79–006 

1 25 U.S.C. 177. 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 115–564 

OREGON TRIBAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah, from the Committee on Natural Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 3225] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 3225) to allow the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower 

Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes of the 

Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of 

Siletz Indians of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Warm 

Springs, and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians to 

lease or transfer certain lands, having considered the same, report 

favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 

do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3225 is to allow the Confederated Tribes of 

Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated 

Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated 

Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of 

Warm Springs, and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians to lease or transfer certain lands. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

A law commonly called the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act reserves to the United States the exclusive right to acquire Indian 

lands.1 The Act was intended to protect Indian tribes by preventing 

the loss of their lands, except by treaty. Specifically, the Act prohibits the transfer, sale, lease, or other conveyance of land owned 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS
2 

2 City of Sherrill v. Oneida Nation of New York, 544 U.S. 197, 204 (2005) (internal citation 

omitted). 3See P.L. 114–127 and P.L. 113–88. 

4See P.L. 106–217. 

5See P.L. 102–497; P.L. 107–331; P.L. 103–435; P.L. 105–256; and P.L. 110–76. 

6 Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes 

of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, 

the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians. 

by an Indian tribe to third parties without federal approval. This 

prohibition applies to both trust and fee lands of a tribe. 

Over the last century, Congress has enacted laws that govern the 

acquisition by the Secretary of the Interior of land in trust for 

tribes, and for the leasing of these trust lands. Because such laws, 

which are thought to supersede the Indian Trade and Intercourse 

Act, do not impose a restriction on a tribe’s acquisition, sale, exchange, or leasing of land not held in trust, tribes often buy, sell, 

and dispose of non-trust lands without federal approval, notwithstanding that the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act remains in the 

U.S. Code. Although the purpose of the Act is viewed by some as 

outdated, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 said it ‘‘remain[s] substantially in force today . . . [and] bars sales of tribal land without 

the acquiescence of the Federal Government.’’ 2

Tribes occasionally seek a waiver of the Act to facilitate business 

transactions and mortgages related to their non-trust lands. For 

example, in the 113th and 114th Congresses, bills similar to H.R. 

3225 were enacted to permit the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma and the 

Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa to lease or transfer 

interests in their fee land without further federal approval.3 In the 

106th Congress, a bill was enacted into law with a similar purpose 

for the Lower Sioux Indian Community in Minnesota.4 Congress 

has also enacted other legislation authorizing several tribes to sell 

or mortgage specific parcels of fee lands.5

H.R. 3225 would allow five tribes 6 in Oregon to lease, sell, convey, warrant, or transfer all or any portion of interest in any real 

property not held in trust for the tribes. Without this bill, these 

tribes may encounter difficulty securing financing or demonstrating 

clear title due to the restrictions imposed by the Indian Trade and 

Intercourse Act. 

H.R. 3225 is similar to S. 1285, which was reported by the Committee on January 10, 2018 (H. Rept. 115–507). Both bills waive 

the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act for the non-trust lands of five 

tribes in Oregon; however, S. 1285 additionally waives the Act for 

the Klamath Tribes and the Burns Paiute Tribes. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3225 was introduced on July 13, 2017, by Congressman 

Peter A. DeFazio (D–OR). The bill was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs. On January 17, 2018, the Natural Resources Committee met to consider the 

bill. The Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous consent. No 

amendments were offered, and the bill was ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS
3 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET

ACT

1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives and sections 308(a) and 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has 

received the following estimate for the bill from the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office: 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, February 13, 2018. 

Hon. ROB BISHOP, 

Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3225, the Oregon Tribal 

Economic Development 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. 

H.R. 3225—Oregon Tribal Economic Development Act 

H.R. 3225 would authorize five Indian tribes located in Oregon 

to lease, sell, or otherwise transfer any real property owned by 

those tribes that is not held in trust by the United States for the 

benefit of those tribes. Under current law, those tribes are prohibited from leasing, selling, or otherwise transferring any land, 

whether or not the government holds it in trust for their benefit, 

without specific Congressional approval. 

Because H.R. 3225 would not affect land that has any associated 

costs or benefits to the federal government, CBO estimates that enacting the bill would have no effect on the federal budget. 

Enacting H.R. 3225 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

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

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3225 would not increase net 

direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

H.R. 3225 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The bill 

would benefit the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and 

Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, and the Cow 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS
4 

Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians by allowing the tribes to 

lease or transfer some land. 

On January 5, 2018, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 1285 

as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources 

on December 13, 2017. The two pieces of legislation are similar (S. 

1285 would affect seven tribes whereas H.R. 3225 would affect five 

tribes), and CBO’s estimates of their budgetary effects are the 

same. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Robert Reese (for 

federal costs) and Rachel Austin (for mandates). The estimate was 

approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to allow the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes of the Grand 

Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, and the 

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians to lease or transfer 

certain lands. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined under clause 9(e), 

9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5

Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any directed 

rule makings. 

Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not establish or 

reauthorize a program of the federal government known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was not included in 

any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 

pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111–139 or identified in the 

most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program Information Act (Public Law 95–220, 

as amended by Public Law 98–169) as relating to other programs. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes to existing law. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with REPORTS