Regarding Elizabeth Warren and the DNA test

[Desert grandma]

I heard on MSNBC that experts estimate her Native American heritage as between 1/64 and 1/128. I just wanted to mention that my foster daughter and her brother are both members of the Cherokee Nation and both have a CIB (Certificate of Indian Blood) indicating their blood quantum is 1/64. Her daughters, whose biological father was NOT a member of a tribe, are both also registered Tribal members of the Cherokee Nation. Their CIB card states 1/128 blood quantum. All of them are entitled to use Indian Health Services facilities as well as other benefits of tribal membership. The Cherokee Nation defines their members via lineage NOT blood quantum. Any descendant of any individual whose name is written on the DAWES rolls of 1893 is eligible for membership in the Cherokee Nation. Native American Tribes are considered sovereign nations, and each can decide their own requirements for membership. Many tribes require a specific blood quantum for membership. Others define their members via lineage.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. But Warren is not claiming membership in the tribe. She was just proving through DNA

that she had a Cherokee ancestor, which confirms what members of her family had always claimed.

[Desert grandma]

2. Yes. My Point exactly.

She did not claim tribal membership. But all of those folks criticizing her percentage of Native American ancestry, need to be reminded that someone with1/64 or 1/128 percent quantum blood CAN be a registered tribal member. She is not a registered tribal member BUT an individual with that SAME percentage of Indian Blood CAN be a registered tribal member. And many members of tribes with lineage membership do have members with that same percentage or even less of Indian Blood..

[NanceGreggs]

3. None of which is relevant here.

Warren is not laying claim to recognition as a tribal member, nor any of the rights or benefits such recognition might entitle her to.

[CaptainTruth]

5. But I found it informative ... so in that sense it was relevant for me.

[lunasun]

7. +1 agree

[Mickju]

9. I also think it's relevant.

[leftofcool]

8. But she did say this:

"As a kid, I never asked my mom about documentation when she talked about our Native American heritage," Warren said in a 2012 campaign ad. "What kid would? But I knew my father’s family didn’t like that she was part Cherokee and part Delaware. So my parents had to elope."



And therein lies part of the problem since both tribes have researched this and found it to be a falsehood.

[NanceGreggs]

11. So what?

So she grew up hearing a family story that may or may not have been true.

If her DNA says she has a Native American ancestor, that's a fact - and that fact is not dependent on family lore.

I can tell you that in my own family, there were stories passed down - and sworn to be true - many of which were later proven through geneological research, and quite a few that turned out to be literally impossible to have ever occurred.

I don't see where this is "part of the problem". What problem?

[Desert grandma]

4. That is correct.

Her percentage of Native American ancestry should be irrelevant. She is not claiming tribal membership but so many of these so called "pundits" on Faux News and other networks are criticizing her claim of Native American ancestry based upon her small percentage of Native American DNA. Percentage of Indian Blood has no bearing on tribal membership and/or Native American ancestry.

[SunSeeker]

6. K & R

[Cha]

10. Thank you for this, DG!

I strongly disagree with those criticizing EW for her Vid.. she wants nothing but to set the record straight.

It was brilliant.. I was really impressed.. And, I am not always happy with what she does.