If the United States was run by the Chairman of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, you'd be expected to pay for his election, travel and campaign expenses. For his re-election.
Imagine that you were a Bush or Clinton supporter. That you could use taxpayer monies to allow you to fly, travel and hotel at every place your opponents might be speaking, while forcing their challengers to cough up the money to go on the campaign trail out of their own pocket?
Unless I am mistaken, that is what is happening in the current electoral process for the Citizen Potawatomi Nation.
I am a member of Citizen Potawatomi Nation, and that is what I have heard. That the incumbent Chairman, who has held the post for the last 24 years has all of his travel expenses paid by our tribe, while challengers are forced to 'pay their own way'.
But, you might say, surely challengers could raise funds to pay their way? What if the incumbent essentially owned all of the American newspapers, and therefore could campaign therein for free, while limiting their challengers access to voting parity and fundraising? That is what the Citizen Potawatomi Nation is facing this year, but they don't know it, because their so-called newspaper (privately owned essentially by the present Chairman, but billed as the 'People's Voice) and paid for out of tribal funds, does not allow for editorial or opinion content unless it shines favourably upon the present Chairman.
Wouldn't it be easy, if there were no term limits, to have an incumbent rule for over 24 years, if you had THAT set-up? Imagine how suspicious it might be if every four years for the last 24 years, your challengers fortunately got hauled into tribal jail for one offense or another?
From what I have heard from multiple sources, all campaign meetings begin with slideshows of our supposed tribal accomplishments. How is this not a manipulation of the electoral process? In presidential debates, are our incumbent leaders allowed to take all morning giving slideshows of their personal accomplishments?
Any intelligent person will see that this is inherently wrong. That it is corrupt.
There is no way to create political change other than to vote in such large quantities that the voting is not 'close' and cannot be misintrpreted.
Twenty four years of change might mean something to our present 24 year Chairman John 'Rocky' Barrett as a campaign slogan, but it makes no sense to the common Citizen Potawatomi Nation member. Twenty four years of the same corruption is not change. With these advantages, any political party, probably the one you hate the most would have now been in power for over 24 years.
You do not have to have a political agenda to recognize right and wrong.
I have recently received an invitation to Jackson, CA for a Northern California regional meeting. It was sent from Citizen Potawatomi headquarters in Oklahoma (where the Chairman resides, and obviously from a list from our 'newspaper'). It says nothing about it being a campaign event, yet it is.
I have a real hard time putting up with things I can smell as 'as something bad'.
My 11 year old son has been following my interest in this, among other of my writings, has a baseball game the day of the non-identified 'campaign' day. I am a divorced parent, and hate to miss any of my children's activities (and bragging, he is a great leftie, pitches like a pro, and is beautiful to watch when he's running and his long hair is flying)
But what he told me was that he wanted me to go to that regional 'meeting'. He said he understood that I wanted to be with him at his game, but that me going to this meeting, and possibly speaking, was 'doing something more important for him'.
How can you argue with that?