Candidate’s conflict of interest concerns citizen
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
Dear Editor,
Lake County has three choices for Lake County Sheriff in the upcoming November election and one candidate has a serious conflict of interest problem. This candidate is Jay Doyle.
Doyle recently made an application and subsequently became a member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. He is now “on the rolls” and is eligible to receive benefits and entitlements that non-tribal citizens of Lake County are not entitled to receive. Additionally, as an enrolled member, Doyle is now subject to the constitution and bylaws of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation.
The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 allows the Salish and Kootenai Tribes the ability to declare and enjoy the status of a sovereign nation within the boundaries of Montana and the United States. Under this act, the U.S. Congress did not require tribes to provide tribal members with full protection of the U.S. Constitution. Congress also allowed (and still does allow) tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs to discriminate in favor of tribal members. This congressional act also created the existence of two governmental systems, state and tribal with completely different legislative, administrative, enforcement and judicial systems in the same legislative area. Under the sovereign nation status, this tribe can claim immunity from lawsuits and jurisdiction over all persons and property within their reservation. Additionally, the federal government verbally supports this notion of sovereignty by proclaiming that it must deal with Indian tribes on a nation to nation basis. Under the wards of the federal government status, this tribe also claims the right to government provided welfare programs, healthcare, asset management and legal assistance. Finally, under their individual citizen status, members of federally recognized tribes claim all the rights of citizenship and more.
In my opinion, in a country where “all men are created equal,” Doyle is apparently more equal and merits special consideration. I now ask you, the readers, if Doyle can serve two masters, does he merit an ability to enrich himself with benefits and entitlements from both masters and will he equally enforce the rights of non-Indian persons if our rights do not apply to him?
Bob Rew
Polson
