In a recent editorial in your newspaper, Cobell v. Norton litigation spokesman Bill McAllister says that reporters are not asking the Department of the Interior enough questions. I agree. There are many misconceptions about the litigation, the current state of the Indian Trust, our accounting activities, and our record keeping that need clarification, and I welcome questions.
Any good reporter will find that history has not been kind to the American Indian, and that there have been historical problems with the management of the Indian Trust. However, there is a widespread belief that the long running Cobell v. Norton litigation is about mismanagement and theft of Indian trust funds. This is not so. The case was filed to compel Interior to do an accounting of the funds that have been deposited to, and disbursed from, the trust, and to provide that accounting to each trust beneficiary.
We take the subject of trust management very seriously at Interior. In the past, department officials have stipulated to a number of trust management problems. For some years Interior officials and tribal leaders have been hard at work improving and modernizing the trust for the benefit of all trust account holders. Today business is different in Indian Country. It is detrimental to all Indian Trust account holders to propagate the notion, as plaintiffs and others do, that nothing has changed in ten years.
Newspapers have been printing emotional stories about people in Indian Country who, plaintiffs say, have been wronged by Interior. It is not difficult to find people to profile American Indians who are in need, and who deserve attention from the press. But it is manipulative to use these human interest stories to demonize Interior. Good reporters asking knowledgeable questions will find that those situations can have roots in other social, economic, or congressionally required management policies. Take, for example, the people who see oil pumps working on their land, but who receive checks for very small amounts. There are a number of questions that should be asked: Does the beneficiary own the subsurface mineral rights or did an heir sell them at some point? Is the ownership of the land highly divided among many beneficiaries? Because of early inheritance laws and probate codes passed by Congress, trust land is often divided among many heirs as it is passed down from generation to generation. It is common to have hundreds—even thousands—of Indian owners for one parcel of land. (If you divide a lease payment of $1,000 a month between 300 heirs, each beneficiary will receive a check for $3.33.) What’s more, many businesses are not interested in leasing Indian land simply because of the enormous amount of congressionally mandated regulations and red tape that lessees have to navigate. This, sadly, drives away competition, and results in the loss of higher market prices.
Many news articles include stories that are not factual but due to the Privacy Act we are unable to respond to these articles. …
— Ross Swimmer, Special Trustee for American Indians, letter to Native American Times