Several communities have campaigned for decades for federal recognition as indigenous tribes. Besides the 571 federally-recognized tribes, 62 others are recognized at the state level across 16 states, while several in the Midwest and Appalachian areas lack any state recognition but have several unrecognized communities which are seek some sort of government recognition. Some of the largest groups locked out from federal recognition as tribes are the Lumbee people of North Carolina, the United Houma Nation of Louisiana, the Echota Cherokee Tribe of Alabama, and the Chinook Indian Nation of Washington.

But then there are other communities which do not consider themselves as Native American but may either have some level of indigeneity to their homelands or are currently organized around distinct economic and cultural activities largely separate from their neighbors in the prevailing culture. This includes the Native Hawaiians, but on a broader level includes the Gullah-Geechee of South Carolina and Georgia, the Romani people, the Melungeons of the Appalachians, the Freedmen communities in Oklahoma, and more.

In Brazil, the federal government since 2007 uses the designation “traditional populations/communities/peoples” to describe a broader number of communities than just federally-recognized indigenous peoples. This term includes the quilombolas, or residents of historic maroon communities in the interior of Brazil, among several others.

Canada’s federal government largely uses the term “indigenous peoples” when describing “First Nations”, “Inuit” and ‘Metis” altogether, but each group is legally distinct from each other.

I argue that the U.S. federal government should create a second tier of federal recognition of peoples through the Department of the Interior, one with a broader definition and looser criteria for federal recognition than those for federally-recognized tribes. My idea is that these communities which fall under this broader umbrella would:

• include state-recognized tribes, unrecognized tribes, indigenous communities distinct from Native Americans, and ethnic groups which maintain distinct folkways.
• form public-private partnerships with the federal government in which the federal government plays an advisory and assistive role (similar to the recently-formalized National Heritage Areas)
• are not entitled to the level of sovereignty accorded to Indian tribes
• would not be entitled to exclusive land claims
• may only be designated by an executive order, an Act of Congress, a federal judicial decision, a administrative decision or an application by a state government which recognizes that group under state law

This would go a long way to accommodating several of these communities in this country. They would also bring more tourism opportunities in the areas where they live, as well as allow for more opportunities for ecological and historical preservation.

And at the very least, state governments should lead the way, away from “state-recognized tribes” to “state-recognized traditional peoples and communities”.