Suchergebnisse

AbstractU.S. national policies toward Native Americans followed a zig-zag path of change from 1889 to 1970. How do we explain policymakers' unsteady attraction to the rights of Native Nations? I argue that in precarious circumstances, Native Americans forged interest-based political coalitions with non-Native American western rural interests. At times, this cross-racial, interest-based coalition successfully challenged the power of non-Native American eastern ideologues. These findings advance our understanding of the interplay of race and federalism. Also, these findings illustrate the unique importance of Native Nations for American political development. This article presents quantitative and qualitative analyses of a new dataset on federal Indian policy. It also reviews existing historical scholarship.

By analyzing the politics of Indigenous peoples in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, political scientists gain new perspectives on power and powerlessness. Such study offers a new vantage point on pathways of exclusion and regulation, as well as on the pathways of challenging inequity. It illustrates how beliefs and identity configure and reconfigure power. I highlight research from four domains of research on Indigenous politics: studies of political advocacy, political attitudes, rules of the game, and the public good. Political science research on Indigenous peoples fits comfortably within the discipline. It is flush with ideas that draw on and speak to other theories of politics.Were political science to broaden its perspective and recognize the insights available from the racial minority groups and indigenous nations regarding the manner in which law and political institutions channel energies of distinct groups and create, in their application of discriminatory policies, responses and reactions manifest in other areas of life, it could embark on a broadening of its offerings and clientele.Deloria & Wilkins (1999)

By analyzing the politics of Indigenous peoples in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, political scientists gain new perspectives on power and powerlessness. Such study offers a new vantage point on pathways of exclusion and regulation, as well as on the pathways of challenging inequity. It illustrates how beliefs and identity configure and reconfigure power. I highlight research from four domains of research on Indigenous politics: studies of political advocacy, political attitudes, rules of the game, and the public good. Political science research on Indigenous peoples fits comfortably within the discipline. It is flush with ideas that draw on and speak to other theories of politics. Adapted from the source document.

How do American Indian tribal governments relate to nearby local governments? Do insights gleaned from these cases illuminate the constraints and opportunities that marginalized groups face within any system of federalism? What circumstances of marginalized governments help or hinder their effectiveness? Although some Native American tribes have transformed their fortunes with highly profitable casinos, most continue to face stark disadvantages. Some tribal governments, despite limited opportunities prevail locally by cultivating policy and political expertise. This analysis demonstrates that such expertise can be developed, even when resources are scarce.

What did Native American women and men voters think about Donald Trump on the eve of the 2018 election? This question has important implications for understanding the gendered political attitudes of peoples adversely targeted by Trump's politics. To examine this issue, we analyze a path-breaking, nationally representative sample of six hundred Native American voters. We find that Native Americans' attitudes about sexual harassment are central to their attitudes about politics and policy in the Trump era. This relationship suggests that Native American voters are an informed electorate influenced by the president's words and actions. Our work demonstrates multiple ways that gender influenced Native American politics during an election where gender and racial identities were central. In so doing, our work illuminates how race, institutions, and vulnerability affect the political attitudes of Native American voters, one of the least studied groups in American politics.

We draw on new and original data to examine both partisan and systemic inequities that have fueled the spread of COVID-19 in Native America. We show how continued political marginalization of Native Americans has compounded longstanding inequalities and endangered the lives of Native peoples. Native nations have experienced disproportionate effects from prior health epidemics and pandemics, and in 2020, Native communities have seen greater rates of infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19. We find that Native nations have more COVID-19 cases if they are located in states with a higher ratio of Trump supporters and reside in states with Republican governors. Where there is longstanding marginalization, measured by lack of clean water on tribal lands and health information in Native languages, we find more COVID-19 cases. Federal law enables non-members to flout tribal health regulations while on tribal lands, and correspondingly, we find that COVID-19 cases rise when non-members travel onto tribal lands. Our findings engage the literatures on Native American politics, health policy within U.S. federalism, and structural health inequalities, and should be of interest to both scholars and practitioners interested in understanding COVID-19 outcomes across Tribes in the United States.