Alaska State Recognition of American Indian Tribes Initiative (2022)

Alaska State Recognition of American Indian Tribes Initiative
Election date November 8, 2022
Topic American Indian issues
Status Approved by the legislature
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

The Alaska State Recognition of American Indian Tribes Initiative was not the ballot in Alaska as an indirect initiated state statute on November 8, 2022. It was approved by the legislature on May 17, 2022, and signed by the governor on July 28, 2022.

In the state Legislature

As an indirect initiative, the proposal went before the Alaska State Legislature, which could approve the initiative or equivalent legislation before the 2022 legislative session adjourned, keeping the measure off the ballot. Otherwise, the initiative would have been certified to appear on the ballot for November 8, 2022.

In 2021, several legislators introduced House Bill 123, which Alaskans for Better Government, the support campaign behind the initiative, described as "functionally identical and... written to serve the same purpose" as the ballot initiative.

On May 19, 2021, the Alaska House of Representatives approved the bill. The Alaska State Senate approved an amended version on May 15, 2022. The House approved the amended version on May 17.

Vote in the Alaska State Senate May 15, 2022
Requirement: Simple majority of members in each chamber
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	15	0	5
Total percent	75.00%	0.00%	25.00%
Democrat	5	0	2
Republican	10	0	3

Vote in the Alaska House of Representatives May 17, 2022
Requirement: Simple majority of members in each chamber
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	37	2	1
Total percent	92.50%	5.00%	2.50%
Democrat	15	0	0
Republican	18	2	1

Overview

The ballot initiative provides for formal state recognition of federally recognized American Indian tribes in Alaska, adding a section of law stating, "The state recognizes the special and unique relationship that the United States government has with federally recognized tribes and specifically recognizes the relationship between the United States government and federally recognized tribes in the state."

Attorney General Treg Taylor (R) issued a review of the ballot initiative, stating that "[i]t is not clear whether the state recognition... would have any legal effect on the relationship between tribes and the State." Taylor also noted that Legislative Legal Services analyzed a similar bill, concluding that "the bill would not have any legal effect, because the United States and Alaska Supreme Courts have already held that federally recognized tribes are sovereign entities." Richard Chalyee Éesh Peterson, President of the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, said, "As we try to build communities, build a better Alaska, it’s about relationships. And so the fact that the state of Alaska doesn’t recognize us currently is kind of a barrier in the building blocks, right? So that’s what it really comes down to."

Text of measure

Full text

The full text of the ballot measure is below:

Support

Alaskans for Better Government led the campaign in support of the ballot initiative.

Supporters

Alaskans for Better Government provided a list of endorsements on its campaign website, which is available here. Following are some of the campaign's endorsements:

• Sealaska
• Tangirnaq Native Village
• Tlingit & Haida
• Eskimo Indian Aleut
• Copper River Native Association
• Old Harbor Native Corportation
• Sealaska Heritage
• Skagway Village
• Koniag
• Alaska March On
• Alaska Black Caucus
• Organized Village of Kake

Arguments

• Alaskans for Better Government stated, "This would create a long overdue permanent government-to-government relationship between the State and our Alaska Native Tribes. The math is quite simple: 1 + 1 = 2. With a respectful partnership we'll have more ways to enhance the lives of Alaskans by streamlining services; partnering to amplify federal and state funding for deep, sustainable, and long-term impact; and tapping in to the 10,000 plus years of Indigenous brilliance, diversity, and knowledge of our Native homelands that so many now call home. The basis of any good relationship is respect, and too often when sovereign governments cannot work together our Tribal peoples disproportionately bear the price of injustice, diminishing equity, liberty, and freedoms for all."

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not identify committees, organizations, or individuals opposing the ballot initiative. If you are aware of any opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Alaska ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through July 7, 2022.

The Alaskans for Better Government PAC was registered to support the ballot initiative.

Ballotpedia had not identified a PAC opposed to the ballot initiative.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$724,544.40	$16.00	$724,560.40	$628,056.16	$628,072.16
Oppose	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$724,544.40	$16.00	$724,560.40	$628,056.16	$628,072.16

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the initiative.

Committees in support of State Recognition of American Indian Tribes Initiative
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Alaskans for Better Government	$724,544.40	$16.00	$724,560.40	$628,056.16	$628,072.16
Total	$724,544.40	$16.00	$724,560.40	$628,056.16	$628,072.16

Donors

The following were the top donors to the committee.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Sixteen Thirty Fund	$600,000.00	$0.00	$600,000.00
Tides Advocacy	$100,000.00	$0.00	$100,000.00
Sealaska Corporation	$10,000.00	$0.00	$10,000.00
Copper River Native Association	$5,000.00	$0.00	$5,000.00
Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska	$5,000.00	$0.00	$5,000.00

Background

Federally recognized tribes

As of January 29, 2021, there were 574 federally recognized tribes, of which, 229 were in Alaska. According to the U.S. Department of the Interior, a federally recognized tribe is "an American Indian or Alaska Native tribal entity that is recognized as having a government-to-government relationship with the United States, with the responsibilities, powers, limitations, and obligations attached to that designation, and is eligible for funding and services from the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Furthermore, federally recognized tribes are recognized as possessing certain inherent rights of self-government (i.e., tribal sovereignty) and are entitled to receive certain federal benefits, services, and protections because of their special relationship with the United States."

Tribes can become federally recognized through an Act of the United States Congress, a decision by a United States court, or through the granting of a request submitted to the Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA). Criteria for a tribe to become federally recognized is established in § 83.11 of Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations, reproduced below:

§ 83.11 What are the criteria for acknowledgment as a federally recognized Indian tribe? The criteria for acknowledgment as a federally recognized Indian tribe are delineated in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section. (a) Indian entity identification. The petitioner has been identified as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900. Evidence that the group's character as an Indian entity has from time to time been denied will not be considered to be conclusive evidence that this criterion has not been met. Evidence to be relied upon in determining a group's Indian identity may include one or a combination of the following, as well as other evidence of identification. (1) Identification as an Indian entity by Federal authorities. (2) Relationships with State governments based on identification of the group as Indian. (3) Dealings with a county, parish, or other local government in a relationship based on the group's Indian identity. (4) Identification as an Indian entity by anthropologists, historians, and/or other scholars. (5) Identification as an Indian entity in newspapers and books. (6) Identification as an Indian entity in relationships with Indian tribes or with national, regional, or state Indian organizations. (7) Identification as an Indian entity by the petitioner itself. (b) Community. The petitioner comprises a distinct community and demonstrates that it existed as a community from 1900 until the present. Distinct community means an entity with consistent interactions and significant social relationships within its membership and whose members are differentiated from and distinct from nonmembers. Distinct community must be understood flexibly in the context of the history, geography, culture, and social organization of the entity. The petitioner may demonstrate that it meets this criterion by providing evidence for known adult members or by providing evidence of relationships of a reliable, statistically significant sample of known adult members. (1) The petitioner may demonstrate that it meets this criterion at a given point in time by some combination of two or more of the following forms of evidence or by other evidence to show that a significant and meaningful portion of the petitioner's members constituted a distinct community at a given point in time: (i) Rates or patterns of known marriages within the entity, or, as may be culturally required, known patterned out-marriages; (ii) Social relationships connecting individual members; (iii) Rates or patterns of informal social interaction that exist broadly among the members of the entity; (iv) Shared or cooperative labor or other economic activity among members; (v) Strong patterns of discrimination or other social distinctions by non-members; (vi) Shared sacred or secular ritual activity; (vii) Cultural patterns shared among a portion of the entity that are different from those of the non-Indian populations with whom it interacts. These patterns must function as more than a symbolic identification of the group as Indian. They may include, but are not limited to, language, kinship organization or system, religious beliefs or practices, and ceremonies; (viii) The persistence of a collective identity continuously over a period of more than 50 years, notwithstanding any absence of or changes in name; (ix) Land set aside by a State for the petitioner, or collective ancestors of the petitioner, that was actively used by the community for that time period; (x) Children of members from a geographic area were placed in Indian boarding schools or other Indian educational institutions, to the extent that supporting evidence documents the community claimed; or (xi) A demonstration of political influence under the criterion in § 83.11(c)(1) will be evidence for demonstrating distinct community for that same time period. (2) The petitioner will be considered to have provided more than sufficient evidence to demonstrate distinct community and political authority under § 83.11(c) at a given point in time if the evidence demonstrates any one of the following: (i) More than 50 percent of the members reside in a geographical area exclusively or almost exclusively composed of members of the entity, and the balance of the entity maintains consistent interaction with some members residing in that area; (ii) At least 50 percent of the members of the entity were married to other members of the entity; (iii) At least 50 percent of the entity members maintain distinct cultural patterns such as, but not limited to, language, kinship system, religious beliefs and practices, or ceremonies; (iv) There are distinct community social institutions encompassing at least 50 percent of the members, such as kinship organizations, formal or informal economic cooperation, or religious organizations; or (v) The petitioner has met the criterion in § 83.11(c) using evidence described in § 83.11(c)(2). (c) Political influence or authority. The petitioner has maintained political influence or authority over its members as an autonomous entity from 1900 until the present. Political influence or authority means the entity uses a council, leadership, internal process, or other mechanism as a means of influencing or controlling the behavior of its members in significant respects, making decisions for the entity which substantially affect its members, and/or representing the entity in dealing with outsiders in matters of consequence. This process is to be understood flexibly in the context of the history, culture, and social organization of the entity. (1) The petitioner may demonstrate that it meets this criterion by some combination of two or more of the following forms of evidence or by other evidence that the petitioner had political influence or authority over its members as an autonomous entity: (i) The entity is able to mobilize significant numbers of members and significant resources from its members for entity purposes. (ii) Many of the membership consider issues acted upon or actions taken by entity leaders or governing bodies to be of importance. (iii) There is widespread knowledge, communication, or involvement in political processes by many of the entity's members. (iv) The entity meets the criterion in § 83.11(b) at greater than or equal to the percentages set forth under § 83.11(b)(2). (v) There are internal conflicts that show controversy over valued entity goals, properties, policies, processes, or decisions. (vi) The government of a federally recognized Indian tribe has a significant relationship with the leaders or the governing body of the petitioner. (vii) Land set aside by a State for petitioner, or collective ancestors of the petitioner, that is actively used for that time period. (viii) There is a continuous line of entity leaders and a means of selection or acquiescence by a significant number of the entity's members. (2) The petitioner will be considered to have provided sufficient evidence of political influence or authority at a given point in time if the evidence demonstrates any one of the following: (i) Entity leaders or other internal mechanisms exist or existed that: (A) Allocate entity resources such as land, residence rights, and the like on a consistent basis; (B) Settle disputes between members or subgroups by mediation or other means on a regular basis; (C) Exert strong influence on the behavior of individual members, such as the establishment or maintenance of norms or the enforcement of sanctions to direct or control behavior; or (D) Organize or influence economic subsistence activities among the members, including shared or cooperative labor. (ii) The petitioner has met the requirements in § 83.11(b)(2) at a given time. (d) Governing document. The petitioner must provide: (1) A copy of the entity's present governing document, including its membership criteria; or (2) In the absence of a governing document, a written statement describing in full its membership criteria and current governing procedures. (e) Descent. The petitioner's membership consists of individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe (or from historical Indian tribes that combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity). (1) The petitioner satisfies this criterion by demonstrating that the petitioner's members descend from a tribal roll directed by Congress or prepared by the Secretary on a descendancy basis for purposes of distributing claims money, providing allotments, providing a tribal census, or other purposes, unless significant countervailing evidence establishes that the tribal roll is substantively inaccurate; or (2) If no tribal roll was directed by Congress or prepared by the Secretary, the petitioner satisfies this criterion by demonstrating descent from a historical Indian tribe (or from historical Indian tribes that combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity) with sufficient evidence including, but not limited to, one or a combination of the following identifying present members or ancestors of present members as being descendants of a historical Indian tribe (or of historical Indian tribes that combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity): (i) Federal, State, or other official records or evidence; (ii) Church, school, or other similar enrollment records; (iii) Records created by historians and anthropologists in historical times; (iv) Affidavits of recognition by tribal elders, leaders, or the tribal governing body with personal knowledge; and (v) Other records or evidence. (f) Unique membership. The petitioner's membership is composed principally of persons who are not members of any federally recognized Indian tribe. However, a petitioner may be acknowledged even if its membership is composed principally of persons whose names have appeared on rolls of, or who have been otherwise associated with, a federally recognized Indian tribe, if the petitioner demonstrates that: (1) It has functioned as a separate politically autonomous community by satisfying criteria in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section; and (2) Its members have provided written confirmation of their membership in the petitioner. (g) Congressional termination. Neither the petitioner nor its members are the subject of congressional legislation that has expressly terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship. The Department must determine whether the petitioner meets this criterion, and the petitioner is not required to submit evidence to meet it.

Path to the ballot

Process in Alaska

In Alaska, the number of signatures required for an indirect initiated state statute is equal to 10 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Alaska also has a signature distribution requirement, which requires that signatures equal to 7 percent of the vote in the last general election must be collected in each of three-fourths of the 40 state House districts. Petitions are allowed to circulate for 365 days from the date the lieutenant governor issues petition booklets to be distributed for signature gathering. Signatures must be submitted 365 days after the lieutenant governor issued petition booklets to be distributed for signature gathering or before the legislative session begins, whichever comes first.

The requirements to get an indirectly initiated state statute certified for the 2022 ballot:

• Signatures: 36,140 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was 365 days after the lieutenant governor issued petition booklets to be distributed for signature gathering or before the legislative session began on January 18, 2022, whichever comes first.

In Alaska, when enough signatures are verified for an initiative, the initiative is not certified for the ballot until after "a legislative session has convened and adjourned." This gives the Legislature a timeframe to consider the proposal or similar legislation. The initiative is void when “an act of the legislature that is substantially the same as the proposed law was enacted after the petition had been filed, and before the date of the election," according to state law. Otherwise, the initiative is certified to appear on the ballot for the first statewide election 120 days after the legislature's adjournment.

Stages of this initiative

Wáahlaal Gíidaak Barbara Blake, Chaa yaa eesh Richard Peterson, and La quen náay Liz Medicine Crow filed the ballot initiative on August 11, 2021. Lt. Gov. Kevin Meyer (R) certified the petition on October 8, 2021, and circulating petitions were issued on October 21, 2021. The signature deadline was set to be October 20, 2022.

On December 13, KNBA reported that the campaign had so far collected about one-third of the signatures needed. Alaskans for Better Government reported that more than 53,000 signatures were collected as of January 5, 2022.

On January 13, 2022, Alaskans for Better Government submitted about 56,200 signatures for the ballot initiative. The campaign reported that signatures were collected from each of the 40 legislative districts.

On March 3, 2022, Lt. Gov. Kevin Meyer announced that 47,199 signatures were valid, which exceeded the minimum requirement of 36,140.

As an indirect initiative, the proposal went before the Alaska State Legislature, which could approve the initiative or equivalent legislation before the 2022 legislative session adjourned, keeping the measure off the ballot. Otherwise, the initiative would have been certified to appear on the ballot for November 8, 2022. The House and Senate both approved the measure, sending it to the governor's desk.

On July 22, Alaska Governor Dunleavy announced that he would sign the bill. On July 28 , Gov. Dunleavy signed the bill.

See also

2022 measures

• 2022 ballot measures
• American Indian issues on the ballot

Alaska

• Alaska ballot measures
• Alaska ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls