Alex Gimarc: A subsistence opportunity gift from Deb Haaland

9
1080

By ALEX GIMARC

The latest iteration of the race-baiting Dementia Hitler administration attempt to foment a subsistence race war here in Alaska comes courtesy of Secretary Deb Haaland’s Department of the Interior. The vehicle is the announcement of racial quotas for tribal representation on the Federal Subsistence Board.

The subsistence board falls out of the lie that is the notion that the rural preference for subsistence isn’t actually a racial preference. The only surprise in this is that the racialists in the Dementia Hitler administration forgot they still needed to continue lie about what they are doing, pretending to protect and defend a rural preference rather than a racial one.

We have been tolerating (demanding?) the lie on subsistence since ANILCA was written and passed in 1980. Congress at the time didn’t have the cojones to write an actual racial preference into federal law, likely because it would have been quickly and easily tossed like yesterday’s garbage by federal courts at the time. 

They went for the next best thing instead, creating the notion of a rural preference for subsistence out of thin air.  Of course, the notion of disparate impact on all things racial swung by the Obama regime like a broadsword against their enemies has not yet been applied to this little fantasy (lie). With the announcement of racial preferences for leadership and membership of the federal Subsistence Board, perhaps that time has come.

In making this recommendation, Haaland gave Alaska a gift, a vehicle to rid the state of the unwelcome racialist federal Subsistence Board for all time. 

Here’s how we get from here to there. The AK Supreme Court interpreted the Alaska Constitution found that the rural preference was unconstitutional in 1989, essentially boxing the federal Subsistence Board into management on federal lands only.

The Alaska Constitution prohibits discrimination on race, color, creed, sex or national origin. Once you manage fish and game on this basis, you violate this provision.

Solution?

Take advantage of this opening.  This will require actions by the commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish & Game to reject the federal Subsistence Board and kick them out of the state for being racists. The attorney general needs to back him up, as does the governor.

Force the feds and like-minded racialists to take the state to court and prove they aren’t racists while demanding racial preferences for subsistence take of fish and game. 

Shove this noodle through the federal courts until the courts either tell us that racism is a new, positive family value in America, or slap them down like the David Duke / Al Sharpton wannabees they so desperately want to be.

It is time to stop asking permission and do the right thing, daring the Bad Guys to prove their case in court, not unlike what governors in Texas and Florida have been doing for years.  Deb Haaland just gave us an opening.  Let’s drive an Alaska-sized 18-wheeler through it.  

Alex Gimarc lives in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing and disabilities policies. His weekly column “Interesting Items” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He was a small business owner and Information Technology professional.

9 COMMENTS

  1. I like how you pointed out how disparate impact doctrine is, in practice, only utilized in service of non-whites.

    Imagine if the State of Alaska imposed a special ‘rural’ alternative minimum tax, using lack of a local property taxes as a justification. I’m not saying this is a good idea, just creating a state policy that turns rural status from a benefit into a liability.

    Every slimy ACLU lawyer would immediately come out of the woodwork to claim the state is actually disproportionately taxing Natives and take Alaska to federal court, and in the 9th Circuit – they’d probably win. But wink-wink-nod federal preference on the basis of race is A-OK in leftist land.

  2. You won’t get rid of the federal subsistence board that way. The best you can hope for is for the courts to find that tribal preference is unavoidably a racial preference.
    However since tribes are questionably now considered “government-to-government” relationships (a whole other set of judicial exception problems), they might get away with it.
    You can always depend on the D’s to buy votes from Natives at our expense.

    I always believed that “subsistence” should be regulated by “methods and means” and not where you live or who’s land you hunt on. The current rules are designed to allow rural users to use boats, planes, cell phones, radios, high-powered firearms, night vision scopes, 4 wheelers, snowomobiles, and now probably drones for their “subsistence harvest.

  3. The other contradiction is that Alaska Natives own vast areas of land that they can hunt and fish exclusively (prohibit others from using). And since they presumably live in the area – they have a de facto advantage of proximity to use the public land.
    That seems like a pretty good “preference” all on its own.

  4. Feds suck. Take a look at the wildlife refuge in Bethel. If you’re white, you aren’t getting on any of the advisory boards.

    No one gets past the selection process that is a half hour interview with a Human Resources officer, usually in DC.

    Then they grill three references you have to provide. By the time HR goes through the interview process, you better be a pro federal takeover fan or you’re done.

    Looking at the boards out here, by law they should have to put some of us kussaks on, in the name of equity.

    Even one kussak would be a breakthrough.

    We can all thank Lisa Murkowski for the federal takeover out here

  5. Bold, but I doubt this gets us anywhere. The FSB will still include the Alaska federal agency leads and as such, will not likely adopt any proposals for general federal hunting, fishing, or trapping opportunities that are racial in nature. They may however slowly adopt more Religious Ceremonial harvest options, or community harvest groups which certainly could lean tribal. This slow erosion of our equality is what should trouble us the most. Yes this latest move is bold and unfortunate. Our state is one big family, and we really don’t need anything further, driving a wedge between families and communities. This only happens though when we stop focusing on race, and focus on what we have in common. Unfortunately, the powers that be seem to want to widen rifts between us. It’s happened slowly over time. Our FSB currently has 3 public seats, all occupied by Alaska natives. Adding 3 more seats specifically for Tribal appointments, and forcing the Chair to be Alaska Native is simply wrong, but legally overturning this won’t likely be easy. Get involved folks, vote, speak up. AFN is looking to help bring us all together on subsistence. Let’s engage.

Comments are closed.