From Good to Great?

Baker has nominated a new treasurer.   In an all-employee email, since forwarded to Cherokee Truth, Baker said he wants Lacey Horn to replace Callie Catcher.  In the email, Baker tells us that she has a bachelors and masters degree from SMU and her previous experience includes a four-year stint as senior auditor with Chicago’s KPMG.  She is currently a CPA in Vian, her hometown. She graduated from Vian High School in 2000.  According to an online directory of businesses,

“Lacey A Horn Cpa, Pllc in Vian, OK is a private company categorized under Accounting and Bookkeeping Services. Our records show it was established in and incorporated in Oklahoma. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of $35,000 and employs a staff of approximately 1.”

Callie Catcher has been the treasurer of the Cherokee Nation since 2004.  Prior to that, she was controller of Dover Resources, where she was responsible for all financial functions for the international manufacturing group.  Dover’s revenues last quarter were $2.2 billion dollars.  That’s just in one quarter.  That works out to almost $9 billion in revenue per year.  That’s basically NINE times bigger than the Cherokee Nation.

When Catcher was confirmed, Baker voted for her to become Treasurer.  Joe Crittenden said “I have every confidence in her as a professional.”  Crittenden’s Adair County council cohort Jackie Bob Martin said, “We’ve best Secretary/Treasurer of any Indian tribe.”

So how has she done since then?  Well, the Cherokee Nation has won 10 straight awards for excellence in financial reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association for the Cherokee Nation’s “financial transparency and full accountability by exceeding the minimum requirements of generally accepted accounting principles demonstrated through comprehensive annual reports.”

That means the Cherokee Nation has done really well since Catcher became Treasurer.

Baker says one of his first orders of business is to have Horn audit Catcher’s work. 

So to sum up, Baker wants to replace a Cherokee who wins awards for financial excellence and has overseen finances for a multi-billion dollar company... with quite possibly the best CPA in Vian. 

Election Limbo Part II, Day 5: Predictions Based on Truth (but predictions/guesses all the same)

We are kind of used to early voting, which Cherokee Nation Election Commission calls, oxymoronically, In-Person Absentee Voting.  That all happens before the election.  Today, we’ve entered the brave new world of late voting, which occurs when the rules for an election change after Election Day.  Only in the Cherokee Nation, right?

Well, there’s been a big fuss by both candidates about what this means, and if it’s fair.  Today, we’re trying to figure out how much it will matter, if at all.

We have no official numbers, but our reliable sources say the election commission was not that busy today.  Nowhere near what it was like for a typical day of early voting.  According to the Election Commission, about 1100 people voted in early voting for the September election, in four days of walk-in voting.  That’s 275 folks a day. 

So let’s guess about half that today, just to be safe: maybe 150. 

We know from the June election that Baker won the Tahlequah walk-in voting 609 to 427 (which of course is why he and Crittenden-- S. John Crittenbaker-- probably wanted it reopened after they took a close look at the turnout)

That’s basically a 60-40 split. 

A 60-40 split for 150 voters is 90 for Baker and 60 for Smith.  So, if Baker gains 30 votes a day on Smith, for five days, he’ll be 150 votes closer to (or further ahead of) Smith than he was before Baker asked for the rules to change.  That’s not an insignificant number, but it’s hardly earth-shattering.  

If Baker does gain 150 votes here, how many does he really gain overall?  Because while his plan was only to allow Cherokees in Oklahoma to vote, the election commission said that to be fair to all Cherokees, absentee ballots could be turned in late too.  And those tend to favor Smith.  Using the original count numbers, Smith got about 56% of mail in ballots, to Bakers 44%. 

So for every 100 late absentee ballots that come in, Smith would stand to gain 12 votes on Baker.  Let’s just guess and say 200 total come in.  So Smith nets 24, and Bakers gain is down to 126 votes.  Finally, there’s the freedmen vote, but only the freedmen who haven’t already voted and aren’t already included in the 8787 voters that scared Baker on Sunday and had him asking for the rules to change.

Smith, Baker and everyone else seem to think most of those will go to Baker, but how many will that be?  We’ve heard there are 1000 or so Freedmen voters.  How many more will vote that haven’t already?  200?  300?

So here’s our guess, based on the facts at hand.  Baker nets about 150 more votes than Smith on walk-ins.  Baker nets 300 more than Smith freedmen votes that haven’t been counted.  And Smith gains 30 or so on Baker with late absentee ballots. That means Baker's maneuvering to change the election rules after the fact might gain him 120 votes or so.  The freedmen that he already has in his back pocket are another few hundred.  So a best case scenario for Baker is he picks up 420 votes from where he was on Saturday.  Is that enough to ease his fears?  Considering that the voting was so close in June, he has to be at least happier.

Keep in mind, this is all guess work, but based on the known facts that we have on hand.  Feel free to give your own guesses, but please use facts to back them up.

8 Days before the new election: Is this Blog Post Illegal?

Some of our readers pointed to an article in the Tahlequah Daily Press the other day that deserves the attention of Cherokee Truth, and we would’ve got to it a lot faster if it weren’t for that pesky election- may-not-happen thing that came up.

The Tahlequah Daily Press (TDP) took issue with the Smith campaign for using its stories on two separate mailers, saying the mailers ‘may mislead voters’ into thinking the TDP endorses a candidate (that seems like a stretch). The TDP apparently did a story on this particular round of mailers because their name was on it.  The TDP blamed Smith for using different words in the headline than the Press originally did, and said it might violate copyright law to do so.

But, interestingly, they did NOT deny the truth to the actual stories Smith used, which said Baker and his family have been paid more than $1 million over a period of several years for work they’ve done for Cherokee Nation’s housing group, and Baker saying he didn’t think it would be a bad idea for Cherokee folks to come back home to Tahlequah to vote, even if they lived far away.  

If the TDP went so far as to get a lawyer, we’re sure they would do something if they had a good case, and since Baker did the same thing recently with a Muskogee Phoenix article, we’ll assume that either he’ll be hearing from their lawyers. But more likely, it’s a situation the TDP just didn’t like and used their printing press to make a point.

Earlier today, the Press went a little further on this subject, and you can find out more on their facebook page.

They said "We have NOT filed a lawsuit against anyone, nor have we threatened to. Do not take the word of partisan commenters looking to grind their own axes; check the courthouse records yourself! :)"

Yes, that smiley face does belong to the TDP!  TDP even says a couple of Baker folks (not Baker himself, according to an earlier post) were the ones spreading the lawsuit rumors.  Stop already!  Thank goodness there just a few days until the new election, and then everything will be over, right?   Right?

16 Days Until the New Election: Barney Frank Edition

News on Wednesday is that the smart folks at HUD can’t figure out what the law is, so they are holding up $33 million of housing funding that was set to hit the Cherokee Nation’s bank account.  HUD told the Tulsa World they had “suspended disbursements to the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma while we seek additional guidance on an unclear statute involving the Freedmen. The funding can be restored once this issue is resolved.”

Cherokee Nation Attorney General weighed in with a strongly worded letter, telling HUD that if they don’t understand the law, it doesn’t mean the Cherokees don’t get their money.  It might just mean that the folks at HUD are dumb.  Channel 6 posted Hammons’ letter, and for us was the part where she said: “If Congress wanted to deny funding to the Cherokee Nation, it would have done so…. Congress made a choice that did not side with a particular party, but instead maintained the status quo until the tribal courts decided the matter.”

So just to be clear to the folks at HUD:  Congress could’ve denied funding to the Cherokee people, but they didn’t.  So go ahead and make that check payable to Cherokee Nation, Acting Principal Chief S. Joe Crittenden (APCSJC), and don’t even think about back dating it.

Speaking of APCSJC, we heard from him on this issue, and both candidates as well, in a Smoot article in the Muskogee Phoenix.  Crittenden told us everything’s going to be all right, he’s got it under control, which is good to know.

Baker said it’s all Smith’s fault, saying he could’ve kept congress from choosing sides.  Of course, Hammons says that’s what the law says already, and Crittenden apparently thinks so too, because he says the Nation is complying with the law and he’ll get our funding.

Smith challenges Baker to fight for Cherokees-- and that the Freedmen, who publicly support Baker, are the only people actively seeking to cut services to the Cherokee Nation if they can’t win their legal arguments (or the constitutional votes of the Cherokee people). 

Congressman Barney Frank, (D) Mass.

And of course, this wouldn’t be the Barney Frank edition of the Cherokee Truth if the Massachusetts congressman didn’t weigh in, because, after all, this is a big issue up in Boston.   Frank, according to Indian Country Today, told HUD not to part with a penny for the Cherokee Nation.

Of course, Frank is an expert on the legal intricacies of this case because…?  If you are not familiar with Frank’s track record, google him up.  For instance, last year a tribal leader in California said one of Frank’s proposals was ‘the biggest threat to Indian gaming in 20 years.'

We’ve had a little fun with this, but it’s not really a laughing matter.  There’s $33 million that’s supposed to be heading to Tahlequah to pay employees and help Cherokees.  As much faith as we have in APCSJC, that’s a whole lot of rental assistance, so we hope that gets worked out soon.

18 Days Until the New Election: Marilyn Manson Edition

Last week, we talked about how some people seem to think the freedmen court decision might alter the election with the overall perception being that it would benefit Baker more than Smith if freedmen folks couldn't vote.  

Well, while we were all celebrating the Cherokee National Holiday, freedmen were suing the pants off of the Cherokee Nation.  On Friday night, about the time some of us were loading up on more funnel cake than anyone can really justify, the freedmen asked a federal judge to fire all Cherokee Nation employees, close the health clinics, and terminate the Cherokee Nation.  

That, my friends, is a little harder to swallow than the last Indian taco when the powwow shuts down.  We understand the freedmen not being excited about getting booted out of the tribe via constitutional amendment/supreme court action.

But it takes a special kind of person to pull the ol’ "if I can’t have you no one can" move and the freedmen are basically telling us that if they can’t be part of the Cherokee Nation, then rest of us should just swallow a hand grenade.  And that tastes even worse than leftover powwow food.


They also asked the judge to stop the election, or at least let them vote, and there will apparently be a hearing on September 20th to decide what happens.  


Does this mean that our election will be postponed?  Stopped?  Or will the freedmen get their way and eliminate all our funding and our tribal recognition with the stroke of a judge’s pen?

19 Days until the New Election-Missing Anything?

The Cherokee National Holiday has come and gone and with all the differences between this year’s holiday and the usual ones, there is one thing that the media has picked up on:  The Cherokee Nation’s annual report was not distributed at this year's Holiday festivities.

The Tahlequah Daily Press and the Muskogee Phoenix both had stories on the lack of the report, which has become a staple of the Holiday over the years.  It usually includes things like contact numbers for programs and council reps, budget information and of course some feel good stories about the Nation. We do know what the annual reports look like for the past ten years or so, because they are posted on-line.  You should check them out if you haven’t because, again, there is a lot of truth and public information out there and it can dispel a lot of rumors.  The Cherokee Truth, if you will.

But back to the point: APCSJC has issued an order saying that the reports are NOT to go out this year at the Holiday, because, well, Crittenden is the Chief and he says so.  Crittenden points out that the report contains messages from Smith and Grayson (we’ll have to take his word for it) and they aren’t chiefs right now. All true. 

But in 2007, no one complained when outgoing council members like Taylor Keen and Phyllis Yargee, among others, were featured in the report.  Also, all the numbers in the reports are retrospective, from the year before. So, the information for this year's annual report to the people is from the year when Smith and Grayson were in office.

Acting Speaker of the Council Cara Cowan Watts (ASCCCW) isn’t happy about it though. She told the Muskogee Phoenix:  “The Cherokee Nation Annual Report has traditionally been passed out at Cherokee National Holiday for at least the past eight years.  By not following through with the report at Cherokee National Holiday, I believe Acting Chief Crittenden is violating the spirit of the Tribal Freedom of Information Act.”

Smith doesn’t like it either, saying “It’s understandable they feel like Bill John Baker and his friends are trying to keep information from the Cherokee people.”

Crittenden says he thinks the information is good ‘for the history books’ and that its up to the guy who gets elected September 24 to make the decision on what to do with the reports.  Until then, it looks like the Cherokee Nation has spent a bunch of money to NOT inform its citizens about what is going on.

We’d like to see a copy, just to see what the fuss is about and see if we can tell why APCSJC wants to keep a lid on it.  And to let everyone else see what the fuss is about.  If anyone comes across a copy, please let us know. As always, our email is cherokeetruth@gmail.com.

Election Limbo Day 40: To Meet or Not to Meet?

Friday there is a special council meeting with four agenda items, two of which are focused on the election and two of which are not.

The two election-related items are the appointment of the council’s election commission nominee, Susan Plumb, and potential election law changes.  The council chose not to take up the changes in committee last week, even though the majority of the committee voted to do so.  They needed two thirds of the vote to amend the agenda, and came up one vote short.  Baker was one of the votes against considering changing the laws, and he tells the Muskogee Phoenix that changes to the election law ‘would not be valid at this point,’ even though he asked the Supreme Court to change the rules himself just a few weeks ago.

In fact, Baker proposed seven different election law changes himself to the Supreme Court, and could have had the council consider them at last weeks committee meeting, but instead voted not to.

It will be interesting to see what he does tomorrow, because, it’s apparent that a lot of Cherokees, including Smith and Baker, think things could be improved in our election processes.

Smith seems to think Baker might not show up at all, and points out that Baker once supported penalties for council members who skipped meetings back during the crisis.  In the Muskogee Phoenix story earlier this week, Smith challenged Baker to show up, and Baker didn’t appear to answer whether he would be there or not.

If he’s not, it may have something to do with the other two items on the agenda, the appointments of Diane Hammons as Attorney General and Sharon Wright as Marshal.  Both of these appointments are for 5 year terms, which are intended to overlap chief terms in accordance with the Cherokee Constitution.  Their terms have expired, but some council members, including Hoskin and Crittenden who are in Baker’s camp, wanted to wait until after the September election to fill those slots, just in case Baker wins and he can appoint them instead.  That’s just politics, but the other two items could impact the quality of our election-- so it will be interesting to see if Baker and his friends who have been critical of the previous election show up, or if they try to keep a quorum from being assembled.

Added to the mix is the fact that council member David Thornton is recovering from heart surgery and likely won’t be at the meeting.  It takes twelve members to make a quorum, so we’ll see if they get that many and see if they address the election issues that both candidates (and their supporters) have raised over the past few months.

Election Limbo Day 8: The "Resounding Loser"

The Muskogee Phoenix deserves a shout-out for their latest story on the election, especially the first line:

“Two winners were declared this week in the contest to elect the Cherokee Nation’s principal chief. But the resounding loser appears to be the tribe’s election commission.”

Both sides have had problems with the commission, and no one seems to know for sure what the real vote was at this point.  When Smith was ahead, he thought it was fair to have a recount and Baker thought the commission was ‘stealing’ the election from him.  But when Baker went ahead on the recount, which the commission admits was screwed up, he suddenly thought they were a-ok and  reliable. 

So who are these people and how did they get there?  As some of our readers point out, the Cherokee Nation web site has some good information on the commission. 

They are not, as Mr. Hoskin has said in statements, Smith’s ‘hand picked’ election commission:  Hoskin and Baker voted in favor of the two commissioners selected by the council. The commissioners are:  Roger Johnson and Martha Calico, both of whom were selected unanimously, (including votes from Baker and his spokesperson/fellow council member Chuck Hoskin, Jr.).  Resolutions 07-08 and 08-08 on legistar show those votes.  Chief Smith also selected two people, Patsy Eads-Morton and Curtis Rohr.  Together, those four selected Brenda Walker.  Johnson, one of the council’s selections, is the Chairman of the commission.  So even though both sides seem to have no confidence in the commission, it’s true that both sides had an equal say in assembling the people who have created the mess.

One bit of truth that has gone unnoticed so far:  either candidate could have avoided any of this mess by getting, say, 500 more votes than the other thus making the margin large enough that the rest of these things would seem irrelevant.  However, with such a close election and such a mess made by the election commission, neither candidate has a mandate or the right to invoke the strong will of the Cherokee people.