At Week's End; At Weeks End #804; 804; Wilma Mankiller Interview

This is weird to hear the jabber in the ear. This is weird to hear. A one -on -one interview with Wilma Mann -Killer, the first woman to lead the nation's second -largest Native American tribe. Next, on At Weeksend. Welcome to the first segment of this season's At Weeksend. I'm Kate Nelson. Our guest today is Wilma

Mann -Killer, who became principal chief of the Cherokee Nation in 1987 at the age of 45. Born in rural Oklahoma, Ms. Mann -Killer presides over the second -largest tribe in the United States. She has decided not to seek re -election in 1995 and is currently touring the United States to promote the paperback publication of her book, Man -Killer, a chief and her people. Welcome to At Weeksend, Ms. Mann -Killer. Your book is not only the story of your life, but the Cherokee people all sort of woven together, the very beginnings to where you are today. For our listeners, our viewers who may not be as familiar with you as others, if you could just briefly tell us what were some of the defining moments that led you into politics and this position of power today. Okay, first I'd like to talk about why I chose that particular form of autobiography. I think that autobiography that not only talks about an individual's life, but also puts that life in a historical and

tribal context is a uniquely Native American form of autobiography. In fact, when Geronimo was asked to tell a biographer about his life so that they could write a book, what he said to the biographers, first let me tell you about my tribe and about my people and then I'll tell you about myself. And so it never occurred to me really not to use that form of part history and part personal information. I think it's hard to look at my life and because I've lived it and figure out what were defining moments. I guess maybe leaving Oklahoma. We left Oklahoma when I was 11 as part of a BIA relocation program, which was really another misguided government policy designed to quote, solve the Indian probe. Let me start that all over again, which was designed basically by the US government to quote, solve the Indian problem unquote. And this

program was designed to mainstream Native American people. So our family left a very isolated community, no paved road near our house, no electricity, no indoor plumbing, a very insulated Cherokee community got on a train. And several days later, got off in downtown San Francisco. And this was what year? There was 1957, I was 10 years old. And we ended up in the red light district there in San Francisco for about two weeks in the old key hotel. And we'd went on this program, our family participated because the Bureau of Indian Affairs promised my family that there would be a better life for us in San Francisco. I'm one of 11 children. And as it turned out, the better life ended up being a very rough housing project in San Francisco. So I think that was a defining moment, the move from Oklahoma to California leaving a Cherokee community going to an urban area, entering a school where we were basically objects of ridicule. We dress like country

children. We had a very different accent, we had a very different last name. And all of us who had enjoyed school in Oklahoma began to hate school. And so that had an impact on me. And it politicized our family without even knowing it because we talked about the Bureau of Indian Affairs. And we talked about the U .S. government. And then later on just living in San Francisco during the 60s and sort of coming of age in the late 60s in San Francisco had an enormous impact on me politically. The women's movement was just starting. Several rights movement was going on. There was a free speech movement at UC Berkeley. There was all kinds of middle -class young people going to San Francisco really looking for a different way of living. And right in the middle of all that, the group of Native American students decided to occupy Akutra's Island. And my family knew a lot of the people involved. And so there's never any question that we would get involved in the occupation of Akutra. It wasn't just a random occupation. There's a treaty

provision with some of the tribal treaties. It says that unused federal land should be returned to Native people in Akutra. It was no longer being used as a prison. And so we got involved. And that was going to political of a political watershed for me. After that I got more and more involved in Native rights issues. And which ultimately led me to return home and run for political office. That is a decision that had to come with some soul searching. A woman, an Indian woman attempting to attain some level of power. Before you even put your name into the hopper, what did you go through internally? Well, it was hard because I'd always been in helping professions. And doing social work or developing programs or doing community development or community organizing. It was hard for me to imagine making the transition from being in kind of a helping profession to a political position. Our tribe is very large. There are 162 ,000 enrolled members. And

running for election in our tribe is kind of like running for Congress. And so I had to somehow imagine myself making a transition to a political being. And I couldn't see myself in that role. And I think what really caused me to change my mind is that I had skills in housing and development and other skills that I thought could change things. If I got in a position of power, if I had the power to allocate resources where they should be allocated. And so in the time period, after I had told our former chief, I did not want to run for election with him on a ticket as David E. Chief. And I was an interested in elective office. During that time, I visited a community where there was a family living in a car. And they had closed out on the line and had just set up housekeeping, but instead of a house, they had a car. And that had an impact on me. I really felt

that I should try to do something to provide housing to people. And so I initially ran for deputy chief in 1983 and won that election. And then ran for chief in 87 and won that election in the 91 again. In the book, you described campaigning and the reactions that you got not only during the campaign, but upon taking office. There was the kid who pointed his finger at you as though we were shooting you while you were in a parade. The men who were somewhat reluctant to accept a woman in positions of power. It surprised me most, the backlash that you received from women tribal counselors. What's going on there? Why do we turn into our own enemies? Sometimes I think that women hear stereotypes about what leaders should look like so often that we begin to internalize that and believe it ourselves. That not just women in stereotypes, but people who hear stereotypes about themselves. If it's all around you, then it becomes so pervasive that even against your better judgment, you

start to believe it. And I think that women have been told for so long that they don't make good leaders or that they shouldn't be in top leadership positions that some women begin to internalize that and actually believe it. How did you overcome this? Well, I think you overcome it just by continuing to hang in there and continuing to lead and refusing to bow down to that kind of nonsense. I think the idea that women can't lead is just foolishness. And I think that what I decided to do in the initial election in 1983 and subsequent elections is simply ignore those arguments. And I thought it was foolish to even try to make the argument to me that women shouldn't be in leadership positions. And I wasn't going to let my energy be drained off into these kinds of nonsensical arguments. So I just continued on. The Cherokee culture has a tradition in its far past of very powerful women, both as warriors and political leaders and so forth. Has your being in

this position, do you see that in any way, reviving at least an interest in where we as a tribe, as a people, used to be and how we need to nurture that? Yes, I sure do. I think that in an odd way, my initial election in 1983 and subsequent elections were a step backwards into tribal tradition and a step forward for women at the same time. And through my being there, I think I've been able to educate a lot of people about the importance of having both men and women's forces in leadership. To the Cherokees, it's always been very important that we have balance in our world and balance in our lives. And there was a time when there was more balance and harmony between men and women. But what happened as we became more assimilated, we began to move women to a secondary role. And so by the time I was elected in 1983 or ran for election,

there was a lot of opposition to me. People would stand up in meetings and say, well, our tribe is going to be the laughing stock of our tribes if we have a woman holding a political leadership position. And so I think what we're trying to do now is return to the balance where we have both men and women in leadership positions. And I think that society in general, that we need to look at having a balance in leadership between men and women. How do we go about making that happen? Here in New Mexico, women do not have a good track record of holding the highest positions of power. They're doing better. We're getting more legislative representation and women running for the higher offices. Particularly Indian women, we don't see in non -tribal positions of leadership. What sort of lessons have you learned in your experience that we could translate? Well, I've learned that there are a lot of women out there that are quite capable of leading all the major institutions in society and banking and business and the

academic community and television and politics. There are risks, whatever, that there are women who could have the skills and the ability to lead, but they don't have the support they need to get there. And it's still very, very difficult for women to get elected to high positions. Very, very difficult. They don't attract revenue as well. And don't attract the kind of support that men do when they're running for positions. I think that women have to have a resume about twice as long as their male opponents before they're considered. In fact, this Southern woman told me something one time that I thought was very true. She said that it's so difficult for women to get elected and they have to have so many skills that we're not going to begin to see any kind of equity and elective politics until you see the day when we can elect mediocre women to very high positions in this country. And because we don't seem to have any problem electing mediocre men, that's right. But if you women that get elected have just outstanding

credentials. And have to. Yeah, and have to in order to get there. What about a non -tribal politics? This, due to your schedule, we are taping this before it will run. By the time this runs on the air, we may in fact have our first Native American state governor. That will be that will be a big step beyond tribal politics into so -called mainstream politics. Yeah. Were we going to see more of that? I think so. I think that one of the reasons that I support Native American people, whether I totally agree with all their positions on everything or not, is because I think that it sends a powerful signal to other Native American people that this can be done. That we can hold positions of leadership and shape public policy and and to shape public policy in a way that makes more sense for Native people. And so I think every time we elect someone or like Ben Nighthorse Campbell or others that every time we elect someone it encourages someone who may have thought about it but weren't quite ready to step up

and lead. And so I hope that the next statewide Native American race that gets won is by a woman. That would be nice. You have decided not to run for re -election. You've faced some health problems in recent years. What led to this decision and what are you hoping will be your legacy? Well, I think what led to the decision partly had to do with the fact that I've been there for 18 years. Either as an employee or as an elected person, I've been elected for three terms now. And it was interesting a couple of years ago, I heard myself sounding like people I used to oppose and I thought, hmm, I think we should move on in time for a change. Time for a change for the circulation and also a time for a change for me. And also my health is a factor. It's not the major factor but certainly is a factor in my decision not to run for election again. And I just, I always have had a strong feeling that people who get in these positions don't own the jobs and that you use your best ideas in the first few years and you need to get

your best ideas out there and move them forward and then get out of the way so somebody else can come along. And so a lot of it is just my own beliefs about leadership and then part of it's personal as well. What do you think your legacy will be? You know, it's hard to tell. It's so hard to, you would think that I would think about those things but when you're directly involved in the work, it's really hard to say. I think that others don't have to determine what my legacy will be. I don't think that it's very easy for me to determine that. One of the things that will improve one presumes, if more tribal members are in mainstream politics, are the public policy issues that tribes, particularly here in New Mexico, are struggling with now. And the big debates that you see regard tribal efforts to improve their economic development status through gambling and through waste storage, often nuclear waste storage, surely you face similar things on the Cherokee Nation. How do you size up all this? The

storing waste on Indian land is something that I'm rapidly opposed to. I think that how people do development on their lands is an issue itself. If you just have marketable natural resources, it's a huge issue and that each tribe has to sit down and make a decision for themselves about how they want to approach development. But the storage of nuclear waste on Indian lands is just one of the things that I'm just absolutely adamantly opposed to. We've seen these people come into visit our tribe and they always tell them because they usually have gold Rolex watches on and they start telling you that they work for recycling companies. And that sort of thing, and then pretty soon you can figure it out, trust me. And we've seen a lot of these people coming to Eastern Oklahoma with these plans and it's just... Why are some tribes listening to that? Why does that sound attractive? Well, I think some tribes are listening to it because they

need the revenue and because they get up every day and face a donning set of problems and ranging from lack of just basic infrastructure and clinics and health and roads and education programs. And that sort of thing, it's really economic blackmail and people know that folks are very vulnerable, that tribes have been pushed to places where there are almost no economic alternatives. And so they approach tribes that have just an incredible way of needs and push this plan, the plan to store nuclear waste. And I think that's why some tribes are listening. Is gambling the goose that laid the golden egg? Well, I feel better about gambling. I think gambling is just a business. And it's a business that many, many states are in. Many of the states are doing riverboat gambling. A lot of the states are doing lotteries, have developed lotteries. So it's a way of generating revenue.

And it's a heavily regulated industry. It's regulated by tribes who have regulatory agencies in place and also by the federal government. Not I think it's a little disingenuous of the states to take the position that against Indian gaming by saying, oh my god, the Indians are gaming when they're all involved in it. And so the communities and people surrounding tribes are involved in gaming. I think it's a legitimate business. It strikes me as part of the dichotomous way that in general white people look at Indians. On the one hand, there's a bit of a disdain for the poor living conditions. And yet on the other hand, a reluctance to say that you have the sovereignty to bring in these sorts of economic development tools. The gambling proceeds will go off the reservation anyway. The nuclear waste will destroy the land you're supposed to be, the protectors of the land. How do we go about reconciling that and bringing these two sides together?

Well, you know, I don't think that there's any any group of human beings anywhere that manages to live without contradictions in their lives and in their work. And I don't think that my own sense is that all the tribes that I've met that have been involved in gaming didn't come to gaming as their first option. They came to gaming after trying many, many other economic development enterprises. And because of the fact that many people are on land that is very isolated from other businesses, there aren't just a lot of businesses that are dying to move to places where tribal communities are located. And so I think that tribes would be the first to agree that this is not the optimum business to get involved in, but it is a business. It is one way of generating revenue for services. Is it the only way? I don't think it's the only way. And I think in many tribes, it's just one of many kinds of businesses that tribes are involved in. And on the Cherokee Nation, you've done some innovative type of things. Yeah, we've done

other types of things. We have a, the Cherokee Nation Industries is our oldest business. It's a manufacturing company. And then we have started a distributing company about, oh, about eight years ago in this last year, it was profitable, very profitable. And so that's going to be a good business for us. We bought a furniture company. And we hope to develop a proprietary line of Cherokee furniture products. Right now it's, you know, pretty routine kind of furniture. And so we're, you know, we're trying to diversify into a number of other businesses. And I think other tribes are as well. I do, you know, one of the things that I don't understand is how, why tribes are defined by gaming if they're involved in gaming and yet states aren't defined by gaming if they're involved in gaming like California has a huge lottery. And so every time the governor goes to do a news conference, someone doesn't ask him about the lottery. And to explain, you know, the lottery and yet tribal people are being defined by gaming. And I don't

know why. I mean, I haven't quite figured that out myself. Part of the old patronistic thing. Yeah, maybe so. You started off by talking about the, the, the broken promise from the government when you were relocated from Oklahoma. In 92, President Clinton, then governor Clinton campaigned very actively for the Indian vote. How has he done so far? Well, I'll tell you the big difference. I've been in office during President Reagan and President Bush and President Clinton. And I've met with all three of them with Native American delegations. And the big difference between Reagan and Bush and Clinton is that with Clinton, we have access to senior level cabinet members. And we've never had that kind of access before. And we've, I've had meetings with Janet Reno and had dinner with Janet Reno. I can't even imagine having dinner with Ed Mies, not that I would have wanted to have dinner with Ed Mies. But, you know, you see, there's a lot more access. I've met with Secretary Babbitt

and other members of senior administration and so, and so have many other tribal people. But the long standing problems with the BIA, with IHS and so forth. Well, I think, you know, those kinds of things are not going to happen with our, without our being there and keeping our agenda in front of people. And we're just a little blip on the national screen. And we are not a large population. And we don't have millions and millions of dollars to give to candidates all over the country. And so we have to rely on political leaders who will take up our issues because it's the right thing to do, not because we're very influential political lobbyists. And so the issues like IHS, the Indian Health Service and BIA, folks aren't going to just, you know, help us with those issues of their own volition. We're going to have to be there and keep those issues sort of in their face in front of them in order to get any kind of response. They listen to you. They invite you to dinner. What's next for a Wilma

Mankiller? Will you continue working on these sorts of issues? I think I'll work on different issues. I think that the issues I've worked on during a government are very far removed from the issues that I like to work on. And I like to work on issues and projects that I can reach out and touch. And I've been able to do some of that in tribal government. We've built clinics and I can drive by and see people using a clinic. We've built daycare systems and head start programs and educational programs and created jobs and those kinds of things. But I spent way too much of my time now in Washington or on administrative matters, budgetary matters, personnel matters and those kinds of things. And I just would like to rotate out of that and do more direct development. My skill, I think, is always in development being able to conceptualize some new program or project that no one's done before and then put it together and fund it and move it forward. Some were out there. We hope watching this show is a young Indian girl.

What would you want to say to her? I would want to say to her that it's very, very important that everybody take some responsibility for making sure that our community survive and our tribes survive that there's a role for everybody. Whether it's leading the tribe or working in the Indian Health Service or teaching in the schools or something that in the community there's a role for all women. And that women should be active participants in society wherever they choose to play a role. And to that girl's brother you say? I would say to make sure that they treat girls with equity and respect them and make sure that their voices are heard. It's not just a woman thing to make sure that there's balance between men and women. I think it's important for men to do that too. You talk in your book very highly of your husband's support. Would you be here if you had a good man behind you?

No, I wouldn't. My husband is very fluent in Cherokee and in my first two elections he went out and talked to a lot of people and convinced them that it was fine to elect a woman. And he's been a lot of time listening to people. He has a different kind of demeanor. I tend to be very fast and I'm always running 100 miles an hour and he has a much more laid back demeanor. And so he would sit on people's porches and talk with them and drink coffee and get groups together and that sort of thing. And so he was very important. I would never have been elected without his help. Very traditional style of campaigning there. Very much so. I had to do that. I couldn't have won by doing just signs and direct mail and all that. It had to be much more personal. And now in your new campaign, City to City. That's right. That's right. You had another book tour for Wilma Mann killer. You are doing well. It's great to have you with us today. We

are out of time. Thank you Wilma Mann killer for being with us today for at week's end. I am Kate Nelson. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.