Counterspin

Go nowhere politics and Indian Lesbian Love

By Phil Hayworth

Pioneer Press

Fort Jones, CA

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

page W4, column 2

A drive down south through Shasta County and past the Shasta Dam reservoir illustrates the mess we - that is the people of the North State - are in: there's no water in the dam.

Barely a drop. Shasta is so bone dry that pleasure boats are tied up and that seaplane that you can see from the bridge is nearly dry docked on land. The lesson is simple: dams at one time were the answer, but long hot summers and the unquenchable thirst of a growing population and big agriculture in the Central Valley prove that dams can't do the job.

Instead, underground storage is the answer. But California's Senate last week rejected the Democrat-led $9.8 billion water bond - a bill slightly different from the one proposed by the Governor, because they fear that the Dem-backed bill will shortchange money for dams.

Meanwhile, the deadline for getting the bill - any bill - on the Nov. 4 ballot was Sunday and, as of this writing, it didn't look like it would make it. That's a shame because we need to do something now, not tomorrow.

Both bills included $3 billion for storage - possibly including dams - and money for conservation, recycling and ecosystem improvements in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta where most of Shasta's water goes.

But there's at least one key difference, reports the Sacramento Bee newspaper:

Democrats want to be able to oversee water-storage spending yearly. Republicans, fearing that Democrats will pull the money for dams, are seeking a continuous appropriation, which is included in the governor's plan. Now, it looks like the Assembly and the Senate are stalemated - and we have only our ineffective political system to blame. However, some lawmakers believe that, in reality, they may have all of next week to strike a water deal. The Democratic plan was given an informational hearing Monday. No vote was scheduled, but what it means is that the measure didn't make it to the ballot. It could get onto another ballot soon. My question is: why do they wait so long?

Now, onto something completely different.

As Californians contemplate a proposition this year that could once again ban gay marriage, one Oregon Indian tribe has decided that Adam and Steve are alright with them. The Coquille Indian Tribe on the southern Oregon coast has adopted a law recognizing same-sex marriage at the request of a lesbian couple on the reservation. The tribe is the first to sanction such marriages. The Navajo and Cherokee tribes, for example, prohibit same-sex marriages, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. It's really a ground breaking situation. But I highly doubt that other tribes will follow suit. But if they do, I suspect you won't see a great move to the reservations by those of Indian descent just to get hitched. I'm not sure how Modoc, Klamath, Karuk, Hoopa, Yahooskin and Shasta Indians view homosexuality, but I sure like to know. If a reader out there has some thoughts, make sure to zap them off to the Pioneer Press.

In the Hawaiian culture, for example, it was always seen as something fairly normal. Indeed, the priests and keepers of the ancient knowledge were very often gay. And in ancient times, they were also the ones who taught martial arts. So, if you made a snide remark back then, you can bet they'd open a can of whip-butt. Meanwhile, 25 year-old Kitzen Branting said the reason she pushed the tribal law was to prove a point, not to get the benefits. But Oregon and federal law still ban gay marriages. No matter. The tribes are sovereign entities. And even state law won't apply. Oregon voters amended the state Constitution in 2004 to prohibit gay marriage. But with its sovereignty recognized by the federal government, the tribe is not bound by the state Constitution.

To comment, email: presscomment@yahoo.com

The publisher grants permission for the article to be reprinted or distributed.