Understanding the Indian Reorganization Act

Aftermath and Results

Effects on Self-Governance and Reservations

In the years that followed the passage of the Indian Reorganization Act, a substantial number of Native American societies, tribes, and reservations adopted constitutions or corporate charters based on the Indian Reorganization Act, though by 1981 only 45% of these societies had drawn up constitutions, with many prominent communities such as the Navajo Nation choosing to reject the proposed government structures of the IRA.

As a direct result of the end of allotment policy, the falling rate of land owned by Native Americans stabilized, though more recent studies indicate that Native Americans have been unable to recoup the losses from prior to 1934, with held land per acre being about the same in 1997 as it was in 1934. Another positive effect of the end of allotment was the halting of the "checkerboarding" of reservations. This refers to maps of reservations becoming difficult to understand messes, comprised of land owned by tribal entities, individual original allotments to Native Americans, and non-Native American land holdings sold off prior to the passage of the IRA. Despite these changes, however, "checkerboarding" remains an issue for many reservations, demonstrating how the Indian Reorganization Act simply halted economic decline rather than fully reversing it.

The Shifting Federal Landscape

Despite the important changes made to overall federal policy, the Indian Reorganization Act fell short of completely revitalizing Native American communities. The fact that it was heavily limited in scope by Congress during the drafting process contributed in large part to this, and the conflict between Collier and Wheeler continued on well past the point when the Indian Reorganization Act was signed into law. Wheeler eventually unsuccessfully attempted to have the Indian Reorganization Act repealed wholesale, preferring to create a new law that would limit the powers of reservations in an attempt to hasten assimilation by Native Americans.

These long-held beliefs of assimilation also did not disappear with the passage of the IRA, with many officials at the Bureau of Indian Affairs continuing to express assimilationist attitudes when enforcing the new legislation. Assimilation as a policy began to move to the center of federal policy once again in the middle of the 1940's and continued through the early 1960's with the development of termination policy, which terminated many reservations and ended federal recognition of countless tribal groups. Many of these tribes continue unrecognized to this day.

Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes handing the first constitution authorized under the IRA to Native American delegates of the Flathead Indian Reservation in Montana, 1935, accessed from Library of Congress.

A copy of the above constitution can be found here.

Digital copy of a New York Times article from 1937 detailing Wheeler's attempt to have the IRA repealed (Collier depicted left), accessed from ProQuest New York Times database.

Connecting the IRA to the Present

Considering the nature of how diverse the Native American population within the United States is, it is no surprise then that a wide variety of reactions and responses were made by the subjects of the Indian Reorganization Act. Evidence suggests that communities further along the process of assimilation were better able to take advantage of the benefits the IRA was able to offer, while societies that held on to existing traditional structures over the course of history had very little reason to adopt a new governing structure.

Today, Native Americans continue to be one of the least affluent ethnic communities within the United States. Fewer and fewer individuals of Native American descent continue to live on reservations, which was estimated at 22% as of the 2010 Census. Despite advances over the past century in terms of economic development, many reservations experience poorer living conditions on average when compared to other communities in the United States. Native American individuals similarly continue to experience higher likelihood of poverty than average in the United States, while lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality rates continue to be an issue.

Google Sites

Report abuse