In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

267 (d) In any election held pursuant to this section, the vote of a majority of those actually voting shall be necessary and sufficient to effectuate the adoption of a tribal constitution and bylaws and the initial election of the tribe’s governing body, so long as, in each such election, the total vote cast is at least 30 per centum of those entitled to vote. . . . Sec. 6. [Provisions concerning transfer of assets and arrangements with the State of Wisconsin.] [U.S. Statutes at Large, 87:700 ff.] 168. Comprehensive Employment and Training Act December 28, 1973 Congress in 1973 provided job training and employment opportunities for unemployed and underemployed persons. A special section of the law pertained to Indians, who had special needs. The legislation reflected the new emphasis on Indian participation in running the programs. An Act to assure opportunities for employment and training to unemployed and underemployed persons. . . . . statement of purpose Sec. 2. It is the purpose of this Act to provide job training and employment opportunities for economically disadvantaged, unemployed, and underemployed persons, and to assure that training and other services lead to maximum employment opportunities and enhance self-sufficiency by establishing a flexible and decentralized system of Federal, State, and local programs. . . . indian manpower programs Sec. 302. (a) The Congress finds that (1) serious unemployment and economic disadvantage exist among members of Indian and Alaskan native communities; (2) there is compelling need for the establishment of comprehensive manpower training and employment programs for members of those communities; (3) such programs are essential to the reduction of economic disadvantage among individual members of those communities and to the advancement of economic and social development in these communities consistent with their goals and life styles. (b) The Congress therefore declares that, because of the special relationship between the Federal Government and most of those to be served by the provisions of this section , (1) such programs can best be administered at the national level; (2) such programs shall be available to federally recognized Indian tribes, bands, and individuals and to other groups and individuals of native American descent such as, but not limited to, the Lummis in Washington, the Menominees in Wisconsin, the Klamaths in Oregon, the Oklahoma Indians, the Passamaquoddys and Penobscots in Maine, and Eskimos and Aleuts in Alaska; (3) such programs shall be administered in such a manner as to maximize the Federal commitment to support growth and development as determined by representatives of the communities and groups served by this part. (c) (1) In carrying out his responsibilities under this section, the Secretary [of the Interior] shall, wherever possible, utilize Indian tribes, bands or groups (including Alaska Native villages or groups . . . ) having a governing body, for the provision of manpower services under this title. . . . (2) In carrying out his responsibilities under this section the Secretary shall make arrangements with prime sponsors and organizations (meeting requirements prescribed by the Secretary) serving non-reservation Indians for programs and projects designed to meet the needs of such Indians for employment and training and related services. (d) Whenever the Secretary determines not to utilize Indian tribes, bands, or groups for the provisions of manpower services under this section, he shall, to the maximum extent feasible, enter into arrangements for the provision of such services with public or private non-profit agencies which meet with the approval of the tribes, bands, or groups to be served. . . . 268 (h) No provision of this section shall abrogate in any way the trust responsibilities of the Federal Government to Indian bands or tribes. . . . [U.S. Statutes at Large 87:839, 858–59.] 169. United States v. State of Washington March 22, 1974 The vital question of Indian fishing rights in the Pacific Northwest was decided in the landmark decision by Judge George Boldt of the Federal District Court for the Western District of Washington. After a long analysis of treaties, fish migratory patterns, Indian fishing customs, and state regulations, this “Boldt Decision” set forth a series of principles to govern Indian fishing rights. The most controversial was the decision that Indians were entitled to one-half the harvestable fish. On July 2, 1979, the Supreme Court upheld with minor changes Judge Boldt’s decision (Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association, 443 U.S. Reports, 658–708). . . . . Since tribal on reservation treaty right fishing is exclusive, fish taken on reservation shall not be included in any allocation of fish between treaty and non-treaty...


Additional Information

MARC Record
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.