them to see international tells us that one in three american indian and alaska native women will be raped in their lifetime this is a rate two and a half times the national average the risk of being murdered is twice as high for an american indian living on a reservation as for the average american living off a reservation unfetter mean has made it as made its way to the reservations and as another areas is destroying lives and communities in spite of these excess of high crime rates law enforcement in indian country remains underfunded undertrained and understaffed prosecution of crime in indian country is also below the national average the department of justice reported earlier this year that the number of cases declined for prosecution in an indian country by the federal government referred to as the declamation rate was fifty two point two percent for fiscal year two thousand and seven and forty seven percent for fiscal year two thousand and eight the rate for crimes reported off of indian country is a twenty three point seven percent for fiscal zero seven and fifteen point six percent for fiscal zero eight while these figures are not directly comparable they do not tell the entire story they indicate that there is a serious problem with crime control in indian country and we need to make sure that the problems addressed in addition inadequate resources in which to investigate and prosecute serious crimes in indian country there's also a dearth of evidence based prevention and intervention tools which we now know are effective in reducing crime before it occurs and so it is important that we consider evidence based crime prevention intervention substance abuse treatment and reentry programs in indian country is vast covering fifty six million acres in remote scarcely populated areas such as these where responding to a crime may take hours of travel even under the best of circumstances crime prevention is especially important unique status of indian tribes as an independent sovereign stick together with the trust responsibility going to states two tribes however privileged presents as issues not normally faced by law enforcement these issues affect court decisions such as who is suspect and victim the location of the crime and the type of crime by the time these jurisdictional questions are answered critical evidence may be lost forever similarly those who prosecute a case tribal state or federal government also depends on whether the suspect and victim a members of a tribe whether the crime occurred on indian country and the type of crime and most reservations serious felony crimes in indian country involves the dead involved suspects and victims who are tribal members will be prosecuted in federal courts under the major crimes act in six states however known as public law to eighty states the state is responsible for prosecuting these crimes have a gloss to eighty states are california alaska minnesota major crimes in indian country other than this change a bill does not alter existing jurisdiction over indian court and indian country coprime bill also increases travel tensing such travel sentencing authority from one year  offense to three years of incarceration for each offense the intent of this provision is to increase tribal authority to prosecute incarcerate more serious criminals but it also raises significant concerns for the individual rights of tribal members because a federal constitution does not apply to tribal prosecutions and this is true even though the tribal defendant is also a u s citizen one such concern is that there's no guaranteed a right to counsel and tribal court some tribes jurisdiction in p l two eighty states and also fails to prioritize these possible investigations and prosecutions so the question remains as to who should investigate and prosecute the case to the federal government defer to the state governments and only intervene when the state ask for assistance or fails to prosecute as in the hate crimes bill should tribal governments also have a say in who investigates the case and whether the case is prosecuted in state or federal court this increase with no guidance would seem to have the potential to create more confusion resulting in fewer if not more prosecutions i look forward to hearing from eyewitnesses about this issue i raise these concerns to with the hope that i would assist can help us trapped a bill that will reduce the unacceptably high crime rate that currently plagues many indian reservations while respecting the individual rights of travel defendants tribal law and order act of two thousand and nine is a comprehensive bill that incorporates a number of different approaches to prosecuting crime as with all crime bills we need to examine the existing problems of reservation crime to ensure to do the best that we can divest if we can of the bills provisions address those specific problems and avoid unintended consequences so i look forward to hearing from eyewitnesses on these issues and finally i understand that the senate committee on indian affairs has proposed amendments to the senate companion built h r one hundred twenty four that seek to address some of the concerns that have been raised with this bill to look closely at these many months now my pleasure to recognize the acting ranking member of the subcommittee gentleman from california  must attend a little bit later but i thank you for having this hearing examining h r nine hundred twenty four the tribal law and order act of two thousand and nine as i recall this i believe is the first hearing the subcommittee has held on the issue of criminal law enforcement in indian country in some time i don't recall hearing this year or last year and so i'm very pleased that we are doing this it is a matter this committee needs to spend time on as the cry the rising crime rate and apparent in adequate law enforcement on law on indian reservations have been a serious concern for many years as a former attorney general california and a member whose district contains indian country i have some familiarity with tribal issues there are five hundred sixty four federally recognized tribes in the united states comprised of one point nine million american indians and alaskan natives with tribal lands covering about fifty six million acres in the continental united states but indian country is desperate century disparate country what i mean by that is is very different than what you find in some other states that have large expanses we are a p l two eighty state as the gentleman suggested with general criminal supervision law enforcement by state law and there may be gaps there but i think that that is not a bad model and i am very interested in how this the changes intended in this law might impact our state concurrent jurisdiction sometimes is an addition an additional protection i would not want to see it advanced in a certain way that would interfere with  prompt and timely investigation and prosecution of crimes by local jurisdictions state under state law as is currently the case if there is no problem there as you stated the jurisdiction over criminal matters in indian country is a responsibility shared by tribal state and federal law enforcement officials in a very complex manner in fact the reservation that is in one of my counties  crosses over state lines a good part of the land is in nevada some of the land is in california i believe more of the members of that tribe actually live in the vat of than in california i've worked in the past on how we deal with across jurisdictional matters and how we try and work with the tribal law enforcement in conjunction with local law enforcement it is not an easy question and i believe it's important for us to have these kinds of hearings to understand what is done sometimes you have peculiar circumstances i recall at one point in time in california where the federal government was not enforcing the laws dealing with gambling and the interesting thing was that local law enforcement could go in and do general prosecution on indian lands but they could not do anything with respect to illegal gambling on the indian lands and so you had the anomalous situation where a local sheriff would go in if there were an act of violence at the at a gambling establishment on land but could do nothing about illegal gambling that was going on there i mean those things have been sorted out better but it just shows you that the confusion that can arise when you have concurrent jurisdiction and in some cases the result was an inability or a failure to enforce laws at all and so this is a very interesting very important thing for us to talk about and one of the things that we need to do is to make sure our colleagues when we deal with this issue understand the unique status the tribes have they hold a unique status of a dependent domestic sovereign nation within the united states nobody else has that as a result many members don't understand why we have these kinds of conflicts of law and why our examination is necessary so i thank the chairman for bringing us to this point and i'm very interested in looking at the material and i promise that well while i might have to leave for a good portion of this for the impeachment proceedings i will examine this information and follow this and hopefully work with you and others so that we can come to completion on this thank you first panel consists of the sponsor of h r one hundred twenty four the gentle lady from economic opportunity she also serves on the select committee on energy independence global warming then limbs good to see you you know the drill thank you very much chairman scott for holding today's hearing and for your interest in the travel law and order act and for allowing me to testify in support of this legislation i want to thank mr longer and for his comments and his understanding and perspective as it relates to the impact of law enforcement across the country and the different tribes that we represent as south dakota's lone member of the u s house of representatives i have the privilege of representing nine sovereigns two tribes the tribal law and order act as a bipartisan and by cameral initiative to improve coordination among tribal state and federal law enforcement agencies and increase accountability standards senator byron dorgan who is chairman of the senate committee on indian affairs has introduced nearly identical legislation in the senate that's been approved by the committee and president obama announced at the tribal nations conference held in washington d c here last month that quote i support the tribal law and order act and look forward to congress passing it so i can sign it into law at a special like to thank the u and attorney general holder for the priority the department has given to travel justice issues the department held a tribal nations listening section session on public safety and law enforcement in minneapolis and october and other places across the country which together with the tribal nations summit in washington d c and d o j ongoing efforts to work with congress to fashion the very best tribal law in order bill that demonstrates the president and his administration's commitment to working with tribes on law enforcement priorities that we share in common i'm very glad to see that associate attorney general tom perelli is here today to testify and i thank him for all of the initiative and attention that he himself has given and devoted to these issues throughout his career including speaking at the listening session minneapolis and the tribal nation summit i'm particularly proud these are his candor that the federal government must do better and that he has experience working with a large land based tribes like tribe in south dakota as you know the federal government has a unique relationship with the five hundred sixty two federally recognized american indian and alaska native tribes this government to government relationship is a stablished by our founders in the u s constitution recognized to hundreds of treaties and reaffirmed through executive orders judicial decisions and congressional action fundamentally this relationship establishes the responsibilities to be carried out by one sovereign to the other native american families like all families in our country deserve a basic sense of safety and security in their communities law enforcement is one of the federal government's trust obligations to federally recognized tribes yet as the to cross the country know all too well on many counts we are failing to meet that obligation and has done so for too many years for instance as the chairman noted in his opening remarks amnesty international's reported that american indian alaskan native women are more than two and a half times more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted than women in the united states in general yet the majority of those crimes go unpunished moreover fewer than three thousand law enforcement officers patrol more than fifty six million acres of indian country that reflects then less than one half of the law enforcement presence in comparable rural communities the situation is particularly challenging i think mr longer noted for large land based reservations in south dakota and elsewhere the kinds of problems that arise include the case of a young woman living on the pine ridge reservation who received  restraining order for an ex boyfriend who had battered her one night she was home alone and woke up as he attempted to break into her with a crowbar she immediately called the police but due to a lack of landlines for telephones and spotty cell phone coverage the call was cut off three times before she could report the situation to the dispatcher the nearest officer was over forty miles away even though the police officer who took the call started driving  home at eighty miles an hour on roads that the quality of which well if you traveled those roads you would understand why traveling over sixty miles an hour is a hazard in the high incidence of traffic accidents  have and deaths that result but even with his efforts by the time he arrived the woman was severely bloodied and beaten and the perpetrator it escaped in addition to the situations faced by victims of violent crime these officers frequently have no backup and again just to put the expansive nature of this territory into perspective just the cheyenne river sue tribe that i represent the reservation is comparable to the size of the state of connecticut the tribal law and order act would improve on foresman efforts in indian country by clarifying the responsibilities of federal state tribal and local governments with respect to crimes committed on tribal in tribal communities it would increase coordination and communication among several state tribal and local law enforcement agencies that would empower tribal governments with the authority resources information necessary to affectively provide for the public safety in tribal communities reduce the prevalence of violent crime in tribal communities and combat violence against indian and alaska native women it would target youth prevention by authorizing funding for summer education programs in at risk youth treatment centers address and prevent drug trafficking and reduce rates of alcohol and drug addiction in indian country an increase in standardize the collection of criminal data and a sharing of criminal history information among state federal and tribal officials respond civil for responding to an investigating crimes in tribal communities one example of an improvement the bill would make is the provision for special law enforcement commissions currently only federal agents such as the f b i can make arrests for rapes on reservations in cases in which the perpetrator is not an indian in many cases those f b i officers can be hundreds of miles from the reservation a provision in this bill would expand a training program to give special law enforcement and commissions to travel on force my officers with a special commission a tribal law enforcement officer can be federally  arrest any person on travel and who commits a federal crime such as rape murder or drug trafficking the bill also streamlines the process for i just officials to testify in criminal cases such as rape or sexual assault cases before a tribal court official or be a officer to answer a subpoena to testify in court approval must be given by someone in washington d c the result is that some tribal court criminal cases are dropped because the person who conducted the rape examination or the officer who answered the distress call doesn't show up in tribal court that would be change that if approval isn't given within thirty days they requested to testify will be considered approved by expanding training programs to grant tribal law enforcement officers authority to arrest all suspects of crime on travel land and making it easier for h s experts to testify in court we can slow the flood of crimes that go unpunished while there will be no simple or quick fix this comprehensive legislation is a step in the right direction by passing this legislation will make important strides in improving law enforcement and in country during this congress i thank you again chairman scott for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the travel law and order act of two thousand and nine and for helping to advance it's important on behalf of the tribal communities across indian country that are in desperate need of improve law enforcement thank you very much thank you did any questions thank you and will be proceeding with the next department he oversees what is traditionally described as a department civil litigation components else oversees much of the department's work is supporting state local and drive alone for us when efforts he graduated from harvard law school magna cum laude and is morning chairman scott acting ranking ranking member lundgren and members of the subcommittee thank you for having me here today to testify about the tribal law and order act of two thousand and nine it's an important area and i would like to thank representative hurst her leadership in this area and i also want to thank the committee for taking on this issue by any standard we have an enormous public safety problem in indian country as those who have worked in indian country know and as congressman longer than said in forcing the law is complicated due to jurisdictional complexities lack of resources and the basic challenge in many locations that comes from distance and the challenges of enforcing the law in california are different from those in south dakota and different again from those in alaska but i want to make something clear we need to make indian country safer and i think we can do so the problems today are severe and there are canadians in alaska natives suffer violent crime rates far greater at far greater rates than other americans some tribes that experience crime rates of two three four or even ten times the national average violence against native women and children is a particular problem with some counties facing murder rates and native women well over ten times the national average reservation and clinic research shows that there high rates of intimate partner violence and those levels of violence have continued for years the leadership of the justice department is absolutely committed to doing better the federal government has a trust responsibility to native americans and the reality is that in many indian communities the federal government has the primary law enforcement role but in that role we are also partners with tribal prosecutors law enforcement courts and service providers and with state and local authorities all of us need to do to work together more effectively to improve the lives of native americans and make those communities safer the tribal law and order bill is key to this effort because it focuses on a number of critical areas including building tribal capacity to play an increasing role in public safety encouraging partnership and communication among tribal state and federal actors addressing the violence against native women that has devastated many communities and reauthorizing important programs that address public safety and improve the lives of tribal youth now as i've said the department of justice  its highest levels is committed to this effort as part of that the attorney general convened a listening session as congresswoman hearses sandland explained to discuss public safety and law enforcement leaders of all the federally recognized tribes who were invited and what we heard there is simply unacceptable we were told by a veteran south dakota prosecutor that in one neighborhood nearly every other house had been a crime scene in the last ten years we heard from american indian women about reservations in which women who had not been sexually assaulted was the exception we heard from tribal law enforcement officials who were so sweaty strapped on a reservation the size of delaware that they can only have two officers on duty at any given time putting those officers hours away from likely crime scenes and we've heard from a tribal judge about the frustration of learning that a domestic violence perpetrator who had been given no jail time had more than twenty prior arrests for domestic violence but he simply was not able to access a database that would have told him that these issues are real priorities for the department of justice both the department the deputy attorney general and i i have extensive personal experience in indian country having been involved in efforts to improve public safety there over the years i personally consider the efforts with the circle project which was a project that attempted to bring comprehensive approaches to problems in indian country with as many partners as possible in the northern cheyenne oglala sioux and suny poor blow areas to be one of the most fulfilling aspects of my career with a new focus we at the justice department are hard at work to develop sustainable effective and efficient strategies and i'd be happy to talk about the things that we're already doing we believe the tribal law and order act would make important changes and we strongly support s seven ninety seven the senate version of this legislation which is sponsored by senator dorgan and we look forward with this committee the subcommittee to further develop h r one hundred twenty four i urge the subcommittee to do all that it can to move the measure forward so that it can be signed into law as soon as possible thank you very much and i look forward to questions thank you and i know recognize myself for five minutes for questions you indicated you supported the senate bill do you not support the house bill i think we the we have been working with the senate to make improvements on the bill there are a number of areas where i think we've been able to to do that that includes areas such as ensuring a right to counsel that includes trying to create the right set of incentives in the area of declamation reports and reporting on decision making by the federal government and those are just a couple of the areas so we think that as seventy seven is represents the next stage of development and we look forward to working with us  that what is the status of seven ninety seven it's my understanding that there they are looking at a manager's amendment to that but i don't think i've seen a copy of that in committee i think it is out of committee but but it's out of committee of the changes have been made in committee correct ok no the challenges in the prosecution involving evidence rest process in evidence and chain of custody of evidence the challenges the prosecution in that area there are significant challenges in indian country some of them are presented by by sheer distance the amount of time it takes to get to a crime scene when evidence may have spoiled but there and there's simply the challenge of the lack of resources whether insufficient number of police officers or insufficient resources for forensics so those are serious challenges and they certainly affect the ability to prosecute cases in indian country what about number of prosecutors and  indigent defense attorneys for defendants i think both of those there are challenges in both of those areas while some tribes do provide counsel to criminal defendants we certainly think that particularly if  the congress determines to enact a tribal law in order act and increase the potential of sentencing for three years that it will be important to ensure counsel to engine defendants on the prosecution side i think we're actively engaged in trying to determine what additional resources need to be put because i think put it put in indian country a major initiative for the department is to move law enforcement and prosecutorial prosecutorial resources closer to the reservations where they're needed so that some of the problems of distance we can cut down in troubled trials so the trials by joining it's not every trial trial by jury but there are trials by jury and many many tribal courts and the juries in different tribes have different practices and procedures but some have all native american jurors others have a mix of native and non native enormous improvement and the quality of tribal court judges have spent the last several months working with a number of them on developing the right approach for the justice department taking indian country but a judge is legally  to have formal legal training many are but some are not what about services after conviction services like drug courts alcohol safety court s those available in tribal courts and they are available in federal courts in many many tribal communities there are wellness courts or or drug courts that have been i think proven very effective and we've seen some t promising practices and i know that when i meet with tribal leaders they very much with those who don't have such courts very much want to develop them in their jurisdictions have you proposed a budget for prevention long force criminal defense and prosecution have you presented a budget to solve some of these problems we are we are certainly are engaged in the two thousand and eleven budget process and are very focused on these issues and i agree with i think the premise of your question which is we need to look at this comprehensively it can't just be about putting police officers on the street and prosecutors one has to fund the indigent defense one also has to fund prevention and reentry strategies without putting all of those pieces together we won't do the best job and are you developing a budget we are we are working we are engaged in the twenty eleven budget process where we are we are looking at what additional resources are needed in indian country across the entire spectrum and with that budget include costs of incarceration  most certainly we will factor that in in this year under the recovery act there is two hundred twenty five million dollars dedicated to the construction of tribal prisons one of the things that the tribal law and order act would do and that we think is important is allow those funds to be used in a broader way currently it really only allows the construction of traditional prisons and we think that tribal communities have come to us and said we it's we'd like to use them for broader purposes whether it's just the center's rehabilitation other purposes so that we think is an important aspect of this act and we can count on the budget on being a comprehensive response to this problem  enforcement by state law enforcement appealed to any state and my understanding is that it would that upon a request of a particular tribe it would and consultation in the house version of the bill consultation with the attorney general i would note on the senate version of the bill it requires the consent consent of the attorney general which which we support and i can explain why that it would move from mandatory appeal to a to a concurrent jurisdiction did i would have to oppose it because i would be afraid we would be losing the very thing the purpose of this bill is to achieve which is do ensure those who are part of indian country the same right to protection from crime including violent crime that every other american has the right to not only deserve but to expect let me ask you this  under current law with respect to criminal violations tribal land what is the appellate process under under current law if the case is taken into the would the federal law enforcement have the ability to make the decision as to whether they would take a case or would that have to be with the acquiescence of the tribe or tribal court how would that work i think it would  work similar to it does in the many concurrent jurisdiction states now where the federal law enforcement makes a decision they have the ultimate authority whether they want to pursue federal charges there is no question that we work to address public safety because it may well be that pursuing it and i state level is a better idea pursuing at the federal level may be a better idea that's really the theme behind what are called our safe trail task forces and their eighteen of them at th i manages their focus on indian country and they bring together tribal state local and federal law enforcement to work together on cases that may ultimately be pursued in different ways but certainly this does not give up any of the discretion of federal law enforcement to pursue cases federally now a number of cases were mentioned by the author of the bill and i think you may have made reference to it too with respect to the unbelievably high level of sexual assaults that apparently did not go prosecuted is this because of a failure of resources is this a failure of tribal law is this a failure of of federal prosecutors is i uniquely serious problem in p o two eighty states i'm trying to get a sense of what if the facts are and i believe them to be true but if the facts are is vivid and as offensive as they appear to be how can this can to new why has it continued i would first of all say it's not a problem specific to p l two eighty states although i would i would certainly note that alaska presents perhaps the biggest challenges there certainly are there are i think several several levels and first there's obviously the need to  dedicate sufficient resources i think the challenges of distance in many areas make it difficult to gather evidence and to be able to pursue crime properly i do think that we in the federal government working with state and local tribal partners need to develop some new strategies one of the things we've seen in child sexual assault cases is the use of child advocacy centers and multi disciplinary teams bringing everyone together has been extremely effective in both protecting children as well as bringing perpetrators to justice i think we are we are looking right now at a model to a similar model in the domestic violence and sexual assault area where we would bring everyone together because i think there's no question you can anybody can look at the statistics and say we're not doing as good a job as we need to thank you mr chairman sorry about that i guess as a former criminal defense attorney i witness the problem that sometimes too could take place just between the state and the federal deciding who is going to  go forward in a criminal investigation or charges this is only compound in this kind of situation could you address some of those issues of jurisdiction and how it could complicate life for defendant but also as is addressed elsewhere the issues that could come out and disparity in sentencing as a result of this given the limits the tribes face and so forth certainly first the on the complexities of the situation that this would arise if if if a tribe were to seek retrocession and if it after actually occurred not dissimilar from what you see in you know maybe  dozen states today which is concurrent jurisdiction where there really are tribal state and federal law enforcement who all have potential could have potential involvement in the matter and it is absolutely incumbent on them to work together and  ensure that a defendant's rights are not violated but it is correct that as separate sovereigns they each have their own authority to potentially prosecute i don't think we've seen it and a huge number of situations where there have been multiple prosecutions in an effort but but it certainly does occur just as it occurs at the state and federal level so i think the but the cornerstone of this bill and i think going forward is the need to work together to prosecute crime  smart way and not prosecute the same crime over and over again but is it detailed in the legislation or you see is suggesting that the defendant needs to hope that these entities work together i think there is a great deal in the legislation that tries to facilitate that kind of cooperation coordination but i think that the defendant is in no different position than defendants and you know connecticut idaho florida massachusetts and other states that have the exact same situation currently so that it's it would be putting in california and other states that are mandatory p l to eighty would be no different and then the situation currently in those other states let me get to the disparate sentencing question which you asked which is an area of real concern concern to us a study was done in two thousand three identifying disparate sentencing and i think you know roughly twenty five percent of the violent crime prosecuted in the federal system is actually indian country crime and so that as violent crime sentences increase it has a disproportionate effect on native american defendants this is been an issue that we have been concerned about and the department is engaged in a broad review of sentencing policy now i think it will require a longer and deeper examination of sentencing policy related to date of native americans and this is something that certainly tribal leaders who have been concerned about this have have sought our engagement  both at the department of justice in terms of thinking about charging decisions but also in trying to engage in sentencing commission is there anything else we can do within this legislation to try to address that or well i think that you know among the perhaps slightly off topic topic but i think getting in the same direction certainly one of the things that we have supported as an amendment to the senate in the bill and would support here is ensuring a right to counsel whenever a tribal court seeks to to impose a sentence more than of more than one year so that's something that we are very supportive of and think that would be helpful thank you lot of the people in central florida and south florida so with that i want to thank you for your testimony i just have a few brief questions and appreciate your response can you provide for me examples of statutes requiring the reporting of all declinations by either federal law enforcement or federal prosecutors to either an office within the department or in their jurisdiction for prosecution and is the referral of cases to states for prosecution governed by the statute i think in terms of reporting on declamations the one bill that i can think of is the emmett till bill which the cold case bills so that  providing specific evidence or particular information because i think our view is that there is always that you want to make sure that a prosecutor has the discretion in a particular case to to say you know i don't want to hand over this evidence because it might be relevant to another investigation or i don't want to provide this evidence because of privacy or other issues so that the one bill that i can think of that has that kind of reporting is amatil them ok in just is the referral cases to states for statute it's not it's not governed by statute that i can think of where we are authorized to cooperate with them but i don't think there's a specific statute that lays out what prosecutors have to do ok thank you does  department support the provision in section one hundred one c of the bill which appears to grant warrantless arrest authority to try both already use for all federal crimes our view is that we think that section would best allow warrantless arrests only upon probable cause which would be a change as well as really for felonies or certain misdemeanors that where there's a threat to safety but for misdemeanors where there's no threat to public safety we've generally been of the view that there's not a need to to authorize and want less arrest we have taken the view and this has been adopted in the senate that there should retrocession shouldn't occur unless the attorney general not just is consulted but actually concurs i think we want to ensure that jurisdiction does not isn't retro seated and federal law enforcement authority given absent a determination by the attorney general that the resources are available and the federal government is prepared to take on that additional there's additional efforts ok does the department support section three zero four of the bill which would allow a tribal court to direct the incarceration of those convicted by tribal court in a bureau prisons facility we have had concerns about doing that wholesale across the across the board i think our view is that the best medium and long term approach here is construction of appropriate facilities including alternatives to incarceration in tribal communities or on a regional basis for a number of tribes but we have been willing to take on a pilot project of up to one hundred  prisoners into that bureau of prison system recognizing that there are capacity constraints in tribal facilities and believing that at least in the in the short term this may relieve some of those problems in the hope that we'll be able to build capacity in tribal facilities over time here if i might take the liberty in this money now prien appropriate question for you but you know somebody who's sort of watched the reservation know our district change over the years specifically with the with the introduction of a very large hotel casino in reading the background of  the your testimony here today in the in the issue it deals with a lot of things that deal with funding obviously manpower in unemployment things like that has has that phenomenon had any effect  in the bigger picture and again if you don't know the answer to this that's i entered completely understand just curious is what has that and what impact if any is that had on what we're talking about here today i think you do see larger differences among tribal communities in terms of the development of whether it's economic development housing health care and criminal justice systems certainly there are certain advantages that  gaming tribes have that live near larger communities and are able to earn significant revenue they certainly have advantages that others do not and so you see that over you know and i particularly focus on some of the they are less less obviously less funds available to spend on justice systems and other things so i think you do see some tremendous development of justice systems health care and other things in some communities and other communities that are still struggling thanks sir and mr chairman just so i would like to submit a letter from our ranking member into the record if i could without objection so ordered thank you sir thank you mr pearl you in response to the gentleman from illinois in munich a did you see what a right to counsel if they're getting more than one year do you do not support a right to counsel and to a year we have we support for the for more than one year we have we have not taken a position on less than less than a year but i think our we have been focused on similar to in the federal system when you're for this situation where you've got potential felony time of more than a year it was not understanding if you're looking at any time you have a right to counsel and as with respect to that not right and well in indian country it's not it has not been corrected in federal court if you're looking at any time you have a right to counsel i guess my recollection was if you're looking at i guess as i thought it was less than six months that well if you can get back to that and also what does council mean we think a council has to mean effective representation and so we have been supportive of amendments that make clear that there's a requirement of effective representation and that effective representation by someone who  a member of a bar of a jurisdiction in the united states a lawyer so well someone who someone who is barred i know that there are some tribal communities where they are they do authorized to practice on lawyers in certain circumstances ok so when you say right to counsel you were talking about a lawyer not an advocate we're talking about what we have said is effective representation and that something is is that an issue like that is an issue we need to look at as a bill goes forward well we certainly think that the current version the house bill needs to be amended to ensure council to counsel who is who witnesses coming forward the first panelist is marcus living's who serves as the great plains area vice president of the national congress of evan merican indians he also serves as a tribal business council of the three affiliated tribes in western north dakota graduated from dickinson state university with a bachelor's degree in business administration and finance knows a masters degree from the university of the university of mary interests she is the chair of the native american justice committee of the national association of criminal defense lawyers for thirteen years she headed the federal public defender office of new mexico she's been in private practice since one nine five where she represents defendants in federal state and indian tribal courts she graduated from yale law school next panelists will be scott burns who is executive director of the national district attorneys association between two thousand and february two thousand and nine his deputy drivers are with the executive office of the president office of national drug control policy and that position is chair of several white house and governmental community committees including the native american initiative  served as they travel is to the united states army corps of engineers and assistant federal public defender and portland oregon she's graduate of university of new mexico school of law we begin with  i just said before you start there's a timing device a little help you keep within the five minutes and you've been allotted bill stored green and when there's one minute left the device will turn to turn to yellow and red when your five minutes have expired honorable chairman and distinguished members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify today we would also like to think congressman her sistan and for efforts to move the tribal law and order act forward we have a public safety crisis on i reservations across the country and we urge congress to move swiftly to pass the legislation in two thousand and nine and some reservations about it crime is more than twenty times the national average one in three native american women will be raped in their lifetimes viewed as places with weak law enforcement and that perception breeds crime and violence as president obama said in his speech to tribal leaders last month these facts are an assault on our national conscience that we can no longer ignore for two and a floor to be considered under suspension our goal is to make two thousand and ten a safer year for american indian communities i would like to mention in two areas that are addressed by the bill federal countability and empowerment of tribal law enforcement under the major crimes act the federal government has the role sole authority for felonies committed in rescissions despite the federal responsibility crime rates have been doubling and tripling in the country while crime rates have been falling throughout the rest united states something is seriously wrong with the federal law enforcement response funding for u s attorney's offices has nearly doubled since one thousand nine hundred eighty yet the number of federal prosecutions of in the country crimes as fallen twenty six percent since two thousand and three these concerns are not confined to any one administration in november two thousand and seven the denver post reported that over the past ten years u s attorneys have declined to prosecute nearly two thirds of felony and in country cases nationally the reforms in the tribal law and order court would ensure that in a country crime is subject to consistent and focused attention and particular section one zero two require the department to compile data on declamations of any country cases and submit and reports to congress tribal leaders and members of congress have sought this data for decades this will provide an important tool for measuring responsiveness and guiding law enforcement policy in the future empowering tribal law enforcement is also critical criminal just diction in any country is divided among federal tribal and state governments tribal law enforcement officers are usually the first responders to crime scenes on indian lands but they're limited authority often prevents them from arresting the perpetrators section three a one will go a long way toward eliminating barriers to law enforcement in indian country special law enforcement commissions have long been available to tribal police but t a has withheld the training and granting of commissions for practical reasons this section expands a special law enforcement commissions program and clarifies the standards required tribal officers section thr also addresses a severe problem that tribes face in recruiting and training police officers another significant concern for tribal governments is their inability to impose appropriate sentences when u s attorneys and state attorneys  declined to prosecute felonies in indian country that responsibility falls to the tribes despite their limited sentencing power the reality on the ground is that tribal courts often responsible for prosecuting felony crimes there is a large gap between the maximum sentencing auth or to have tribes in the average sentence for the least serious felonies that are prosecuted by the federal government section three or four would help remedy this problem by increasing tribal sentencing thirty two a term of three  prison and ensures protection of civil rights by requiring the tribe to provide it to jeanette defense counsel and c i supports a swift passage of the tribal law and order act to address the critical shortcomings in federal support for tribal criminal justice cia urges the committee to acknowledge their urgency of the public safety situation on indian lands and advance the bill as quickly as possible native communities kinetic for another year of the status quo i'd like to thank the committee for inviting us to testify today mr chairman mr gohmert members of the committee to the interests on behalf of the national association of criminal defense lawyers in my testimony here today is also endorsed by the new mexico criminal defense lawyers a so situation and the national association of federal defenders most americans would be completely shocked to know that their fellow american citizens are not entitled to the appointment of counsel when they're looking at going to prison for any length of time and it's our position that native americans charged in tribal court who can be sentenced to any time in prison should have the right to counsel and if they can afford it the right to appointed counsel and we would also ask that this committee include in the bill some funding for that because in this bill there are thirty five million dollars per year of funding for tribal jails and not one penny for the provision of defense counsel you know i believe that most americans do understand that all societies including tribes have a right to law in the rule of law and social order but that still has to be balanced as it is in the federal and state systems with respect for the rights of individuals and here we are forty six years after gideon versus wainwright in thirty seven years after arguer singer versus hamlin which mr scott you had asked the gentleman from department of justice a people are not entitled to counsel and misdemeanor cases in the answer is under arguer singer the supreme court says when someone is facing any period of incarceration they have a right to counsel but as we know that those in apply and tribal courts which now is restricted to a year and so we would ask congress to authorize funds for some kinds of public defender systems i can tell you i live in new mexico and all nineteen problems in new mexico do not have any kind of public defender system one of the two apache tribes is and the navajo tribe has a public defender that represents well less than ten percent of the people who go to court with a staff of only two professional lawyers and four peril legals so while we respect and recognize the importance of tribal sovereignty and the rights of tribes to follow traditional methods of dispute resolution our position is this if a tribe is always this is court system for restore it of justice and restitution and making parties whole then maybe lawyers aren't required but once a person faces any time in prison or jail any loss of liberty then they as u s citizens should have the same rights as other u s citizens to counsel to appointed counsel if they are too poor to afford counsel and we believe that tribes can provide that and provide due process and there should be funding to that so we would ask the court to get this committee to amend the law to guarantee right to kill school for any time in jail and to be that to be provided at the expense of the tribe as is in the senate version and then to provide  funding it should be effective assistance of counsel but it should also be real lawyers and that is people who have graduated from law school and are a member of the bar of any state or the district of columbia i know that some tribal bars allow people to be a member of the bar who have not graduated from law school and maybe not even graduated from high school and so we oppose increasing trouble sentences of three years absent for right to counsel right to appointed counsel in funding in full due process and i would point out that some tribes currently stack sentences so someone gets one year plus one year plus one year for a series of misdemeanors you have to be a kind of an imaginative prosecutor not to see one event could be more than one count and that's done without counsel i attached one court opinion that says to my testimony and cited some others so we also think that the limitation of one year should be or three years should be per course of conduct rather than per kilo not as some tribes currently interpret and we also think that there should be real due process and i want to just give some examples of my one experience of problems in some tribal courts i've seen charges that are not supported by any tribal ordinance or statute i have seen a proposed jury where all the jurors people who are eligible to be on the jury are all men in that case my client was a woman because in the tribe that was their system i have seen a lack of access to actually a statute that the client was charged with no rules of procedure i would call a council on the other side and say so if we have a jury trial does the jury have to be unanimous in the other lawyer would say oh good question let me figure it out and call you back sort of things happening as they go along no rules of evidence no appeal because the tribe chose not to participate in any kind of appellate process situations where the judge was not a lawyer situations where the judge had a real conflict of interest in one case i didn't a tribal court the judge who was first appointed was the person who had fired my client for the same conduct that the client was in charge with or in another case there was a relation family relationship between the victim and the and the judge but the worst was a case i didn't a tribal court where after i won the tribe retaliated against a witness not my client but a witness who was a relative of my client that witness had been the former head of the church tribe and the tribe was mad that he had come and testified for the defendant and so they banished him which meant he lost his job he lost his places to live and his community connections he was a full blood member of the community and not only what that did to that witness yes but in the future anybody else who's called to be a defense witness at trial has to think three times and say do i want to risk my home my livelihood my my job my family and community connections and all i hold dear just because someone's asking me to be a witness because of this retaliation that that happened in this particular case that i was  so i would just say we also oppose having a tribe seven prisoners at no cost to the federal bureau of prisons tribes would have to pay for treatment and and counseling options but they could send people away for free to the of prisons which is ill equipped and in my written testimony which is much more extensive a list some of the problems with this bureau of prisons approach having to do with good time and hey be assigned all kinds of other things not to mention that the b o p s very overcrowded so we would also ask for some guidance so that people are not prosecuted three times by the federal state and tribal governments and i just want to make one last comment in closing and that is about jury pools in the federal court system the federal courts by their own statistics admit that native americans are under represented in federal jury pools and if we are thinking of having more jurisdiction or trials in indian land there has to be a way to require federal courts to use supplemental sourceless such as driver's license lists so that the number of native americans in the jury pools are proportional in percentage to the native americans in the over eighteen population over age eighteen population so that native americans are not so under represented in federal jury pools as is the case now i have other concerns and i've addressed them in my fairly extensive written testimony and i really chairman scott ranking member gohmert members of the subcommittee and i thank you for inviting me to testify today on behalf of america's national district attorneys association we represent and are the voice of some thirty nine thousand prosecutors across the country and responsible prosecuting ninety five percent ninety five percent of all criminal cases in this country as a state local attorney in a small town in the southwest for sixteen years i became familiar with the unique challenges that face indian country you chairman scott and congressman lundgren articulately set forth in your forward in your opening remarks i also had the honor and privilege to serve initially as the deputy director for state and local affairs in the white house office of national drug control policy the drug czar's office and it became acutely aware early that there was something missing from the title and i'd like to say that it was me but it was a lot of pressure from the national congress of american indians and others than it sounds small but it wasn't that we changed the office to office of state local and tribal affairs and began to try and look at in a comprehensive way some of the issues that we were facing in indian country and it was staggering traveling to the obvious hosni mohawk reservation in upstate new york to crow to wind river to net lake to healer and salt river to  penal resources in facilities was staggering it also became clear that the lack of coordination between federal state and local and tribal on the issue that i was then addressing the drug issue  was almost depressing we got some initial money to try and bring to indian country something that it worked in non indian country to hide a program high intensity drug trafficking area first went to five  test areas and asked them went to indian country and said would you be willing to look at this would you be willing to waive sovereignty if we could leverage all of the assets that each bring from their individual agencies and entities and government and all five of them dead and the money was so small five hundred thousand for five different tribes it's hard to say whether that worked or not but what did work was in my mind a sense of commitment and the willingness to try and work together it was going to talk about the staggering numbers chairman's got you talked about i won't repeat it but the domestic violence the sexual assaults the crime methamphetamine gains now and in indian country is obvious and is during recent years all of the criminal justice system especially on a state and local have been pinched by states budgets that are diminishing one of the things that we at the national district attorneys association of prided ourselves in over the years is providing the best training in the country for prosecutors for state and local prosecutors that do ninety five percent of the criminal cases at the national advocacy center in south carolina and while the united states attorneys need it and think it's one point one seven five million which extremely hampers our ability to give state and local prosecutors appropriate training so i guess to wrap up in prior to again thanking you for your insight into these complicated issues i tell you that i can speak for thirty nine thousand prosecutors in saying that we stand ready to assist to help that we get it that we appreciate the issues are complicated but good women and men who call themselves prosecutors look forward to your leadership and we stand ready to assist thank you thank you  good morning mr chairman ranking member gohmert distinguished members of the committee my name is barbara creel i am a member of the federally recognized tribes pub love him as well auto up in new mexico one of twenty two federally recognized tribes in new mexico and one of the one thousand plus i am a former federal public defender but i come to you today not as a person speaking on behalf of my employer or my tribe but as someone who has seen crime and punishment on the ground in indian country and doesn't look at this from an academic point of view but as someone who is a part of the community and families have been devastated by both crime and punishment i commend the the committee for addressing this issue and congress for all of the efforts in trying to make indian country safer for native americans it is part of the federal trust responsibility as we know i cannot agree with the framing of the issue though as one of simply addressing the indian problem by locking up more indians especially without the right to counsel i am happy to hear mr presley say that this must be addressed comprehensively and must include drug court treatment programs for substance abuse and re entry programs and there are effective drug treatment programs today on the ground run by the tribes under their tribal sovereign rights and that are culturally sensitive and again effective the muskogee creek nation has a drug treatment treatment program now currently  program that reduces the ordinary rate for receipt of ism from sixty eight percent to about twenty nine percent and it's culturally sensitive the bill should be the action be amended to address indian defendant's right to counsel in tribal court they should be afforded the right to counsel even if they're going to be imprisoned for just one day i understand that the committee and congress is sensitive to tribal sovereignty and the sovereign right to disturb and the kind of justice system that is president for or policing and in forcing laws on in tribes and pub  lows however i don't know of any tribe that made a sovereign decision to no right to counsel i know that tribes have a particular idea about what maybe they want no coun in no attorneys but once they have decided that to set up a western style court system usually the decision not to have a public defender office is based solely on on the severe lack of resources and the fact that tribes are dealing with many issues all the same time unemployment education health issues the funds that they have to address these issues which all funnel into  crime are severely limited and they're severely fractionated there's piecemeal was mentioned the indian health service department of education as well as a part of justice all have separate tribal offices which aren't always coordinated with each other i think the act itself in coordinating those different programs that are piecemeal together is really important for investigation purposes but also for treatment purposes fundamental fairness and due process requires parity in tribal court justice systems so once the tribe has decided to enact their sovereign right to create a tribal court that has a law trained prosecutor i believe that the right to counsel for those indian events who are facing any imprisonment is imperative and i believe that the united states government who has held that the right to counsel is of as a human right  and is a bedrock principle for fundamental fairness in trial in courts should apply to native people as u s citizens i say this because many times indian defendants are facing prosecution both in their tribal court and in federal court because of the major crimes act they traveled jurisdiction has been preempted and displace tribes don't know whether a case is going to go federal or not so the fact that they may not have a public defender system in place severely impacts the individuals civil rights if that case then does become a success of prosecution also there are in rights when he does not have defense counsel from the moment he has been investigated and those then can impact his ability to create a fair defense in federal court where he is entitled to the right to counsel thank you very much for the opportunity to comment on the act and provide testimony and i look forward to any questions that you may have thank you thank you very much miss crilly you indicated the number of things needed to be done who should pay for the court appointed attorneys in the  training for judges prosecutors and other things associated with the tribal courts i think tribes have chosen to have tribal courts and prosecutors through funds allocated by congress so the bill should include funding for the indigent defense counsel as well if there's any funds that are going to the tribe it should be part of the trust responsibility to ensure that tribes are fully funded to make the dispatch the sovereign decisions that they would like to with regard to what kind of justice system they want and that should include the right to counsel mr burns what should the qualifications be for judges prosecutors and defense attorneys in tribal courts well i mean half of state local prosecutors i have to preface any response that we always have great respect and deference for sovereign nations in the decisions that they make within within that nation but i think prosecutors want law trained judges prosecutors want law trained and competent defense counsel and  prosecutors want a system where you don't call on the phone the night before and say hey do we need a unanimous jury or not and we support a good system what about rules of evidence same thing i mean if somebody is liberty is at stake if we are going to lock people up in the united states it should not be a what do you think it should be should the federal rules be totally effective exclusive it would depend upon that particular area in my opinion misandry what did you mention jury polls what is use for the jury pool today in tribal courts and in federal ok this one works ok ok well ok so in federal court under federal law the federal court is required to make a jury plan that would be approved by the circuit and they are required to use the voter lists then they may choose to use supplemental sourceless in the supplemental sourceless usually or driver's license lists but they can be other things like tax rolls or whatever  in the state is in the federal courts in new mexico i can tell you that the courts have confronted this issue and chosen because they want what they see is a more sophisticated jury pool to only use the voter lists whereas in state court in new mexico we use the driver's license the voter lou this supplemented by the driver's license lists up a minute by the tax rules the state those the computer work of combining those eliminating the people under eighteen and eliminating the duplicate so the federal court could get that list for free when i mean they have to get the voter lists from the state anyway but they choose not to and as a result the under represented groups are hispanics native americans young people in the eighteen to thirty age  range men and rural people and particularly native americans and hispanics are under represented compared to their percentage of the population so about a third of the federal court districts have chosen to a mental sourceless others have not and i know that this is also true for arizona as well the native americans are just under represented in the jury pool with respect to tribal courts right now there are no federal regulations about that and tribes can make their own choices about how they constitute jury pools or if they have juries or not so there's there's those requirements with respect to tribal courts  immediately and gotten this resolved but there was no way for me to do anything about it in tribal court and my concern is not only for that individual who got banished which was a very sad situation there was sort of a small tribe that had kind of two factions and one faction was mad at the other faction but it was clearly retaliation for coming in and testifying and there was no question about this witness it clearly told the tribal courts because you have people who are ostracized for quote snitching and discouraged in any number of ways from time to by federal court  in terms of crime prevention activities and whether or not more is needed in that area well the three related tribes amended odds on a record we work with all of the  counties the sheriffs in the state patrol and our policing we have a unique circumstance up in north dakota western north dakota as you know is very much thriving on oil and gas development we are going gangbusters twenty four seven oil and gas development and the williston box information are our problem mr chairman is that we have a shortage of f b i agents we have one law enforcement in december seventh two thousand and seven it's made a tremendous improvement so we're unique as i say as we're going through this issue today we have technical assistance that's working out the best it's ever been maybe it was the key ten years ago we wish we would have had it then because now we've got the attention of the washington d c office pat ragsdale just moved on i know to fort snelling minnesota but before that  six thirty contract our law enforcement was poor or next to none there was one evening our cops passed grant officer she had the whole reservation one million acres on her own behalf and she was trying to pull the six newtown they flooded alba woods so they came up with this new town sign and it said this is where the new towns can be located and that's where we're at today and then forebears is where our tribe complex is that that's where our tribal chambers is in our in our council  quarters so we're distance just to get around the reservation i think would probably take you four and a half hours to make a round trip that's how far it is apart so when we contracted in december seventh two thousand and seven we made a unique  circumstance work and district one commander i'm affordance i got to commend him the technical it assistance he's given us since that contract i guess going on maybe nine ten months now has been second to none attention i feel for the rest of indian country but it just takes time and you need to work through those things we still have carbs though mr chairman it's ironic i sit here in front of you less than three weeks ago my daughter was sexually assaulted on november nineteenth and she was in the hospital for fifteen days and she's home now and she's got a classmate bag and she's going to be three months recovering and it's  heart to heart for me because the perpetrator got away the first time but this time the f b i agents and the d o j attorneys are doing it by the book and are our thoughts and our our mindset says that if the chairman the daughter isn't safe on fort berthold who is so this is the time for me to be here to tell you how important it is these perpetrators and these breaking of federal crimes on indian reservations is not discriminatory because this is a second time for me my daughter was put in this circumstance in may of two thousand and eight in the never got to any type of prosecution in october two thousand and one my wife was in a drive by shooting at the high school that never did go to any type of prosecution and we know who the individual is the camera caught the incident on live feed because as a school board former president of newtown school pub just one i was the president and we put in cameras outdoors and indoors and they have the car they had speeding away they retrieved the bullet out of the door it was a nine millimeter bullet so these things happen and that time i was a representative now i'm the chairman of the tribe so this is paramount to me perpetrators need to be tried and we need to have a coordinated effort and it needs to be funded to the point where we have enough agents to cover the western north dakota maybe three instead of one so this lewis and clark when they were coming through and seventy seven below wind chill factors back in the day they were coming out toward exploration and we saved them got ready for the trek back out to portland and they moved right along but we have not changed our tribe is made up of a lot of members not just from the three tribes the men but from other tribes i just told you about the block information there's more license plates of employees from other states than there is from our own so we have four percent unemployment so we have different circumstances yes but we still have federal crimes that need to be prosecuted thank you very much with the testimony mr creel mentioned before about the how we would fund criminal defense attorneys do you believe that the tribes are in a position to pay for counsel for indigent defendants and i guess where i'm going with this if mr creoles wish was granted is it a matter of custom that we're we're faced up against here as a matter of funding in other words the way the court system works is it are the obstacles merely a matter of funding or the a matter of that's just the way that it's done and those things have to be overcome too when you talk about the drive by shooting and nothing ever happened was that a matter of just people purposely turning a blind eye or because the resources weren't there are there more obstacles and just money here i guess is a question i  believe when we had the first nischelle meeting as the board president at that time and as a council member i had dual roles i met with the chief of police for the city i met with the chief of police for the bourbon in affairs and i thought i was the best circumstance but it just didn't happen maybe it was a shortage of agents i'm not sure there was actually confessions you know there was different things going on but the tribe we have a committee as well the mandated odds and rick where we have a judicial committee the judicial committee hears everything they hear the plaintive the defendant sides and we actually kind of give an opportunity for our members to vent they come in and of course the defendants are all you know in their own mindset not guilty and then the court is doing things that they have to in the police department doing things they have to to incarcerate but we hear everyone so we hear a lot of the issues one of the main ones was they wanted a public defender so that our tribe has been funding one for several fiscal years now there was a grant or two they applied for sometimes they're fortunate to get a few thousands of dollars maybe a grant twenty five thousand but in the end the council have made it a paramount issue to have a public defender so we fund it out of our general funds from marcus you know revenue or lease income or any other of our other means that we generate out of our profits in this case oil and gas probably but  we keep that as a law trained public defender our judges elected he's elected just as we are as council members and then we appoint him for a two year term and he's got to make his  rooney when chairman lettings was talking about six thirty eight contracting for law enforcement that's public law six thirty eight which allows the tribes to apply to the federal government for funding and then contract and determine how to use those funds in a on the ground culturally sensitive way so funding a public defender system is no different than any of the other services that flow through the federal trust responsibility through the bureau of indian affairs and on down to traditional justice systems would not be affected by the right to counsel the right to counsel obviously implies a tribal court system in which you have a lot train judge and a prosecutor that would that would and the chance of imprisonment or incarceration that would trigger then the right to counsel of tribes are choosing a traditional form of justice in my home there are no advocates or attorneys allowed in the court system at all there's a traditional and then account contemporary if the contemporary court is going to imprison someone though there should be a right to counsel which would be separate from the traditional court which is held in traditional language and only those members who speak the language and are subject to our tribal spiritual leaders atten so that wouldn't be impacted at all mr rooney the vast majority of native american defendants who appear in tribal courts are indigent and are unable to afford counsel there are some federal funds now that could be used for public defenders but the problem is they're not your mark foley for public defenders and so many tribes has so many needs in their court system whether it's for computers or judges or whatever that there are funds that the department justice has sometimes awarded to try wants to use to ask for public defenders that's not precluded but there are no fun here mark now soley for public defenders and so we would see that there be that that there be funds which are available to tribes for public defense and it could work something like the criminal justice act where there variety of ways of providing that whether it's a public defender office which is chairman living spoke a or appointing counsel on an individual basis paid on the hourly rate or private legal aid organization that also takes these kind of cases different ways to do it but there is no your mark funding just for the public defender function mr chairman i see my time expired if i could take the liberty of swimwear it just a follow up to that with a simple yes or no or so a chart nineteen twenty four does it or does it not have the requirement for the trial for counsel for these defendants now ok neither bill has funding ok thank you mr chairman i yield back thank you and i'd like to thank all of the witnesses for their testimony today with that direction written testimony submitted by amnesty international usa and the judicial conference the united states will be placed in that the answers we part of the record each witness is written statement will be entered in the record and it's in entirety without objection the hearing record remain open for one week for submission of additional materials and there's one other piece of business it would like to do at this time and that is to congratulate counsel karen wilkinson for the has been with us for contribution to the committee work