American Indian Self-Determination: The Political Economy of a Policy that Works
Open accessAbstract
Since the 1970s, federal American Indian policy in the United States has been aimed at promoting self-determination through self-governance by federally-recognized tribes. This policy has proven to be the only policy that has worked to make significant progress in reversing otherwise distressed social, cultural and economic conditions in Native communities. The policy of self-determination reflects a political equilibrium which has held for four decades and which has withstood various shifts in the party control of Congress and the White House. While Republicans have provided relatively weak support for social spending on Indian issues when compared to Democrats, both parties’ representatives have generally been supportive of self-determination and local self-rule for tribes. Analysis of thousands of sponsorships of federal legislation over 1970-present, however, finds the equilibrium under challenge. In particular, since the late 1990s, Republican congressional support for policies of self-determination has fallen off sharply and has not returned. The recent change in the party control of Congress calls into question the sustainability of self-determination through self-governance as a central principle of federal Indian policy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Empirical studies have repeatedly shown that the adoption, implementation, and expansion of the Tribal Self-Determination Policy is a central causal factor in the economic and social renaissance in tribal communities.
“Empirical studies have repeatedly shown that its adoption, implementation, and expansion is a central causal factor in the economic and social renaissance in tribal communities (Cornell and Kalt 2010).”
From Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after<i>Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta</i> (2023) · cites this paper as Cornell and Kalt 2010
Empirical studies have repeatedly shown that tribal governance leads to positive social and economic outcomes in Indian Country.
“Empirical studies have repeatedly shown that tribal governance leads to positive social and economic outcomes in Indian Country”
From Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after<i>Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta</i> (2023) · cites this paper as Cornell and Kalt 2010
In the past fifty years, the elected branches have committed to recognizing tribal sovereignty because empirical data shows that empowering tribal governments leads to sustained economic development and improved social conditions for both Natives and non-Natives.
“In the past fifty years, the elected branches have committed to recognizing tribal sovereignty because empirical data shows that empowering tribal governments leads to sustained economic development and improved social conditions for both Natives and non-Natives”
From Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after<i>Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta</i> (2023) · cites this paper as Cornell and Kalt 2010
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after<i>Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta</i>
Carlson, K. M. (2023) · Publius: The Journal of Federalism · doi:10.1093/publius/pjad020 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cornell, S., & Kalt, J. P.
- Affiliations
- University of Arizona (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cornell, Stephen
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1840555327
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Indigenous Cultures and History
- Social Sciences › Law › Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Law
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › American Constitutional Law and Politics
- Keywords
- tribal self-governance, federal Indian policy, political economy of policy, party control of Congress, tribal sovereignty, policy sustainability
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review