revenue source for the Indian health system. Under current law, Medicaid is a partnership between the federal and state governments. But states get a 100 percent federal match for patients within the Indian health system. Four-in-ten Native Americans are eligible for Medicaid insurance.

Rep. Tom Cole, a Republican from Oklahoma and a Chickasaw Nation citizen, said Ryan will be missed in Congress. “Paul Ryan is a visionary leader, a committed conservative and a master of the legislative process. His tenure as been marked by exceptional accomplishments – the largest tax cut and reform in a generation; the most regulatory reform for any Congress in the modern age; the most substantial defense buildup in 15 years; the end of the individual mandate in Obamacare – and a host of other important legislative accomplishments,” Cole said.

“He is not only the best Speaker I’ve had the opportunity to serve with, he’s also the finest person. Even Paul’s political opponents readily concede that he’s a person of absolute integrity, deep sincerity and of profound decency.”

Mark Trahant is editor of Indian Country Today. He is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. On Twitter: @TrahantReports (This story is cross posted with Indian Country Today.)

Congress nears another deadline for government funding legislation

Mark Trahant / Indian Country Today

Cross-posted on Indian Country Today.

Here we go again. Congress has three days to resolve long standing disputes over immigration, health care, taxes, abortion rights, guns, building a border wall, a New York City tunnel, and funding federal programs. Republicans control the House and the Senate, but still need votes from Democrats to enact any spending legislation.

Wait. Didn’t that all happen five weeks ago? Yes. Well, sort of. The Congress and President Donald J. Trump agreed to an overall two-year, $1.2 trillion plan for spending federal dollars. That plan gave Congress five weeks to work out a variety of details, setting a deadline of March 23 at midnight.

And, so, here we go again. It’s the details that continue to divide Congress.

House rules require 72-hour notice before a vote. The legislation has yet to be posted.Rep. Tom Cole, R-Oklahoma, told The Hillnewspaper Monday that Congress is close. “They’re scrambling, working really hard to try to get them done so they can file tonight, or tomorrow at the latest.”

Federal Indian programs are not a part of the policy disputes in Congress, but many agencies including the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service would have operations suspended during a government shutdown. Indian education programs are funded in advance and would not be impacted. There have been two short government shutdowns this year.

Michael “Keawe” Anderson, executive director of the Native American Contractors Association, sent a note to members suggesting contract officers investigate the status of federal contracts, especially if there is a “soft” shutdown over the weekend. “However, given the uncertainty that has become our new norm, I would also add that you should discuss a longer term shutdown – a ‘hard shutdown’—and what their expectations would be,” wrote Anderson.

The National Congress of American Indians will testify Thursday before the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs about the budget and the president’s drastic cuts. “Many of the proposed deep reductions in the president’s Budget threaten to limit this protection and these benefits,” the prepared testimony said. “The proposed budget cuts to tribal governmental services, if enacted, would represent a clear retreat from the federal commitments and treaty promises made to tribes.

The President’s budget would cut the Bureau of Indian Affairs by about half a billion dollars, or 15 percent. BIA Social Services would be reduced by more than a third, Indian Child Welfare by more than a quarter, and critical human services programs, law enforcement and courts programs, environmental protection, housing, and education programs would face unconscionable reductions. Infrastructure programs, such as the Indian Community Development Block Grant would be eliminated, and the Indian Housing Block Grant and road maintenance would be reduced.”

It’s unclear how much funding would be restored to federal Indian programs under any Omnibus bill. The February deal between Congress and the president significantly increased spending for defense and domestic programs, but the details have yet to be enacted into law.

Both the House and Senate will have to act and the president would have have to sign the measure.

Before that occurs, however, there are serious policy disputes that have yet to be resolved.

Congressional Republicans continue to press for funds to construct a border wall with Mexico. Rep. John Carter R-Texas, chairman of the House Appropriations Homeland Security subcommittee, told The Wall Street Journal that he is continuing to push for $1.6 billion for the border wall. Democrats have said that spending might be possible — if the budget extended protections for the Dreamers, undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children. But there were still differences about a sharp increase for the U.S. Border Patrol.

Another issue splitting Democrats and the president was funding for the Gateway, a project to improve rail service in the New York City region. The president said he would veto any spending bill that included that $900 million project. (Many Republicans from New York and New Jersey support Gateway.)

Another complication: Abortion rights and health care spending. Senators Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, have proposed language that would reimburse insurance companies for low-earning customers (a requirement of the Affordable Care Act.)

President Trump told the two senators he supports the measure. However there is significant opposition in both the House and Senate. One provision would also add new abortion rights restrictions to dollars spent by insurance companies, something that Democrats say they could not support. The Kaiser Family Foundation reported that the abortion language conflicts with state laws in California, New York and Oregon.

Conservatives in the House say the spending proposals lack conservative “principles” and may voter against the legislation. Members of the House that support increased funding for the military have called for an end to short-term spending bills and want this process completed. Either one of those factors could complicate a last minute deal before a vote in the House and Senate.

(The National Congress of American Indians is the owner of Indian Country Today and manages its business operations. The Indian Country Today editorial team operates independently as a digital journalism enterprise.)

Mark Trahant is editor of Indian Country Today. He is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Follow him on Twitter @TrahantReports

#NativeVote18 Candidates are boosted by an electorate ready for change

 

Cross posted on Indian Country Today.

Mark Trahant / Trahant Reports

A special election in Pennsylvania is a good sign for Native American #NativeVote18 candidates running for office. Why? Because this cycle is already favoring out-of-power Democrats and, quite possibly, independents. It’s hard to peg any constituent group more out-of-power than those who would represent Indian Country in the Congress of the United States.

First, the news from Pennsylvania, then we will look at the map. Democrats are claiming victory in a special election for that state’s 18th Congressional District. Perhaps. Officially, the race is too close to call between Democrat Conor Lamb and Republican Rick Saccone. It’s a practical tie with Lamb holding a tiny lead. But Lamb has claimed victory and Democrats are celebrating no matter what happens next because this is a district that favors Republicans, it was won by President Donald J. Trump by 20 points. So even normally red districts are up for grabs come November.

Or as Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (New Mexico) posted Tuesday night: ““These results should terrify Republicans. Despite their home field advantage and the millions of dollars … We have incredible candidates with deep records of service running deep into the map this year, and it’s clear that these Republican attacks are not going to stick.”

DYQSLwYX0AAnaT3

Back to the map: Sharice Davids, who is running in Kansas fits that storyline precisely. She is running in a district that Republicans should win easy. Rep. Kevin Yoder won re-election in 2016 with an 11-point margin. But remember the Pennsylvania 18th favored Republicans by 20-points.

Davids is Ho-Chunk, an attorney, and she worked in the Obama administration. This is pretty much an anti-Trump-agenda resume’.

The most immediate boost from Tuesday’s vote should be more campaign donations.

Another #NativeVote18 candidate who could benefit from a re-imaging of the election landscape is Amanda Douglas in Oklahoma. After Lamb claimed victory in Pennsylvania she tweeted: “Yes! his is exactly what I’m talking about!!! I can’t wait to work with newly elected Congressman@ConorLambPA!”

Douglas, Cherokee, is running in the state’s 1st Congressional District. Two years ago Democrats did not field a candidate in that race. It’s rated as a “plus-17” Republican district — in other words, awful similar to the Pennsylvania 18th.

In another part of Oklahoma, two Cherokee Nation citizens could both potentially be on the fall ballot. Rep. Markwayne Mullin is running for his fourth term as as Republican. Democrat Jason Nichols, the mayor of Tahlequah, is running as a Democrat. Mullin won 70 percent of the vote in his last election bid.

Rep. Tom Cole is also running for re-election as a Republican in Oklahoma’s 4th congressional district. Cole, Chickasaw, also earned more than 70 percent of the vote in the last election.

One #NativeVote18 candidate who had a good week before the Pennsylvania election was running in New Mexico.

Debra Haaland, 2018 Elections

Haaland’s challenge is to win the Democratic primary in June because, unlike most Native candidates, she’s running in a district that favors Democrats.

Last weekend Haaland was the top-vote getter at the state’s party convention, winning nearly 35 percent of the vote in a crowded field. She told delegates: “Congress has never heard a voice like mine.”

Haaland, is Laguna Pueblo. Congress has never elected any Native American woman to its ranks since voting began in 1789.

Haaland, Davids, or Douglas could be the first.

The Pennsylvania race also raises questions for the #NativeVote18 candidates who are Republicans. Former Washington State Sen. Dino Rossi would be at the top of that list. Rossi, Tlingit, is hoping to succeed a moderate Republican, Rep. Dave Reichert, in Washington’s 8th congressional district. That district has been trending Democratic.

The president’s popularity is reflected by Rossi’s own words. He told The Seattle Times that he is “not running to be ‘The Apprentice.’ I am running to be the congressman from the 8th Congressional District. The way I am going to treat Donald Trump is just the same way I would have treated George W. Bush or Barack Obama. If I agree with them I agree with them, and if I don’t, I don’t.”

One #NativeVote18 candidate who is not running away from President Trump is Gavin Clarkson in New Mexico’s 2nd Congressional District. His campaign website proclaimed “the best way to help President Trump stop the swamp and protect New Mexico is to run for the Republican nomination to make sure we retain this Congressional seat in November.”

Then this Southern New Mexico district is changing too. The seat is now held by Rep. Steve Pearce is running for governor — making this an open seat. Pearce won easily, capturing 60 percent of the vote. But the district is now 54 percent Hispanic and in a wave election, it could be the ideal seat for a Democratic pickup. Trump won the district by 10 points, half of the margin in Pennsylvania.

There are also three #NativeVote18 candidates running as independents or on third-party lines. Eve Reyes Aguirre is running for the U.S. Senate in Arizona on the Green Party ticket. Aguirre is an Izkaloteka Mexican Native.

She recently tweeted that she is an “unconventional politician” and is rounding up signatures to make the ballot. Henry John Bear is running as a Green Party candidate in Maine’s 8th Congressional District. Bear is a citizen of the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians. And, finally, in Minnesota, Ray “Skip” Sandman is running in the 8th Congressional District as an independent. Sandman is Ojibwe.

Can an independent or third party candidate win in this environment? It’s hard to say, there is no real evidence yet. But as the Pennsylvania results show, this is an election cycle where anything is possible.

Mark Trahant is editor of Indian Country Today. He is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Follow him on Twitter @TrahantReports

The road ahead for Trahant Reports and Indian Country Today #NativeJournalism

Mark-Trahant

Mark Trahant / Indian Country Today

Many years ago Richard LaCourse and I would sit around and toss ideas about what the perfect Indigenous newspaper would look like. LaCourse, at the time, was trying to create a new publication in Washington, DC.

Imagination was his currency. What was possible?

LaCourse had a lot of experience answering that question. He had helped build the American Indian Press Association. He had edited or written for several tribal newspapers, including his own, The Yakama Nation Review. He launched a one-person crusade to raise the standards of Native American journalism.

I even remember the first time I heard him do that. It was on Feb. 24, 1977, at a workshop in Spokane. A workshop speaker was telling tribal editors that they worked for tribal councils and should slant the news accordingly. LaCourse stood up. Angry. Shaking his finger. “Are you aware of the 1968 law that guarantees freedom of the press in Indian Country? Indian newspapers should be professional, straight reporting operations, and your assumptions about cheerleaders for a point of view has nothing do do with the field of journalism. Why are you making this presumption?”

I am thinking of Richard LaCourse as we begin Indian Country Today’s third chapter. The goal is to build on the legacy of LaCourse—as well as from the first two chapters of Indian Country Today. The publication was founded by Tim Giago in South Dakota in 1991 and was followed by the ownership of the Oneida Nation of New York.

It’s hard to think of a better word than legacy, actually. The word is from the 14th century Latin legatus, an ambassador, envoy, a deputy sent with a commission. A century later the word had shifted and become associated with property, a gift. Both definitions fit. The gift is all of the work done before. The commission is the tasks ahead.

Indian Country Today is now owned by the National Congress of American Indians—but we will act independently. We are creating a framework to ensure that. But our primary task is the same as LaCourse’s vision: Professional, straight reporting that tells stories about Indigenous people and our nations.

I’d like to thank the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) for engaging in this experiment. It would have been easy to say, “well, no.” Especially when the challenges of independence are factored into that equation.

The NCAI has a long history of working with the Native press (even while our missions are different.) One of the great journalists of her generation, Marie Potts, a Maidu, and editor of California’s Smoke Signals best writing in Washington while on working on a fellowship with NCAI during the late 1960s.

The best way I know how to demonstrate our independence is to produce solid, thoughtful journalism. Every day. So there is a lot of hard work ahead. (And we will need some time to make this so.)

What does this mean for Trahant Reports? For the time being I will cross post on Trahant Reports and Indian Country Today sites. I have a lot of material I am working on for the elections ahead, Indian health, and other policy issues. So more, not less.

And Indian Country Today is back in business and we are ready to serve.

Our goal is to hire a team in Washington, create (and fund) reporting fellowships around the country, and build capacity for freelance contributors. We want to be partners, not competitors, with tribal newspapers, public media, and web publishers.

I have been teaching journalism for the past seven years and I am always telling students that this is a time of great opportunity. The digital world means that we can reach our audiences instantly. We can communicate ideas. We can explain a complicated process. We can expose wrongdoing. Or write a story about pop culture that makes us smile.

We can invent a new kind of news organization, one that trades on the currency of imagination.

Mark Trahant is editor of Indian Country Today. On Twitter: @TrahantReports

Amanda Douglas ‘bothers’ to run for Congress in Oklahoma #NativeVote18

IMG_5778-Edited-e1519278669308
Amanda Douglas is running for Congress in Oklahoma’s 1st congressional district. She is a citizen of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. (Campaign photo)

Mark Trahant / Trahant Reports

Across the country more women than ever are running for office, including Congress, statewide posts, and legislatures. That’s the case in Indian Country, too. So is it a record year? It sure looks to be so.

Amanda Douglas is the latest candidate. “Northeastern Oklahoma is so skewed that not a single non-Republican candidate has officially registered to run for the 1st District in the coming 2018 election,” she wrote on her campaign web site. “Most agree that this is because it is historically a heavily Republican district– it hasn’t seen non-Republican representation since 1987. The thought is that there isn’t enough support for anyone other than a Republican to even bother running.”

Douglas is bothering to run. (This gets to my favorite rule in politics: You gotta run to win.) Two years ago no Democrat bothered to run and the incumbent, Rep. Jim Bridenstine picked up 100 percent of the vote. Not bad, right? He is not running for re-election because he is President Donald J. Trump’s choice to head the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). That means the district will be an open seat.

Douglas and her family are citizens of the Cherokee Nation from Glenpool, Oklahoma, and she’s a graduate of Oklahoma State University.

“Yes, I know,” she writes. “I am not exactly drowning in political experience; however, I want you all to know that I consider that an advantage over other candidates at this point. We need fresh air in Washington. We need representation in Congress that is NOT part of the club– someone who is there for the good of the PEOPLE, not for financial gains or exploitable opportunities.”

There are now three Native American women running for the U.S. House. Deb Haaland in New Mexico, Sharice Davids in Kansas, and Douglas in Oklahoma. All are Democrats. In Arizona, Eve Reyes Aguirre is a candidate for the U.S. Senate running on the Green Party line. There are two Native American women running for state governors, Paulette Jordan in Idaho, and Andria Tupola Hawaii. And Peggy Flanagan is running for Lt. Gov. Minnesota. There are also six Native American running for Congress. 

Mark Trahant is the editor of Indian Country Today. He is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. @TrahantReports on Twitter.

 

 

 

What experiences should an IHS director have? In my book: Medicine & Medicaid.

1488750764624
Robert Weaver, Quapaw, was President Trump’s first choice to head the Indian Health Service. His nomination was withdrawn last week. (Weaver Group photo)

Mark Trahant / Trahant Reports

Who should run the Indian Health Service? Not “who” exactly, but what kind of leader? What kind of skills and experience would be the most useful?

This question is more important than ever. The Trump administration has withdrawn the nomination of Robert Weaver to lead the agency. Weaver, a member of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma, has a background in private insurance working with tribes to set up plans to cover tribal members. But his nomination was sidetracked after The Wall Street Journal reported serious misstatements on his resume both in terms of education and work experience. So last week a representative of the Department of Health and Human Services said: “Mr. Weaver is no longer the Administration’s nominee for Director of the Indian Health Service.”

For his part, in a letter to tribal leaders, Weaver said the president has been an “ardent supporter of fixing Indian Health throughout this process.” And he said “he will fight to give voice to the change needed at IHS until the mission is complete … the delivery of timely, high healthcare for Indian Country no matter where you live.”

But Weaver went further in an op-ed for Native News Online. He said he wanted to be IHS director for the “sole purpose” of being a part of the solution.  “… many Tribes supported me from around Indian Country. Why? I think because they know that babies are being born on IHS hospital floors. They know that people are dying of heart attacks because the crash carts at their IHS hospitals don’t have the proper medications. They know that some of the places where they live don’t have running water. They knew that I was the right person to start addressing these abuses because I’ve been an unwavering advocate for our peoples’ health and wellness for the past decade and I was willing to meet and listen.”

The key word is “mission.” The mission of the Indian Health Service has become so distorted that even policy makers cannot or will not articulate the challenges ahead. The discourse about the Indian Health Service continues to be about a federal agency that delivers health care to American Indians and Alaska Natives. And, within that story, there are so many clinics and hospitals that only require more order and funding in order to carry out even basic health care. The system is failing. Babies being born on hospital floors. The usual.

Only the IHS story is much more complex. We need to think differently about the IHS. (As I have written before: I would even change the name to the Indian Health System to reflect what the agency now does.)

Most of the Indian Health system is managed by tribes or non-profits. There are 26 IHS hospitals, and 19 tribal or or non-profit hospitals. But, and this is huge, there are 526 clinics, health centers and stations run by tribes and non-profits and only 91 by IHS. 

Hospitals Health Centers Alaska Village Clinics Health Stations
IHS 26 59 N/A 32
Tribal 19 284 163 79

 

The federal role is changing. The Indian Health Service still does operate health care delivery. And it sets standards. But it’s also a major funding source — and even that is misleading because it is Medicaid, not the Indian Health Service, that’s often the largest source of funding for tribal and non-profit facilities.

This is a critical difference because Medicaid has been under attack by the Trump administration from day one. The administration claims it’s protecting the Indian Health Service budget … all the while proposing deeper and deeper cuts into Medicaid.

There is a disconnect. And it’s visible in the budget. The line item for “collections,” that is money from Medicaid, Medicare and private insurance, is roughly $1.2 billion. That’s a number that has not changed much despite a huge expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. This number should have been growing dramatically. But it’s not because it does not capture the amount of dollars collected tribes and non-profits, only the money that goes into IHS direct services.

This is misleading because when you talk to tribal and non-profit administrators, as I have, there is a different story to tell. Medicaid is now more important to local budgets than the IHS itself. 

The expansion of Medicaid also explains a lot about the shortages within the Indian health system. The federal Indian Health Service will take Medicaid funds, but it’s not growing the pot. Tribes and nonprofits have done that. And so there is more money for Indian health in states that have expanded Medicaid.

This is not the Indian Health Service we grew up with. And the next director of the Indian Health Service needs to acknowledge this complexity and own the new story. If I had my way: the next IHS director would have a solid background in medicine and Medicaid.

Mark Trahant is an independent journalist and a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. On Twitter @TrahantReports

Reposting or reprinting this column? Please do so. Just credit: Mark Trahant / TrahantReports.com #IndigenousNewsWire #NativeVote18

 

Data day. Working on #NativeVote18 #SheRepresents spreedsheets

I have been working on #NativeVote18 lists … folks running for state legislatures (55 and counting, 25 women and 30 men). I have also been working on a list of Native American women who have run for state wide offices and Congress. Fascinating stuff. (I was thinking of a trivia game I could post.) There have been four candidates for governor, three for Lt. Gov., and 12 for Congress. First statewide race that I have found, 1978. Cool stuff. #SheRepresents Will post this soon. I want to make a graphic.

Here is the #NativeVote18 state legislature list. Who’s missing?

One thing I should mention: Google has changed the way you can access pictures and it no longer is compatible with fusion tables. So I am looking for a solution or a new spreadsheet system. #Transparency

 

https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=1i_wzJ_tneyBQ-A_htt1xnDqeo3wEhyXQ8KI9mGQt

#NativeVote18 — Sharice Davids offers a Ready-for-Congress resume in Kansas

SHarice-Davids-714x476.jpg
Sharice Davids, Ho-Chunk, is running for Congress in Kansas. (Campaign photo) #NativeVote18

Mark Trahant / Trahant Reports

Another Native American woman is ready to make history. Sharice Davids is running for Congress in the 3rd district of Kansas.

Davids, 37, is a member of the Ho-Chunk Nation. She has a Ready-for-Congress resume. She is an attorney,  a Cornell Law School alumna, a White House fellow during the Barack Obama administration, the former deputy director of Thunder Valley Community Development Corporation in Porcupine, South Dakota, and, this is something that could definitely help the Congress, she once founded a coffee company, Hoka Coffee in Pine Ridge.

She began her campaign on Feb. 15. In a tweet, Davids cited an urgency for Congress to act to stop gun violence, singling out the current member of Congress in that district, Rep. Kevin Yoder. “We need more than condolences from legislators. We need swift legislation for commonsense gun safety reform. We can’t allow lawmakers, like Rep. Yoder, who accept big money from the gun lobby to continue sacrificing our safety in exchange for campaign contributions.

The Kansas City Star noted that if elected she would be the first female Native American to serve in Congress and the first openly gay member of the Kansas delegation. “Until it got pointed out to me it wasn’t necessarily part of my thinking, but the gravity of it really hit me recently,” Davids told the Star. “It’s amazing how long we’ve been in a country, but we’re still having firsts.”

Davids posted this on her web site: “I am proud to call myself a Kansan. But I have been disheartened by the way our district has been represented in Congress. We deserve a voice who represents our values and interests … As the daughter of a single mother Army veteran, I know the importance of determination and service to country.  As a woman and a Native American, I know how to stand up and fight for equity. As a lawyer, economic advisor, and advocate, I know how to build consensus and get things done.”

There are three Native American women running for Congress this election year. So far. In the House, Davids, and Debra Haaland in New MexicoEve Reyes-Aguirre is running on the Green Party ticket for the U.S. Senate in Arizona. (Worth noting: There are also three Indigenous women running for state-wide elected office, Paulette Jordan for governor in Idaho; Andria Tupola for governor in Hawaii, and Peggy Flanagan for Lt. Gov. in Minnesota. (All are Democrats except for Reyes-Aguirre and Tupola, a Republican.) #SheRepresents

This is the year where women are breaking campaign records across the board. More women than ever — 400 plus — are running for Congress as a referendum on President Donald J. Trump and his policies. There have been 12,244 people elected to Congress since 1789. The first woman, Jeanette Rankin of Montana, was elected in 1916 and since then only 327 women (about a third of whom are serving now) have won a seat in the U.S. House or Senate. 

Davids, and most of the other Native American women running for office, are running in competitive primary races. That means they need the resources *cough* money *cough* early in order to have a chance. Davids’ primary election is in August.

Kansas’ 3rd Congressional District includes Kansas City and some of its suburbs as well as much of eastern Kansas. The district “leans” Republican. Yoder won the seat last election with a margin of more than ten points, 51 percent to 40 percent for the Democrat.

Mark Trahant is an independent journalist and a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. On Twitter @TrahantReports

Reposting or reprinting this column? Please do so. Just credit: Mark Trahant / TrahantReports.com #IndigenousNewsWire #NativeVote18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trump budget is a ‘messaging document’

P20180212SC-0701-1200x600
National Economic Council discusses White House infrastructure plan. (White House photo)

Mark Trahant / Trahant Reports

Budgets are statements: This is what “we” care about.  It’s money that reveals priorities. The “we” could be, and ought to be, the country. Or the “we” could be a presidential administration that’s not really equipped to govern. So there will be lots of stories this year, like last year, about the Trump’s administration’s desire to cut federal Indian programs, wipe out public broadcasting, end student loan forgiveness, wreck Medicaid and Medicare, food stamps, housing programs, and generally just about every federal program that serves poor people.

As Trump budget director Mick Mulvaney told reporters: “This is a messaging document.”

And what a message: Rich people face tough times so they deserved a huge tax cut. Poor people are poor because of their own failures. And more money is needed for a wall that’s not needed, for the largest military in the world, and the Republicans no longer believe that deficits matter.

But Mulvaney has a different version. Here is what he says are the messages.

“Number one, you don’t have to spend all of this money, Congress.  But if you do, here is how we would prefer to see you spend it,” he said. “And the other message is that we do not have to have trillion-dollar deficits forever.”

Ok. So the action is in Congress. Even Republicans on Capitol Hill know that this budget cannot be. It’s chaos as numbers.

Perhaps the best line of nonsense was written a line written by the budget director to House Speaker Paul Ryan saying domestic spending at the levels Congress has already approved would add too much to the federal deficit. That’s funny.

For this budget to become law (and overwrite the current spending bill) the House and Senate would have to agree to a budget. That’s unlikely. As I have written before there are lots of votes against any budget but not enough votes to pass any budget. A budget resolution would allow the Senate to move forward with a spending plan with only Republican votes (and even then only one to spare). But unless the rules change (which President Trump wants) the Senate needs 60 votes for regular appropriations bills. That means a lot of compromise before federal spending.

The most popular part of the president’s budget is infrastructure spending. But most of his plan would be funding from state, local, and tribal governments. That’s a problem. Congress will not be eager to follow this approach, especially in an election year. Members of Congress love announcing new roads and other projects. It means jobs back home.

It’s telling that in the White House statement on infrastructure tribes are not mentioned (something that was routinely done in the Obama White House).

Gary Cohn, the director of the National Economic Council, wrote: “Our infrastructure is broken. The average driver spends 42 hours per year sitting in traffic, missing valuable time with family and wasting 3.1 billion gallons of fuel annually. Nearly 40 percent of our bridges predate the first moon landing. And last year, 240,000 water main breaks wasted more than 2 trillion gallons of purified drinking water—enough to supply Belgium.”

So the Trump administration’s answer is to fund this with local government dollars because, as Cohn puts it, “the federal government politically allocated funds for projects, leading to waste, mismanagement, and misplaced priorities. The answer to our nation’s infrastructure needs is not more projects selected by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C Instead, the President’s plan designates half of its $200 billion for matching funds to stimulate State, local, and private investment.”

Another thing for a broken Congress to fix. If the votes are there. In theory that should be easy. This is an area where Republicans and Democrats agree (actually anyone who looks at the crumbling state of infrastructure can figure this one out). But in this Congress? We shall see.

At the State of the Indian Nations Monday, National Congress of American Indians President Jefferson Keel said: “Native peoples are also builders and managers of roads and bridges, and other essential infrastructure. These projects are often in rural areas. They connect tribal and surrounding communities with each other, and the rest of the Nation. Tribal infrastructure is American infrastructure. In 2018, NO infrastructure bill should pass, UNLESS it includes Indian Country’s priorities.”

Back to the budget as a messaging document. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities says this budget “violates the spirit of the bipartisan agreement that congressional leaders negotiated just a few days ago.”  That’s going to make it much more difficult to come up with the next agreement in Congress (unless the law is ironclad, stripping the administration of some of its governing authority).

The budget assumes that Congress would repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with a block grant formula. The votes are not there for that. It’s fantasy.

The current bipartisan agreement “calls for adding $2.9 billion per year over the next two years to the discretionary Child Care and Development Block Grant, boosting this key federal program to help make child care affordable for low- and modest-income parents.  But the budget reneges on that and proposes essentially flat funding for the program. The Administration’s blatant dismissal of a major bipartisan agreement on which the ink is barely dry may make bipartisan agreements harder to reach in the future,” the budget center reports. “And then, in years after 2019, the budget calls for cuts of unprecedented depth in non-defense discretionary programs even though that’s the part of the budget that contains many federal investments in long-term economic growth.  By 2028, funding for non-defense discretionary programs would fall 42 percent below the 2017 level, after adjusting for inflation.  Indeed, by 2028, total NDD spending, measured as a share of gross domestic product, would be at its lowest level since Herbert Hoover was president.”

fullsizeoutput_3805
Where federal money is spent. Source: Congressional Budget Office.

To me that’s the key point. Domestic spending, the programs that serve Indian Country, are already dropping and have been for a long time. All domestic discretionary programs add up to about 4.6 percent of the budget — and federal spending on Indian Country is a tiny fraction of that.

And, as the budget center points out, that means Trump budgets would actually “go below the 2019 sequestration levels, which Congress just agreed is too low to meet national needs.”

The messaging document (the budget, remember?) has another problem. It’s based on assumptions that are even more of a fantasy than repealing the Affordable Care Act. The budget assumes a 3 percent growth rate this year and 4 percent next year. So lots more people earning more and paying more income taxes (since corporations will be paying less). Not. Going. To. Happen.

Even economists think this is nonsense. The crackdown on immigration, for example, is shrinking the economy, not growing it. And the Congressional Budget Office projects a long term growth rate of just under 2 percent. Last year the economy grew at 2.6 percent, below what Trump said would happen and even below the consensus of economists.

This 2019 budget will accomplish one thing: It will serve as a mile post for the fall election. Republicans can make the case for defense spending and, I suppose, that they used to be against deficits. And Democrats will make the case for protecting health care and other domestic priorities.

Mark Trahant is an independent journalist and a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. On Twitter @TrahantReports

Reposting or reprinting this column? Please do so. Just credit: Mark Trahant / TrahantReports.com #IndigenousNewsWire #NativeVote18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The money chase. #NativeVote18 federal candidates make their pitch for big bucks

tom-cole-right
U.S. Rep. Tom Cole, a member of The Chickasaw Nation, raised more than $869,000 last year. #NativeVote18 (Campaign photo)

Mark Trahant / Trahant Reports

It’s time to look at the money. How much money are #NativeVote18 candidates raising?

Yes, I know, this is a silly metric. After all there is no relationship to governing and calling up people you don’t know and asking them for money. Yet this is the system in place. A candidate is more likely to be successful if she or he can raise a lot of money.

So it’s no surprise that the big money collectors — even in Indian Country — are the ones who already hold office or who have held office recently. And it’s probably no surprise that the big money is headed down Republican alley.

The top money raiser is Rep. Tom Cole, R-Oklahoma. The latest Federal Election Commission reports were posted at the end of January and reflect fundraising for 2017. His net: $1.7 million, cash on hand.

Several tribes donated the maximum amount to Cole’s campaign. Oklahoma tribes, such as his own, the Chickasaw, and the Cherokee Nation, backed Cole as well as tribes from across the country ranging from Penobscot to Stillaguamish.

Some of the contributors have different agendas. Tribes, for example, support Cole because of his strong stands on tribal sovereignty. Yet the American Dental Association, another contributor, has worked against that very issue by challenging the tribes right to regulate mid-level dental practices. (Previous: Tribal sovereignty and the call for better oral health.)

Washington congressional candidate Dino Rossi comes in second for fundraising last year, netting a little more than a million dollars. This is remarkable when you consider he was not even a candidate until September. Rossi is Tlingit and Italian.

As I wrote in September:  “One of his first jobs was working for Bernie Whitebear at Seattle’s United Indians of All Tribes. It’s interesting how some candidates make their tribal affiliation prominent and weigh in on issues that impact Indian Country. That would not be Rossi. But he doesn’t shy away (as many politicians do) from the conversation. It’s just not his focus.”

His campaign finance report bears that out. You won’t find a lot of tribal money.

deb_haaland_-_courtesy_cpilar_law1
Debra Haaland, who is running for Congress in New Mexico, raised more than $386,000 in her bid. If elected, she would be the first Native woman ever elected to the House. (Campaign photo)

The top Democrat for fundraising this cycle is Debra Haaland running in Albuquerque. She ended the year just shy of $200,000 in cash. Haaland, of course, and I can’t write it often enough, would be the first Native American woman ever elected to Congress. She’s running in a district that favors Democrats but she must win the primary first against seven other candidates. So far Sedillo Lopez, a former associate dean at the University of New Mexico Law School, has raised some $456,000 and reports $348,000 in cash on hand. Haaland has raised a total of $386,000 in contributions.

There is a huge difference between Haaland’s fundraising and Cole’s money. Most of her contributions come in $10 and $25 chunks. Small money. But that’s important because it could reflect interest by real voters instead of tribes and Political Action Committees and business interests. She does get some money from tribes, including her own, Laguna Pueblo, but not nearly as much as is found in Cole’s treasury.

The race for Oklahoma’s second congressional district could become the first election between two tribal members, the incumbent, Rep. Markwayne Mullin, and his challenger Tahlequah Mayor Jason Nichols. Both men are Cherokee.

But so far on the money side it’s not much of a contest. Mullin raised about $725,000 last year, netting $434,333.37. Nichols raised $17,575.52 and ended with $8,287.30 cash on hand.

The trick in any campaign is to raise as much money as needed to be competitive. That doesn’t always mean first. But it does mean having the resources to compete in media advertising, including social media, hiring staff, and organizing.

Several #NativeVote18 candidates showed no fundraising in the FEC reports. It could be because there fundraising is scant, or ramping up later, or because reports have not been filed yet.

#NativeVote18 spreadsheet of federal candidates with links to FEC reports.

Next up: State candidate fundraising totals.

Mark Trahant is an independent journalist and a member of The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. On Twitter @TrahantReports

Reposting or reprinting this column? Please do so. Just credit: Mark Trahant / TrahantReports.com #IndigenousNewsWire #NativeVote18