Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Federally funded Internet access to be cut off for Navajo Nation

By Michael Hatamoto, BetaNews

April 4, 2008, 4:18 PM

When it looks like things couldn't get any worse, OnSat Network Communications is expected on Monday to pull the plug on thousands of Internet users who reside in Navajo Nation. Residents use the wireless connection of reservation chapter houses after they get home from work or school.

Navajo Nation is a 27,000-square-mile Indian reservation spread across Arizona, New Mexico and Utah, and is home to more than 175,000 residents.

An internal audit conducted last year revealed OnSat may have double-billed Navajo Nation, which led to questioning about the bids for Internet contracts. Last month, the Universal Service Administration Co. (USAC), which monitors the service and operates under the Federal Communications Commission's E-rate program, told Navajo Nation it will withhold a $2.1 million payment to the Internet company.

Withholding the funds, according to an attorney from OnSat, meant the company would not be able to pay a subcontractor for satellite time for the Internet service.

The USAC helps the tribe receive 85% to 90% reimbursement from the FCC for the Internet service for 70 of 110 tribe chapter houses spread across Navajo Nation.

The USAC sent a letter on March 28 to Navajo Persident Joe Shirley Jr., stating money would be withheld from OnSat for the 2006-2007 billing year due to overbilling and possible federal violations after the tribe allegedly did not choose the cheapest Internet service and equipment.

Navajo Nation has until May to respond to the accusations. OnSat will continue offer service to the Division of Public Safety and Office of the President and Vice President, which do not operate with FCC money.

Add a Comment (34 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By preinterpost

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 12:12 PM

I guess you should have paid more attention at school so you wouldn't have to compete with or worry about the guys who take care of the jobs the average white american feels is beneath them to perform...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 12:53 PM

Who are you talking to?

Try using the reply button. :p

Score: 0

By preinterpost

edited Apr 7, 2008 - 2:35 PM

The guy b****ing about Navajos and Hispanics just below.

Well, looks like I am having a rough day with the forum today. Cut me some slack - its Monday!!!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 3:00 PM

:P

its Monday!!!

Yes, yes it is. :)

Score: 0

By livewiremaxx

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 10:21 AM

There are a lot of races, and people that had lost their lands, or had to move along at some point in time. Most didnt get any compensation. The statement is true to some point. Move on and and get in on the American dream and quit sitting int he past expecting to have your lives paid for. Have you ever been in some of the reservation lands. Most homes have 12 cars parked on their lawns that dont work, 5 dogs, and garbage to boot cause they are too lazy to clean up after themselves. Then they sit and wait for the American people to pay them to sit there and do nothing. Its the same concept as the Hispanics that are coming here illegally and using our health care, or dollars to pay for them to stay here and watch our economy to fall.

Now, as far as keeping your heritage, that can all be done without having the rest of America pay for it out of their pockets.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 1:11 PM

Illegal immigrants are responsible for millions in revenue yearly. It is more expensive to send them home than to keep them here. Why don't you read a little before you spew your bigotry.

And no, I don't support amnesty for illegal immigrants, I am just stating the facts.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Apr 7, 2008 - 2:24 PM

Illegal immigrants are responsible for millions in revenue yearly.

Depends on what (or who) you read, really. Other figures easily offset the millions with over 4 billion in dependent Social Services to illegal immigrants.

I've even heard that in order for a non-skilled, non-English speaking immigrant to go from a drain on the economy to a contributor takes 2 or more generations (on average).

That said, I've nothing against people coming to the US. I'm even open to letting folks in who cannot immediately contribute to growth...so long as there is a means in place of getting them there.

Right now, there is nothing. There is no way to support the increasing number of non-skilled workers, and we're showing preference to them over skilled immigrants on work-visas.

I understand that the world they are coming from is not pleasant. I would *love* to provide them a safe haven, and feel we have a duty to do so, but not at the expense of our own economy and safety. We need to put a stop to it, IMO, until we get a handle on those currently here and a plan for those we want to help in the future.

Yay! for the off-topic posts today. Seems like this thread is going to have a lot of it. :p

Score: 0

By mreese

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 10:08 AM

Looks like there's gonna be another casino somewhere to pay for Native American High-speed porn downloads. God Bless (Native) America.

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 12:09 AM

Back to the old smoke signals I guess...

Score: 0

By preinterpost

edited Apr 7, 2008 - 11:33 AM

(why doesn't this forum accept smileys?)

: -)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Apr 7, 2008 - 11:47 AM

BN comment system will not show a line with less than 3 characters as the last (or only) line of a post.

...so make a new line under your 2 character smiley with 2 characters in it as well. It fails to show that last line, but *does* show the smiley.

Example;

:)
..

Will show:

:)

as the last line of the post.

Score: 0

By pafinator11

posted Apr 6, 2008 - 11:31 AM

Honestly, why does the government even give any money to Native Americans? They were conquered a long time ago fair and square. I firmly believe they've gone through enough generations to finally give up their culture and join the rest of the American society.

Also, if they're on these reservations to be able to keep their culture and lifestyle, why the heck do they need the internet?

Score: 0

By pridewalker

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 3:22 PM

Conquered 'fair and square'? What color is the sky in your world?

There was very little 'fairness' on the part of the American government, when it came to dealing with Native people. Treaties were broken (in some cases they were never meant to be honored). Many nations were deliberatly exposed to illnesses such as smallpox, after conceding to the American gov't. Other nations had families scattered across multiple reservations, in order to indoctrinate the children and destroy the family bonds that gave them their strength and identity. Even today, there are instances of purchased goods and services being denied to the reservations, because they won't charge a state sales tax on supposedly soveriegn land.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 8, 2008 - 1:11 PM

Admittedly, "fair and square" and "conquered" aren't really things one would expect to find in the same sentence.

"Conquered" usually implies sound defeat, which is generally seen by the defeated parties as "unfair", to put it mildly.

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 1:14 PM

Fair and square? The US government broke every single treaty with them, often before the ink was dry (literally).

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 8, 2008 - 9:02 AM

Every single one, eh? You wouldn't be exaggerating, would you?

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Apr 8, 2008 - 10:31 PM

Hearsay, I guess. I've been told from American Indians (I've lived in the Southwest all my life) and history scholars that that's what happened.

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 1:13 PM

You don't have to give up your culture in order to be an American.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Apr 7, 2008 - 2:12 PM

No, you don't.

Sucks, don't it?

This is why people *die* in snowstorms because they've brought coal-burning grills into their apartments to provide heat.

Sure.... worked *great* in Somalia, where "indoors" wasn't all that "indoors". Doesn't work so well in the USA where there is *no* airflow other than what is provided by A/C or Heat Exchange...neither of which function without power. Hence we get what happened in Seattle a year or two back when hundreds of immigrants died because they lived in our buildings without actually becoming "americanized".

Just as *us* going to Somalia and getting ourselves killed through complete lack of understanding of our surroundings.

By ignoring these folks (or letting them in without a means of support) and letting them "do their own thing", we're essentially relegating them to poverty and, sadly, death.

To move to Canada? You need to *know* one of the two national languages (English or French), and you need to have either 6 months worth of living expenses or a job waiting for you (a means of support).

In the US? You need nothing. You don't even have to be be a citizen to live here. You don't need a means of support, you don't need to be able to speak the language, and you don't need to know that that the apartment you and all your living relatives occupy is air-tight and that you will die if you use a coal-burning grill inside of it.

Holy off-topic, batman!

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Apr 6, 2008 - 10:26 PM

Fair and square? I guess it depends on how you define that. Also why should they give up their culture? That's a pretty arrogant statement.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 10:15 AM

Apparently you missed the "conquered" part...

Heartless as it may sound, there are a lot of folks out there (Native and otherwise) who think a lot of the current issues within the "culture" would have been completely eliminated had the US not given in to the "bleeding-hearts" by setting up treaties and such.

Can anyone name one other country or nation off the top of their heads where the conquered peoples act as their own independent nation within the territories of those who conquered them? If you can, can you enlighten us as to how well that's working for them?

It's guaranteed conflict. It is guaranteed to engender an "us vs. them" attitude, and guaranteed to foster resentment. This resentment would have *long* died off decades ago if they had been "assimilated" to US culture.

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 1:00 PM

The US conquered Japan. At one point, the US conquered Mexico. In both cases, the US returned control, though Japan isn't allowed to have a standing army of its own (as I recall).

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Apr 7, 2008 - 1:59 PM

This doesn't meet the requirements as they are both outlying countries we don't currently occupy.

There is an example. It doesn't actually involve the US. ...and it's turned out even worse there than it has here.

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 3:48 PM

Realized that after I posted. Btw, Japan turned the situation to their advantage. Since they didn't need to worry about supporting an army, they turned their energies to copying other countries technologies, then worked to improve them. Obviously, that worked quite well for them.

Are you referring to Palestine? Yeah, that's a disaster.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 8, 2008 - 9:08 AM

Bingo.

The only existing example what is currently going on in the US. Extreme, to be sure, but take a gander at their history.

Scary as hell.

We screwed up, big time. We should have either given them territory outside of our control or denied them sovereignty. What we have now is untenable, undesirable (by both parties), and destined to be a source of conflict.

Score: 0

By The-One

edited Apr 6, 2008 - 5:43 PM

I actually have the same question as your second statement, but perhaps they want some modernization. But, we aren't talking about the Omish here.

The first part of your statement is completely insane. Our nation was built on screwing many people. American Indians don't get talked about a lot, but we did just just as bad or even worse as a nation to the American Indians than we did with slavery. We owe these people more than internet. We took there land including the very place you live.

How much money are we giving nations that hate us? Or defending nations that don't care about us? Let's add some perspective here.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 10:16 AM

But, we aren't talking about the Omish here.

Good. Never heard of 'em.

Amish, perhaps? :p

Score: 0

By Muskie

posted Apr 5, 2008 - 7:43 PM

Once again Native Americans getting screwed by the white man.......hmmm........... Imagine that.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Apr 5, 2008 - 1:38 PM

I say toss government funding altogether and let them fund their own needs with their massive casino income.

Can we possibly find another group in this country that feels every other tax payer is obligated to pay for something they want?

Score: 0

By absoluteevel

posted Apr 5, 2008 - 4:53 PM

This is funded by the USF, not traditional taxes.

To my knowledge, the Navajos do not have any casinos.

Score: 0

By mikeeberhart

posted Apr 4, 2008 - 10:11 PM

Unreal: do the math... $2.1million for serving 70 tribe chapter houses with internet. That's $30,000 PER HOUSE (yes, THIRTY-THOUSAND each location!).

Only this government could figure out how to justify spending that kind of money delivering satellite Internet that anyone else could certainly find a way to get for $100/month or LESS. Sounds like some serious profit margins - god, how it must be nice to land contracts like this (though, I simply find it sick!)

Score: 0

By absoluteevel

edited Apr 5, 2008 - 4:15 AM

A chapter house is equivalent to a city hall, obviously on a somewhat smaller scale. These normally contain the library and other public services for the area.

The reservation does have pretty good coverage with Smith Bagley, (A Cellular One licensee based in Show Low) so maybe they can work something out with them. An EDGE modem with cell amplifier would work in most of the locations.

I travel the reservation on a monthly basis for business and know how remote some of these places are. Every time it rains, the land line phones go out to entire cities and if you aren't in or between the bigger cities, you sometimes can't even get a landline phone.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 11:41 AM

Alright... So if you choose to live in the woods why should anyone pay for your internet?

Doesn't preserving the unique culture stand in direct conflict with loading those places up with always on high tech communication equipment?

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 7, 2008 - 11:44 AM

Shame on you for pointing out hypocritical logic!

Smiley's work great, btw:

:p

Score: 0

Sep 5 - 8:44 PM ET Mozilla's Aza Raskin: The journey back to Ubiquity

Sep 5 - 7:10 PM ET Red Hat buys virtualization specialist Qumranet

Sep 5 - 7:06 PM ET Analysts: Online news viewers rising as newspaper readership falls

Sep 5 - 6:55 PM ET Where does Sarah Palin stand on technology issues?

Sep 5 - 6:51 PM ET Adobe Flash to deliver NFL games in full

Sep 5 - 4:29 PM ET Exclusive beta invitation from GameTap and BetaNews

Sep 5 - 4:09 PM ET Report: OLPC buy one, give one deal returns

Sep 5 - 3:45 PM ET No ruling yet in TiVo vs. EchoStar patent case

Sep 5 - 3:37 PM ET Google Analytics starts tracking Chrome, with intriguing results

Sep 5 - 2:14 PM ET Comcast challenges FCC's authority in sanction appeal