The Glacier reporter. [volume] (Browning, Mont.) 1953-current, 1961-12-07

uidiiS vi the same OASIS % 10
other citizens. The Bureau OF In
dian Affairs, through its Branch
of Welfare, provides general as
sistance to Indians living within
the exterior boundaries of a res
ervation and on other trust or
restricted land Except in a few
States which include reservation
Indians in their own programs
and in parts of Oklahoma and
Alaska, where the Bureaus gen.
eral assistance program Is ex-
tended to certain other Indians
as weld.
In many States, the general
assistance program Is wholly or
largely financed and administer
ed by counties whose budgets are
limited. II is common practice
for such counties to employ legal
devices designed to keep down
the welfare load. Persons may be
excluded from eligibility for a
variety of reasons related In some
way to residence. For example,
in order to qualify for the Min
nesota general assistance pro-
gram, person is required to re-
side for a stipulated period of
time in the State and county
without receiving welfare" aid
from any source. Some South
Dakota counties fall back on a
warning" procedure whereby an
individual is given notice that If
he remains in the community,
regardless of The amount of time
which may be involved, he will
never be eligible for welfare as
sistance. Policies of the above
nature, in States with large In
dian populations (such as the Da-
kotas), effectively exclude off
reservation Indians. from entitle-
ment to State and county assist
ance. II may be true that other
persons besides Indians are ex-
cluded by these devices, but in
some counties far more Indians
than non-Indians are affected.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs
has consistently taken the posi-
ton in recent years that off-res-
ervation Indians are entitled to
the same State and County serv-
ices as are other inhabitants of
the areas in which they live. Fur
thermore, it maintains that to
provide general welfare assist
ance to those living off the res
ervation gives the States and
counties additional excuse for ex-
Guiding Indians from the gen.
eral assistance programs which
they maintain.
Although there have been few
cases in which the Bureaus con-
tention has been tested, those
which have reached the courts
have resulted in decisions favor
ing the Bureaus position. Yet, in
spite of these favorable decisions
testimony by Indians n the Task
Force indicates that s"me coun-
ties and States are still exclud-
ing Indians from General welfare
assistance, either through de-
vires such as those mentioned
above, or simply saying to them,
Your rot eligible. Go back to
IT, reservation and the Federal
Government will take care of
you"
In arguing against assuming
the responsibility of off-reserva-
ton Indians, some States and
counties often maintain that
these Indians represent a well
fare burden they cannot afford
financially; that the Indians were
placed by the Federal Govern
ment on reservations with lirli-
ted resources which the Bureau
of Indian Affairs has not always
aided the tribes in developing;
and that the Indians, because of
Federal neglect, are not suffi-
GENTLY educated or skilled to
provide themselves with incomes
adequate for subsistence. AL
though these arguments in many
cases reflect measure of truth,
the Federal Government has in
sisted that the States and coun-
ties have the same responsible
ties to Indians as to others, re-
gardless of historical circum-
stances, and that a Federal sub
sidy for off-reservation Indians
should be provided only when it
is provided for other citizens as
well.
The Task Force views the prob
lem OF general assistance for off
reservation Indians as one which
has three facets:
i. Who has the legal RESPONSE
bility for providing welfare serv-
ices?
z. IL II is determined that States
and counties have the response
bility, is Federal assistance need
ed because of low-income level
locally? OF such assistance is
needed, it should come preferab-
ly in form which does not treat
Indians as a separate group)
8. Pending such determinations,