Elouise Cobell in Washington, D.C., on the day the settlement was announced. (AP photo)

We recently blogged here about a Facebook page for people who object to the historic multi-billion-dollar settlement in the Cobell v. Salazar case over federal mismanagement of royalties due Indian people for the use of their lands.

The case took more than a decade to settle, and the $3.1 billion amount is far more than the $455 million originally proposed – but far less than the $50 billion that many say more accurately reflects the actual amount owed tens of thousands of Native Americans.

The Facebook page objecting to the settlement has a couple hundred members, an amount that’s doubled in the last two days.

But Facebook is the least of it, as Rob Capriccioso of Indian Country Today writes here:

Tribal leaders are increasingly raising concerns over a proposed Cobell v. Salazar lawsuit settlement. Some want Congress to put the brakes on the matter to better examine how Indian class members would be affected.

Ever since the Obama administration and the lead plaintiff in the case, Elouise Cobell, a Blackfeet citizen and longtime Native American advocate, announced an agreement in December, murmurs that the deal might have weaknesses have swept through Indian country.

Congress has yet to approve funding for the settlement; in fact, the deadline for that approval recently was extended again, to April 16. Critics of the settlement renew the contention that the $3.1 billion amount is far too low.

A resolution, ultimately tabled, at this month’s National Congress of American Indians meeting sought more transparency regarding the settlement, and more time to examine its provisions.

Capriccioso’s extensive story details several problems cited by different tribal leaders regarding the settlement. As he writes:

Gavin Clarkson, a Choctaw Nation citizen and leading tribal financial expert with the University of Houston Law Center, said it’s his sense that “most tribal leaders don’t think the settlement is fair in terms of what is really owed, but many of them realize that dealing with the federal government isn’t a place for optimum fairness.

“The truth is, Bill Martin, and those who are making their arguments public, are right. But the bottom line is that most tribal leaders know there is no ‘fair.’ ‘Fair’ doesn’t exist in Congress.”

Gwen Florio

Tags: Blackfeet, buffalo post, Choctaw, Cobell v. Salazar, Elouise Cobell, Gavin Clarkson, Gwen Florio, Indian trust case, National Congress of American Indians, Native American news, University of Houston Law Center