Reconsidering the Tribal‐State Compact Process

Abstract

This e.ssay evaluates the tribal-state compact process, as one of several alternative, nonadversarial processes, warranting attention. It argues that, because of its binding character and relatively low cost (in contrast to litigation), and because it is based in the idea of tribes and states exhibiting mutual re.spect, the compact process is an advanced version of negotiation and bargaining that tribes and states should consider where appropriate. Literature ReviewConflicts, and occasional amicable agreements, over subjects as diverse as education, taxation, law enforcement, Indian burial sites, water, hunting and fishing practices, the environment, and, the most recent and one of the most explosive issues.

Intergovernmental Relations and Native American Gaming

“…It is difficult to mark precisely when the self-determination period began, as there are various elements that commentators point to in describing this newest era of tribal-federal relations. Many argue it gained considerable momentum in the 1960s and 1970s (e.g., Wilkins, 1994). However, a foundational piece is discovered in the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934 (Deloria & Lytle, 1983).…”

“…In this spirit, Congress has enacted other legislation that allows tribal governments to enter into legally binding compacts with states to resolve substantive conflicts, most of which are based on sovereignty questions. An early example is the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (92 St. 3069) that permitted tribal governments to transfer authority to appropriate state agencies to care for and have custody of Indian children (Wilkins, 1994).…”

“…Indian gaming generally, and New Mexico's experiences specifically, point to the need to better integrate tribal governments into the traditional intergovernmental triad. There have been instances of relations between these governmental actors in the past, including the development of agreements addressing criminal justice and environmental issues (e.g., Gibb, 1999;Wilkins, 1994). In New Mexico, for example, Wright (1988, p. 305) reports that two tribes signed agreements with the state to license day care centers in 1979.…”

American Indian Policy in the States

“…While scholars generally agree that we have entered a new era in tribal‐state interaction, there is a bit of disagreement on when the current era began. Steinman (), McCool (), Wilkins (), Cornell (), and others suggest that the contemporary era began in the late 1960s or early 1970s around the time of then President Nixon's declaration of a shift in federal policy from termination to the self‐determination of Indian nations. One key piece of evidence used to signal this policy shift came a few years later with the passage of the Indian Self‐Determination and Educational Assistance Act of 1975, a law that not only provided for more tribal involvement in the provision of federal services on tribal land, but also increased tribal‐state interaction over education and social welfare policy (Public Law 93‐638).…”

Situations de blocages dans la sphère de la protection de l’enfance : le statut particulier des enfants amérindiens aux États-Unis

“…La protection de l'enfance contribue ainsi à faire évoluer les modalités du dialogue entre les États et les tribus vers un modèle relationnel moins conflictuel. Sur les relations grandissantes entre ces deux entités politiques, voir les articles suivants : MatthewFletcher (2007), SarahHicks (2007) et DavidWilkins (1994). 15.…”