Proposed Resolution Paper - Broad Topic - AT: Kuswa

[Corey Rayburn]

"Indian Country" really wouldn't make a good agent because it is more of a
place than a thing.  It is defined as the reservations themselves not
anyone on them.

For passive voice alternatives on the broad topic, you could have:

"Federal Indian policy should be overhauled"
"Federal Indian policy should be substantially changed"
"Indian Country should be treated substantially different"

I don't think any of those are particularly well worded but I haven't given
it too much thought.

As an aside, there is a secondary definition to overhaul that appears in
some dictionaries that allows for a "strict examination with a view toward
correction or repairs" which may capture some of the benefits of a passive
voice wording without actually moving the agent around.  Just an idea.

Corey



                                                                                                                     
                    kevin kuswa                                                                                      
                    <k.kuswa at mail.u        To:     "Corey Rayburn" <CRayburn at shearman.com>, edebate at ndtceda.com      
                    texas.edu>             cc:                                                                       
                                           Subject:     Re: Proposed Resolution Paper - Broad Topic - AT: Asher      
                    06/01/2001                                                                                       
                    11:47 AM                                                                                         
                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                     



How about a topic wording with "Indian Country" as the agent(s)?


At 11:00 AM 6/1/01 +0100, you wrote:
>Overhaul is not in the "literature" in any meaningful sense but rarely
will
>you find the words "substantially" or "significantly" there either.
>
>As for "Indian Country," read some law reviews or policy oriented books;
>you won't be able to avoid it.  If I remember right, there are
>approximately 250 law review articles that use the term in ALLREV (but my
>memory is not always reliable).  Ultimately, it is one of the few precise
>terms to define Native America.  "Reservations" or "tribes" get into the
>question of recognized versus unrecognized lands; "Indians," "Native
>Americans," or other people references get into trouble with those not
>living on the reservations; "federal Indian policy" or other generic terms
>lack any precise definition but could serve as a catch-all substitute if
>"Indian Country" is not suitable.
>
>Corey
>
>
********************************NOTICE*************************************
>This transmittal and/or attachments may be a confidential attorney-client
>communication or may otherwise be privileged or confidential.  If you are
>not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received
>this transmittal in error; any review, dissemination, distribution or
>copying of this transmittal is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
>this transmittal and/or attachments in error, please notify us immediately
>by reply or by telephone (call us collect at +1 212-848-8400) and
>immediately delete this message and all its attachments.
>
>Thank you.
>
>