Elections 2012: As Goes Indian Country ... Goes the Nation?

Mark Trahant
9/10/12

Go back a couple hundred years. Think about the American political system as it was designed – especially the Electoral College – and a Constitution with little more than a quick reference to “Indians not taxed.” Now think about a political system where the tribes had a say, some clout and some respect.

What would the landscape look like? How about tribal nations included in the Electoral College. Based on the number of citizens that are present in a congressional district, a map of “tribal nations” would include at least two and possibly three electoral votes.

Why would that matter? The United States elects its presidents with a system that is convoluted. In fact this presidential election is now completely focused on voters who live in one of nine states. Conservative strategist Karl Rove puts those states as: Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida. His polls show those states as tied using an average of polls. (Remember most polls have a margin of error that’s based on the number of people questioned. So a candidate “leading” by 3 points when the margin of error is 4 points is really in a statistical tie.)

And, while Indian country doesn’t have two or three electoral votes, it does have voters and a potential for impact in all of the states in play.

Nevada is an interesting state to think about. Two years ago Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was up for re-election. The Republicans really would have liked to defeat him, that would have helped shift the Senate from Democratic Party control to the Republicans. The Republicans nominated a conservative, Sharron Angle. Normally Nevada would be a conservative state. But the race wasn’t even close. Reid won by 6 percent, a margin of more than 40,000 votes.Electoral Polling Trend

American Indians are only a fraction of the state’s population – less than two percent – but as in other states, that number becomes part of a voting coalition. The fastest growing group in Nevada is Hispanics, now more than a quarter of the population. Four years ago Obama put together that kind of coalition, as did Reid two years ago. The demographic coalition included women, younger voters, Hispanic voters, and Native Americans. The Reid operation is at work again.

Virginia shows a different picture because so many American Indian voters are federal employees. More than 65,000 federal workers live in the Washington, D.C. suburbs in the north part of the state.

But that constituency is more complicated. Some of those workers are in the defense industry and lay-off notices are expected soon as part of the budget cuts under the sequestration process.

Rep. Frank Wolf, a Republican from Virginia, told WAMU radio that the pending defense cuts along with federal pay freezes puts this group of voters up for grab. “The only place the Obama Administration has made any cuts have been freezing federal employees' (pay) year after year after year,” he said. “So I think we've seen this administration fail with regard to federal employees.”

Then again Nevada is similar. There are more than 38,000 federal employees in the state and another 21,000 retirees.

The interesting thing about federal employees: They tend to vote in higher numbers than their neighbors. But it’s not a voting bloc. A recent study in a political journal put it this way: federal employees “are divided among themselves much as the society at large is divided.”

It would be interesting to see – if the data existed – how Native American federal employees voted. That information will probably surface about the same time as the tribal nations’ electoral vote is established. Of course it's preposterous. But it sure would be fun to hear pundits exclaiming, as goes Indian country, goes the nation.

Mark Trahant is a writer, speaker and Twitter poet. He is a member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and lives in Fort Hall, Idaho. He has been writing about Indian Country for more than three decades. His e-mail is: marktrahant@thecedarsgroup.org.

You need to be logged in in order to post comments
Please use the log in option at the bottom of this page

POST A COMMENT

Comments

se's picture
se
Submitted by se on
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in more than 3/4ths of the states that now are just 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions. When the bill is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes– enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538), all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC. The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action. In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%,, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%. Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win. The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers in 21 states. The bill has been enacted by 9 jurisdictions possessing 132 electoral votes - 49% of the 270 necessary to go into effect. NationalPopularVote Follow National Popular Vote on Facebook via NationalPopularVoteInc
1