Responding to Negative Labeling
by
 Darrel Smith

    I sometimes  hear a misinformed characterization of CERA as "anti-Indian." This label is  used  to attack our organization and its individual members, some of whom are Indians themselves. I suspect disparaging labels are used against CERA and its individual board members in an effort to avoid discussions of the real issues we are raising.
   
The board of CERA includes a group of knowledgeable Indians. Our related foundation - the Citizens Equal Rights Foundation has a majority of Indians on its governing board. We have an Indian lawyer as president and a former Tribal Judge as vice-president. Personally, I am excited to be working together with these capable and sincere people.
    CERA is dedicated to the proposition that as we enter the twenty-first century, it is time to think about treating all American citizens equally. We believe the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteeing "the equal protection of the laws" requires equal treatment for all American citizens. In contrast, racism is defined by the dictionary as prejudice or discrimination based on race. We really have only two options. We can treat races the same or differently. Treating races differently is the definition of racism. One of the most serious negative consequences of legalized racism (i.e. federal Indian policy) is that it tends to incite individual racism.
    CERA's mission statement says, "Federal policies currently deny millions of people living on or near Indian reservations their full constitutional rights. It is therefore CERA's mission to advocate equal protection of the law so that this nation of many cultures may be one people, living under one system of laws. Our first objective is to "guarantee constitutional and civil rights for Indian Americans living on reservations." Our second objective is to "protect all who live on or near Indian reservations from discrimination by United States, State and Tribal laws and policies."
    I find it hard to understand why advocating equal constitutional and civil rights for reservation residents is sometimes considered anti-Indian by individuals when they wouldn't consider protecting the same rights for themselves anti-White. Although it may be difficult to believe, one of the problems seems to be that these individuals can't seem to distinguish the interests of individual Indians from Indian governments. Unable to make this distinction when it affects Indians, they assume a pro-Indian government position is automatically a pro-Indian position and the opposite. Almost everyone understands that local, state or federal governments may have different interests than individual American citizens. Few would belittle the need for constitutional protections from these governments for American citizens. Why can't they see the same need for reservation residents? It appears to me that they have a basic problem instead of us.
    CERA believes the damage federal Indian policy causes is obvious and overwhelming. Investigate CERA for yourself by visiting our web site at www.citizensalliance.org. If you agree with us, CERA would appreciate your support.