79–010 

1 An Act to provide for the disposition of judgment funds of the Klamath and Modoc Tribes 

and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians, and for other purposes, Pub. L. No. 89–224, 79 Stat. 897, 

897–898 (1965) (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 565 et seq.). 

Calendar No. 272 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 115–190 

KLAMATH TRIBE JUDGMENT FUND REPEAL ACT 

DECEMBER 5, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. HOEVEN, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1223] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the bill 

(S. 1223) to repeal the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act, having 

considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment 

and recommends the bill, as amended, do pass. 

PURPOSE

The bill, S. 1223, repeals Public Law 89–224, commonly referred 

to as the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act.1 The bill is intended 

to promote the Klamath Tribes’ ability to exercise its sovereign authority and discretion over tribal funds. S. 1223 provides greater 

flexibility for the Tribes to access and use monies it was awarded 

following successful litigation against the United States. 

BACKGROUND

On August 13, 1954, Congress passed Public Law 83–587, otherwise known as the Klamath Termination Act (1954 Act). The 1954 

Act established procedures for the sale of a portion of the reservation land belonging to members of the Klamath and Modoc Tribes 

and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians (collectively, ‘‘Klamath 

2 

2 An Act to provide for the termination of Federal supervision over the property of the Klamath 

Tribe of Indians located in the State of Oregon and the individual members thereof, and for other 

purposes, Pub. L. No. 83–587, 68 Stat. 718 (1954) (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 564 et seq.). 3 22 Fed. Reg. 9303 (November 21, 1957). 

4The Long Struggle Home: The Klamath Tribes’ Fight to Restore Their Land, People and Economic Self-Sufficiency, Native American Rights Fund Legal Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 at 5 (2002). 5 Id. supra, note 2 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 564e(c)). 6 An Act to create an Indian Claims Commission, to provide for the powers, duties, and functions thereof, and for other purposes, Pub. L. No. 79–726, 60 Stat. 1049 (1946). See generally 

An Act to authorize appropriations for the Indian Claims Commission for fiscal year 1977, and 

for other purposes, Pub. L. No. 94–465, 90 Stat. 1990 (1976) (providing for the eventual dissolution of the Indian Claims Commission). 7The Treaty of October 14, 1864, obligated the United States to pay less than $300,000 for 

over one million acres of aboriginal land in southern Oregon and northern California. 8 Klamath and Modoc Tribes, et al. v. The United States of America, 13 Ind. Cl. Comm. 41, 

Docket No. 100 (1964). 9 Id. supra, note 1. 10 Klamath and Modoc Tribes and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians v. The United States of 

America, 21 Ind. Cl. Comm. 343, Docket No. 100–A (1969) (The Tribe was awarded 

$4,162,992.80 for unconscionable consideration paid pursuant to a 1901 land-sale agreement); 

Klamath and Modoc Tribes and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians v. The United States of America, 37 Ind. Cl. Comm. 2, Docket No. 100–C (1975) (The Tribe was awarded $785,000 for claims 

involving grazing and rights-of-way); Klamath and Modoc Tribes and Yahooskin Band of Snake 

Indians v. The United States of America, 39 Ind. Cl. Comm. 262, Docket No. 100–B-1 (1977) 

(The Tribe was awarded $18,000,000 for mismanagement of tribal funds and properties, primarily timber and ranch lands). 

Tribes’’), and the termination of the federal government’s trust relationship with the Tribe.2

As required by the 1954 Act, six months after passage, the Tribes 

submitted to the Secretary of the Interior a final roll consisting of 

2,133 members.3 Klamath tribal members on the final roll were 

separated into two groups: those who would receive their share of 

the tribal estate in cash from a liquidation of tribal assets (i.e. the 

‘‘withdrawing members’’), and those who would hold an undivided 

interest in the tribal estate to be managed by a private trustee (i.e. 

the ‘‘remaining members’’).4 In addition to transferring rights in 

tribal property to the final enrollees, including their heirs and 

legatees, the 1954 Act specified that nothing would ‘‘prevent [either 

remaining or withdrawing members] from sharing in the proceeds 

of tribal claims against the United States.’’ 5

On August 13, 1946, Congress passed the Indian Claims Commission Act, creating a special forum in which Indian tribes could 

seek damages against the Federal government for, among other 

things, the cessation of land for inadequate compensation.6 Prior to 

the passage of the 1954 Act, the Klamath Tribes filed a claim with 

the Commission, the basis of which was unconscionable consideration paid for lands ceded by the treaty of October 4, 1864.7 Otherwise known as ‘‘Docket 100,’’ this claim was settled on January 31, 

1964 for $2.5 million.8

On October 1, 1965, Congress passed Public Law 89–224, otherwise known as the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act, which directed the distribution of the Docket 100 settlement funds to both 

‘‘withdrawing’’ and ‘‘remaining’’ members of the Tribe.9 In so doing, 

Congress required the Secretary of the Interior to make per-capita 

distributions to all living individuals listed on the August 13, 1954 

roll. The share of any deceased enrollee would be paid to his or her 

heirs and legatees pursuant to the 1954 Act. 

In the years following the settlement of Docket 100, the Klamath 

Tribes were awarded three more judgments against the United 

States from the Indian Claims Commission for various claims including the mismanagement of tribal assets and unconscionable 

consideration paid for Reservation land.10 Like Docket 100, monies 

3 

11 Id. supra note 1. 12 Id. See also Disposition of Klamath and Modoc Judgment Funds: Hearing before the 

Subcomm. on Indian Affairs of the H. Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs, 89th Congress 

(May 13, 1965). See also H.R. Rep. No. 89–889, at 1 (1965) (Comm. Rep.). 13The Klamath Indian Tribe Restoration Act, Pub. L. No. 99–398, 100 Stat. 849 (1986). 14Legislative Hearing to Receive Testimony on S. 943, S. 1223, and S. 1285 Before the Senate 

Comm. on Indian Affairs, 115th Cong. 115–76 (2017) (statement of Tony Dearman, Director, Bureau of Indian Education, U.S. Department of the Interior). 

from these judgments were distributed pursuant to the Klamath 

Tribe Judgment Fund Act. 

Under the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act, distributions 

would only occur after the United States deducted litigation expenses and estimated costs of distribution.11 On April 15, 1958, the 

Klamath Tribal Executive Committee passed a resolution authorizing the use of a $350,000 reserve fund for the reimbursement of 

attorney expenses for presentation of tribal claims. Any unused 

portion would remain in the U.S. Treasury to the credit of the 

Tribes.12

On August 27, 1986, the Klamath Tribes’ federal trust relationship with the United States was restored with the passage of the 

Klamath Indian Tribe Restoration Act.13 Nevertheless, the Klamath Indian Tribe Restoration Act did not restore the Klamath 

Tribes’ former reservation lands, and efforts to regain their tribal 

land base continue to this day. 

NEED FOR LEGISLATION

At present, the Klamath Tribes have no pending claims against 

the United States. Any distribution of remaining funds held in the 

U.S. Treasury, to the credit of the Tribes, will occur pursuant to 

the terms set forth by the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act 

wherein the statute, rather than the tribal governing body, prescribes the distribution and use of the funds. However, compliance 

with the distribution terms of the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund 

Act is cumbersome and expensive. Therefore, in order to ensure 

that any future distribution of successful claims against the United 

States will not encounter cumbersome bureaucracy, this bill repeals the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act. Repeal ensures that 

tribal funds will be distributed to the Tribes in accordance with 

traditional notions of tribal sovereignty, allowing the Tribes to benefit from those funds and use them on their own terms as needed. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On May 24, 2017, Senator Merkley introduced S. 1223, the 

Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Repeal Act, and the bill was referred to the Committee. Senator Wyden is an original co-sponsor. 

No companion bill has been introduced in the House. 

The Committee held a legislative hearing on S. 1223 on July 12, 

2017. In testimony before the Committee, Mr. Tony Dearman, Director of the Bureau of Indian Education, on behalf of the Department of the Interior, stated that the Department could not take a 

position on S. 1223. He further stated that the Department needed 

to better understand the manner in which a blanket repeal of the 

Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act would affect its trust responsibility to the Tribe.14 The Committee also received testimony from 

a Senior Attorney from the Native American Rights Fund, Mr. 

4 

15 Id. (statement of Mr. Donald R. Wharton, Senior Attorney, Native American Rights Fund). 

Donald R. Wharton, on behalf of the Klamath Tribe, noting the 

Tribe’s full support of S. 1223.15

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Committee considered S. 1223 at a duly called business 

meeting on October 25, 2017. Senator Udall, on behalf of Senator 

Merkley, filed one amendment to the bill. The amendment, timely 

filed and duly considered by the Committee, would add a third section to the bill to clarify that the Secretary of the Interior shall disburse the full balance of any remaining or reserve funds held in 

the U.S. Treasury to the Tribes as soon as practicable, after the 

date of enactment of S. 1223. The text of the amendment was 

based on the Department of the Interior’s technical drafting assistance. Following the business meeting, the Department of the Interior informed the Committee of its support for S. 1223, as amended. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 sets forth the short title of this bill as the ‘‘Klamath 

Tribe Judgment Fund Repeal Act.’’ 

Section 2. Repeal 

Section 2 contains a full repeal of Public Law 89–224, the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act. 

Section 3. Disbursement of remaining funds 

Section 3 requires the Secretary of the Interior, as soon as practicable following enactment, to disburse all remaining funds in 

trust accounts for legal fees and administrative expenses, as well 

as funds in per-capita trust accounts, to the Tribes. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following cost estimate, as provided by the Congressional 

Budget Office, dated November 20, 2017, was prepared for S. 1223: 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, November 20, 2017. 

Hon. JOHN HOEVEN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1223, the Klamath Tribe 

Judgment Fund Repeal Act. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Robert Reese. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL, Director. 

Enclosure. 

5 

S. 1223—Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Repeal Act 

S. 1223 would repeal the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act, 

which authorizes the Department of the Interior (DOI) to establish 

and maintain a fund from which payments may be disbursed to 

Klamath Tribe members to satisfy any judgments obtained by the 

tribe. The bill also would require any amounts remaining in the 

fund upon its closure to be disbursed to the Klamath Tribe. 

According to information provided by DOI, about $600,000 remains in the fund. That money is slated to be paid to almost 200 

members of the Klamath Tribe or to their next of kin, none of 

whom DOI has been able to locate. Assuming enactment of S. 1223 

near the beginning of 2018, CBO estimates that the $600,000 in 

the fund would be disbursed directly to the government of the 

Klamath Tribe during fiscal year 2018. Payments to certain tribal 

trust funds that are held and managed in a fiduciary capacity by 

the federal government on behalf of Indian tribes are treated as 

payments to a nonfederal entity. Thus, the balances remaining in 

the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund were previously recorded as 

budget authority and outlays at the time those balances were deposited into the fund, and subsequent disbursement of those funds 

would have no effect on the federal budget. 

Enacting S. 1223 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 1223 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

S. 1223 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Robert Reese. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT

Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in carrying 

out the bill. The Committee believes that S. 1223 will have minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork requirements. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

Except as otherwise noted, the Committee has received no communications from the Executive Branch regarding S. 1223. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In accordance with Committee Rules, subsection 12 of rule XXVI 

of the Standing Rules of the Senate is waived. In the opinion of the 

Committee, it is necessary to dispense with subsection 12 of rule 

XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate to expedite the business 

of the Senate. 

Æ