Today's Seattle Times has an editorial deploring the Corps of Engineers continuing interference in the study of the skeleton. In a nutshell:
"In response to the scientists' earlier study-plan proposal, Corps officials seem intent on applying new restrictions even though two federal courts have ordered that the scientists can study them under existing laws."
On another front, I received an alert concerning the 14 July Oversight Hearing Before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978. The hearing included discussions on the emendation of NAGPRA, but as a glance at the linked list will show, no scientists or museum representatives were solicited to testify. Senator Inouye's opening statement asks...
"I think the question I would pose to each of the witnesses today is whether this framework of laws is sufficient, or whether we need to consider amendments to the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, for instance, to assure that Native people have a cause of action that they can bring when the spirit and intent of the law are not being honored."
...and good parts of the witnesses' responses include discussions not only of AIRFA but of NAGPRA in general and of Bonnichsen vs. United States (the Kennewick Man case) in particular. But no scientists were solicited to testify. All witnesses who refer to Bonnichsen (see Panel 2) argue for amending NAGPRA in order prevent any future "unfavorable" Kennewick-like rulings, and all call for amending NAGPRA such that it reflects a particular religious belief about the peopling of the New World. If that sounds like an exaggerated interpretation to you, please read the statements in question and consider the logical implications. ...More later...