7 November 2016
The treachery of Washington’s faithless Democratic elector
appears linked to the anti-pipeline protests at Standing Rock
Robert Satiacum is not a man who allows himself to be governed by pledges he has signed. A member of the Puyallup Tribe in Washington, son of a famous (and now dead) fugitive, colorful and outspoken, he’s one of 12 Democrats that party chose to cast votes in the Electoral College if Hillary Clinton carries Washington. As a condition of becoming an elector, he signed a pledge to vote for the Democratic nominee for President.
Satiacum’s father led high-profile protests in support of Indian fishing rights in the northwest in the 1960s and 70s. The Associated Press reported, when the elder Satiacum died in 1991, that Marlon Brando and Jane Fonda appeared with him at these protests. He later became a fugitive from justice on “racketeering charges that involved trafficking in contraband cigarettes, arson and the attempted murder of a rival tribal leader.” In 1989, awaiting sentencing on molestation charges, he fled again and died a week after his capture. [Politico] Internal link added by FM.
Now, reports the Seattle Times, Satiacum says he won’t vote for Hillary Clinton:
“No, no, no on Hillary. Absolutely not. No way,” said Robert Satiacum, a member of Washington’s Puyallup Tribe who had supported Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders as the Democratic presidential nominee.
He had earlier told various media outlets he was wrestling with whether his conscience would allow him to support Clinton and was considering stepping aside for an alternate elector. But on Friday, he sounded firm, even if the election is close.
“I hope it comes down to a swing vote and it’s me,” he said. “Good. She ain’t getting it. Maybe it’ll wake this country up.”
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Speaking with The Seattle Times by phone from the site of protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline, he said he did not trust Clinton on tribal or environmental issues, and expressed anger that the Obama administration has not halted the project. The Associated Press first reported his decision Friday.
Would Satiacum change his mind and vote for Clinton if she changed her mind and promised to stop the Dakota Access pipeline? If Obama issued an order to stop the pipeline (a power he may not have)? If so, how does Satiacum’s flouting his pledge to be a faithful elector differ from trying to extort concessions from political candidates and elected officials? Is this not a case of “The voters be damned. Give me what I want or I'll give you President Trump”?
Satiacum and other activists at Standing Rock are putting heavy pressure on Clinton to publicly oppose the Dakota Access pipeline. Grist reports that on 27 October:
A dozen teenagers from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation showed up at Clinton’s campaign headquarters in Brooklyn on Thursday afternoon to deliver a letter to the candidate. Around the same time, North Dakota state police were breaking up a blockade along the pipeline route and making arrests.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
When Grist recently asked Clinton campaign Chair John Podesta about the nominee’s position on Dakota Access, he avoided saying anything other than that Clinton supports the Obama administration’s belated efforts to bring tribal voices into the process.
The Standing Rock teen delegation carried wooden poles and a cloth tarp into the Brooklyn high-rise office building that houses the Clinton campaign’s headquarters. They sported black T-shirts, many of which read “Straight Outta Standing Rock” in imitation of the lettering on the classic NWA album cover. In less than two minutes, they assembled a tipi bearing the slogan: “We are here to protect / Water is life!” They unfurled a large banner reading “Protectors not protesters” and assembled a drum circle.
The event’s main speaker was a 13-year-old from Standing Rock. (Organizers asked that her name not be used, due to her age.) “We just want to be heard. As the next president, she needs to represent us,” the teen said, referring to Clinton. At one point, the speaker choked up with tears as she said: “They took away our land, they took away our buffalo, and they’re trying to take our water.”
About 25 local activists showed up in support, even though no organization officially co-sponsored the event. A phalanx of reporters and police officers clustered at the perimeter. The office building is private property and, after about 15 minutes, the police ordered everyone to leave or face arrest for criminal trespassing. The demonstration continued outside in the rain.
According to Gracey Rae Claymore, an organizer from Standing Rock, the Clinton campaign refused to come downstairs to take the letter the group was trying to deliver. They tried to leave it with front desk security, who would not accept it. Eventually, the delegation left the letter sitting on the front desk, where someone from the Clinton campaign retrieved it after everyone had left the building.
After the polls close tomorrow, the protesters at Standing Rock lose most of their political leverage. President Obama and the Democrats have been treating the protesters very gently, not only trying to do justice to the issues but also to preserve Indian County support for Democrats. If the election in the Electoral College is a solid victory for Clinton, Satiacum’s vote won’t be needed. If the election in the Electoral College is close, he may have, or at least think he has, some leverage.
This is a sordid business. As noted by Ian Millhiser at Think Progress, Washington's Democrats were reckless in their choice of electors — and the Founding Fathers were reckless in adopting the Electoral College instead of electing the President by popular vote.