e-mails to Congress 2008/2009(Nov.)

Let it be known!

During Osage Nation Emergency session Monday November 5, 2009, Congressman Doug Revard made a reactionary statement that the people voted this Congress in to adjust the Osage Nation “Budget”.           

Beginning with the statement that he, “had never been accused of working long hours”, before.   He apparently forgot the long hours he put in while working on the Constitution Committee.  

He was reacting to a comment made by Congresswoman Debra Atterberry, commenting on a transparency issue and by some members having a closed-door meeting to decrease the Executive operating budget.

Please let it be known - that the Osage People did NOT vote Congress in to single handedly control the Nations budget promises.     Granted, the budget was and is a concern of the peoples, but not to the point of personal Control with bad judgment, and while hurting the very people that elected them to Congress.

Doug Revard and Jerri Jean Branstetter were appointed by the 31st Minerals Council and by that same Chief to be on the committee to consider and address the peoples concerns and to provide and support a Constitution for the new Government, not to abridge the Executive or Judicial Branches Annual budgets. What amazes me is why both are not protecting that very Constitution they took an oath to protect, unfortunately they are instead following the manipulations’ of others in Congress.

The majority of this Congress is making decisions as if they were the Council of old and has used the “transparency” conflict for an “excuse” to justify their infractions and platitudes to suit their own transgressions, while abusing their own rules and that is getting old.

They manipulate the meaning of transparency and “oversight” requirements while overriding all the Chiefs vetoes.   As they override the Chief’s veto’s they do not explain in an open forum their individual reasons for their action and the people have the right to know.   Mark Simms openly opposes the reading of the Chiefs veto during the open session.

They continually put themselves above the Chiefs executive power.

The majority of this Congress is out of control, and their continued refusal to listen and cooperate with the people including the executive branch is a direct slap in the face to the people.  

People they do not care!

Sandra Akins ,

Concerned Osage Member

Dear Congresswoman Edwards,

There are many curiosities’ that I have been wanting to inquire about for many months and recent meetings proposed by Speaker Mason.   I am asking you because I know I will get an answer that I can trust.

Open meetings and executive sessions.

I noticed that Speaker Mason has scheduled a 9^th Special Session for January 7^th, 2008, for Congressional Internal concerns.   This is vague and notwithstanding of the Congressional Rules approved up by this same Congress.  It suggests   that some congress members have a personal agenda and want to control Congress vote which is an abuse of power.     I witnessed in 2007 that Speaker Mason supported some congress members to ignore and abuse these rules.   These actions are NOT in standing with their oaths and promises, and the people should know what is being at the risk of the people.

These may be strong words, but I believe is necessary.

In calling this meeting, my other question is I can only hope this is not the time to change any committees, as I understand in your rules that you established this to take place in March of the following year.

I have more quierys, but I wanted to get this to you before your meetings Monday.   I will send you more of my concerns later, i.e. congress budgets, allocations to programs that do nothing (museum and culture), American Legion, these are only a couple, please know I am reviewing the budgets for my questions.

This is Sandra Akins, 405 Senior Circle, Pawhuska; I have some questions and comments. Please keep in mind I am not a lawyer and consider me only as a concerned citizen.

I attended the previous council and committee meetings and reported the truth in my osageforum.com web site.  I have received numerous requests to continue.

Rules Committee:
I am very concerned that you are still considering closed meetings.
During the Government Reform process, this topic was and still is a real concern of the people where they do not have the opportunity to voice or be included of the decisions made on their behalf.  The only acceptable closed meeting would be employee problems.   The closed meeting with the tribe’s attorneys has and still is unacceptable to the majority of the people, I hear their complaints about the previous so-called Osage Tribal choices and payments schedule.  The people believe they have the right to be present at these negotiations and meetings with attorneys for the people’s benefits, when they do not have a say, after all, it is their money too!

Personal note:  I believe there are circumstances where some litigations meetings that need to closed.  

Congress Salaries:
The people have expressed to me about the salaries - $56,000.00 annually, but   the most problematic is the $750.00 monthly stipend that brings the dollar amount of $65,000.00 annually.  Raymond Red Corn told me that your health insurance and other expenses come from these funds, granted you are not “employees” but couldn’t you have the health insurance cost taken out of your salaries?    My concern on this is, you also have a separate budget travel and expenses, which is a high potential for abuse and should be a concern.
I would like your comments please.

ARTICLE III - MEMBERSHIP

Section 4.

Please consider my opinion on the Adopted question
.
The sentence with; including application and appeal procedures, loss of membership] – drop the - and the [adoption of members]. This was addressed during the US courts in the 1800 and 1900’s which is noted in the 1906 and other Legislation decisions. 

 Laws are written to confuse many people – is “Simplicity” a dirty word in all this legal jargon.
 
If this part of the membership section stays then perhaps a definition would be in order.    This leads me to other considerations – For the matter of misinterpretations, I would like to see definitions included on matters of possible litigations and areas where there may be cause to question between legal minds.

Will there be any inclusions of protection for those Osage members living outside the reservation and in states all over the US?      How will the Constitution and Congress protect those Osages?   This question has been in my thoughts for years; I believe they must be included – simple as that.
Please give me your thoughts on this question.

If you wish to set down and discuss my ideas, concerns and thoughts, please let me know, I have a busy week this week and I know you are short on time.