PLEASE HURRY When the 1905 Sequoyah Convention ratified their state constitution and submitted it to Congress, Congress chose to ignore it. Do you feel this was the right decision? If you had been a member of Congress in 1905, would you have voted to ratify the Sequoyah Constitution, voted against it, or tried to have it tabled? Defend your choice.

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.

do not use any of these common illegal characters/symbols:

# pound

% percent

& ampersand

{ left curly bracket

} right curly bracket

\ back slash

< left angle bracket

> right angle bracket

* asterisk

? question mark

/ forward slash

  blank spaces

$ dollar sign

! exclamation point

' single quotes

" double quotes

: colon

@ at sign