The Will of the People: Citizenship in the Osage Nation1
By
Jean Dennison, Ph.D. Candidate, Anthropology, University of Florida
Abstract:
This teaching case tells the story of Tony, one of nine Osage government reform
commissioners placed in charge of determining the “will of the people” in reforming the
government of the Osage Nation. Because of Congressional law the Osage Nation had
been forced into an alien form of government for a hundred years. Recent legislation has
reversed this and has recognized the Osage Nation’s sovereign right to determine its own
citizenship and form of government. As part of this case, students will analyze the highly
charged debates over citizenship that took place during Osage community meetings.
From these perspectives students will be asked to write referendum questions covering
the central issues at stake with Osage citizenship. This case provides an opportunity for
students to explore a range of issues including American Indian citizenship and
sovereignty, the power and danger inherent in racial identity, and the process of
community-based reform.
Late one evening in February, as Tony sat watching television, he received a call from his
neighbor Terry Mason Moore, who was on the Osage Tribal Council. After visiting for a
while she surprised Tony by asking him if she could nominate him for the 10-member
Osage government reform commission. As Tony went back to the television he felt
honored to have been nominated, never imagining he would actually be selected for the
commission, nor what the next 18 months would entail. While he had lived on the
reservation his entire forty-six years and made a point of befriending all those he came
into contact with, he had not really thought about the structure of the Osage government
or what changes might be needed. He did know, however, that when he was younger he
had never wanted to have a vote in Osage tribal elections. This was because one of his
parents would have to die in order for him to have a vote. However, his father had passed
away, leaving Tony and his sisters partial shares in the Osage mineral estate, known as a
headright, and therefore partial votes in the tribal elections.
On March 3, when Tony swore an oath to uphold his duties as an Osage government
reform commissioner, he took his new position more seriously than anything he had ever
done. As he worked with other members of the reform commission, attending training
sessions and planning community meetings, Tony came to better understand his tribe and
its history. Piecing together new information with what he already knew, he came to
understand that during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the Osage people had
progressively lost their land to colonial encroachments. By the 1870s the U.S.
government convinced the Osages to sell their remaining lands in Kansas and purchase
1
Copyright held by The Evergreen State College. Please use appropriate attribution when using and
quoting this case.
1
reservation land from the Cherokees in Oklahoma. In 1881, shortly after their relocation
to northeastern Oklahoma, the Osages adopted a constitutional form of government.
Building on a national identity that had been in existence for centuries, the Osages
intended this new constitution to provide written property protection and to mediate
disputes with other tribes residing nearby. However, in 1900 the Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA) abolished the Osage government and appointed its own Osage leaders in
hopes of allotting the Osage Reservation as part of their policy of assimilation. Because
the Osages had purchased their lands they were not subject to the Dawes Allotment Act
that forced the breakup of other tribal lands. They were, however, eventually persuaded
to accept allotment anyway.
The government formed by the BIA in 1906 to administer the mineral estate was
originally intended to last for only 25 years at which time the BIA assumed that the
Osage people would be acculturated into the mainstream, eliminating any need for a
tribal government. As Federal policy changed, however, the mineral estate of the Osage
tribe was extended into perpetuity. While most of the land allotted in 1906 is no longer
held in Osage hands, the Osage tribe continues to own all the mineral rights on lands
within the Osage reservation and has an income from all oil and gas produced in the
territory.
When the land was allotted in 1906, the Osage tribal roll had four qualifications for
admission: Osage blood in any quantum, local residence or continued affiliation,
enrollment prior to December 31, 1881, and proof of birth prior to July 1, 1907.
However, Osage leaders at the time argued that 244 of the 2,229 people put on the roll
had been included fraudulently. While some people without Osage blood had been
included because they had been adopted into the tribe, others had bought their way onto
the roll. The Federal government refused the Osage leaders appeal and continued to use
the full 1906 roll as the basis of determining membership in the tribe, which included a
640-acre land allotment, a headright share in the extremely profitable mineral estate2, and
a vote in tribal elections. Those born after July 1st, 1907, however, were not given any
part of the Osage estate nor a vote in tribal elections. This would only change if a
relative were to pass away and leave them part of their share in the mineral estate.
This system often created two different classes of people within a single Osage family.
One common example of this occurred when the oldest sibling was an original allottee,
meaning they were listed on the 1906 roll, but the other siblings were born after the July
1st, 1907 cut-off date. All those listed on the roll, no matter what their age, were given
four-160 acre parcels of land within the Osage reservation, 1/2229th share of all monies
produced from the mineral estate, and a vote in tribal elections. Any Osage born after the
1907 cut-off date did not receive anything and had no voice in the tribal elections. It was
only upon the death of a person holding a share in the mineral estate that these
disenfranchised people could gain access to the land, money and the ability to vote.
Often when a parent would die they would will equal parts of their mineral share to each
of children. If there were two children, they would each get 1/4458th of a share in the
2
The income from mineral extraction was equally divided into per capita payments, which for the Osage
are known as shares or headrights.
2
mineral estate and half a vote in tribal elections. Additionally many headrights left the
tribe in the 20-year period when the mineral estate headright were considered like any
other piece of property and thus could be willed to anyone or any organization. Thus
many churches, lawyers and even some famous actors ended up with shares in the
mineral estate. This did not give them a vote in tribal elections, but it did keep some
Osage descendants from voting.
On the other hand, the headright system of membership did create a sense of legitimacy
for Osages who did hold a share in the mineral estate. Because many people of Osage
descent would eventually inherit a headright it was thought that those without a headright
simply needed to wait their turn. Likewise, the fact that parents and grandparents were
often those who held shares, it was argued that this system allowed elders to make
decisions based on their more mature understanding of Osage politics and history.
Furthermore, since the headright system was linked to quarterly financial payouts from
the sale of oil on the reservation, all attempts to open up membership were challenged as
merely attempts to redistribute this money.
In the century following the 1906 Osage Allotment Act, being Osage was partially
defined by descent. While all descendants of the original 1906 allottees are eligible for a
Certificate Degree of Indian Blood (CDIB) card from the BIA, the voting citizens of the
Osage tribe continue to be only those people who hold a headright share in the mineral
estate, regardless of their residence, blood-quantum or affiliation with the Osage tribe.
As a result those people of Osage descent with living parents or whose parents,
grandparents or great-grandparents did not, for various reasons (including fraud) pass on
their mineral estate rights, have not been eligible to vote in Osage affairs or run for office.
By the 21st century this form of government had left nearly 16,000 of the approximately
20,000 people with Osage ancestry without voting rights and had alienated them from
tribal politics. This alienation was the principal motivation for attempts at reform that led
the United States Congress in 2004 to pass a law recognizing the Osage Nation’s inherent
sovereign right to determine their own membership and form of government. After
holding a sovereignty celebration on February 4, 2005 the Osage Tribal Council created
the Government Reform Commission and set them on the task of determining the will of
the Osage people.
At first Tony felt overwhelmed with all the new information to be processed and the
difficulty of the commission’s job. The commission, as he now understood it, was
responsible for holding community meetings, establishing a webpage and using other
media to collect and disseminate information about the reform process. In addition, the
commission was responsible for surveying the Osage population and collecting opinions
about how citizenship ought to be determined and what shape the tribal government
should take. Once the commission had gathered this information they were supposed to
create a series of referendum questions, which would be voted on by the Osage people
determining the contents of the constitution. Finally the Osage people would vote on the
proposed constitution.
3
Tony wondered what he could offer to the reform process. All the other commissioners
seemed to have particular skills, such as a background in tribal governments, institutional
knowledge of the Osage tribe, or a law degree. Finally, after many late night
conversations with his family and members of the commission, Tony decided he did have
something very valuable to contribute. He was going to make sure that as many Osages
as possible had input into this new form of government.
The Commission began their work in March. It is now nearing the November 19
referendum election. Many of the questions have been drafted, but the citizenship
questions are proving difficult to write. Because the commission knows they have to
keep the referendum short and simple, they agree that there can only be a few questions
dealing with citizenship. However, Tony wants the constitution to represent the will of
the Osage people and therefore wants to include as many of the important issues as
possible in the referendum.
What questions could Tony and the Commission write on citizenship in order to cover the
range of issues addressed in the community meetings?
4
Testimony Gathered From Community Meetings
Those Opposed to a Blood-Quantum Requirement for Tribal Membership
“I think that there should be no blood quantum. If we stop now and try to clean up our
roll, it is going to bog us down and we'll be bogged down for the next 50 years and never
accomplish a thing and not get a membership…. If you take another tribe, say across the
river, the Poncas … right now they are dealing with lowering their membership quantum.
I think that all the tribes are going to have to do that eventually if they have one set at one
quarter because we are living in a time period where people marry other races and other
tribes and so the blood lines are really thinning out.”
“It (citizenship) is who you are culturally and socially, I think. To me blood has very
little to do with it. We have people that live right here that, or maybe I should say, people
that live away from here who are more Osage than some people that live right here in the
community because those people are recognized as Osages, culturally.”
“It is important to remember that Indian Nationhood is not a racial or ethnic matter, it is a
political status. So blood quantum should be irrelevant. Being Osage is more of a state
of mind; it is being part of a community.”
“I guess it is a difference if we call ourselves Osage tribe, or are we Osage Nation.
Whether it is a nationality or it’s just an ethnic background. For me, I am Irish, French,
Osage, I probably got something else mixed in there. But, my identity is with the Osage,
I consider myself Osage. I think that is an important distinction, especially in our country
with so many Indian tribes and so many people mixed together, it’s how the tribe wants
to be in the long run.”
“The Bureau of Indian Affairs is in the business of going out of business; we are in the
business of ensuring the future. It is our inherent right to determine our membership and
our responsibility to ensure it lasts for as long as an Osage draws a breath.”
“Blood is a BIA genocide policy.”
“No blood quorum [sic] should be considered in determining who is Osage. Mine is
incorrect on the roll
“I kid a lot of them who think they are half blood, ok if we get down to this nut cutting
and fighting over this blood quantum, I am going to tell them who their great
5
grandmother was. Because I can also do fractions. I know some who claim full half
blood status who are 29/64ths and that is not a half. I can do fractions good. Them old
people did not do them too good. Like my grandpa his oldest brother on the rolls was
3/8ths he was almost a quarter and the other was on as an eighth and they all had the
same mom and daddy.”
“The Federal Government bases program needs off the numbers, how many people are in
need. So if you cut people out of the tribe then you may be cutting yourself off for certain
funding that a tribe may be eligible for all kinds of programs, including housing.”
“The blood issue that seems to come up in every Indian Nation is a slippery slope for our
people. This is a white man’s game. We as original human beings never thought of
blood; we thought of family and deeds. We adopted others into our tribe and treated
them with love and respect as equals. There are no full bloods, so by thinking of degrees
of blood then there are no more Osage people either. I feel that blood degree is a form of
discrimination. We need to be Indians not white Indians.”
“We should all be cautious about setting a blood quantum level. By doing this we kill
our own tribe’s identity. The reality of blood levels is, after decades only a handful of
Osage will remain – then none.”
“Treat all of us equally regardless of our blood quantum; it’s not our fault.”
“I know there are other rolls out there, but the CDIB cards are tied to the 1906
roll…There are no rolls that Osages created, they were all created by the BIA”
Support For a Blood-Quantum Requirement
“By 1906 clearly it was obvious that if you could get on the roll it might pay off, which
of course it did. So I would say as a personal thing I would think that the 1901 roll would
be more reliable as to who was more likely to be culturally identified as Osage. By 1906
it is pretty demonstrable that a number of people who are on the 1906 roll are not of
Osage blood.”
“Let’s face it, you ought to be Osage to be a member of the Osage tribe. But if they can
prove that you’re not, then why do you want to be part of our tribe…If you want to be a
member of the tribe you should be of Osage blood.”
6
“There are some families that go around here and say that they know they are not Osage.
But they said they sure will use what we give them. I believe not all are like that, but I
just feel that when you have a tribe and membership that it should be by blood. Yes, they
did adopt a lot in the Osage Tribe. I just don’t think that it is right that they get a vote or
anything when our own Osage children don’t get much not because of how many of the
adopted ones and people that were on by fraud get the same as an Osage by blood. I am
not saying people can’t feel like they are Osage. It is different to feel than to actually be
an Osage by blood. I have several friends that are really not Osage, and I feel that they
are taking away from my children. I am not trying to make anyone mad but just telling
my feelings on it.”
“Somewhere in our records we have a number of people in the 1906 Act that were Osage
blood and a number of people that weren’t. And it’s amazing at how many people in the
1906 Allotment act were allowed on the so-called allotment on the Indian roll that were
not of Indian descent. So there is a lot of descendants out there that were not on the 1906
roll that are absolutely not Indians.”
“Is this an organization, a club or is it is nation and tribe? Is this an organization just out
there to make money or out there, or is it a tribe. Blood quantum is encouraging, blood
quantum is what it does is encourage, it doesn't…you have a choice, everybody has a
choice, but it encourages marrying back into the tribe, if you don't that's what's going to
happen.”
“Can you call it Osage then, when they’re all mixed-bloods?…in one of those inputs that
we had at one of our meetings, one of the people said that if we have a no blood quantum,
it would lengthen our existence as a tribe. And I didn’t understand that, if we have a
blood quantum the existence of the Osage tribe would be shortened. And I just wondered
how she meant that. I would rather it really be Osage just a week, at least we’d have that,
you know.”
“Blood quantum should be kept at some point. Otherwise the blood would disappear and
the culture would be lost. They would then organize into an association.”
“The Indian is getting bred out. The Mixed-blood is getting bigger and bigger and it is
going to die out. All the whites see is the card so they give the money to the mixed
bloods not the full bloods, because they adapt easier.”
“People with a flea’s eyelash are now saying that they are Osage. Are you going to be
able to take care of all of us? If the 1906 is adopted as the base roll, other people will
think they are as much Osage as the full bloods.”
7
“When you use the words “zero blood quantum,” that means you just included everybody
in the world as a tribal member.”
“I believe our Osages will need a blood quantum so that “Osages” know who they are. It
concerns me that if the roll is opened up to include descendancy, that only those who live
in Osage County will be served. Even though I do not live in Pawhuska, Hominy, or
Fairfax, I come home very frequently and have always participated in our ceremonies. It
concerns me that a Osage who is very little can receive services and/or benefits because
they have a card, whereas, if I do not live in Osage county, I am not be able to receive
any such services.”
“On blood quantum: Otherwise, what’s the point in considering yourself an Osage? It’s
fictitious.”
“I believe having a blood quantum is essential in having a legitimate tribe. Merely
wanting to be Osage is not enough. To be on the Osage roll you must be Osage, it’s that
simple. If word got out that the Osages didn’t have a blood quantum it would open our
tribe to all sorts of unsavory people; i.e. con artists, liars, and thieves. It (not having a
blood quantum) would probably cause another Oklahoma land run.”
“The main thing in this new government is there should be some kind of blood quantum;
you can put it real low—128th or even lower, but there has got to be some kind of blood
quantum, some sort of guideline to go by, or else you might as well just be a tribe of
anybody. But I think you should be able to prove that you are or have some sort of Osage
blood, and I’m sure there are ways to work that out. I know the other tribes have some
sort of blood quantum too, but that’s really my main thing is there should be some type of
blood quantum. That’s all I have to say.”
Other Views
“I would strongly support a decision to allow “blood quantum/degree of Osage blood” to
determine the amount of vote a tribal member possesses. For example, if a member is 1/4
Osage, this would mean that he/she possesses 1/4 of a vote, 1/8 Osage blood would equal
1/8 vote and so forth. This would not limit membership to any person and would give
voting privilege to all. In addition, as many of you are aware, the original allottee roll
contained the names of individuals who were not of Osage descent and who were
otherwise frequently listed as tribal members. Therefore, the descendants of the nonOsages should not be allowed to acquire membership.”
8
“I think we should do like Canada. If a person lives on the reservation and is a
descendant then they should be part of the tribe. No blood quantum.”
“I believe we should only let those who live on Osage Reservation vote on Reform
decisions.”
“I think we should utilize all the scientific methods that are available to us today. And if
we really have a question about blood quantum, why don’t we utilize DNA. That might
have some very interesting outcomes.”
“I think in terms of benefits and such that full bloods, 3/4 bloods, half bloods, and so on
should get FIRST PRIORITY. If a full blood and a 1/32 blood both apply for housing the
full blood should get it first. I know many people will think this is wrong, but facts are
facts, people. The full bloods are our last remaining link to our past. These people's blood
is not mixed, it is pure Osage. I think that is important.”
“My idea of what’s an Osage is somebody that goes to the church, helps out at the
Inlonshka and wants to learn the language. And we’ve got a tribe of around 18-20,000
Osages, and we don’t have but 180 that want to learn the language. Then you look at all
these people that say they’re Osage, but they never help out drum keepers, and then you
never see them in a church, you hardly ever see them at a hand-game, but yet they’re
wanting blood quantum, and if they want a blood quantum, they ought to practice what
we do. But instead just a few of us are trudging on trying to keep it going. To be an
Osage, you have to have 3 things. You have to have land base, then you have to have
language, then you also have to have culture.”
“I would propose that mixed-bloods (of whatever degree is decided on) would be
required to register in person at Inlonshka every 4 years between the ages of 21 and 50 or
55, unless serving in the armed services abroad (or perhaps Osages living out of the
county?).”
“Well, maybe if you want to vote you need to walk up and be able to say who you are,
what district you are from and where you live in the Osage.”
“And then you need representatives from your districts from like Fairfax, Hominy and
Pawhuska. We need to know what’s going on in each community. We look at the three
communities’ support there, which is Osage County, Pawhuska is doing pretty good
compared to, say, Fairfax.”
“Voting for representatives to our government should be by district, each district, not just
the three villages should be represented, that is California, Bartlesville, Oklahoma City,
etc.”
9
“But what I’ve very concerned about is, the strength of the Osage people is built on three
districts: Gray Horse, Hominy, and Pawhuska. Each one of us in this room in some form
can tie back to a district… What I will be suggesting in writing later is that when we
come to vote, that we register in each district from which we came from, from which
we’re a part of. You go back to your district and you register and vote in that district for
that district’s representation in the government. Each district would have an equal
number of candidates. Hominy votes for its Hominy representative. Gray Horse votes
for its representative, Pawhuska votes for its representative. All of our people can come
back to a district. We know about-I’m from Pawhuska district-I know the Pawhuska
people. And they know me… Each district would have that responsibility to send their
best into the government as councilmen as president or whatever. But I behoove you to
seriously consider bringing us into that district which is similar to precincts. Get that
process in here somewhere so that we will not be influenced by voting blocks that would
send people in there that we know don’t know us, nor care about our district.”
“All elected officials should be elected at large. We live in a free society now. I know it
has been many years the Osage has lived in a non-democratic government, with no
checks or balances. Lets not go back to the past. All Osages are important.”
“Sometimes limit by geographical boundary encourages too much introspection. To lead,
and more importantly to accept that position, cannot be controlled by a line on the
ground. If we are in fact to increase our membership, it may be impossible to elect our
leaders "at large" only within the confines of Osage County. There are many qualified
people and to limit their participation because of county boundaries may cost our Nation
the best qualified person. After all, if I live in Sedan KS, am I disqualified from a
potential position? Nation building is tough, and our Nation is no longer confined to
Osage County.”
“Shame on you for trying to get into the mineral estate money. If you wanted to be a
shareholder then your ancestors should have signed on the rolls, just like mine did. Even
if they had to claim one-quarter blood Osage when they were three quarter or fullblood,
just like mine did. I waited my turn as did my ancestors before me. I don’t see a fair way
to write you in now. The government we have already is the government I want!”
“I will one day be a shareholder, when it is my turn, because my family held on to their
headrights. Those who gave their headrights away have no right to change the existing
government or any part of the mineral estate. Only the shareholders should be allowed to
vote. Our government should not be changed to suit those who have not maintained their
connection to the tribe.”
10
References
Osage Background Readings
Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1850-1935. Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office.
Beaulieu, D. L (1984). Curly Hair and Big Feet: Physical Anthropology and the
Implementation of Land Allotment on the White Earth Chippewa Reservation. American
Indian Quarterly 8(4): 281-314.
Burns, L. F. (2004). A History of the Osage People. Tuscaloosa: The University of
Alabama Press.
Mathews, J.J. (1932). Wah’Kon-Tah: The Osage and the White Man’s Road. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.
McAuliffe, D. (1994). Bloodland: A Family Story of Oil, Greed and Murder on the
Osage Reservation. San Francisco: Council Oak Books.
Rollings, W. H. (2004). Unaffected by the Gospel: Osage Resistance to the Christian
Invasion 1673-1906: A Cultural Victory. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Warrior, R. (2005). Democratic Vistas of the Osage Constitutional Crisis. In The People
and the Word (49-93). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Wilson, T. P. (1985). The Underground Reservation: Osage Oil. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Osage Background Web Resources
Osage Nation - http://www.osagetribe.com/
Osage Nation Government Reform - http://www.osagetribe.com/reformindex.html
Unofficial Osage Nation Website - http://www.osagenation.net/
Osage Forum - http://osageforum.com/
Osage Shareholders Association - http://www.osageshareholders.org/
11
Other Citizenship Resources
Barcham, M. (2000) Constructing the Politics of Indigeneity. In D. Ivison, P. Patton, and
W. Sanders (Eds) Political Theory and Rights of Indigenous People. New York,
Cambridge University Press.
Biolsi, T. (1995). The Birth of the Reservation: Making the Modern Individual Among
the Lakota. American Ethnologist 22(1): 28-53.
Brownell, M.S. (2000). Who is an Indian? Searching for an Answer to the Question at the
Core of Federal Indian Law. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Fall/Winter
(34): Pp. 275-319.
Dickson-Gilmore, E.J. (1999). Iati-Onkwehonwe: Blood Quantum, Membership and the
Politics of Exclusion in Kahnawake. Citizenship studies 3(1): 27-43.
Garroutte, E. M. (2003). Real Indians: Identity and the Survival of Native America.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hamill, J. (2003). Show Me Your CDIB. American Behavioral Scientist 47(3):267-282.
Johnston, J. (2003). Resisting a Genetic Identity; The Black Seminoles and Genetic Tests
of Ancestry. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 31(2): 262-271.
Meyer, M. (1999). American Indian Blood Quantum Requirements. In Matsumoto, V and
B. Allmendinger, (Eds). Over the Edge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Povinelli, E. A. (2002). The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the
Making of Australian Multiculturalism. Durham: Duke University Press.
Simpson, A. (2000). Paths Toward a Mohawk Nation: Narratives of Citizenship and
Nationhood in Kahnawake. In Eric Lemont (Eds.) Political Theory and the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples (Pp. 113-136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simpson, A. (2003). To the Reserve and Back Again: Kahnawake Mohawk Narratives of
Self, Home and Nation. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, McGill
University.
Strong, P. T. and B. Van Winkle (1996). “Indian Blood”: Reflections on the Reckoning
and Refiguring of Native North American Identity. Cultural Anthropology 11(4): 547576.
Sturm, C. (2002). Blood Politics: Race Culture and Identity in the Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma. Berkeley: University of California Press.
12
Tallbear, K. (2003). DNA, Blood, and Radicalizing the Tribe. Wicazo SA Review Spring:
81-106.
Vaughan, A. T. (1982). From White Man to Redskin: Changing Anglo-American
Perceptions of the American Indian. The American Historical Review 87(4): 917-953
Wood, P. K (2003). Aboriginal/indigenous citizenship: an introduction. Citizenship
Studies 7(4):371-379.
Teaching Notes
Issues/Topics case includes:
1. American Indian citizenship and sovereignty
2. The power and danger inherent in racial identity
3. Community based reform
Learning Objectives:
1. To introduce students to the complications surrounding American Indian
citizenship, including issues of blood quantum, descent, culture, and residence
2. To understand the sovereign rights of tribes to determine their own citizenship
and government structure
3. To explore the process of community-based decision making
4. Teach students basic research and problem-solving skills
Intended Audience: Depending upon the issues emphasized, this case is suitable for use
in courses in anthropology, sociology, political science, Native American studies, and
public administration. Early testing has suggested that this case is suitable for non-Indian
students as long as a proper background in provided, particularly about the complications
associated with tribal citizenship today. While this case was written for college and
graduate students it might be possible to use it with upper division high school students.
Implementation:
Depending on the amount of time allowed for this teaching case you might want students
to complete one or more of the following research assignments. You can have the
students present their findings to their group, to the class, or in the form of a written
paper.
1. Interview family members and/or friends about what it means to be a citizen.
2. Interview family members and/or friends about what blood quantum means to
them (Native students only).
3. Research the history of Osage citizenship and how it changed over time. (Other
tribes can also be researched.)
4. Research the treaty relations between the Osage and the United States, paying
particular attention to where the right to determine citizenship came from. (Other
tribes can also be researched.)
13
5. Research the idea of blood quantum and where it came from.
6. Research how the science of genetics is changing ideas of blood quantum.
7. Research different ways in which various nations (tribal and non-tribal) are
determining citizenship; brainstorm alternatives.
8. Research the structure of state and tribal referendum questions.
9. Write a short essay on your own lineage and what heritage(s) is most powerful in
your life. How is belonging to that group or groups determined?
Role of Facilitator: As the facilitator, you are responsible for setting the scene of Osage
tribal government reform for your students. Using the background information within the
case and the additional resources provided you could lecture to your students and/or
assign further readings/research. Following are two options for teaching this case.
Option 1: Once students have read the case they should be broken into groups and given
an allotted time of at least thirty minutes to write the referendum questions on citizenship.
The more time allotted the more students are likely to explore the various perspectives in
depth and discover the complicated nature of the task. When the allotted time is up
students should present their question, discussing at least some of the following issues:
1. What did you learn from this exercise?
2. What were the hardest issues to include in the referendum questions?
3. How were the ideas of citizenship presented in the testimony different from or
similar to your own understandings of citizenship?
4. How do other Nations determine their citizenship and why might this be
different?
5. What problems were associated with having a blood requirement?
6. Why might a blood requirement be so important to certain people?
7. What does culture have to do with citizenship?
8. What does residence have to do with citizenship?
Option 2: This case could also be used to facilitate role-play, which would require at
least 50 minutes of in-class time. Ideally the case would be given to students before class
and there would be multiple class periods for students to develop their parts, complete
research, act out assigned roles in a community meeting situation, write referendum
questions, and hold a final vote. Once students have the background you will break them
into four groups: 1) the Osage government reform commission (OGRC), 2) community
members against a blood requirement, 3) those in favor of a blood requirement, and 4)
those that have other ideas about how citizenship ought to be determined.
Building on the quotes and other information provided in the case study, the students will
need to develop a strategy for how they are going to push their agenda at the community
meeting. Encourage each student to take on a different role within their group. Be sure
to tell the commission group (OGRC) how long the community meeting will last so they
can plan how they are going to organize the meeting.
14
Ideally each student would complete a two page position paper, allowing them time to
develop their role. Whether in writing or in small groups there are important several
issues each group needs to discuss, which have been outlined below.
Group 1: OGRC
The primary goal of your group is to figure out how you are going to run an organized
community meeting where all voices are heard. Be sure to pay careful attention to each
comment because you will have to write two to three questions about citizenship to be
included on a short referendum that will determine what will go into the Osage
constitution.
Below are several questions your group will need to address before the community
meeting.
1. How are you going to structure the meeting in order to allow for as many
comments as possible?
2. Are you going to provide a short introduction about the Osage government reform
so that all community members know what this reform is about?
3. How are you going to determine who can vote in the upcoming referendum
election? Should any limitations be put on the initial vote or should all people who
currently have a Certificate Degree of Indian Blood (CDIB) for the Osage tribe be
eligible to vote?
4. How are you going to let the community know about the meeting? What, if any,
food are you going to serve during this meeting?
5. What is the best way to structure referendum questions? Some outside research
may be necessary to see what state and tribal referendum questions look like. You
will have to write the citizenship component of the constitution based on these
questions, so they will need to be specific.
Group 2: Opposition to a Blood Requirement
The primary goal of your group is to convince the commission and the other community
members that citizenship should be based on lineal decent from the 1906 roll and not
include any blood requirements. The 1906 roll is currently used for Osage (CDIB) cards
by the BIA and is therefore thought to be the most inclusive roll. Some of the members
of your group have a low blood quantum and some live outside the reservation, but you
are all united in your desire to go solely by the 1906 role, avoiding any further
restrictions on membership. After going through the quotes and choosing a perspective
slightly different from the others in your group you should answer the following
questions from this position.
1. What is your position and what is the major argument for this position?
2. What questions could the referendum ask that would cover the citizenship issues
important to you?
3. Is Osage citizenship reform needed, why or why not?
4. Why is lineal descent from the 1906 roll the best way to determine membership?
5. What are the problems with including a blood requirement within the
constitution?
15
6. Should a residency or cultural requirement be included in the constitution, why or
why not.
Group 3: Support for a Blood Requirement
The primary goal of your group is to insist that citizenship requires at least some Osage
blood, i.e. descent from those who were biologically Osage. However, everyone in this
group should have a different understanding of how this can be accomplished. For some
it means that a person just needs one drop of blood (one ancestor, no matter how far
back) to be considered Osage. In order to accomplish this they would like to see the
words “Osage blood” in the constitution. This would allow for lawsuits removing people
from the citizenship roll if it was proven they did not have any Osage blood.
Another approach within the group will be to use an earlier roll, such as the 1901 roll,
which came about before reservation land was opened for allotment and thus would have
fewer fraudulent people listed on the roll.
Others in the group will be in favor of setting a minimum blood quantum. However there
are different ideas about how high blood quantum should be set. Some will argue for
setting it high at 1/4th while others want it lower, around 1/32nd or 1/128th
After going through the quotes in your section and choosing a perspective different from
the others in your group you should answer the following questions from this position.
1. What is your position and what is the major argument for this position?
2. What questions could the referendum ask that would cover the citizenship issues
important to you?
3. Is Osage citizenship reform needed, why or why not?
4. Why is lineal descent from the 1906 roll not the best way to determine
membership?
5. What are the benefits of including a blood requirement within the constitution?
6. Should a residency or cultural requirement be included in the constitution, why or
why not.
Group 4: Other ideas on citizenship requirements
This group represents a wide variety of other perspectives concerning how citizenship
ought to be determined. These perspectives range from a residency requirement to
having membership based on cultural involvement to wanting no change at all. At the end
of the case are a series of quotes taken from actual Osage community meetings. After
going through the quotes and choosing a perspective slightly different from the others in
your group you should answer the following questions from your position.
1. What is your position and what is the major argument for this position?
2. What questions could the referendum ask that would cover the citizenship issues
important to you?
16
3. Is Osage citizenship reform needed, why or why not?
4. Why is only lineal descent from the 1906 roll not the best way to determine
membership?
5. What are the problems with including a blood requirement within the
constitution?
6. Should a residency or cultural requirement be included in the constitution, why or
why not.
Referendum: After the community meeting group #1 (OGRC) should be allowed time to
create a series of referendum citizenship questions based on the feedback they received at
the meeting. Make sure they understand that they must keep these questions short and
simple. Once questions are created all the students should vote on what requirements
will be put into the constitution. Give the students a choice of either voting based on their
role in the community meeting or on whose argument was the most persuasive.
At the end of this exercise, or as needed throughout the process, you should ask students
to discuss the following issues:
1. Do you think that perspective was portrayed realistically? How might it have
been played differently?
2. What did you learn from having to play that role?
3. What did you learn from the exercise as a whole?
4. How were the ideas of citizenship presented in the testimony different from or
similar to your own understandings of citizenship?
5. How do other Nations determine their citizenship and why might this be
different?
6. Why is lineal descent from the 1906 roll such a powerful idea?
7. Why might a blood requirement be so important to certain people?
8. What does culture have to do with citizenship?
9. What does residence have to do with citizenship?
10. What made the community meeting so difficult?
11. Why was it hard to come up with the referendum questions?
Field Testing: This case has been taught to one group of 22 students who, prior to the
semester, were not familiar with indigenous citizenship. On their evaluation forms most
felt that the case study provided enough background information about the Osage
situation, but that the earlier readings in the semester on indigenous citizenship were very
important to the success of the case. Students had read and discussed: Beaulieu 1984,
Simpson 2000, and Barcham 2000 prior to completion of the case. Other changes
suggested by the students have been incorporated here, including shortening the position
paper, adding more information about each position, and further explaining the 1906 roll
and the problems that led to the reform. Many of the students reported learning the
challenges associated with democracy and the complexities of indigenous citizenship.
The community meeting role-play was one of the better class sessions of the semester
with students highly entertained and engaged.
17
18