Check out Senate Joint Resolution 29, introduced a few days ago in the Alaska Legislature.
It asks the state's congressional delegation to pursue a change in federal law to add four new voting members to the North Pacific Fishery Management Council.
These four couldn't be just anybody.
The resolution says the seats must be filled with "members of federally recognized tribes or Alaska Native organizations who are not employed by a community development quota program or the pollock industry."
The problem with the present council, the resolution says, is that it's "dominated by state and industry voices that do not advocate or represent the subsistence needs of Alaska's rural tribal peoples."
The council currently has 11 voting members from Alaska, Oregon and Washington.
So four new Native seats obviously would form a potentially powerful voting bloc.
No individual legislator's name appears on the resolution as sponsor. Rather, it was introduced by the Senate Community and Regional Affairs Committee, the chairman of which is Sen. Donny Olson, D-Nome.
The resolution hasn't advanced since it was introduced on Feb. 26.
Of course, legislative resolutions don't carry the same weight as bills to actually change the law.
To change the seating on the NPFMC, that would take action by the US Congress, as the seats are laid out in the MagStevens Act.
ReplyDeleteDo you think Washington and Oregon are going to let there influence on the NPFMC be reduced by a significant margin?
Let alone the commercial fishing interests in Alaska?
The Governor has the power to make the six Alaska appointments to the Council - much better path to success there than trying to get an act of Congress to enact this seating change.
No chance in hell that this will pass; even if it does, there is no chance in hell that the changes will be made by Congress. This is obviously at attempt to make a constituent group happy, and that's all; as such, it is just political theater.
ReplyDeleteHow about appointing a few council members to represent independent fisherman of any race? Enough of the pandering to CDQ Groups, Japanese Multi-Nationals and Chuck.
ReplyDeleteObviously you boys are ignorant of the history. No one is pandering to the cdg group, but a segment of a population that enjoys a government-to-government relationship relationship with the U.S. government dating back before your ancestors walked on two legs. This is about justice and equality based on the U.S. Constitution that states tribes will be treated as sovereign governments, but not interests, so crawl back into your cave dwellings and fester.
ReplyDeleteObvious who is on the big bloated CDQ executive payroll
ReplyDeleteLove the argument that Alaska natives are not represented at the council(NPFMC). Duncan Fields draws a check as a lobbyist for the CQE consortium, Eric Olsen(BBEDC)is running the circus we call NPFMC. The equality which is sought by above poster reeks of favoritism and would disadvantage many others. I offer up that the real injustice is the power that corporations hold over coastal Alaska and it's residents be them native or non native. In a parting note, was not compensation accepted by your native brethren when willingly signing ANCSA?
ReplyDeleteJust trying to stop the tyranny. Thats all this is. Worthless CDQ organizations who are getting fat and the NPFMC/NMFS who helps them along, it's all tyranny.
ReplyDeletei guess the 8 A licences to steal from the taxpayer is not enough
ReplyDeleteMore discrimination against non-natives. What happened to the Bill of Rights in Alaska
ReplyDeleteNPFMC & CDQs, the best fisheries mismanagement a corrupt US Senator could buy -- Uncle Ted Stevens, the gift that keeps on giving.
ReplyDeleteHey, if he was still around, paying him under the table several hundred thou to amend the American Fisheries Act or Magnuson-Stevens could easily be arranged. Now we have to rely on Lisa and she is more discreet.
My friend, you have not done your home work. The PAC for Senator Murkowski suggests $30,000 from Alyeska Seafoods and Trident. Who's pocket is she in? You all have one agenda, the bottom line.
ReplyDeleteRace-based fishery management? Give me a break. Even if the tribal "governments" operated in a fair and representative fashion, (they don't) this is pure racial discrimination. Rural Alaskans should be better represented on the council than they are now but all rural Alaskans, not just the handful of wannabees who claim they represent phony tribes.
ReplyDeleteThese endless shrill demands for unreasonable race based preferential treatment will surely result in a backlash that will roll back some of the hard earned gains that have been made in working toward racial equality.
The self-appointed, so called leaders who demand these preferences are in it to promote themselves at the expense of everyone else.
Government to government relationship? Uh right.