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

315 Claims Settlement Act, is well adapted to the reality of life in Native villages and to the continuation of traditional Native cultural values; (5) to ensure the continued success of the settlement and to guarantee Natives continued participation in decisions affecting their rights and property, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act must be amended to enable the shareholders of each Native Corporation to structure the further implementation of the settlement in light of their particular circumstances and needs; (6) among other things, the shareholders of each Native Corporation must be permitted to decide— (A) when restrictions on alienation of stock issued as part of the settlement should be terminated, and (B) whether Natives born after December 18, 1971, should participate in the settlement; (7) by granting the shareholders of each Native Corporation options to structure the further implementation of the settlement, Congress is not expressing an opinion on the manner in which such shareholders choose to balance individual rights and communal rights; (8) no provision of this Act shall— (A) unless specifically provided, constitute a repeal or modification, implied or otherwise, of any provision of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act; (B) confer on, or deny to, any Native organization any degree of sovereign governmental authority over lands (including management, or regulation of the taking, of fish and wildlife ) or persons in Alaska; and (9) the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and this Act are Indian legislation enacted by Congress pursuant to its plenary authority under the Constitution of the United States to regulate Indian affairs. . . . duration of alienability restrictions Sec. 8. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act is further amended by adding the following new section after section 36: ‘‘duration of alienability restrictions “Sec. 37. (a) General Rule.—Alienability restrictions shall continue until terminated in accordance with the procedures established by this section. No such termination shall take effect until after December 18, 1991”. . . . [U.S. Statutes at Large, 101:1788–89, 1797]. 203. Report on BIA Education March 1988 Provisions of educational facilities for Indians continued to be a major activity of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, even though students enrolled in BIA-funded schools in 1986 were less than 10 percent of all Indian students in the United States. This “final review draft” of the report produced by the BIA’s Office of Indian Education Programs focused on broad policy questions affecting all of BIA education and was a step toward establishing a Comprehensive Education Plan. SUMMARY [tables omitted] . . . . Since the 1960s, the Federal government has adopted a policy of Indian selfdetermination . This policy was applied in a new legislative framework for Indian education built by Congress in the 1970s (Indian Education Act of 1972; Indian SelfDetermination and Education Assistance Act of 1975; and Title XI of the Education Amendments Act of 1978). The cornerstone of this framework has been the promotion of the assumption by tribes and other Indian groups of direct responsibility for the education of Indian children. Following this objective, Indian groups have contracted for the operation of many elementary and secondary schools formerly operated by the BIA. Where schools continue to be run by the BIA, 316 Congress has required the creation of Indian school boards and various other measures to ensure a major role for parents and other tribal members in the operation of the school. For all Indian schools funded by the Federal government, the aim today is to provide Indian students with an effective educational program that offers an environment in which each student can maximize his or her learning and that serves the educational goals and aspirations as they are identified and defined by the local Indian community. The self-determination policies of the Federal government today generally prescribe that Indians should assume control of their own political affairs and should develop viable reservation economies capable of relieving Indians from their past dependence on Federal assistance. Both these objectives depend heavily on the quality of future Indian education. Better informed and more knowledgeable Indian voters hold the key to a tribal government that serves the best social and economic interests of the full community of tribal members. Successful economic development of Indian reservations depends no less on higher levels of education of reservation workers, managers and entrepreneurs. The future of contract and BIA-operated schools will in significant part determine whether the current Indian policies of the Federal government are successful in introducing a new, more lasting and more satisfactory era in...


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.