S. HRG. 108–420

FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

PRESIDENT’S BUDGET REQUEST FOR INDIAN PROGRAMS

FEBRUARY 11, 25, 2004

WASHINGTON, DC

(
FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

91–835 PDF 2004

S. HRG. 108–420

FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

PRESIDENT’S BUDGET REQUEST FOR INDIAN PROGRAMS

FEBRUARY 11, 2004

WASHINGTON, DC

(
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Vice Chairman

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona,

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota

HARRY REID, Nevada

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

PAUL MOOREHEAD, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel

PATRICIA M. ZELL, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel

(II)
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

FEBRUARY 11, 2004

Statements:

Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii ....................................... 3

Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado, chairman,

Committee on Indian Affairs ....................................................................... 1

Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota .................................. 12

Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota ............................ 2

Edwards, Gary, chief executive officer, National Native American Law

Enforcement Association .............................................................................. 22

Hall, Tex, president, National Congress of American Indians ..................... 4

Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs ................................................................................. 2, 30

Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from South Dakota .................................. 7

Kashevaroff, Don, president and chief executive officer, Alaska Native

Tribal Health Consortium ............................................................................ 13

LaMarr, Cindy, president, National Indian Education Association ............. 15

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator from Alaska ......................................... 11

Smith, H. Sally, chairman, National Indian Health Board .......................... 8

Sossamon, Russell, chairman, National American Indian Housing Council .................................................................................................................... 19

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

Action for Indian Health Campaign from California ..................................... 37

Edwards, Gary .................................................................................................. 39

Hall, Tex ............................................................................................................ 48

Jack, Lyle, chairman, Oglala Sioux Tribal Education Committee ............... 54

Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from South Dakota .................................. 58

Kashevaroff, Don .............................................................................................. 59

La Marr, Cindy ................................................................................................. 64

Smith, H. Sally ................................................................................................. 70

Sossamon, Russell ............................................................................................ 78

Steele, John Yellowbird, president, Oglala Sioux Tribe ................................ 84

FEBRUARY 25, 2004

Statements:

Black, Douglas, director, Office of Tribal Programs, Indian Health Service

Department of Health and Human Services .............................................. 94

Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado, chairman,

Committee on Indian Affairs ....................................................................... 91

Garman, David, assistant secretary of energy efficiency and rewewable

energy, Department of Energy ..................................................................... 108

Hartz, Gary, acting director, Office of Public Health, Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services ........................................ 94

Henke, Tracy, deputy associate attorney general, Department of Justice .. 110

Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from South Dakota .................................. 97

Jones, Lonna, acting director, Elementary, Secondary and Vocational

Education, Division of the Budget Service, Department of Education ..... 104

Liu, Michael, assistant secretary, Public and Indian Housing, Department

of Housing and Urban Development ........................................................... 107
Page

IV

Statements—Continued

Martin, Aurene, principal deputy assistant secretary for Indian Affairs,

Department of the Interior ........................................................................... 92

Martin, Cathie, group leader, Office of Indian Education, Department

of Education ................................................................................................... 104

McSwain, Robert G., director, Office of Management Support, Indian

Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services ................... 94

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator from Alaska ......................................... 98

Swimmer, Ross, special trustee for American Indians, Department of

the Interior .................................................................................................... 92

Vasques, Victoria, director, Office of Indian Education, Department of

Education ....................................................................................................... 104

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

Garman, David (with attachment) .................................................................. 120

Hartz, Gary ....................................................................................................... 117

Henke, Tracy (with attachment) ..................................................................... 136

Liu, Michael ...................................................................................................... 154

Martin, Aurene (with attachment) .................................................................. 161

Swimmer, Ross (with attachment) .................................................................. 161

Vasques, Victoria (with attachment) .............................................................. 177

Note: Other material submitted for the record will be retained in

committee files.
(1)

FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2004

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room 485,

Senate Russell Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman

of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Campbell, Akaka, Conrad, Dorgan, Inouye,

Johnson, Murkowski, and Thomas.

STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S.

SENATOR FROM COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON

INDIAN AFFAIRS

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning. The committee will be in session.

On February 2, 2004, the President submitted to Congress his

$2.23 trillion budget request for 2005. The request includes $10.8

billion for the Department of the Interior, with increases targeted

to trust programs, law enforcement, fire management and others.

This morning, the committee will hear from national tribal organizations to get their views on the request. On February 25, the

agencies will be in to provide their views on the request.

For the past several years Indian trust matters have come to

dominate the agenda and the budget debate and very simply have

overshadowed an awful lot of things that we ought to be doing. It

should therefore come as no surprise that a total of $614 million

in this budget is requested for trust-related activities in Department of the the Interior. Specifically, funding is requested for historical accounting, departmental reorganization, technology upgrades, records management, and the Indian land reconsolidation.

Of that $614 million, darn little of it will go to education for youngsters, or health care, or money that is needed for senior citizens.

In particular, I am encouraged by this budget’s request of $75

million to buy back parcels of fractionated lands and return them

to tribal ownership. There are a number of other items that need

to be discussed in the weeks ahead such as Indian health care,

funding for Indian housing, and the Federal commitment to Indian

education. In the interests of time, since we have a number of committee members here today, I would like to yield to Senator Inouye

for any opening statement he has.
2

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM

HAWAII, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, as you have indicated, ever since

this committee was formed, there is one thing that we can always

count on. There is never enough funding to carryout even the minimal nature of the programs that this committee would want.

We have some good things on the horizon. The National Museum

of the American Indian is scheduled to open this year. It has been

a long wait, but I hope that all of you here will take advantage and

just walk out there to see the new edifice.

I have been advised that the mediation process on the trust account may be on the verge of some success. They are looking at a

new proposal which seems acceptable to all parties.

So there are happy signs on the horizon. I hope that we can come

to a conclusion on this budget that we can handle early, and a bit

more realistic than the one that the Administration has submitted.

I thank you very much, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Just as a reminder for those who are interested, the National

Museum on the American Indian opening that Senator Inouye and

I authorized years and years ago is going to take place the whole

week of September 21. It is going to be a week-long celebration.

That will be the newest museum in the Smithsonian chain. We are

very excited about that. We are encouraging all tribal people to try

to participate in that grand opening, too.

I think I will go back and forth here. Senator Thomas, did you

have an opening statement?

Senator THOMAS. No; thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am just interested in hearing the information.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Senator Dorgan.

STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM

NORTH DAKOTA

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, just briefly let me say how

proud I am that Chairman Tex Hall from the Three Affiliated

Tribes is here. He is also the president of the National Congress

of American Indians. He is from my home State of North Dakota.

He will be testifying today, and we really appreciate Chairman

Hall’s leadership.

Let me also say we have just received the President’s budget. I

am very concerned about the BIA budget cut, tribal college funding

cut, BIA school funding cut, Indian health facility construction cut,

and so on.

Look, we have a full-scale crisis, Mr. Chairman, on Indian reservations in housing, health care and education. We have to address it. The President’s budget increases funding for wild horses

and burros by $12 million. I am all for wild horses and burros, but

I do not believe that they are more important than health care,

education and housing needs of American Indians.

It is also the case that when we say we do not have the money

to do this, to invest in children and others on reservations, we just

sent $19 billion-plus to Iraq, so they now have a housing program

in Iraq paid by U.S. taxpayers’ dollars. They have a health care
3

program in Iraq. They have an education program in Iraq. If we

can make that kind of investment in Iraq, we can make that kind

of investment on America’s Indian reservations in health care, education and housing for American Indians in this country.

We will have a lot more to say about that. I do not want to have

a lengthy statement here. But let me finally say one final point, we

are blessed here in this capitol building to work under the watchful

eye of a young woman named Sakakawea. We just finished a ceremony not long ago by which we in North Dakota put our second

statue in statutory hall in the U.S. Capitol. I am proud to tell you

that it is a young woman named Sakakawea and her child on her

back. I think the only statue in the Capitol with actually two people, a young 16-year-old woman and her baby, who guided the

Lewis and Clark expedition with such great skill. I am really proud

of that. I tell you that only because Chairman Hall was here that

day and was part of that ceremony, and I am really pleased he

was.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Akaka, did you have a statement?

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR FROM

HAWAII

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank you and Vice Chairman Inouye for holding this

important hearing today, as we examine the President’s fiscal year

2005 budget request for Indian programs.

I want to take the time to say thank you to the witnesses who

are here and to welcome them here.

Over the years, the committee has worked with Indian country

to address challenges facing native people across the country. Here

is another one of those efforts. We welcome the advances that have

been made, as was mentioned, in health care, but to continue making progress in this and other areas such as education and other

social areas really needs more work. I want to tell you that I am

here to join my colleagues in continuing to work with them to increase funding to meet the needs of all native peoples.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Now, if the panel would come and take the table. Tex Hall, president of NCAI; Sally Smith, chairman of the National Indian Health

Board from Denver; Don Kashevaroff, the president and chief executive officer of the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium; Cindy

LaMarr, president of the National Indian Education Association;

Russell Sossamon, chairman of the National American Indian

Housing Council; and Gary Edwards, the CEO of the National Native American Law Enforcement Association.

We will start in that order, and would tell the panel that all of

your written testimony will be included in the record, so you do not

need to read it verbatim. If you would like to ad lib part of your

testimony, that would be fine. If you would just go ahead in the

order that I announced you.

President Hall, why don’t you go ahead and proceed.
4

STATEMENT OF TEX HALL, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS

OF AMERICAN INDIANS

Mr. HALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, Senators Dorgan, Akaka, Thomas, and the members of the committee.

We are very pleased to be able to present testimony today on this

very important hearing on the President’s budget. We are representing of course the National Congress of American Indians,

over 250 tribes.

Mr. Chairman, as you mentioned, the President on February 2

proposed a $2.4 trillion-budget for the fiscal year 2005 year that includes level funding and numerous decreases for Indian programs,

continuing a trend of consistent declines in Federal per capita

spending for Indians compared to per capita expenditures for the

population at large.

We are deeply disappointed that the budget request does not reflect leadership to take on the quiet crisis of underfunding for Federal Indian programs that was underscored by a comprehensive

2003 report of the bipartisan United States Civil Rights Commission. While we recognize that this budget reflects fiscal belt-tightening across the board, we believe this quiet crisis should be a national priority that we need to address. We hope that Congress and

this committee will work with the tribes to see this priority better

reflected in our budget.

The Administration’s proposed budget does not reflect the priorities of Indian country to fully fund Indian health care, tribal priority allocations, contract support, road maintenance, school facilities

and services at the local level. These priorities have been laid forth

by the BIA Tribal Budget Advisory Council, of which I am a member, as well as all of the 12 regions are represented in the United

States, as well as by tribal leaders in budget consultations with Indian Health Services and the other Federal agencies. We ask that

these recommendations be taken more closely to heart as the 2005

budget advances.

In addition to addressing the troubling general trend of decreased Federal fulfillment of trust obligations to tribes, we want

to highlight three key concerns within the proposed budget. One is

self-determination programs, which throughout the budget initiatives within the Administration has expressed consistent support

for, have not only failed to receive needed funding increases, but

face cuts which will deeply hobble tribes’ ability to effectively assume local control in the face of shrinking TPA budgets, inadequate 638 pay cost increases, insufficient contract support funding, and grossly underfunded administrative cost grants for

schools.

Second, funding for law enforcement in Indian country would

continue a troubling downward trend under the 2005 budget request. At a time when the national concerns are for homeland security and public safety, most require a concerted Federal support.

Essential Department of Justice funding for tribal courts would be

cut by $7.6 million. In Indian country, prison detention grants

would be cut by $2.5 million, and a 50-percent increase in funding

for tribal law enforcement is necessary to provide for basic public

safety in Indian country.
5

Third, precious resources continue to be diverted to the Department of the Interior’s reorganization, which tribes have opposed as

the way it is proceeding and which fails to take into account the

need for local flexibility for the results of the 2(B) study which was

recently completed by the Department. More effective use of funds

is demonstrated by the focus, for example, on the funding for the

land consolidation, which is proposed within the budget, which we

support. Until a better plan which reflects consultation with the

tribes who know best what works in trust management at the local

level, a moratorium should be placed on further funding of the reorganization.

In the BIA budget, the costs of OST and BIA reorganizations are

effectively punishing the tribes for the Department’s own trust mismanagement, a double injury to individual and tribal trustees hurt

by this mismanagement.

With the continuing focus on a reorganization plan which NCAI

and numerous tribes have opposed, the 2005 budget proposes a net

increase of $42 million in trust-related programs, and cuts other

programs to offset trust increases, resulting in basically a decrease

in critical tribal funding within BIA of over $100 million. So other

key areas of the BIA budget remain deeply underfunded, including

TPA. Unfortunately, the proposed budget does not even address inflationary costs. So NCAI recommends at least a 5-percent increase

in TPA for 2005 to address the inflation.

The budget request includes a significant increase of $53.3 million to the Indian land consolidation account, a welcome increase

to this area which is strongly supported by NCAI and tribes, is

vital to the long-term trust management reform. However, $109

million would be directed toward a historical accounting in the absence of any acceptable parameters for how to undertake this extraordinarily complex task.

The Office of Special Trustee would receive a $113.6 million increase, for a total of $322.7 million, which is partially offset by a

$63 million-cut to BIA construction and a $13.5 million-cut to BIA

other recurring programs. We believe this is unacceptable. Within

BIA construction accounts, education construction will lose $65.9

million, despite a terrible backlog of new school construction needs

that everyone agrees must be addressed promptly.

Tribal leaders have repeatedly emphasized that funding needed

to correct problems and inefficiencies in DOI trust management

must not come from existing BIA management must not come from

existing BIA programs or administrative moneys. Yet once again,

this year’s budget reduces expected funding for tribes to fund a reorganization that we have opposed.

In addition to contract support costs, this budget reflects a $2

million-reduction in funding for contract support. An additional $25

million is needed in BIA to fully fund contract support. We need

to stop penalizing tribes that operate BIA and IHS funding under

self-determination.

NCAI and the United States Civil Rights Commission have

called for badly needed increases to funding for BIA school operations. But rather than addressing the tremendous need that exists

for classroom dollars, transportation and contract support for trib-
6

ally operated schools, this critical account would be decreased

under the 2005 budget request.

Within the added burden of implemented requirements of No

Child Left Behind, additional funding for ISEP is critical. NCAI

also remains deeply concerned about the impact of the Office of Indian Education program at BIA is consolidation of line officers on

BIA school functions that would reduce services as tribes are trying

to become in compliance with the No Child Left Behind Act.

In Indian health care, it marks a rise of $45 million over the

2004 enacted level, but still falls far short of addressing the overall

growth in population and rapidly increasing medical costs which

have resulted in expanded unmet needs in Indian country. IHS’s

real spending per American Indian has fallen sharply over time,

and now stands at less than 50 percent of what is spent for health

care for Federal prisoners. Proposed funding for Indian health care

facilities construction would be cut more than half under this proposal.

Funding for maintenance and improvement, as well as medical

equipment for Indian health facilities would receive level funding

in the proposed budget, despite a crisis situation of aging facilities

and equipment.

In Contract Health Services, in my tribe failure of the IHS to reimburse for contract care in a timely fashion has damaged the

credit ratings of many tribal members and impacted their capacity

to qualify for home ownership mortgages. NCAI recommends an increase to Contract Health of $120 million in the 2005 budget.

We are heartened to see the $10 million increase in the BIA public safety and justice account, most of which will fund new operations at eight BIA detention facilities. These funds are sorely

needed and the increase will be well received. We remain concerned, however, that this funding does not meet the need for policing and on-the-ground patrol services. At a time when homeland

security and public safety concerns most require concerted Federal

support for law enforcement in Indian country, a 50-percent increase for funding for tribal law enforcement is necessary.

Tribal leaders share the President’s concern for homeland security. We ask that a concerted effort be made to ensure that tribal

areas have equal access to the 2005 funds directed toward homeland security and public safety.

The Department of HHS has reported that 8 percent of Indian

homes lack running water, compared to less than 1 percent of the

non-Indian population homes; 33 percent of tribal homes lack adequate solid waste management systems. Yet as reflected in our

written testimony, critical programs to improve these infrastructure shortfalls would be cut under the 2005 budget.

Finally, under tribal colleges, we welcome the increases in funding for the Native American Institution Endowment Fund which

would be increased by $3 million in the Department of Agriculture.

But the President’s budget would cut nearly $6 million from BIA

funding for tribal colleges for a third year in a row. The budget also

recommends no funding for the United Tribes Technical College in

Bismarck, North Dakota, a very important tribal institution which

NCAI strongly supports.
7

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, again NCAI realizes Congress must make difficult budget choices this year. As

elected officials and tribal leaders, we certainly understand the

competing priorities that you must weigh over the coming months.

However, the Federal Government’s solemn responsibility to address the serious needs facing Indian country remains unchanged

whatever the economic climate and competing priorities there are.

So we at NCAI urge you to make a strong across-the-board commitment to meeting the Federal trust obligation by fully funding those

programs that are vital to the creation of a vibrant Indian Nation.

So Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to testify. I will be

happy to answer questions later on.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Hall appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Next we will go to Ms. Smith.

Ms. SMITH. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. I tell you what, just 1 moment. We did have a

couple of members come in.

Did you have a statement that you needed to do before you have

to leave, Senator Conrad or Senator Johnson, either one?

Senator CONRAD. I would be happy to have the witnesses proceed, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Senator Johnson.

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to make a very brief statement, if I may.

The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. I do not know what your schedule is.

STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM

SOUTH DAKOTA

Senator JOHNSON. I want to say, Chairman Campbell and Vice

Chairman Inouye, thank you for holding this hearing on such a

vital issue. I will keep my comments very brief, but I do want to

highlight a couple of problems that frankly I think are of enormous

importance.

Needless to say, I am grossly disappointed with the President’s

priorities; that is another way of saying with his values. We are

spending $1 billion a week in Iraq. The President is proposing billions of dollars of additional tax cuts for America’s wealthiest families, while at the same time proposing to cut funding for construction of hospitals and schools here at home.

The President recommends IHS health facilities construction be

gutted, from $94 million in 2004 to $42 million in 2005. Additionally, the BIA school construction account is being cut by $65.9 million, while over 40 schools are desperately waiting for construction

funds now. The backlog is long and the need is immediate, and the

President’s proposal makes no sense whatever.

Broadly speaking, I am concerned that the President wants to

fund trust fund reform at the expense of other Indian programs.

While trust fund reform is necessary, I am encouraged that the

President has increased the amount of money going toward the

buying back of fractionalized land. It is a matter of great importance to me.

The injustice in the budget I think is rife with examples important to my South Dakota tribes, such as the President’s request
8

pertaining to the tribal priority allocation or TPA funding. The

President’s request has a minuscule increase. These TPA funds are

critical because tribes use them to carryout day-to-day government

programs and functions. The President’s request in this area is

simply inadequate, and therefore impeding self-determination.

Within BIA and OST, there is an initiative which I found particularly interesting, the creation of a new Office of Tribal Consultation at BIA with a whopping $1.1 million budget. The President apparently wants to create an office to do a function that the

Administration is obligated to do under treaty and trust obligations

as it is.

I am sure that President Steele of the Oglala Sioux Tribe and

Councilman Jack from OST, who are with us today, can think of

a lot better things that they could use $1.1 million for in the Pine

Ridge Reservation, where as we speak their constituents are wondering how they are going to heat their homes tomorrow without

spending an additional $1 million to do obligations that this Administration already had in the first place.

As the testimony today will reflect, every aspect of Indian funding is hurting, housing, health care, education, infrastructure. I understand this is a tough fiscal year. I understand that the tribes

will not get every need fulfilled. But there are a lot of problems

with the President’s budget. We have got to do better. As a member

of the Budget and the Appropriations Committees, and working

closely with Chairmen Campbell and Inouye, I will do what I can

to correct these problems and to put our priorities and our values

back where they ought to be.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

You probably know, Tex, there are five, if I am not mistaken, of

the members on this committee are also appropriators, as Senator

Johnson mentioned. As in the past, you need to remember that the

budget that comes over from the White House is a request, and

rarely ends up the way any President asks for. We have a lot to

say about what is increased and what is decreased. I know I can

speak for the other members who are appropriators on this committee that we are going to do our best to make sure that the needs

are met.

Mr. HALL. That is very encouraging. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, now let’s go on to Sally Smith, please.

Welcome, Sally.

STATEMENT OF H. SALLY SMITH, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL

INDIAN HEALTH BOARD

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman

Inouye and distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. I am H. Sally Smith, chairman of the Bristol Bay

Area Health Corporation in Southwest Alaska.

On behalf of the National Indian Health Board, it is an honor

and a pleasure to offer my testimony this morning on the President’s fiscal year 2005 budget for Indian programs. The National

Indian Health Board serves federally recognized American Indians

and Alaska Native tribal governments in advocating for the improvement of health care delivery to American Indians and Alaska
9

Natives. Our board members represent each of the 12 areas of the

Indian Health Service and are elected at-large by the respective

tribal governments within their regional areas. I am pleased to tell

the committee that the entire National Indian Health Board is

with us this morning.

I will keep my remarks to less than 5 minutes, and ask that my

statement be entered into the record.

The CHAIRMAN. It will be.

Ms. SMITH. With release of the President’s budget, as expected

things look challenging. For the Indian Health Service, the request

is $2.97 billion, which constitutes a 1.6-percent increase over the

fiscal year 2004 request or $45 million. Tribal leaders gather annually to develop a needs-based budget for Indian Health Service

funding. The needs-based budget developed for fiscal year 2005 documents the Indian Health Service health care funding needs at

$19.4 billion. In light of the documented needs for Indian country,

$2.97 billion falls well short of the level of funding that is actually

needed.

Even though we face an uphill climb, given that the President

wishes to hold non-defense discretionary spending to one-half of 1

percent, we will not abandon our efforts to see that the health care

crisis in Indian country is addressed, and we call upon Congress

to do the same.

Health care spending for American Indians and Alaska Natives

lags far behind spending for other segments of society. My written

statement provides detailed recommendations regarding the fiscal

year 2005 budget request, but because of my limited time this

morning, I want to focus on the importance of health promotion

and disease prevention, and the need to increase such activity in

Indian country.

One of the most valuable and cost-effective ways to improve a

person’s health and well-being is through health promotion and

disease prevention. It is a wise investment. The Administration has

placed a high priority on health promotion and disease promotion

as evidenced by the steps to a healthier U.S. initiative. We could

not agree more. The Indian Health Service, as well as the National

Indian Health Board, are increasing efforts to emphasize the value

of health promotion and disease prevention.

As a member of the IHS Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Policy Advisory Committee, I believe that with a small financial commitment from Congress to boost prevention in Indian country, we will see a vast improvement in several critical areas.

As the committee is keenly aware, no other segment of the population is more negatively impacted by health disparities than the

American Indian-Alaska Native population. Tribal members suffer

from disproportionately higher rates of chronic disease and other

illnesses. Heart disease and cancer are the leading causes of death

for American Indians and Alaska Natives. The rate of cardiovascular disease among American Indians and Alaska Natives are

twice the amount for the general public, and continue to increase.

The prevalence of diabetes is more than twice that for all adults

in the United States and the mortality rate from chronic liver disease is more than twice as high. There are 20 percent fewer American Indians and Alaska Native women that receive prenatal care
10

than all other races, and they engage in significantly higher rates

of negative personal health behavior such as smoking and alcohol

and illegal substance consumption during pregnancy.

While these disparities are largely attributable to a lack of adequate funding, we could make a substantial impact if health promotion and disease prevention efforts are expanded. The President’s budget provides a $2-million increase to the Indian Health

Service for health promotion and disease prevention efforts. While

we desperately need additional funding in all services, I ask that

Congress pay particular attention to this area and make a real

commitment to providing Indian country with the tools to combat

obesity, improper nutrition, inactivity and other negative health behaviors.

The President’s budget includes $103 million for sanitation con- struction, an increase of $10 million. This increase demonstrates

the Administration’s commitment to providing safe water and

waste disposal to an estimated 22,000 homes. Proper sanitation facilities play a considerable role in the reduction of infant mortality

and deaths from gastrointestinal disease in Indian country. We are also pleased that the Administration has requested $3

million for new epidemiology centers to serve the Navajo, Oklahoma, Billings, and California areas, as well as increasing support

for the seven existing centers, which currently serve about one-half

of the IHS-eligible service population. The budget request includes $497 million for Contract Health Services, which is an additional $18 million. While we are very

thankful for any increase, the proposed level of funding is so limited that only life-threatening conditions are normally funded. The

documented need for Contract Health Services exceeds $1 billion.

At present, less than one-half of the Contract Health Services need

is being met, leaving too many Indian people without access to necessary medical services. We recommend an increase of $175 million, which would raise American Indian–Alaska Native tribes to

approximately 60 percent of need.

The President’s fiscal year 2005 budget request does not provide

an increase for contract support costs. An increase in contract support costs is necessary because as tribal governments continue to

assume control of new programs, services, functions and activities

under self-determination and self-governance, additional funding is

needed.

Tribal programs have clearly increased the quality and level of

services in their health systems fairly significantly over direct service programs, and failing to adequately fund contract support costs

is defeating the very programs that appear to be helping improve

health conditions for American Indians and Alaska Natives. We

strongly urge reconsideration of this line item in the proposed

budget.

As tribes increasingly turn to new self-determination contracts or

self-governance compacts, or as they expand the services they have

contracted or compacted, funding necessary to adequately support

these is very likely to exceed the proposed budgeted amount. We

ask you to fund contract support costs at a level that is adequate

to meet the needs of tribes and to further the important trust responsibility charged to the Federal Government. We recommend an
11

additional $100 million to meet the shortfall for current contracting

and compacting.

According to the President’s fiscal year 2005 budget, the number

of tribally managed IHS programs continues to increase both in

dollar terms and as a percentage of the whole IHS budget. Tribal

governments will control an estimated $1.8 billion of IHS programs

in fiscal year 2005, representing 56 percent of the IHS total budget

request. Because of this, it is critical that funding for self-governance be provided in a manner reflective of this.

Finally, for tribal governance to continue managing IHS programs and other direct services tribes could consider compacting,

we ask that funding for self-governance be increased to $20 million.

The President’s fiscal year 2005 budget request increases spending for homeland security by 10 percent. The budget request reflects the priorities of the United States with regard to health and

safety concerns relating to homeland security. It is important to

note that along with the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs health systems, the IHS occupies a unique position within the

Federal Government as a direct health care provider.

Therefore, we are requesting that funding be added during fiscal

year 2005 to help the Indian Health Service and tribal governments prepare for and respond to potential terrorist attacks, including increases for data systems improvements. It is imperative

that we continue to pursue tribal inclusion in the national homeland security plan.

On behalf of the National Indian Health Board, I would like to

thank the committee for its consideration of our testimony and ask

for your continued interest in the improvement of health for American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Smith appears in appendix]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Sally.

Before we go on to Don Kashevaroff, Senator Murkowski, did you

have a statement, since your constituent just made her presentation?

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR FROM

ALASKA

Senator MURKOWSKI. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I wish that I

had been here at the very beginning, but I think I did get most of

Sally’s testimony, so I appreciate that.

I do have an opening statement, Mr. Chairman. I will submit it

for the record. I would just like to state I understand that we were

scheduled, as is tradition here in the Senate, to hear the agency

folks first, and that was canceled.

The CHAIRMAN. It has just been postponed. It will be next week.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Postponed, right. But you kept this hearing

so that the constituents are actually heard from first, which is

good. I would hope that the agency folks are listening to the comments that we will receive today. I know that when we do hear

from the agencies, my questions will be probably as a consequence

of some of the comments that we hear today.
12

I do welcome Sally Smith. I also welcome Don Kashevaroff, also

from Alaska, and I am pleased once again to have their very fine

testimony here this morning.

I think, as were many of us, we were a little disappointed in seeing the budget that we have before us. I have some very specific

issues in certain of those areas. I think my constituents know well

of those, but we will be probing into them in a little greater detail

as we move forward with this process.

So Mr. Chairman, if I can submit my opening remarks.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it will be included in the record. You bet.

[Prepared statement of Senator Murkowski appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Kashevaroff, why don’t you go ahead.

Senator CONRAD. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Excuse me. Yes, Senator Conrad.

Senator CONRAD. Might I take just 1 moment of time at this

juncture.

The CHAIRMAN. Sure.

Senator CONRAD. I appreciate that.

STATEMENT OF KENT CONRAD, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH

DAKOTA

I wanted to thank our chairman, Tex Hall, for being here; chairman of Three Affiliated Tribes. Tex has really done a superb job

as president of the National Congress of American Indians. He is

a leader. This is a time that requires leadership.

As a member of the Senate Committee on the Budget and a

member of this committee, I must say in looking at this budget, I

think it is deeply flawed; deeply flawed in its priorities; deeply

flawed in its commitment to one place where the Federal Government has a unique responsibility. That is with respect to our Native American citizens.

The President’s priorities strike me as completely out of whack.

On the one hand, he says we should make permanent the tax cuts

previously enacted. Let me just say that an accountant friend of

mine from back home called me just a few weeks ago and told me

had just taken in the tax return of one of his clients who had $1

million of dividend income for last year. He had just filled out his

tax return for him, and he is going to get a refund of $250,000; an

elderly man with no family, no financial needs. Under the tax plan

the President pushed through, that gentleman is going to get a

$250,000 tax refund, that in the context of the biggest deficit in the

history of the United States. The President’s answer is, make that

plan permanent.

Then on the other hand, he turns to the spending side of the

equation and he says, we are going to eliminate all of the funding

for the United Tribes Technical College in my home town of Bismarck, ND, a place that gives hope and opportunity to thousands

of students, that has the chance of giving people a lift, a chance

to make the most of their God-given talent.

And the President’s budget says cut the tribal colleges by 10 percent; cut them. In my experience in Indian country, the greatest

hope lies with those tribal college institutions. I have seen the

looks on the faces of those graduating. I have seen their pride and

accomplishment. I have seen their sense that they can make a bet-
13

ter future for themselves and their families. It is a riveting thing

to go to the graduation ceremony of a tribal college.

Those opportunities, which are already a fraction of what we provide traditionally Black colleges, a fraction of what we provide community institutions in this country. The President’s answer is cut

them. Why? Because we have to apparently provide for tax relief

for the wealthiest among us, when we can’t pay our bills now.

These are priorities I do not think reflect the priorities of the

American people. I think if we sat down around the kitchen table

in North Dakota and were working out a budget, we would say, you

know, we should have a United Tribes Technical College; we should

not eliminate that institution; we should not be cutting tribal colleges; we should not be cutting housing opportunities; we should

not be underfunding the provisions for health care for Native

Americans when the Federal Government has a direct obligation

and responsibility, so that we can turn around and give a gentleman with a million dollars of income a $250,000 tax refund.

What kind of priorities are these? They are certainly not priorities that I share. And to say we ought to make permanent, make

permanent that kind of tax relief in the face of a flood of red ink

and unmet needs that are clear and acute.

So Mr. Chairman, I hope on a bipartisan basis that we are able

to go back and change these priorities and get this country back

on a course that makes more sense.

I thank the Chairman and I thank my colleagues.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, thank you.

Don, why don’t you proceed.

STATEMENT OF DON KASHEVAROFF, PRESIDENT AND

CHAIRMAN, ALASKA NATIVE TRIBAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM

Mr. KASHEVAROFF. Thank you, Chairman Campbell and Vice

Chairman Inouye, and Senator Murkowski and members of the

committee, for the opportunity to testify on the President’s 2005

budget for the Indian Health Service.

My name is Don Kashevaroff. I am the president of Seldovia Village Tribe in Southcentral Alaska, that serves about 500 Alaska

Natives. I am also chair and president of the Alaska Native Tribal

Health Consortium, which serves 120,000 Alaska Natives and

American Indians. I also serve as the chair of the Tribal Self-Governance Advisory Committee which serves one-half of the tribes of

this great Nation.

I know we have limited time today so I really just want to touch

on two important issues, Mr. Chairman. That is, inflation and contract support costs.

One of the first things I learned in business school was the time

value of money. To put this simply, because of inflation, $1 yesterday was worth more than $1 today. Well, Mr. Chairman, inflation

really is our deadly enemy here. This might not seem possible, but

every year that IHS budgets do not keep up with inflation, our people are suffering.

In 2004, I just received a 1.2-percent increase across the board.

Medical inflation was actually 8 to 10 times more than this. In my

written testimony, I included some references to a U.S.-Government study that showed that Medicare has been rising nearly 10
14

percent a year; Medicaid costs over 10 percent a year; and prescription drug costs 15 percent a year.

Compare this to IHS’s cost increases that we have been getting.

We have been getting between one and three percent for the last

couple of years. Even in our best year a couple of years ago when

we had a 3.2-percent increase, we were still at least 7 percent behind inflation.

My question, I guess, Senators, is how are we going to get rid

of the health disparities that Native Americans face today if we

can’t even keep up with inflation that we have right now? I know

that you are all aware of the various challenges that American Indians face, but the President’s 2005 budget continues this deadly

trend. Funding increases for Medicare in this budget are much

higher than those for IHS. It seems odd that if one can recognize

that Medicare costs have to increase, why can’t we recognize that

IHS costs also must increase? They both are for direct service in

the end. We need to look at the increases not only to keep up with

inflation, but also to close the gap of disparities.

So Mr. Chairman, I ask that you do what you can to have a 12-

percent increase across the board in the IHS budget this year, to

meet the inflation and also to make up some of the ground we lost

last year.

I also want to talk to you about the very important, but misunderstood funding need, and that is contract support costs. Contract support costs are mutually agreed upon costs between the

U.S. Government and the tribe. These costs are for part of the costs

of running the programs that we have been taking over. The tribe

and the Government mutually agree on these costs. It is not something that the tribes pull a number out of the air and say, this is

what it costs us. It is just a mutually agreed upon thing through

the different circulars that everyone knows what is accurate and

what is correct. But when it comes time to pay these costs, after

the tribe has performed their service, the Government neglects to

pay the full amount.

This would be something like if I took an example maybe in the

private sector, that if a government was going to outsource something for a product or services, or maybe like buy a jet fighter, the

Government would sit down with the contractor and work out the

contract and negotiate a cost or negotiate a price. And then after

the company went out and did their deal and made the jet fighter

and gave it to the Government, the Government would not turn

around and say, oh, we are going to short you on some of the

money; we decided that we do not have enough; we are only going

to pay 80 percent of what we agreed to. That would be ludicrous

to do that, and it would be very dishonest to do that.

But when it comes to Native American tribes that diligently perform their duty and perform their contracts, their mutually negotiated contracts, the U.S. Government does just that. They turn

around and say, well, you did your work; thank you, but we have

decided that even though we agreed on what we should pay you,

we are going to pay you less now. That is really inexcusable in my

mind, sir.

Why are the first Americans treated differently in this respect?

I cannot figure that out. In my training in ethics in business
15

school, they never taught me that it is okay that if a business is

run by the tribes that you do not have to treat them the same. I

was brought up knowing that when you make a deal, a deal is a

deal. You pay your debts, and if you do not have the right deal,

then you go negotiate a new one, but you don’t welsh on what you

have.

So my concern, sir, is that this has been going on for many years.

You heard testimony that the need is around $100 million, and we

really need to have contract support costs paid. The tribes of this

country that have taken over their own programs have become very

efficient; have become very good at running health care. At the

same time, the U.S. Government has decided to not fully fund them

and all their costs to take over the Indian Health Service programs.

So Mr. Chairman, I would ask that you do everything in your

power to correct this serious contractual embarrassment, really,

and fully fund contract support costs for the first Americans.

I know that America is, in my mind, the greatest country on

earth. I think most folks know that. The world kind of looks to us.

I know there are a lot of people in the world that do not like us,

but the whole world does look to us because we protect the world.

We drive its wealth. We provide health services to countries across

the oceans. And we really stand for democracy in this world, and

by democracy, self-determination.

So I want to know why in this multi-trillion budget, why can’t

we keep the first Americans from falling further behind in health

care? It is often said that if we can put a man on the moon, why

can’t we do this or why can’t we do that. But I understand that

pretty soon maybe I will be able to say, if we can put a person on

Mars, why can’t we find adequate funding for IHS?

I think that is what it is coming to, sir. I know that this committee knows the details. I know you are well-educated and versed on

the problems. I ask that all the members of this committee work

hard to educate the rest of the Senate and the rest of the government on the needs of Indian country, sir.

Thank you very much.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Kashevaroff appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Don.

Ms. LaMarr.

STATEMENT OF CINDY LAMARR, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL

INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

Ms. LAMARR. Thank you, Chairman Campbell and Vice Chairman Inouye. It is an honor to be here before. Also, thank you to

the members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. Thank

you for this opportunity to be here before you to testify on problems

with the fiscal year 2005 budget. As I heard here, you understand

and so we are speaking to the choir, so to speak, when it comes

to education matters.

I am the president of National Indian Education Association. I

am Pit River Paiute from Northern California. We have the largest

population of American Indian students in the Nation in California

and some other problems.
16

NIEA was founded in 1969 and is the largest organization in the

Nation dedicated to Indian education advocacy issues, and embraces the membership of over 4,000 American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian educators, tribal leaders, school administrators, parents, teachers and students.

NIEA makes every effort to advocate for the unique educational

and culturally related academic needs of Native students, and to

ensure the Federal Government upholds its immense responsibility

for the education of American Indian and Alaska Natives through

the provision of direct educational services.

This is incumbent upon the trust relationship of the U.S. Government and includes the responsibility of ensuring educational equity

and access. Recognition and validation of the cultural, social and

linguistic experiences of these groups is critical in order to guarantee the continuity of Native communities. The way in which instruction and educational services are provided is critical to the

achievement of our students, for them to obtain the same standards of students nationwide.

Making education a priority for native students: In the Senate

committee’s views and estimates report for last year’s fiscal year

2004 budget request for Indian programs, it states that educational

attainment for native youth is deficient compared with other

groups in the United States. An aggravating factor in educational

achievement is the continued inability of the Federal Government

to ensure adequate, safe and clean educational facilities conducive

to learning.

The No Child Left Behind Act: Although NIEA supports the

broad-based principles of No Child Left Behind, there is widespread concern about the many obstacles that NCLB presents to

Indian communities, who often live in remote, isolated and economically disadvantaged communities. There is no one more concerned about accountability and documenting results that the

membership of our organization. But the challenges many of our

students and educators face on a daily basis make it difficult to

show adequate yearly progress or to ensure teachers are the most

highly qualified.

The requirements of the statute and its timeframe for results do

not recognize that schools educating native students have an inadequate level of resources to allow for the effective development of

programs known to work with native students. For example, the

appropriation available under Title VII of No Child Left Behind

provides only a few hundred dollars per student to meet the special

education and culturally related needs of our students.

The implementation of the statute does not include within the

definition of ‘‘highly qualified teacher,’’ the idea that teachers educating native students actually have the training and demonstrated

experience in order to be effective teachers of native students. Not

only is there inadequate funding for No Child Left Behind, there

are serious concerns about confused guidance on adequate yearly

progress mandates, inadequate assessment examples for limited

English proficient students, weakened protections to prevent high

school dropout rates to occur, a lack of focus on parental involvement, recognition of para-professionals’ qualifications, and a basic

denial of civil rights protections for children.
17

The fiscal year 2005 President’s budget leaves Indian children

behind. As I heard this morning, I think you are all aware of that.

President Bush’s budget proposes a 4.8-percent increase to education, $266.4 billion in total budget authority for the Department

of Education. But Indian program funding remains at the same

level as 2004, with some programs slated for elimination.

In addition, $120.9 million for fiscal year 2005 is down from the

fiscal year 2003 level of $121.6 million. The request for Alaska Native education and Native Hawaiians is capped at $33.3 million for

each group, or at the same level as 2004. Native communities are

not only denied equal access to a quality education at fiscal year

2003 levels, they are now asked to shoulder an even more atrocious

burden by being subjected to even deeper cuts.

The fiscal year 2005 Department of Education budget request:

Nearly 90 percent of the approximately 500,000 Indian children attend public schools throughout the Nation. Indian students who attend these schools often reside in economically deprived areas and

are impacted by programs for disadvantaged students. The President’s 2005 budget fails to fully fund the title I low-income school

grants programs critical to closing achievement gaps. An increase

of $1 billion for this program still leaves more than $7 billion below

the authorized level for No Child Left Behind.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, is proposed to be funded at less than half the full funding level when

IDEA was first adopted in 1975. These inadequate increases also

eliminate 38 education programs that provide vital services to Indian children such as dropout prevention, gifted and talented education, school counseling, and after school programs, to name a few.

If the fiscal year 2005 budget is enacted, the proposed increase of

4.8 percent would be the smallest increase since 1996 and would

complete disregard Native students’ critical needs.

The Department of the Interior budget request is proposed to be

cut 0.5 percent. Within that budget, there is a $52-million reduction in funding for the BIA, reducing that agency’s budget by 2 percent, to $2.3 billion.

We talked about Indian school construction funding. During

President Bush’s first term, he promised to remove the backlog of

new Indian school construction. Within the 2005 budget, Indian

school construction funding is proposed to be cut $65.9 million from

fiscal year 2004’s appropriation of $229.1 million. The rationale is

the Office of Management and Budget wants more schools completed and the rate of school construction has fallen behind. This

can be due to a number of factors, including bureaucracy delays,

contracting delays or weather conditions.

I wanted to also point out that it may be coincidental, but this

cut is the same amount of funding that has been appropriated or

set aside for Indian trust fund accounting. It has been increased by

$65 million, the same amount as the construction funds have been

cut.

We urge you to ask the Bureau of Indian Affairs to get its house

in order, to step up this process and to urge the restoration of

school construction funding that is necessary to meet the needs of

Indian students.
18

Indian education facilities improvement and repair funding: The

continued deterioration of facilities on Indian land is not only a

Federal responsibility. It has become a liability of the Federal Government. The 2005 budget request cuts facilities improvement and

repair by $6.1 million, from $137.5 million. There is a known backlog of hundreds of millions of dollars in critical repair needs. It

could be stated in the billions.

We urge not only restoration of funds to the fiscal year 2004

level, but an increase that will realistically address the needs of Indian children who must try to learn in buildings that are not conducive to learning. It is unfair to hold Indian children hostage in

their right to a successful education.

The Impact Aid Program directly provides resources to State

public schools, school districts with trust status lands within the

boundaries of a school district for operational support. That program funding is slated to remain on the same level as fiscal year

2004. Of course, as we heard earlier, we are very disappointed that

tribal colleges and universities funding has been reduced by $5.8

million, and we request that level be restored as well as the United

Tribes Technical College.

In addition to that, NIEA requests additional funding needs, and

of course we are underfunded, as we know. We are asking that for

the first time in history that tribal departments of education be

funded. True success can be attained only when tribes can assume

control of their children’s educational future. As mandated in many

treaties and as authorized in several Federal statutes, the education of Indian children is an important role of Indian tribes.

The authorization for TED funding was retained in Title VII of

the No Child Left Behind Act. Despite this authorization and several other prior statutes, Federal funds have never been appropriated for tribal departments of education. Achieving tribal control

of education through TEDs will increase tribal accountability and

responsibility for their students and will ensure tribe’s exercise

their commitment to improve the education of their youngest members.

For fiscal year 2005, we are requesting a total of $3 million, or

$250,000 per tribe for 12 tribes, to initiate the process of their education departments and to finally begin the process of empowering

them to direct their own educational priorities that reflects their

linguistic, cultural and social heritage and traditions.

On the Native American Languages Act, Senator Inouye has

been a champion of this. The preservation of indigenous languages

is of paramount importance to Native communities. It is estimated

that only 20 indigenous languages will remain viable by the year

2050. We must begin the legislative process to ensure there is some

substance in the Native American Languages Act for projects that

address the crisis of our language losses.

NIEA urges this committee’s support for additional funding that

will address language needs of communities with less than a handful of elderly fluent speakers. NIEA, in partnership with other organizations, is willing to assist in the identification of needs and

funding required for this process to begin.

One final request, John O’Malley funding. In 1995, a freeze was

imposed on Johnson O’Malley funding through the Department of
19

the Interior, limiting funds to a tribe based upon its population

count in 1995. This freeze prohibits additional tribes from receiving

JOM funding and does not recognize increased costs due to inflation and accounting for population growth. NIEA urges that the

Johnson O’Malley funding freeze be lifted and other formula-driven

or headcount-based grants be analyzed to ensure tribes are receiving funding for their student population at a level that will provide

access to high quality education for Indian students.

Finally, NIEA respectfully urges this committee to truly make

Indian education a priority and to work with the congressional appropriators and the Administration to ensure that Indian education

programs are fully funded. We encourage an open dialogue and are

willing to work with you to build a more reasonable and less punitive approach that takes into account our experience in Indian education.

NIEA was instrumental in helping with the passage of the Indian Education Act of 1972 and assisted the Congress at that time

in conceiving ideas and recognizing the need for improvement in

the effectiveness and quality of education programs for Native students. Please join NIEA and other organizations established to address the needs of Native students, to put our children at the forefront of all priorities. We must work with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Department of Education and tribal leaders to ensure our

children are not left behind.

Without acknowledgement who are our future, our triumph and

our link to the past, there is no need for tribal sovereignty’s continuation.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Ms. LaMarr appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Cindy.

We will now go to Mr. Sossamon.

STATEMENT OF RUSSELL SOSSAMON, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL

AMERICAN INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL

Mr. SOSSAMON. Thank you, Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman

Inouye and other distinguished members of the committee. On behalf of the members of the National American Indian Housing

Council and its board of directors, I would like to thank you for this

opportunity to address you today on the President’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2005.

As chairman of NAIHC and executive director of the Choctaw

Nation Housing Authority of Oklahoma, I was disappointed with

the President’s proposed budget this year. This is the 4th year in

a row that it does not include any increases for Indian housing. Inflation has risen steadily, as well as construction costs,

compounding it with a growing Indian population.

The threat of funding cuts continues to intensify for all domestic

programs. We are happy to avoid any cuts, but we are not so grateful as to just accept what we are granted in the face of brutal realities in Indian country.

Throughout this hearing and your continued examination of the

President’s budget, we hope you will keep our concerns in mind.

NAIHC believes that $700 million is the minimum that should be

appropriated for Native American housing for fiscal year 2005. The
20

president has proposed $647 million. This is roughly the same

amount that has been appropriated for the last 4 years.

Given the rate of inflation and increased housing costs, housing

funding has actually decreased under this Administration. Based

strictly on inflation, the Indian housing block grants should receive

at least $713 million for fiscal year 2005, an amount that would be

a true flatline of funding, and not actually an increase.

We understand that this committee in particular has been frustrated with the lack of hard data to support yearly budget requests

for Indian housing. We share your frustration. You may remember

that last year, HUD’s Office of Native American Programs underwent a performance assessment through the Office of Management

and Budget. ONAP received a poor score, due mainly to its lack of

data, therefore its inability to measure performance.

We had hoped this assessment would lead to a swift implementation of a data collection system that would allow for tribes and

HUD to demonstrate the progress that has been made and the

unmet need. HUD collects data yearly in an Indian housing plan

and annual performance reports on such items as the number of

overcrowded units, the number of housing units constructed, and

the number of housing units rehabilitated. Unfortunately, HUD

does not have a data base that can pull this data together to give

a national picture.

Since we at NAIHC know that this data could be key to increased appropriations, we have decided to embark on our own

comprehensive data collection. A survey will be sent to all tribes

across the country in March that will seek to collect the kind of information required to show both what NAHASDA has accomplished, but also identify the current housing needs. We hope to report back to this committee by the end of May with the facts and

figures on the use of Federal funding from various agencies, as well

as a report on services and banking opportunities that are currently not available to tribes.

However, without this data on hand for the beginning of this

budget process, I would like to illustrate for you how the proposed

block grant amount would be used and why an increase is needed.

This illustration was provided by one of ONAP’s housing administrators during a meeting earlier this year. The funding factors in

these figures are approximate: $647 million for the fiscal year 2005

block grant. Subtract from that $7.5 million for set asides, less 20

percent for administration expenses allowed under NAHASDA, less

30 percent for current assisted stock, which is to maintain the

homes developed under the 1937 Act, leaves us with only $320 million available for new housing construction.

With an average cost of $125,000 per unit, tribes should be able

to build approximately 2,550 new units of housing nationwide. According to the census, more than 40,000 Indian houses are overcrowded. That is more than 1.1 persons per room. So at 2,550 units

a year, it would take nearly 16 years to address only one of the

seven need factors used under NAHASDA to determine need, overcrowding if funding and costs remain constant. This may be an

oversimplification of the situation, but it shows that progress, while

steady, is slow to meet the need.
21

I would like to refer you to my written testimony on the discussion of other vital Indian housing programs, including the community development block grant, rural housing and economic development program, and BIA housing.

Because of the short time today, I must finish with a discussion

on technical assistance. The President has proposed technical assistance funding for the implementation of NAHASDA in fiscal

year 2005 by eliminating $2.2 million in set asides for NAIHC,

which supplements HUD’s technical assistance funding of $5 million. In spite of the same budget request last year, Congress chose

to fund NAIHC’s efforts in the final fiscal year 2004 appropriation

in the amount of $2.2 million. We would like to see the same happen in 2005.

NAIHC also receives set asides from the community development block grant for a total of $4.7 million in fiscal year 2004 for both

grants. The Administration has proposed $2.48 million for NAIHC

in 2005.

HUD’s Native American block grant is not an easy program to

administer if you have no experience with it. For tribes with extremely limited funds and/or limited experience, it can be daunting

and trying to effectively use the NAHASDA block grant funds. In

particular, small tribes across the country are in desperate need of

alongside support and training.

HUD is simply unable to address this need when their job is to administer and provide oversight for the program. Using the $2.2

million Native American housing block grant set aside in 2003,

NAIHC provided 430 scholarships to attend NAHASDA-related

training opportunities offered by NAIHC and HUD. We facilitated

five mentoring trips utilizing the expertise of one tribe to demonstrate and mentor for another. We offered 29 free classroom sessions in 10 different subject matters relevant to Indian housing;

780 students received training on 23 subjects during two of

NAIHC’s annual meetings.

We have coordinated four policy development workshops for 136

individuals to develop NAHASDA complaint policies. We provided

free board of commissioner and tribal council training to 30 tribes.

We have developed five technical assistance documents, including

a set of model construction documents, an executive director’s orientation manual, and three sample policies that deal with collections, compliance, procurement and property acquisition.

All of these have been or will soon be approved by HUD and will

be reproduced and distributed free to tribes and TDHEs. So as you

can see, NAIHC’s Native American housing block grant set aside

is being put to good use and is being applied right where the tribes

need it to implement NAHASDA.

Using the CDBG technical assistance funding, NAIHC provided

on-site technical assistance to over 162 tribes in 2003 alone, supplemented by more than 365 e-mails and phone calls. Approximately 530 tribal housing staff attended training courses as part

of NAIHC’s leadership institute, separate from all the other courses

that have been mentioned above.

Despite all this good work, NAIHC’s funding has been cut in half

by the President’s budget. Tribal capacity will improve only when

there is training and other assistance provided. NAIHC has shown
22

precisely how it uses its Federal funds for the betterment of these

housing programs. Has HUD been able to show the same amount

of support for the tribes? We have seen no similar breakdown in

services by HUD, and believe that the tribes will suffer if only

HUD is there to provide this assistance. We are therefore requesting that full funding of $4.8 million in

fiscal year 2005 for NAIHC technical assistance, which would ideally all come from the community development block grant program,

so as not to compete with tribes for scarce housing dollars out of

the Native American Indian housing block grant.

Mr. Chairman, during this hearing last year, you had a question

about fetal alcohol syndrome and what can be done to prevent it

in tribal communities. One way to prevent alcoholism is to provide

hope for the future. What hope can there be when you are living

in a home with 25 other people, having no running water and no

electricity? When people live in those kind of conditions, we see

commonly in tribal areas there is no hope.

Strictly on the basis of human need, shelter is number three in

the hierarchy. Let’s go to the core of the problem of this epidemic

in the tribal communities, including alcoholism, and address the

basic safety and comfort for shelter. Funding appropriated for

health care and education, while important, goes much further

when the base need of shelter is met. Absent adequate housing,

you are discounting your investment in these other two areas.

I would again like to thank all of the members of this committee,

in particular Chairman Campbell and Vice Chairman Inouye, for

their continued support for the tribes and Indian housing. NAIHC

looks forward to working with each of you for the rest of this session of Congress and I will be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Sossamon appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. And last, Gary Edwards.

STATEMENT OF GARY EDWARDS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,

THE NATIONAL NATIVE AMERICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT

ASSOCIATION

Mr. EDWARDS. Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman Inouye, distinguished committee members, tribal elders and leaders, my name

is Gary Edwards. I am the chief executive officer of the National

Native American Law Enforcement Association and the vice chairman of the Native American National Advisory Committee for Boys

and Girls Clubs of America.

The National Native American Law Enforcement Association was

founded in 1993. Its membership is made up of Native American

and non-Native American women and men in law enforcement and

individuals that are not in law enforcement. The association cultivates and fosters cooperation and partnership between Native

American law enforcement officers, agents, their agencies, private

industry, tribal industries and the public. NNALEA’s goal is to give

back to the communities from which we come.

I have prepared my testimony and written statement today and

I ask that it be accepted by this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. It will be included in the record.

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you.
23

With regard to the fiscal year 2005 budget, NNALEA believes

that it is necessary for funding for Indian programs critical to tribal sovereignty, stability, infrastructure and quality of life to be at

least maintained at the minimum funding levels of today, with additional funding levels necessary for programs essential to maintain national security strategies and objectives, such as the national homeland security defense strategy and the Federal enterprise architecture.

NNALEA also believes that two specific categories of Indian programs warrant special discussion today. The categories are tribal

law enforcement, public safety and homeland security, and tribal

youth. In my remaining time, I will briefly highlight some of the

risks and potential solutions for each category.

First, tribal law enforcement, tribal safety and homeland security. The risk, drugs. Approximately 80 to 90 percent of crime in

Indian country derives from some form of illegal substance or alcohol abuse. Violent crime: Native Americans are 2.5 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime than non-Native Americans. The

violent crime rate for Indian country in 2002 was 49.8 percent

higher than the national average. Gang activity is rampant on

some tribal reservations.

Public and officer safety. It is not uncommon for an officer to

wait more than 3 hours for backup. Officer backup is not only contingent on the availability of another officer, but also on the ability

and capability to transmit the call for assistance via radio or telephone.

Tribal homeland security vulnerabilities. Southwest and northern tribal border areas have been historically known for smuggling

of narcotics, illegal immigrants and trafficking in various other

items of contraband. The significant increase in border crossings

today not only has caused a drain on tribal law enforcement focused toward protecting our homeland, but also has caused a drain

on our Indian Health Service hospitals. The significant border

crossings with regard to the Tohono O’odham Reservation has cost

this year alone in excess of $200,000 of unfunded care. Tribal border security is clearly a priority on everyone’s short list.

Now I will give a potential solution snapshot for the areas of concern and risk. Drugs and violent crime. We must increase the number of drug enforcement officers in Indian country. Also, we must

increase the number of BIA and tribal law enforcement officers to

perform public safety and regular law enforcement functions. Also,

we must conduct training with regard to drugs and violent crimes

in Indian country such as NNALEA has conducted at their last

three national conferences and plan to do so again this year at our

2004 national conference.

Public safety and officer safety. A program like the COPS office,

the Community Oriented Policing Program, provides not only infrastructure for law enforcement in Indian country, but it also provides manpower. It is essential that a program like that exists and

continues to move forward.

Tribal law enforcement and public safety officials need to be at

parity with their non-tribal counterparts in areas of pay, benefits,

equipment, training and technical assistance. In turn, Indian country law enforcement needs to improve the quality of its law enforce-
24

ment level of performance to parity with that of non–Indian law

enforcement organizations.

NNALEA will help Indian country achieve this goal of parity by

developing better training on a national area, and also through our

development of the academic center for excellence in education and

training and technical assistance for Indian country.

The ACE program has members from NNALEA, Fort Lewis College of Durango, CO, East Central University of Oklahoma, the

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Distance Learning Program, the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Visual Training Academy. This particular

program will today increase our ability to train and maintain officers with current techniques utilized today to fight crime and to

protect our homeland.

Currently, ACE partners are seeking to develop an interoperable

satellite communications system for tribal and rural law enforcement officers, public safety, and emergency responders to utilize.

Testing has already been successfully done at the Navajo Reservation.

Tribal corrections programs in correctional facilities are in great

need of funding support for quality, culturally sensitive corrections

programs, and funding sufficient to build new facilities, modernize

current structures, and maintain adequate professional staff.

Tribal homeland security vulnerabilities. Today, the National

Native American Law Enforcement Association has developed and

presented a seven-phase approach to tribal lands homeland security. The approach will encompass Native Americans in the continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii. The National Congress

of American Indians is partnering with NNALEA and the Department of Homeland Security to conduct a tribal border pilot project.

The project will be an assessment-type project and this particular

type project needs to be moved to other parts of Indian country as

soon as possible.

Another very positive movement is that the Department of

Homeland Security has reserved a position on the table with other

national, State and local representatives for the voice of the development and writing of a national incident management system,

which is the NIMS, and the rewriting of the national response

plan. This gives Indian country a voice at the table and can have

great impact upon our ability to cooperate with Federal, State local

police and emergency response organizations in the future.

The second area I would like to briefly discuss is tribal youth.

First, I will go over the risks. The risks that tribal youth are looking at today is that American Indian and Alaskan Native mortality

from alcoholism is over 10 times the rate of all races in the United

States. Also, between 1990 and 2001, there has been 106 percent

increase in diabetes for the American Indian and Alaska Native

age group from 15 to 19.

Violent crime. Native American teenagers are 49 percent more

likely to be victims of violent crime than non–Native American

teenagers. There are approximately 375 Native American-based

gangs with approximately 6,000 members and associates in Indian

country. Much of their illegal activity goes on on reservations unchecked.
25

In 1999, approximately 2,000 American Indian and Alaska Native youth were being held in juvenile residential facilities across

the country. That number increased by eight percent by the year

2001. Some potential solution snapshots for that particular problem

are the Boys and Girls Clubs of America. The Boys and Girls Clubs

of America had one club in Pine Ridge in 1992; today we have 171

clubs across Indian country. We serve approximately 70,000 Native

American youth in 22 States, representing 77 different American

Indian, Alaska Native, and Hawaiian communities.

Recognizing the economic impact on Indian reservations, the

Boys and Girls Clubs of America has established the Native American Sustainability Fund to enable the clubs to be sustained on Indian country. NNALEA recommends that these funds be designated that would help the BGCA sustain critical Indian clubs.

Another program that was very effective in a pilot program last

year was from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. It as

the Gang Resistance Education and Training Program that was piloted on seven reservations across the United States. It was a true

success for Native youth in tribal communities. Tribal youth established new relationships with law enforcement officers, community

leaders, parents, club staff, and they acquired new skills in resisting gangs.

The Indian Health Service partnered recently with the National

Congress of American Indians and Boys and Girls Clubs of America

to develop a more active role in healthy lifestyles and keeping

American Indian and Alaska Native youth in school.

Another program of note from last year is the Helen Keller

ChildSight program which conducted a vision screening for a group

of Native American children ages 10–15. As a result of that, they

found that there was an astonishing refractive error rate of 37.7

percent in Native American youth. The refractory rate for the average across the country is 11 percent to 20 percent.

In closing, funding is very important to the success of the programs I have mentioned. It is NNALEA’s belief that it is for necessary funding for Indian programs critical to tribal sovereignty,

stability, infrastructure and quality of life to be at least maintained

at the current level, while additional funding may be necessary for

Indian programs essential to national strategies and objectives.

Thank you, and I am happy to answer any questions you may

have.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Edwards appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Let me ask a few and I will submit some for the record, too.

Since you are the last one that spoke, Gary, a few years ago I was

the speaker at Reno at your national convention. I have to tell you,

I was really impressed with the professionalism and the type of

training that the law enforcement officers go through and their

ability to interact with other agencies, too.

You mentioned several things I wanted to get your reaction to.

You know that Indian law enforcement has the ability like any law

enforcement to tap into Federal programs like what is called the

CETAC program, which is transfer of Federal technology and apparatus like drug-sniffing apparatus, things of that nature. Tribes

have that authority, you knew that, and also by the way bullet-
26

proof vests, you mentioned that in your testimony. They can also

avail themselves to those, too.

You also mentioned that you are working with several colleges

now. I remember we talked about Fort Lewis once before. How is

that program going? Are they actually offering some classes now to

help what you do?

Mr. EDWARDS. They were very helpful in our 2003 conference in

November in Fort Worth, Texas. We actually put on a presentation

regarding the Academic Center for Excellence where we had eight

different pilot sites across the country that were utilizing distance

learning. We had all of our partners there from Fort Lewis, East

Central University, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center,

NNALEA and Boys and Girls Clubs of America. We interchanged

during a learning session during that period of time.

Then we had a special class after that for those in attendance

and via the satellite communication regarding legal updates put on

by the Office of Tribal Justice. So it is on the way. It is going.

Also, as a result of that partnership, we were able to give 53 people in attendance at our national conference two hours of full college credit based upon the curriculum and their qualifications

through this group of the Academic Center for Excellence.

The CHAIRMAN. Good.

We have also had a number of tribes coming in that have land

bases that border either Canada or Mexico, that have talked to us

about trying to define a little better relationship on the homeland

defense bill that we passed, and making sure that they retained

tribal sovereignty, too. It is something that we are aware of and

we are trying to work on. I just wanted to pass that on to you.

Cindy, let me ask you a couple of questions next. First of all, did

you say you were Pit River?

Ms. LAMARR. Yes; I am one-half Pit River, one-half Paiute. I reside in Sacramento.

The CHAIRMAN. You work from Sacramento.

Ms. LAMARR. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you know the Preston family, the Lucky

Preston family of Pit River?

Ms. LAMARR. Sure.

The CHAIRMAN. Thirty years ago, I taught him when he was a

youngster in Indian art classes. After he was married, they named

their son Ben Nighthorse Preston. Wasn’t that nice of him? [Laughter.]

He is about 14 now and we have sort of a pen pal. He writes me

and tells me how school is going and the classes he is taking and

his activities. I just really was honored that they would do that. It

is kind of the Indian way, or something, but it was very nice of

them to do that.

Ms. LAMARR. I will be sure to name my next grandchild after

you. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRMAN. That would be nice.

Ms. LAMARR. Hopefully it will be a boy.

The CHAIRMAN. However, I do not know of a Dan Inouye

Thunderhawk or something of that nature. Perhaps we ought to reserve that honor for my vice chairman here. [Laughter.]
27

Let me talk to you a little bit about the No Child Left Behind

Act. As I understand your testimony, you believe that the NIEA

does believe in accountability and documenting results, but the No

Child Left Behind Act is not the proper vehicle to be able to do it.

Could you tell the committee how the NIEA would introduce accountability and measures of effectiveness into the education of Indian children, which you believe in, that would be done in lieu of

the No Child Left Behind Act, if that is the wrong way to go?

Ms. LAMARR. I don’t know that we can supersede the No Child

Left Behind Act, but our tribes and public schools that serve American Indian and native students are trying to meet the mandates

of the law. But because of the many problems such as isolation, low

economic factors, and also that teachers that teach on reservations

are very hard to come by, that really want to live and teach on a

reservation, causes a problem.

I think overall, there are problems with No Child Left Behind for

all public schools, but particularly with Indian communities it

poses a huge problem. I guess I am not asking for an alternative.

I am asking for some special exceptions.

The CHAIRMAN. We have heard from literally everyone on the

panel that our funding is inadequate in the President’s budget, and

we understand that. I am sure you believe that in educating for Indian kids, as we believe too, should be fully funded, but we do not

have a dollar figure. I did not hear you suggest a dollar figure.

What do you think that the BIA needs in order to do the job right?

Ms. LAMARR. That is a good question.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a good answer?

Ms. LAMARR. Billions. [Laughter.]

What I have heard is that the backlog of repair needs for Indian schools is about $2 billion.

The CHAIRMAN. How much did you say?

Ms. LAMARR. About $2 billion.

The CHAIRMAN. About $2 billion.

Ms. LAMARR. When you factor into many areas such as inflation

and the cost and deterioration, I think that we can’t even begin.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is one of the problems we face, that

we are not doing a real good job with education money. There is

no doubt in my mind.

Ms. LAMARR. No.

The CHAIRMAN. But the needs seem to be going up faster even

if we put more money in. The growth of youngsters on the reservations has just, we literally have a population explosion, as you

know. We are well aware that we are not doing a very good job in

keeping up with the education of our youngsters.

Ms. LAMARR. The fact that our Indian communities are increasing in numbers is a good thing. But the fact that education numbers and dollars are decreasing is not good. It is a terrible tragedy.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand that.

Mr. Sossamon, you stated that at least $1 billion in annual funding is needed for Indian housing. Are any other factors being considered in reaching that amount, other than needing more money

from the Federal Government?

Mr. SOSSAMON. Yes, sir; what we believe is that there is ongoing

now a vigorous effort to access not only other Federal programs,
28

but to utilize travel funding, to utilize the tribes’ bonding capacity,

and expand the tribes’ bonding capacity, to work through tax exempt bonding, through the State agencies; also to leverage private

dollars. We are working with a number of entities, both private financial institutions and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Wells

Fargo, to name a few, to bring private dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. That is all well and good if the tribe is financially secure and has natural resources or casino money or something. But those tribes that are really poor, some of those opportunities just do not present themselves for poor tribes.

Mr. SOSSAMON. Absolutely. The reason that we believe that Fed- eral investment needs to increase to the $1 billion level is to address inadequate infrastructure, to allow tribes to develop on their

own.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. Kashevaroff, coming from a long way off in Alaska, can you

tell the committee to what degree that telemedicine usage is done

in Alaska, or whether this is an area that we ought to focus on

with the limited funds that are in the President’s budget?

Mr. KASHEVAROFF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Alaska has implemented a telemedicine project over the last 5 or 6 years. We have

telemedicine carts in about 170 Alaska villages. the utilization has

been increasing every day. We basically worked out the framework

of where to transfer the images to and how to read them and everything like that. We have quite a few good success stories now of

villages that where the weather is bad and no one can get out, that

doctors have been able to use the telemedicine system to help the

patient out and even save lives.

It has been pioneered in Alaska, and really needs to be shared

throughout the Nation. We basically have a system that is ready

to be shared throughout IHS and we have already had some requests for maybe even overseas to be able to come and use the

same type of system. So we are ready to share that, and it is pretty

much mature, and it just really comes down to the amount of funding.

The CHAIRMAN. I am not aware of how much other tribes use

telemedicine, but I have seen a little bit of it in Montana. It seems

to me it is a real wave of the future. Would you say that Alaska

is on the leading edge of that, using telemedicine?

Mr. KASHEVAROFF. Yes; I believe we are on the leading edge of

it. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Tex, funding for historical accounting, your testimony takes issue with $110 million for historical accounting, without what you call ‘‘mutually acceptable parameters’’. I jotted that

down on how to undertake the task. We wanted to find out, what

is ‘‘mutually acceptable parameters’’? Is that the agreement that

we are trying to get?

Mr. HALL. Right, right. We wanted to work with the committee

in terms of how we go about historical accounting, especially with

the 1-year moratorium with the rider that was passed in the last

fiscal year through the appropriations.

And then to see that in this budget without coming to any kind

of an agreement about the parameters of how to do that is the

issue that we were raising, Mr. Chairman. So again, I think that
29

is very important as we move forward on this very, very important

initiative and very costly initiative, that we work together collectively to define that. So I think we can actually save dollars, but

it is just puzzling to see that again without any kind of an agreement on how to go about it.

The CHAIRMAN. We are trying to make that a priority to get that

settle this year, so that the appropriators do not try and take it

away from us like they did last year. We have talked about this

before, that we really need to get our shoulders collectively to the

same grindstone and get some solution to it. I hope that NCAI will

really help us this year on doing that.

Mr. HALL. We are 100 percent in support of the committee wanting to move forward. This is the appropriate committee, and not

through the appropriations to try to legislate anything.

The CHAIRMAN. Something else came up to my mind when Senator Conrad was speaking, and Senator Dorgan. It seems like every

year something comes up about the United Tribal Technical College, why the Administration does not support it or fund it properly. What is different about that school than other schools? Is

there something that we are not aware of that we need to change

legislatively?

Mr. HALL. My understanding is that their budget is in kind of

like what they call a special pooled overhead, so it is discretionary,

versus a permanent line item in their budget.

The CHAIRMAN. Why was that school put into a discretionary category?

Mr. HALL. I am not certain what the history on that was, but

United Tribes and Crown Point from New Mexico are both of those

special pooled overhead. We have been asking for that permanent

line item for quite some time.

The CHAIRMAN. Is Haskell also in that category?

Mr. HALL. No; Haskell has a permanent line item. So Secretary

Norton came out in 2002 and Neil McCaleb, assistant secretary at

that time, both agreed that United Tribes has nearly 600 students;

they have a high graduation rate; it is a very important part of the

whole tribal college initiative and does a great job. We were led to

believe that it was going to find a permanent line item in the budget, but evidently it has not.

Senator CONRAD. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I did not see you come back in. I am glad

you did. I was just asking about this.

Senator CONRAD. Yes; which I appreciate very much. Maybe I

could explain what we have been told is the problem, because it is

a catch-22 if ever there was one. This institution is owned by five

tribes. As a result, they do not qualify for Tribal College Act funding. The Tribal College Act requires that you only have one institution per tribe. This is owned by multiple tribes.

The CHAIRMAN. So we can pro-rate it or do something.

Senator CONRAD. What they say is, look, we want it funded by

the Tribal College Act, but the Tribal College Act specifically precludes funding of this institution because it is owned by multiple

tribes.

The CHAIRMAN. The Tribal College Act is up for reauthorization

this year. This would be an opportunity for you to work with us,
30

and Senator Inouye, and I know Senator Dorgan, between our collective staffs, maybe we can change it in the act so we do not have

to keep dealing with it every year and it would be a line item like

the rest of them.

Senator CONRAD. We would certainly appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. We would look forward to working with you to solve this

problem.

The CHAIRMAN. Good. Okay.

Senator Inouye, I yield to you if you have questions.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM

HAWAII, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, I have been a member of this

committee now for 27 years. Of those years, I have served and I

have had the honor of serving as either chairman or vice chairman

for 17 years. Throughout those years, I have sat on this panel and

listened to hundreds of stories of pain and shame, of discrimination, of broken promises. I have heard stories of the high rate of

diabetes, the worst in the United States; in fact, worse than some

of the third world countries; of the number of amputees and the

blind.

I have heard horror stories of glaucoma, where the rest of the

population has never heard of it, but in Indian country it is commonplace. I have heard of the suicide rates among Alaskan teenagers, seven times that of the national norm. I have heard of drug

abuse, substance abuse in Indian country, about 50 percent higher

than the rest of the Nation, and yet we have only 11 DEA agents.

I have heard all of these stories. I have heard stories of cancer,

of heart disease. I have heard stories of spending $4,500 per student in our community colleges. At the same time for African

American students at Howard University, under the same type of

program, over $20,000.

It is a good story to tell, but these are some of the best kept secrets that I know of. These walls have heard all these stories. We

have heard these stories. The record would show these stories, but

who reads those records? How many of you read the Congressional

Record? We give eloquent speeches on the floor, but I doubt if five

of you read the Congressional Record. So you can imagine how

many people read the Congressional Record in the United States.

At the same time, we know that more Native Americans have

volunteered and put on the uniform of this Nation since World War

I than any other ethnic group. Even today, more Indians die, more

casualties among Indians. Yet how many Americans know about

this? The land that we reside on belonged to the Indians, but we

take that for granted.

So Tex Hall, I have a little suggestion to make. How about forming a task force on public relations and information, so we can get

all the motion picture people, the public radio people, the PBS people, producers and such, and maybe we will hit the goal, get them

excited, let the others know about your problems. We know about

it. We try to convince our colleagues and frankly they could care

less. I hate to say this, but you look at this panel here. There are

three of us, and we are handling your budget, the three of us.
31

So this story must be told so that decisions are made because it

is politically correct. It is sexy. Right now, the Commerce Committee is having a hearing on indecency, violence, and sex on television. I can assure you that room is filled with cameras and filled

with members. I am a member, but I am sitting here.

So let’s get down to work. We have a story to tell, a good story.

It is about time the rest of America finds out.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a terrific idea, Tex. You know, after those

very derogatory stories came out about Indian gaming in Time, you

read them, the National Indian Gaming Association did just that.

They started putting together a public relations effort with packets

that went out to members of Congress and to educators, to the

news media and so on. I think they have done a really good job.

As Senator Inouye said, it is a story that we try to tell, but we

cannot do it alone. We always fight for you and try to fight for

money for Indian programs, but part of the responsibility has to be

on Indian people to get that story out, too. Not just when a good

movie comes out like Dances With Wolves or something, we need

an ongoing effort all the time.

You have to remember, around here every 2 years, a whole

bunch of people are not here again. The whole House is up for reelection and one-third of the Senate every 2 years. So you have a

constant change of faces here, and with the exception of people like

Senator Inouye who has literally dedicated his life to helping Indian people, a lot of them that are here this time are not going to

be here next time. It is as simple as that. They go on to other

things or they lose or something.

So you have to have a constant ongoing drum-beat every single

time, every 2 years, that same kind of an educational process has

to take place back here. Because Senator Inouye is absolutely right.

We put things in the Congressional Record, and even our colleagues don’t read most of them. So I certainly recommend that.

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, just briefly. Senator Inouye and Chairman Campbell, I definitely agree with it and I would even further

add to it that it needs to be a permanent task force, because as you

mentioned, there is turnover all the time that occurs. We want to

take that challenge up. We have been talking about this for a long

time.

Senator INOUYE. And I want to serve on it.

Mr. HALL. We would most appreciate it. And then the Grammys

that came out just the other day, was it Sunday night? I was

ashamed to see that they said there was no, speaking of the Commerce Committee, there was no hanky-panky at the Grammys, but

the Outcast that won the record of the year I think insulted Indian

tribes. Somebody had a fake war bonnet. Speaking of selling sex on

TV, they had scantily clad female dancers with green turkey feathers. It was a mockery of our culture. But the headlines were that

Grammys pulls off without a scandal, real tame, and nothing was

wrong. That is not right.

So again, we need to have a public relations effort, and we are

going to write a letter to the Grammys and to the FCC Chairman,

Mr. Powell, and talk about that very issue. It is not acceptable to

criticize and mock Indian culture.
32

The CHAIRMAN. No; it is a big question and it deals with a lot

of things like mascot names and all the other stuff that we have

dealt with for years. But a lot of the momentum has to be developed within Indian country to say enough is enough.

Mr. HALL. Exactly.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Conrad, did you have any questions?

Senator CONRAD. Please, I do, Mr. Chairman.

Let me just say that we know the needs in Indian country in

housing and health care and education and law enforcement are

enormous. They are far greater than is being met by this budget.

That is a fact. The population with the greatest needs in the

United States are Native American people.

Yet with this budget, once again they are getting short shrift,

short-changed. The needs are not being met. In fact, the needs are

growing more dramatically in the Indian population than in other

populations, but the budget is going the opposite way.

So what will be the result? Housing will deteriorate. Schools will

decline in quality. Health care among Indian people will be worse.

That is the truth of the matter. It is really very dramatic. I go to

the Indian Health Service first. The budget there is almost $3 billion, $3 billion. The increase asked for is 1.5 percent, $45 million.

Medicare, much larger budget, is being increased by almost 9 percent, 8.8 percent.

You can see if you would provide for an increase in Indian

Health Care in the same way as is being provided for in Medicare,

reflecting increased utilization and reflecting increased health care

costs, it would not be a 1.5 percent increase. If it was Medicare,

it would be 8.8 percent. That is seven percent more; seven percent

of $3 billion is another $200 million. Still you would be nowhere

in the ballpark of the need. The needs-assessed budget that has

been put together says the need is not for $3 billion or $3.2 billion,

if we got the same increase that Medicare is getting. The need is

$19 billion.

For anybody that has gone to Indian country and seen the health

care needs, they are crushing, whether it is diabetes, as was referred to by our distinguished ranking member, or whether it is

suicide, which he also referenced with respect to Alaska. I can tell

you we have an epidemic of suicide in my State of North Dakota.

At the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, we have had an epidemic of suicide. Why? Because Chairman Hall said it well, it is a lack of hope.

When you go to a school and that school you can’t hear yourself

think because there is no division between the classrooms, that is

the high school at Standing Rock, designed by apparently an architect in the Southwest who had no clue about North Dakota winters.

So in one part of that building it is 80 degrees; in another part it

is 50 degrees, and there are no separations in the classroom. You

can’t hear yourself think. How are you going to have a chance to

learn in a setting like that?

In housing, I go to Turtle Mountain Reservation 2 years ago, I

would say to my colleagues, and I was taken into a series of homes

that had mold infestation that was so incredible I literally gagged.

And those who were with me, some of them retched on the floor.

The power of the odor was so overwhelming. We went down in the

crawl spaces of those houses and there was 4 feet of water.
33

And the people were sick. They had a type of mold that kills people. It is a black mold. And you know, we got a little bit of money

to build a few new houses, but the fact is there are still thousands

of people living in those conditions. The children die in those homes

because of that mold. It causes respiratory failure.

You know, this all says something about what we are as a Nation, and what we care about and what we value. People talk a lot

about family values. One would hope we would value families. If

families are going to be expected to live in a hovel that is so

unhealthy that the children die there, what kind of a valuing of

families is that?

And then you go to the school and they are in temporary quarters, they are in trailers in the middle of a North Dakota winter.

And you go to the health care facility, and on Texas reservations

there is no after-hour care is there, Chairman Hall?

Mr. HALL. Absolutely not.

Senator CONRAD. I just asked you, you had an experience with

a person that had an accident on horseback. What did you have to

do to get that person to care?

Mr. HALL. Unfortunately, I had to make out that I was a medical

doctor. It happened in Cooley, and not only do we not have after

hours, we don’t have weekend coverage. It happened on a Saturday

and so he got bucked off and the horse went over backwards and

the saddle horn punctured a hole right in his groin area. He was

bleeding so bad the only thing I could do was use my shirt and my

belt to tourniquet him. We do not have 911, so we don’t have that

part of the service as well, so we had to come around with the pickup about 3 miles around from the ranch to the place where it happened. We had to load him up and obviously he was going into

shock because he was losing so much blood. We could not go to

New Town, which was like 20 miles away. We were in Mandareen.

We had to go to Watford City, and of course I had to also be the

ambulance drive and drove 90 miles an hour.

Senator CONRAD. And how far did you have to go?

Mr. HALL. About 40 miles. It is almost twice as far because we

do not have after hours or weekend coverage. It is really unfortunate. The physician in Watford said he basically lost all his blood.

So he needed a transfusion and he said you are fortunate that whoever we were with saved your life.

I have been in those situations far too long. I carried my father,

and he was a big man. He was 250 pounds, and I had to drive him

when he had heart attacks because we do not have after hours coverage. It is really daunting for a person who does not have medical

qualifications to have to play doctor to do that, just to save a life.

So I do not care to do that anymore, but when you are faced with

it, you really don’t have a choice.

Senator CONRAD. You know, Mr. Chairman and Senator Inouye,

Tex was a great basketball player, a great high school basketball

player, a great college basketball player. He put the ball in the

hoop. We have very little scoring going on here in terms of accomplishments for Indian country with respect to these budgets. The

needs just continue and they are no being met. I think we, too,

have an obligation to try to come up with a new strategy and a new

plan.
34

I agree that we ought to ask those in Indian country to help

make the case and go to our colleagues and go over their heads to

the American people, but I think we need a new plan. We need

something dramatic to help our colleagues understand how serious

the needs are, and what a complete failure the Federal Government is meeting our responsibility.

You know, year after year I come to these hearings. This budget

is probably the worst one we have seen in a long time, but the

truth is when we had an Administration of a different party, they

weren’t any good either, if we are going to be just honest about it.

Something has got to be done.

The CHAIRMAN. Would the Senator yield? My view has been that

around here, needs that are not met are just needs that are transferred. If you do not put the resources into education and housing

and job development and health care and so on, you end up with

a higher crime rate, a higher drug abuse rate, a higher suicide

rate. All the other societal problems go with a depressed society or

depressed people.

So when you do not fund needs up front, you are going to fund

them later whether you want to or not, and they are going to cost

a heck of a lot more, I think.

Maybe that is the picture we have to get across to our colleagues

a little more.

Senator CONRAD. And if there is one place, and I will just conclude on this, this is a place where we have a clear responsibility.

We have treaty obligations. This Government made promises,

many of which for example with respect to a health care facility at

Three Affiliated Tribes, which Chairman Hall was just describing,

we took their hospital. We took their hospital and we flooded it. We

flooded the land that it was on, and we promised them at the time,

oh, don’t worry, we will rebuild that hospital. And we never did.

And we never did.

So people talk about a credibility problem. The Federal Government has a credibility problem because these needs are as clear as

they can be. They are our obligation and it is not being done.

So we need a plan. We need a new strategy for breaking through.

I thank all the witnesses here today, and I thank especially the

Chairman and the Ranking Member.

The CHAIRMAN. In terms of the hospital, we did pass a bill last

year, as you know, Tex said that it went through the Senate and

is still pending in the House, and that is where we have to try and

get it.

Mr. HALL. We are crossing our fingers for that to happen in the

House.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Senator Conrad and all of you

for your comments. I just want to make a note that our NCAI conference is the 23rd to 25th, 2 weeks from today. Part of our strategic plan is public relations, so we are going to have a meeting from

8:30–10:30 on February 23, that Monday, so if any of your staff can

attend this very important meeting, we are going to start looking

at a strategy and a plan, because you are right. We need to do

something different. Indian people are not to be afraid of. We are

a part of America. We have a lot to offer and we want to start talking about it.
35

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank the panel for appearing, and all

of our guests and witnesses today. I would remind you that the

agencies will be testifying on February 25. If anybody would like

to attend that, please do.

We will keep the record open for 2 weeks, and there will be a

number of questions from myself and other committee members, including Senator Inouye, that we will send and ask for you to get

answers to those in writing.

With that, the committee is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m. the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

(37)

APPENDIX

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ACTION FOR INDIAN HEALTH CAMPAIGN FROM CALIFORNIA

The Honorable Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman Inouye, members of the Committee, the Action for Indian Health Campaign [AIHC] from California respectfully

submits this statement for the record urgently requesting adequate health care

funding for the Tribal Health Programs in California for the fiscal year 2005 appropriations budgeting process.

The AIHC is an alliance of Tribal Health Programs and is comprised of RiversideSan Bernardino County Indian Health, Inc. [RSBIHI], Indian Health Council, Inc,

Southern Indian Health Council [SIHC] and the 11 member tribal health programs

of the California Rural Indian Health Board, Inc. [CRIHB]. Collectively, these organizations provide over two-thirds of the Indian Health Service [IHS]-funded health

services in the California Area. This work is done on behalf of 53 federally recognized Indian tribes and other American Indians and Alaska Natives who reside in

the contracted service areas. As is widely known, the health care funding for tribal

health programs in the California has historically been and continues to be substantially under funded.

The Federal Employees Benefit Package Disparity Index documents that tribal

health programs in California currently have just 50 percent of the funds needed

to provide the standard of care to our existing 68,000 active Indian clients. To fund

100 percent of the need, $71,063,437 in new IHS funds are required. Tribal health

programs in California are one of twelve IHS Administrative Areas and is one of

the few areas that have no IHS funded hospital facilities to provide inpatient, specialty diagnostic and treatment services.

The absence of Indian hospitals in California is a result of Congressional action

in the 1950’s when Federal lawmakers were persuaded to terminate many federally

recognized Indian tribes in California, along with the single Indian hospital and all

Indian health care services. Thanks in large part to the work of California Indians

and their representative organizations, health care funding and related services to

Indians in the state were reinstated-although at bare minimum. California tribal

health programs have been referred to as ‘‘Contract Health Services [CHS] dependent’’ because CHS funding provides for the purchase of inpatient and specialty services from non-IHS providers.

Tribal health programs in California are at a major financial disadvantage because areas with IHS hospitals have both facilities and CHS funding. The IHS Area

that has approximately the same number of active Indian clients as the California

Area has eight IHS funded hospitals and receives $506 per active Indian client in

CHS funds. The CHS amount in California is $206 per active Indian client. Simply

to bring California up to the average for CHS Dependent areas would require an

additional $7,956,000 in new CHS line item funds.

An on-going myth is that California tribal health programs can use the Catastrophic Health Emergency Fund [CHEF] to supplement the low California CHS active client monetary acquisition. This could not be further from reality. California

tribal health programs do not utilize the CHEF because of the combined effects of
38

general IHS under funding and the specific lack of CHS line item funds. The tribal

health programs rarely have enough CHS funds to spend on individuals to qualify

for CHEF funds. A 10-year analysis of CHEF payouts indicates that California averaged 7 cases per year while the most active user Area of the CHEF program, averaged 161 cases.

With the award of additional CHS funding from IHS headquarters to CRIHB’s

CHS Demonstration Project, CRIHB demonstrated that the number of people in

need of CHEF funds was indeed much higher. With an additional CHS allocation

of $100,000 in fiscal year 1995, CHEF utilization reached a 10-year high of 14 cases.

In that year the non-recurring funds were used to pay all CHS costs for cases above

the threshold of $1,000. This means that more Indian clients in California received

the health care services they needed.

Special consideration is also necessary because the newly established CHS distribution formula will not address the chronic under funding of the CHS program

in California. The new CHS distribution formula, which IHS Director Dr. Charles

Grimm instituted in April 2003, provides for a pro rata distribution of CHS funds

unless the increase to the line item exceeds the Federal Office of Management and

Budget [OMB] established medical inflation rate. A 10-year analysis comparing the

OMB inflation rate and the growth percentage of the CHS line item indicates that

CHS growth exceeded the OMB medical inflation rate only 4 times in 10 years. Additionally, the equity portion of the new formula under counts hospital costs in large

segments of the State.

The AIHC is requesting that Congress support a substantial portion of the CHS

increase amount for fiscal year 2005 to fund the California CHS Demonstration

Project as authorized in the Indian Health Care Improvement Act ≥211 as reauthorized in H.R. 2440. Support to this Project in the amount of $4,488,000 would bring

the CHS allocation to California up to the IHS national average allocation of $297

per active client and it would not take away CHS funds from the other IHS areas.

There has long been a series of misperceptions about the health status and health

services utilization of American Indian and Alaska Natives in California that tend

to impede the growth of the IHS services in the state. The principal causes of these

misconceptions are the lack of uniform and comparative data. California has a large

service area, a large number of tribal governments [107], though most California

tribes are small. In addition there are large numbers of IHS eligible California Indians who are not members of federally recognized tribes [29 percent of active users]

and the relatively large percentage of IHS active users who are members of tribes

located outside of California [25 percent of active users]. These complexities are

compounded by the multiple sources of funding for Indian health care in California

and the paucity of reliable information from both State and Federal sources.

According to recent California Indian health services research studies, conducted

by Dr. Carol Korenbrot:

The hospitalization rate for IHS active users in California [980 per 10,000] is directly comparable with that of the Aberdeen Area [907 per 10,000] and second only

to the rate of the Alaska area. This disparity is indicative of a population in California with high levels of morbidity and counters recent IHS data which erroneously

indicates that only 17 IHS active Indian clients were hospitalized.

The Medicaid expenditure on IHS active users in California who are also eligible

for Medicaid are found to be only 88 percent of those for a matched sample of nonIndians in the same counties. This disparity is consistent with systematic barriers

for Indians in finding specialty care, even with Medicaid coverage.

The avoidable hospitalization rates for California Indians are 30 percent higher

than those of the general California population. This disparity is indicative of a deficiency in access to effective ambulatory care services.

Non-IHS hospitals in California appear to absorb the burden of between $5.7 and

$8.2 million per year in uncompensated care for Indian clients of tribal health programs.

In order to maintain and expand this level of health status and services research,

the AlHC is requesting that Congress support $2 million to fund IHS EpiCenters

in the remaining four IFIS Areas without such a program—Billings, Oklahoma,

Navajo, and California.

In short, the AIHC is requesting that in fiscal year 2005, Congress support

$4,488,000 of the CHS increase amount to fund the California CHS Demonstration

Project and $2 million of increased funding for IHS EpiCenters.

The AlHC thanks you Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman and members of the

Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for taking the time to further understand the

funding needs of the tribal health programs in the California IHS Service Area and

asks you to provide the health care funding being requested.
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89Æ

(91)

FISCAL YEAR 2005 BUDGET

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2004

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room 485,

Russell Senate Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman

of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Campbell, Inouye, Johnson, Murkowski, and

Thomas.

STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S.

SENATOR FROM COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON

INDIAN AFFAIRS

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in session. We are going

to go ahead and start. Senator Inouye called and is stuck in traffic.

He will be along shortly. We have been notified that we have a vote

at 10:30 and that gives us a very limited time, so I am going to

go ahead and start and get through as much as we can.

Welcome to the second hearing of the fiscal year budget request

for Indian programs submitted on February 2 by President Bush

as part of the larger budget request. This morning, the committee

will hear from six Federal agencies responsible for various Indian

programs and services. The request includes a total of $10.8 billion

for the Department of the Interior, with a modest increase proposed for Indian law enforcement, fire management, and others.

Major increases are proposed for the Office of Special Trustee and

Related Trust Activities. Modest increases are proposed in the Indian health and other accounts. Rather than go through that list

of increases and decreases, I will submit a detailed statement for

the record.

I would like to make one comment for those in attendance. Last

week, I think we witnessed a major breakthrough in the Cobell v.

Norton case, as the plaintiffs and the defendants agreed to move

to the stage of meeting with the selected mediators to resolve the

case that has been ongoing for a number of years. This event is a

very big issue, I think, and I believe that if the Indian account

holders are going to benefit, it is going to come about from a negotiated settlement, and not from another 8 years of litigation.

With that, we will go ahead and start with Mr. Swimmer. Welcome to the committee. Why don’t you proceed? For all of the witnesses, your complete written testimony will be submitted for the

record and will be read very carefully, and if you would like to ab-
92

breviate it in the interest of time, because we will have a vote, go

ahead and do it.

STATEMENT OF ROSS SWIMMER, SPECIAL TRUSTEE FOR

AMERICAN INDIANS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ACCOMPANIED BY AURENE MARTIN, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS

Mr. SWIMMER. I will certainly do that, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning and to provide some

information regarding the proposed budget for 2005. I second the

optimism of the chairman regarding the mediation process. On behalf of the Office of the Special Trustee, I want to thank you and

the staff, particularly, for their hard work in assisting us to bring

the parties to the table. We are optimistic that this mediation process will be successful.

The Trust budget encompasses numerous items that are detailed

in the statement and in the budget that the committee has seen.

I will just go through some of the highlights of that to give the

committee an idea of what we expect to do in 2005 as a result of

the budget. The Unified Trust budget has grown from approximately $243 million in fiscal year 2000 to over $600 million proposed for fiscal

year 2005. That is a huge increase in the Trust budget, if you will,

for the Department of the Interior and certainly for the Bureau of

Indian Affairs [BIA] and Office of the Special Trustee.

However, I would like to focus on the two items in particular that make up a large part of that increase. One is the $109 million

proposal for fiscal year 2005 that would fund approximately onethird of the cost of doing the historical accounting that the Department had proposed in its plan submitted to the court last year. We

feel that this is an appropriate request if we do not have any further direction from Congress or from the mediation process or the

court. We feel that it is important that we do proceed with that accounting as we understand it and as has been proposed by the Department.

The other major item is an increase to $75 million for the Indian

land consolidation project. This is a project that is extremely important to Indian country. It is a major cost item on an annual basis

for the Department, both in the BIA and the Special Trustee’s office, Bureau of Land Management and even Minerals Management

Service. We are trying to track roughly 260,000 accounts for Indian

individuals and special deposit accounts and various and sundry

others. Almost 20 percent of those accounts, or about 15 percent of

those accounts, have less than $1 in them. It costs us certainly in

excess of $100 a year per account just to keep those accounts on

the books. We have no authority to do anything with those accounts.

Those accounts come from, in many cases, income of highly

fractionated land. It is not uncommon today to have 50 or more

owners of a tract of land. I believe our statistics indicate that the

most highly fractionated is a tract of land in the Midwest where

we have been working on the ILCA program. I believe it is 2,500

owners of about 80 acres of land. Even if that 80 acres generated

substantial income, which I do not believe it does in this case, try-
93

ing to divide that among 2,500 owners, actually capture the money

identify ownership, invest it, collect interest on it, and then pay it

out, is a huge expense.

In fact, we do have a policy that we do not cut a check until the amount owed to the participant is at least $15, and we have literally tens of thousands of accounts that it takes years for it to

ever get to $15. In fact, we have many accounts, Mr. Chairman,

that require that we round up to a penny. Fractionation is a problem. We believe that this is an amount that can be well spent and

will go a long way to relieve the problem, or at least begin the process of relieving the problem of fractionation and the costs associated with these small accounts.

It is an interesting statistic. The revenue generated from the

money that we are asking for in the Trust budget is approximately

$194 million for the individual Indian money account holders, and

$378 million from tribes. In addition to that, we manage on a continuing basis approximately $3 billion of trust funds that are already on deposit. Those two numbers total about $572 million. If

you look at the Trust budget, it is almost exactly the same amount

of money. In fact, given the accounting and the land consolidation

budget for fiscal year 2005, it is actually about $100 million more.

I am sorry, about $30 million more than what is actually collected.

Other key items in the Special Trustee’s budget are the reorganization and the re-engineering. The reorganization that was begun

last year is virtually complete. We are using the fiscal year 2004

appropriations to hire the trust officers and the Trust administrator’s that were part of the Special Trustee’s reorganization project.

We will have a few staff that will be hired, support staff, in 2005.

There are approximately $2 million in the Special Trustee’s budget

for 2005 directed toward the completion of the hiring of the staff

for reorganization. I believe that there is about $5 million in the BIA budget that

will complete that process, their portion of the reorganization, but

there is really not much money that is committed for reorganization. Most of that was handled in-house within the existing budget

in 2003 and 2004, and is now virtually complete, as I mentioned.

The reorganization is extremely important, however, in terms of

assisting the local BIA agencies, to do the job that they are charged

with in terms of administering the trust, the trust assets, and providing services to the beneficiaries. Almost all of the money that is

scheduled this year and for 2005 for reorganization will be spent

at the local level. It will be spent providing increased beneficiary

services. It is going to be spent to support increased administration

of the trust assets, and to ensure that at least on a going forward

basis, we have a complete accounting on a regular basis of all the

income that is collected and we are able to ensure the title information is correct for those individuals that own property.

The operating budget for the Special Trustee’s office is actually

right at $105 million. That is a slight decrease from last year. The

other items that bring the budget of the Special Trustee to $322

million are those things I mentioned, the addition of the $75 million for ILCA, the $109 million for the accounting, and then various

transfers out of our budget to the BIA, things like computer support, probate, the Office of the Secretary for the Trust architect in
94

the CIO’s office, Chief Information Office, and for expenses of the

Office of Hearings and Appeals, also related to probate.

While it appears that the Special Trustee’s office budget is fairly

dramatic as far as the increase for 2005, I want to reiterate the actual operating budget that we are working with is flat. The increases are primarily those two items in the historical accounting

and in the ILCA program.

So with that, if the committee has questions, I would be happy

to answer those questions and provide any other information that

I might.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Swimmer appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. There will be a number of questions. Most of

mine I will submit in writing, but I will ask you a couple in a

minute. Let’s go ahead with Mr. Hartz, since we have such a short

period of time.

STATEMENT OF GARY HARTZ, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF

PUBLIC HEALTH, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT

OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT G. MCSWAIN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT SUPPORT; AND DOUGLAS BLACK, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF TRIBAL

PROGRAMS

Mr. HARTZ. Thank you, Chairman Campbell and Senators Johnson and Thomas. We are pleased to come before you this morning

to present the IHS budget for fiscal year 2005.

As I was preparing for just making a few opening remarks for

the hearing, I realized that this is the 50th anniversary submission

of the IHS budget. We are just approaching our 50th year in existence. We were transferred from our colleague’s agency a number of

years ago now.

In preparing for the hearing, I also noted some remarks that

were made by Senator Inouye about 2 weeks ago about the story

to be told about Indian health. He remarked that it was a good

story. As I reflect back for just a couple of moments regarding that

good story, I am pleased to say that I was part of that story for

two-thirds of those 50 years, in providing health care to American

Indians and Alaska Natives. We have seen really good budgets and

we have seen some that have been tighter than others because of

constraints that faced the country at various times throughout

those 50 years. Plus, I have very personally observed them during

my tenure.

What we have focused on, is a program that has continued to

provide good health to Indian people, is prevention and public

health. It is critical. In today’s environment of the changing demographics of disease among the American Indian population, we can

see more and more that behavior and lifestyle is what is affecting

health status. We have looked to, as Dr. Grim pointed out last

year, how we can better partner with other organizations and collaborate enhance the resources that we have, how we can leverage

funds into expanded programs.

Some examples of the kinds of things we have done just in the

tenure that I am talking about in my professional career, we have

by, 60, approximately, percent reduced the maternal deaths. Infant

mortality, unintentional injuries, and gastroenteric death rates also
95

dropped dramatically. I alone have seen the percent of homes with

adequate water and sewer go from 40 percent to almost 93 percent.

These are remarkable accomplishments in a relatively short period of time. We still have a long way to go, and we believe by the

budget that we presented in dealing with public health items like

health promotion, disease prevention, and if we believe that personal lifestyles and personal healthy behavior can address the obesity issues, we will address some of the precursors to diabetes,

which is a major precursor to the problems of by cardiovascular

disease.

We see these initiatives, plus those of the Secretary and others,

and the resources we are getting from others, like National Institutes of Health, we are accessing their resources to develop our Native American Research Centers for Health, working in concert

with other entities of HHS under the Secretary’s guidance to further supplement the resources we have.

The Tribal Epi Centers are a critical aspect of making sure that

when we do have funds, that we can target our interventions most

appropriately. This afternoon I will be leaving for the dedication of

the Northern Plains Tribal Epi Center for the Aberdeen area in

Rapid City, SD. I want to thank this Congress and others for the

work that they have done to help support us and support the Aberdeen area tribal chairman’s health board in pulling that together.

I am really looking forward to going there and being part of their

dedication and to share with them this event. It is quite a task. We

have requested additional funds to establish up to four more Tribal

Epi Centers and include the areas that we have not been able to

address.

A final comment I will make regarding accomplishments, and

that lies in the capabilities and outstanding accomplishments of

the tribes in taking over now 52 percent of the resources that we

get for health services. They are doing just a wonderful job.

We are pleased with the resources that are coming to us to ad- dress diabetes. In 2004, we are getting a $50-million increase. With

that, we are going to even go further in targeted interventions

through strategies to take advantage and enhance some of the

interventions that have proven to be most effective. As an example,

in preparation for the potential that the special legislation was

going to run out and not get reauthorized, we were preparing a requested report to Congress. Now it has become an interim report

that is coming to Congress because of the reauthorization, but

there were some important items that were highlighted as we prepared to present that report.

Just two that I will focus on. First, the community-based physical activity programs for children youth and families existed before

1998 in 10 percent of the locations where the diabetes grants were

awarded. Taking a look 4 years later, 71 percent of the locations

had programs within the communities. So they were making inroads into getting these activity programs developed.

Also, school-based health programs focused on physical activity.

Only 22 percent of the grantees had that in existence in their

schools prior to 1998. After 2002, it is up to 53 percent. We need

young people to get their exercise. We need them to get it early and

we need to have that as a part of lifestyle.
96

There are many things that can be done related to public health

and prevention. As my mother used to say, an ounce of prevention

is worth a pound of cure. That is so, so true when we start dealing

with lifestyle and behavioral issues. If we can make those inroads

early, the costs are much, much less. We believe with this budget,

we will be able to make some more of those inroads to deal with

public health and prevention.

Finally, I do not want to leave here with you thinking that all

these good things happening is just Hartz’s perspective on Indian

health. We have been assessed through the program assessment

rating tool that is done through OMB. We consistently rank about

the highest in our Department, and actually higher than comparable entities in other departments that are delivering health

care. We have been evaluated on our direct patient care program,

direct health services, on sanitation facilities, on our RPMS system

as a part of our IT, and our urban programs. So we have had the

outside reviews as well. We are pleased in what we have been able

to accomplish. We know there is a lot more yet to be done.

With that, I will submit the rest of my statement for the record,

sir.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Hartz appears in appendix]

The CHAIRMAN. Before we go to questions, I will ask our vice

chairman, Senator Inouye, if he has any comments. But maybe let

me ask you one thing first, because I just thought about this. Not

too long ago the Senate confirmed Secretary Anderson. Dr. Grim

has been confirmed for a while. Why, when it is such an important

year this year dealing with Indian programs, are they not here, either one of them?

Mr. HARTZ. Dr. Grim had a longstanding personal commitment

that he was unable to break. Sir, I apologize if we are not going

to be able to respond to your questions on these matters. We will

try to do that. If in fact, we are unable to do that, we will certainly

provide any responses for the record. He was really disappointed

in not being able to make it, but at the same time he trusted that

we would bring forth the issues and respond as best we can.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Swimmer, where is Assistant Secretary Anderson?

Mr. SWIMMER. I really do not have an answer for you. I think

that certainly the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Martin is

here, and I would suggest that it has a lot to do with the learning

curve and that he just has not been able to have the time to become real familiar with the budget and preferred that she present

it. She may be able to answer that question.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, well, that is all right. You might just pass

a message on from me personally as the chairman. I have a patience curve, too. It seems to me if we can take the time to deal

with something as important as Indian country on both health and

all the other agency issues for the BIA, they ought to be here.

Would you pass that on to them? They are going to find a less

friendly chairman if they do not get over here when we are doing

hearings which it is very important that they are here.

Mr. HARTZ. I will do so, sir.

Mr. SWIMMER. Yes, sir.
97

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, my apologies for being late, but

we were detained by an accident that included helicopters and sirens. We were not in the accident.

The CHAIRMAN. I am glad of that.

The CHAIRMAN. Let’s see, I believe Senator Johnson, you were

here next. Did you have a statement before we go to questions?

STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM

SOUTH DAKOTA

Senator JOHNSON. Just very briefly, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman and Vice Chairman Inouye, thank you for holding

the hearing. At last week’s budget hearing, I more fully expressed

my concerns about the President’s budget. I will not repeat myself.

My concerns are frankly multiple in nature. However, I would like

to make just a brief comment on a couple of issues of concern

brought to me by my South Dakota tribes.

First of all, I do want to address just very briefly the reorganization that is taking place. It is led by Mr. Swimmer. The tribes from

my home State of South Dakota are deeply impacted and they are

concerned about this. By law, the Federal Government must protect the interests of tribes and its members as their trustee. The

facts have demonstrated over the years that the Federal Government has failed in its responsibilities to tribes. Broadly speaking,

I am concerned that the President wants to fund the Office of Special Trustee at the expense of other Indian programs.

While I understand that we need to fund the Trust Program, the

Department of the Interior’s failure to set up the Office of Special

Trustee in a manner that my tribes see as respectful and then turn

around and use funds that should otherwise go toward TPA, law

enforcement, education, housing and so on, they view, and I share

their concern, as another breach of the Federal Government’s responsibilities, borne out of treaties and trust relationships.

Second, we are spending, as we all know, $1 billion a week in

Iraq, and some of that is going to building hospitals and schools,

but the White House tells us that we are going to cut funding for

construction of hospitals and schools here at home. Overall, the

BIA school construction account is being cut by almost $66 million.

One of the schools on the construction priority list is Enemy

Swim up at Sisseton-Wahpeton. I am very pleased that Acting Secretary Aurene Martin has issued a decision to the tribe indicating

that its square footage and funding was set. So you can imagine

my surprise and dismay this week when Chairman J.C. Crawford

at Sisseton-Wahpeton told me that the BIA at Albuquerque is now

reneging on that promise. I am very pleased that Ms. Martin has

worked so closely with myself and my office.

We will continue to work with her, but it would appear that

some of the subordinates at Albuquerque are calling shots they

should not be calling. You can believe that the Sisseton-Wahpeton

delegation, including Senator Daschle and our friends from North

Dakota, will be following up on this with great energy.

Every aspect of Indian funding is hurting, housing, health care,

education, and infrastructure. I understand it is a tough fiscal year

and I understand the tribes are not going to get everything that
98

they would like. However, there are just profound problems with

the President’s budget.

I will conclude my comments today by making mention of a

major concern of all of our tribes. Tribes are simply not getting the

funding they needed to have credible tribal courts and effective law

enforcement. This was highlighted to me by the Rosebud and Pine

Ridge delegation, and underscored by the domestic violence advocates. The safety of our people literally is at risk. They have the

statistics to prove it. We have to be responsive to that need.

I welcome Mr. Hartz to South Dakota, and I also want to express

appreciation again for Dr. Grim’s willingness to come to South Dakota. I think they are doing the best they can with an inadequate

budget, but I am appreciative of their willingness to come out and

see first-hand on the ground the crisis that we have there.

I am disappointed, and I share your disappointment, Mr. Chairman, that at this hearing not only is Mr. Anderson not here, but

the BIA itself has not even testified. I commend Ms. Martin for her

work, but I think that it would serve the committee well if the

BIA’s agenda was laid out in a more explicit manner here before

the committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Thomas, comments?

Senator THOMAS. No; I really do not have a statement, Mr.

Chairman. I am pleased to be here. It is going to be difficult and

we are going to hear all the time that there is not enough money

in these budgets by the same people who are complaining about the

deficit. So it is going to be hard to balance these things. We look

forward to working with it to fill the needs.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murkowski.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR FROM

ALASKA

Senator MURKOWSKI. I would like to make an opening statement.

I do not know if I am going to be around to ask questions of the

witnesses, as I have to go preside this morning. So I would like to

make a couple of comments about the budget that we have in front

of us, the second in our series of hearings on the fiscal year 2004

budget request. A couple of weeks ago we heard from the representatives of the tribes. Ordinarily, it is in the other order. We

will hear from agency witnesses first, but because of the ricin incident, the people spoke up first on this.

As we look at the committee room, the constituents of this committee are the Indian tribes and the Alaska Native villages that

make up Native America. It is appropriate that the agencies which

have a trust responsibility to our first people, listen first and then

speak. So it is interesting that it has kind of worked out that way

this particular year.

To the representatives of our agencies, I hope that you took the

time to review the testimony of the tribal representatives. In its

coverage of the hearing, the newspaper Indian country Today took

note to the testimony of my constituent, Don Kashevaroff, who is

the chief of the Seldovia Village Tribe. He asked why in this trillion
99

dollar budget can we not keep the first Americans from falling behind in health care. Don’s testimony really struck a chord in me. The budget that has been presented calls for $2 trillion in overall spending, $782 billion in discretionary, and yet the Community

Health Aid program in Alaska, which is truly an innovative program which provides the only health care available in some 178

Alaska Native villages, gets an increase of $2 million. Don’t get me

wrong. I am glad that Community Health Aid is getting funded at

all, but the need is more on the order of $7.4 million. In a budget

with more than $700 billion of discretionary spending, we end up

quibbling or arguing over about a $5-million difference.

Rural sanitation issues. The environmental engineers who devote

their lives to ending the third world conditions that plague our Native villages and the Indian reservations of the lower 48 say that

they need a $20-million increase to continue their progress in fiscal

year 2005, yet there is only a $10-million increase in the budget

request. We know, certainly Senator Thomas has indicated, we all

know this is a tough, tough budget year. An increase is an increase

and we are thankful for that, but we need to look at where we are,

where we are seeing these reductions. When we are talking about

improving the health conditions of my constituents, of the Alaska

Native people, it is a concern. Roughly a $1.6-billion unmet need in Indian sanitation and

about 40 percent of that unmet need is in Alaska, where we have

some 38 percent of the homes that do not have potable water. We

can really do better than that. We should do better than that.

There is the IHS facilities construction budget, which really

sticks out. I suppose it is something of a blessing that there are

modest increases in some of the clinical services accounts, but we

have been presented with a $52-million decrease in the facilities

construction budget. We have a hospital, an IHS hospital up in

Barrow, Alaska in desperate need of replacement. The Nome hospital is also not far behind. But this budget will not be sufficient

to move forward with these next steps.

Now, I know that many of the witnesses in the hot seat today

are advocates for the Native people in their respective agencies. I

know that they may have had other ideas for the budget. Likewise,

there are many different ideas about how much of a budget increase we can achieve for Indian health in the current environment.

Some of my colleagues believe that we should focus on the disparity between what the Federal Government spends on each Indian and what it spends on a Federal prisoner. I think it is a tragedy that we have to do that. The National Indian Health Board has

suggested that a reasonable increase this year should be on the

order of 15 percent. I would like to think that we might be able

to come close to that.

Mr. Chairman, I want my colleagues to know that I look forward

to working with them, certainly on a bipartisan basis, to work with

this budget, to amend this budget so that it does include a meaningful increase for Indian Health Services.

This budget not only causes our first Americans to fall behind in

health care, as I have mentioned, but it also causes our first Americans to fall behind in housing and in education. I am skeptical
100

about whether the $5 million increase in the tribal priority allocations is minimally sufficient. I hope that we will be able to find

some additional money for these areas as well.

As I have indicated, Mr. Chairman, I probably will not be around

to ask the series of questions that I would like this morning. I appreciate the opportunity to serve on this committee and to help you

and the others work to improve the lot of our Native peoples wherever they live throughout the country. I look forward to the testimony this morning.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

I have a series of questions dealing with the new secretarial authority with probate reform, with fractionation and a bunch of

things, but I am going to submit those because we have four people

more that we are going to try and fit in before we have to go vote.

I am going to submit those for the record and would ask that you

get back in writing all the questions I submit to you.

I will yield to Senator Inouye.

Senator INOUYE. Mr. Chairman, I will do the same. I have questions for the Director. First, this is a special request of the Indian

Health Service people. Will you convey to the Indian Health Service our request that, if they would be willing, would they meet with

the representatives of the board of the Tuba City Regional Health

Corporation in regard to their proposal for a joint venture with the

Indian Health Service while they are they are in town this week?

Can you arrange that meeting?

Mr. HARTZ. Absolutely. I was aware that they were in town and

that there was a request being made. Yes.

Senator INOUYE. I am certain they will be very pleased.

How will the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2005 address pay raises, population growth, and inflation?

Mr. HARTZ. The budget includes $36 million for pay to address

Federal and tribal and urban pay in this particular budget.

Senator INOUYE. Will this in any way address the disparities between American Indians and Alaska Natives and the rest of America?

Mr. HARTZ. The primary way that we see addressing those disparities with the budget that we have presented are picked up in

some of the elements. As an example, the health promotion and

disease prevention dollars that we have requested. As I indicated

earlier, we believe a lot of inroads can be made in some of the

chronic diseases, even though it is going to take time, by addressing changes in lifestyle and behaviors.

Additionally, we are looking to establish additional Tribal Epi

Centers by which we can better target our efforts and ensure that

the limited resources can be most appropriately used to address

those disparities. Sanitation facilities is another arena that we believe assists us in addressing the disparities as well. This request

includes $10 million for that purpose.

Senator INOUYE. The census suggests that the urban Indian population has increased quite a bit, yet the level of funding for urban

Indian health programs remains at $32 million. Is that sufficient?

Mr. HARTZ. The budget as it relates to pay act includes about a

2.5-percent increase for the urban program. The overall funding
101

that IHS provides to the 34 urban programs amounts to about 48

percent of their program. They actually do very, very well in

leveraging their resources, as IHS does in a number of its programs. One that came to mind, as Senator Murkowski was talking

about sanitation is that for every dollar appropriated, we are getting almost 50 cents from other sources to supplement our appropriations. Urbans do very, very well in that regard.

Senator INOUYE. There is a $1-billion backlog in facilities con- struction in Indian country, yet you have a $42-million decrease

proposed for this century. How do you hope to cope with this critical need?

Mr. HARTZ. There is no question it will be difficult, however the

important thing that comes out of this budget is we are going to

be able to bring on line, with that $23 million in staffing, five new

facilities. Three of those came out of the Joint Venture Program

that the tribes are constructing with their capital funds. With your

support, we are going to be able to staff, equip and operate all of

those facilities.

So there are five facilities, and we are going to complete funding

with the facilities dollars that we are requesting in this appropriation for Sisseton and Red Mesa, Sisseton in South Dakota, Red

Mesa in Arizona. We have resources to move forward on the designs at Clinton and Eagle Butte. So we are continuing to address

that backlog, but as you point out, sir, we are not moving as rapidly.

Senator INOUYE. Among the primary responsibilities of your

Service, I am certain you will agree that provision of safe and adequate water supply systems and sanitary sewage waste treatment

is a high priority. Because of the rural nature of Indian country,

and because of the neglect of the past, many reservations lack basic

infrastructure. For example, one out of every five Indian houses

lacks complete plumbing facilities. I have been in several of those

without plumbing facilities. How do you propose to cope with this?

Mr. HARTZ. Well, this budget identifies an additional $10 million

for the sanitation facilities program, which will take us from $93

million to $103 million. As I was reflecting back in my opening remarks, we have come a long way from when I, as a field engineer,

chatted with an elderly Navajo lady near her hogan about bringing

water and sewer into her home.

Well, we were having a little difficulty because I did not speak

Navajo too well and she did not speak English too well. So through

our sign language and ultimately the help of a fine Navajo interpreter, I found out what her position was on this issue. She was

very much interested in the water coming, ‘‘well, I wanted a yard

hydrant,’’ and then she was convinced that she would have water

to her kitchen sink. But there was no way under the sun that she

was going to defecate in her home. So the appropriate technology

at that time was the pit privy. I am not saying that is where we

are today, but we unfortunately do have some folks, as was pointed

out in Alaska, utilizing less than what we are accustomed to. We

believe that this $10 million will assist us in furthering our efforts

to address that backlog of sanitation deficiencies.

Senator INOUYE. One of the reports that we have read suggests

that there are more overcrowded conditions in Indian housing than
102

anywhere else in the United States, if not in the world. Do those

conditions continue to exist?

Mr. HARTZ. I suspect that HUD might have a better answer for

that than I might. I have seen instances where there is still quite

a need for housing through some of the analysis that the BIA home

program has done.

I will just stop there, because I am getting into an area that I

am not real familiar.

Senator INOUYE. I asked that question because the crowding of

rooms affects health, does it not?

Mr. HARTZ. Absolutely. Tuberculosis is one of them, sir, and

other communicable diseases. So, we are encouraged by any resources that can be provided for housing programs in Indian country.

Senator INOUYE. How many professionals work in the Indian

Health Service?

Mr. HARTZ. Our staffing level is right at about 15,500.

Senator INOUYE. Professionals?

Mr. HARTZ. Actually, I consider everybody professional. Where

are you drawing the line, sir?

Senator INOUYE. Okay. Of that number, how many are Native

Americans?

Mr. HARTZ. Of our 15,250 employees, two-thirds of them are Native American, 10,580.

Senator INOUYE. Out of 15,000, 250 are Natives?

Mr. HARTZ. Out of a total of 15,250 approximately, just under

10,600 are Native Americans, American Indian or Alaska Native.

Senator INOUYE. We have a way to go yet, have we not?

Mr. HARTZ. We certainly do. We are making tremendous inroads

through the scholarship program and through loan payback and

with the scholarship programs of other departments as well.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murkowski, did you have questions before we move on?

Senator MURKOWSKI. Yes; just very quickly about the contract

support clause, if I may.

My Alaska providers and the self-governance tribes nationally

are pretty upset about the gap between contract support costs owed

and the amount paid. What I would like to know is how much does

IHS currently owe the tribes? If contract support costs are funded

at the budgeted amount, how much will the tribes be owed at the

end of this fiscal year 2005? Can you address that?

Mr. HARTZ. There is a fund called the shortfall fund that has

been identified. I presume that is what you are referring to. That

amount is currently at about $100 million.

Senator MURKOWSKI. That amount is $100 million, then if the

contract support costs are funded at this budgeted amount, how

much will then be owed to the tribes?

Mr. BLACK. Senator, we fund about two-thirds of the need right

now. As Mr. Hartz said, the requirement actually projected for

2005 is $111 million shortfall.

The CHAIRMAN. For the record, would you identify yourself?

Mr. BLACK. I am sorry. Excuse me. My name is Douglas Black.

I am the director of the Office of Tribal Programs in IHS.
103

So there is an enormous shortfall in contract support costs. Our

average level of funding for contract support costs of tribes in the

Indian Health Service is about 82 percent, but we do have tribes

even funded below that average.

Senator MURKOWSKI. So you say that it is about two-thirds is

what you would makeup. So how do the tribes fund the difference?

Do they do it through cuts in services or how is that made-up?

Mr. BLACK. Senator, we project that we will fund roughly twothirds of the cntract support cost need in 2005 with having to

makeup the other one-third of the CSC need. Reluctantly, that is

what they are having to do. Many of the tribes, I believe, are having to divert some of their health care money to support administrative functions that are critical to health care delivery. It is not

a good situation, but it is the reality that we presently find ourselves in.

Senator MURKOWSKI. I know I was only going to ask about the

contract support costs, but since I have you here, I mentioned the

Alaska Community Health Aid Program and the value to certainly

my constituents in Alaska. I mentioned that we are going to be

looking at a funding increase of $2 million. Based on what you

know of the program and how it works in Alaska, do you believe

that it merits an additional increase?

Mr. HARTZ. The Community Health Aid Program in Alaska is

truly a model. It does a remarkable job in its outreach to those village communities and what it is able to do through the utilization

of tele-health. Having experienced those aids sending in their digital images into Kotzebue from the outlying communities when

there is no other means of transportation or to have the highly

trained health professional people out there in the villages daily.

I am truly impressed. Worldwide, it is noted and it is being passed

on to others for replication.

Two million dollars is going to make a definite improvement in

what they are able to do and expand the numbers. They probably

do have a greater need, but I do not know what the total number

would be on that, but I know that this will make a tremendous improvement.

Senator MURKOWSKI. When I met with Dr. Grim, not only here

in Washington, but up in the State, we had a great opportunity to

talk about his focus on prevention, which I am very, very supportive of. What is contained in this budget that helps us with the prevention component as it relates to health care?

Mr. HARTZ. From the prevention standpoint, in the Health Promotion and Disease Prevention [HPDP] funds that we have identified, we are looking to expand from 25, the programs that we have

currently in place, up to 50, to target special health promotion, disease prevention activities that we can learn from and further replicate.

We also have the additional $50 million that has just come in,

to the diabetes program. That amount is going to be a tremendous

benefit to us in dealing with prevention and public health activities. Obesity is the precussor for so, so many things. Additionally,

we are making inroads through the National Diabetes Program

with the Department of Agriculture and the kinds of foods that go

into the schools in Indian country. We are working with a number
104

of other entities, and even the private sector, on how we can acquire resources to address the diabetes problem and further amplify our efforts in prevention and public health.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

I thank this panel for appearing today. We will now go to panel

2, Victoria Vasques, director, Office of Indian Education; and Michael Liu, the assistant secretary, Public and Indian Housing;

David Garman, assistant secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; and Tracy Henke, the deputy associate attorney general.

We will just combine both of these panels in the interest of time.

We will proceed as it is listed on the docket here, with Ms. Vasques

starting. To all of the panelists, if you would like to abbreviate, we

would appreciate that.

Ms. Vasques, would you proceed.

STATEMENT OF VICTORIA VASQUES, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF

INDIAN EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ACCOMPANIED BY CATHIE MARTIN, GROUP LEADER; LONNA

JONES, ACTING DIRECTOR, ELEMENTARY, SECONDARY AND

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION, DIVISION OF THE BUDGET

SERVICE

Ms. VASQUES. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the

committee. On behalf of Secretary Paige, I thank you for the opportunity to discuss our fiscal year 2005 budget request for the Department of Education, especially with programs that address and

serve the needs of American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native

Hawaiians.

I also request that my written statement be entered for the

record

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it will be in the record. All of

the statements, in fact, will be included in the record.

Ms. VASQUES. My name is Victoria Vasques, and I am the deputy

under secretary and director for the Office of Indian Education. In

this capacity, I oversee the programs that support the efforts of

local education agencies, Indian tribes and organizations that assist American Indian and Alaska Native students in achieving to

the same high standards as all our students.

The Department of Education, led by Secretary Paige, is strongly

committed to providing resources that support the No Child Left

Behind Act, and improving educational opportunities for all students, and Indian students are no exception.

We recognize and reaffirm the special relationship with the Federal Government to American Indians and their sovereign tribal

nations, and our commitment to educational excellence and opportunity.

Over the past year, there have been a number of positive developments in the Department. I would like to just go over a few. The

Secretary elevated the Office of Indian Education so that it now reports directly to the Under Secretary of Education. The National

Advisory Council on Indian Education charter has been authorized

through 2007, and candidates, which have been recommended by

the Indian communities, are waiting presidential appointment.
105

The Secretary visited the Gila River Indian community a few

months ago, where he toured the community’s new Early Childhood

Education Center and awarded $750,000 to help prepare our 3- and

4-year-old students for kindergarten. Also, we are working in partnership with our tribal education departments and the BIA to improve our program services.

Working with each of you, the Department wants to make it possible for every child, including Indian children, to be well prepared

academically and ensure that the future generations of Indian students are not left behind. As you know, in a bipartisan effort 2

years ago the President launched the most important reform of

public education by signing into law the No Child Left Behind Act.

The law is based on stronger accountability, more choices for parents and students, greater flexibility for States and school districts,

and the use of instruction that has been proven effective through

scientifically based research. The overall goal is to ensure that

every student, including American Indians, Alaska Natives and

Native Hawaiians, will be proficient in reading and mathematics.

Indian students will continue to benefit from major initiatives in

the NCLB Act, and many programs at the Department help to ensure that our students have full access to these and other reforms

to improve education.

Overall, estimates show the Department programs provide nearly

$1 billion in direct support specifically for American Indians and

Alaska Natives. In addition, significant funds are provided to Indian students who receive services through Federal programs such

as title I grants to our local education agencies, our IDEA State

grants which also provide services to other disadvantaged populations.

The 2005 budget request includes a number of programs and initiatives that focus specifically on helping Indian students achieve.

The 2005 budget request for the Department’s Indian education

programs is $120.9 million. These programs, which are administered by my office, include formula grants to school districts, competitive special programs and national activities.

We are requesting $95.9 million for Indian education formula

grants to school districts. This program is one vehicle for addressing the unique educational and culturally related needs of Indian

children. These grants supplement the regular school program,

helping Indian children improve their academic skills, raise their

self-confidence, and participate in enrichment programs and activities that otherwise would be unavailable. The requested level

would provide an estimated per-pupil payment of $203 for approximately 472,000 students in almost 1,200 school districts and BIA

schools.

Our request for special programs for Indian children is $19.8 million. Approximately $10 million will support our demonstration

grants that focus on school readiness for Indian preschool children

and college prep programs. In addition, the 2005 request will provide over $9 million to continue two training efforts under our Professional Development Program: First, the American Indian Teacher Training Corps; second, the American Indian Administrator

Corps initiatives. Both programs are designed to provide full State
106

certification and in-service support to these new Indian teachers

and Indian administrators.

We are requesting approximately $5.2 million for research evaluation data collection and technical assistance related to Indian

education. Fiscal year 2005 funds would be used to continue support for the third phase of the National Indian Education Study

that will collect data through the National Assessment of Education Progress on American Indian and Alaska Native 4th- and

8th-grade students’ performance in math and reading. Funds would

also be used to continue research grants and data collection initiated in earlier years and to promote ongoing program improvement

for Indian education programs.

In addition to the Indian education programs I have just mentioned, the Department also supports the education of Indian students through other programs. The written statement describes our

proposal for each of them, but I would like to touch on just a couple

highlights.

Title I. Title I provides supplemental education funding to local

education agencies and schools, especially in our high-poverty areas

to help more than 15 million educationally disadvantaged students,

and included an estimated 260,000 Indian children, to learn at the

same high standards as other students.

It is important to note that in our school districts, title I funds

benefit many of our Indian students. The Department is requesting

$13.3 billion for title I grants to local education agencies in fiscal

year 2005, a 52-percent increase since the passage of NCLB. Under

a statutory set-aside of 1 percent for the BIA and outlying areas,

the BIA receives approximately $97.9 million, an increase of more

than $7.8 million.

Reading First is a comprehensive effort to implement the findings of high quality research on reading and reading instruction,

helping all children read well by the third grade, one of the Administration’s highest priorities for education. Providing consistent

support for reading success from the earliest age has critically important benefits. Under this formula program, the BIA will receive

.05 percent of the State grants appropriated, approximately $5.6

million, an increase of $500,000.

Special ed grants. Special education grants to the States’ programs provide formula grants to meet the excess cost of providing

special education and related services to children with disabilities.

Under the budget request of a little more than $11 billion, the Department would provide approximately $83.2 million to the BIA,

more than a $1-million increase, to help serve approximately 7,500

Indian students.

In conclusion, the 2005 budget request for the Department of

Education programs serving American Indians, Alaska Natives and

Native Hawaiians supports the President’s overall goal of ensuring

educational opportunity for all students.

I thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

My colleagues that are here with me today and I are happy to respond to any of your questions.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Vasques appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Mr. Liu.
107

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL LIU, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Mr. LIU. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman.

Thank you for inviting me to provide comments on the Administration’s fiscal year 2005 budget.

My name is Michael Liu, and I am the assistant secretary for

Public and Indian Housing. I am responsible for the management,

operation and oversight of HUD’s Native American programs. I will

summarize my written testimony.

We serve these tribes directly or through their tribally designated housing entities by providing grants and loan guarantees

designed to support affordable housing, community and economic

development, and other types of eligible purposes. Our partners are

diverse. They are located on Indian reservations and Alaska Native

villages, and other traditional Indian areas, and most recently on

the Hawaiian homelands.

You may recall that when I testified before you 2 years ago, I

noted that there appeared to be a backlog of funding not obligated

or expended by tribes. Since that time, on most recent reports

which track and are recorded by the Department’s electronic line

of credit control system, LOCCS, now shows that 80 percent of all

grant funds appropriated through NAHASDA have been obligated,

and over 88 percent in fact have been disbursed and expended. Obviously, the tribes have responded, both in terms of their actions,

as well as in terms of providing us better information so that we

know now that the dollars are being spent on a timely basis.

An overall synopsis of the budget will follow. The President’s budget proposes a total of $739 million specifically for Native

American, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian housing through

HUD. There is $647 million authorized under the Native American

Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act. Of that amount,

roughly $640 million is for direct formula allocations through the

Indian Housing Block Grant Program. $1.85 million in credit subsidy will leverage $17.9 million in loan guarantee authority

through the Title VI Loan Guarantee Program. $71.575 million is

for grants under the Indian Community Development Block Grant

Program, and $1 million in credit subsidy will be provided to support $29 million in loan guarantee authority through the section

184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund.

The Native Hawaiian community will receive through the De- partment of Hawaiian Homelands $9.5 million for the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program, $1 million for the section

184(a) Native Hawaiian Loan Guarantee Fund, which will leverage

$37.4 million in loan guarantees. There is a total of $5.4 million

available for training and technical assistance to support these programs. Finally, the Department requests a total of $6.5 million to support American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-oriented higher education institutions.

To focus on a couple of items very quickly, sir, the Title VI Guarantee Loan Fund and Title 184 Guarantee Loan Funds are supported this year, but I do want to note that there is a significant

accumulation of backlog credit subsidy and credit authority. For
108

the title VI program, the amount is close to $400 million; for the

184 program, it is in excess of $500 million. To that end, should

there be credit subsidy still in existence by the end of 2005, the

budget does propose the rescission of a total of $54 million in credit

subsidy for these programs. However, that will still leave significant amounts of both credit subsidy and commitment authority for

both the title VI and the 184 program. For title VI, it would be

$34.6 million in commitment authority available, and for 184, $226

million available.

Let me also mention that the Native Hawaiian Housing Block

Grant Program has been proceeding very well. The Department of

Hawaiian Homelands over two administrations of two different

parties have been very good in expending dollars and having specific projects. We can provide information if needed by the committee on that.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, let me mention that we have just concluded last month 1 year-long, seven separate meeting process regarding the formula funding for NAHASDA, a negotiated rulemaking in which I was involved at every meeting. I believe was

successfully concluded. It addressed some very knotty issues such

as minimum funding, over-and under-counting of formula current

assisted stock, and definitions such as substantial housing services.

I want to take the chance to thank all of the tribal leaders who

were involved. Things went, I thought, very well.

This concludes my remarks. We stand ready to answer any questions.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Liu appears in appendix.]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

I am going to submit my questions for the record. That was a call

to vote. So we will be taking about a 10-minute recess. When we

reconvene, Senator Inouye will chair, then.

Thank you.

[Recess.]

Senator INOUYE [ASSUMING CHAIR]. May I now call upon Mr.

Garman, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable

Energy, Department of Energy.

STATEMENT OF DAVID GARMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Mr. GARMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The hour is late and I

will be brief.

I am the assistant secretary who leads the Department of Energy’s renewable energy and energy efficiency activities. Today I will

attempt to represent the Department’s activities of greatest interest to American Indian tribes and Alaska Natives, beginning with

those in my office.

The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy has a

tribal energy program. We use that program to assist tribes in assessing the feasibility of renewable energy projects on tribal lands.

We also use that program to help tribes develop renewable energy

projects of their own, to assist them with their energy planning
109

needs, and to promote energy education and training through tribal

colleges and other means.

The President’s 2005 budget request for the Tribal Energy Pro- gram is $5.5 million, a 12-percent increase over the amount appropriated last year. I must note, however, that two-thirds of our fiscal

year 2004 Tribal Energy Program was directed to three specific recipients as a consequence of an appropriations earmark, so our

ability to assist a greater number of tribes and to distribute the

funding competitively will be severely compromised this year.

Another program which has proven to be extremely beneficial to

tribes is our low-income weatherization program. The President’s

fiscal year 2005 budget seeks a $64-million increase for weatherization. If Congress agrees to that request, since it is a formula grant,

the funding that goes to tribes under this program will rise as well.

Elsewhere in the Department, the cleanup of Department of Energy sites is an issue of tremendous concern to many tribes. In the

continuing effort to accelerate the cleanup of these sites, the President has proposed $7.43 billion, or a 6.1-percent increase to the Office of Environmental Management. The Office of Environmental

Management also works directly with tribes, consulting with and

involving them in risk reduction and cleanup activities. Specific

support for tribal efforts totaled just over $6 million in fiscal year

2004, and the President’s budget requests an equivalent amount

for fiscal year 2005.

We have other examples as well. The Office of Nuclear Energy provides $650,000 per year to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes for air

quality monitoring, environmental sampling, emergency planning

and response, and cultural protection activities at the Idaho National Laboratory. The Office of Science provides $700,000 to Indian tribes and Alaska Natives as a consequence of education outreach and technical support activities associated with its atmospheric radiation monitoring, or ARM, program. The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management maintains a $500,000-per year

program to consult with affected tribes on issues associated with

the transportation of waste to Yucca Mountain.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, DOE’s Office of Small and Disadvantaged

Business Utilization helps small businesses, including Native

American businesses, bid for contracts from the Department of Energy. One recent example is a $26-million 2-year contract with an

Alaska Native-owned firm to participate in the management and

operation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. If memory serves,

the Department procures about $19 billion worth of goods and services each year, and we are making an effort to un-bundle those contracts in such a way to ensure that we have ample opportunities

for small and disadvantaged businesses, including Indian and Alaska Native firms, to compete.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to answer any

questions that the committee might have, either now or in the future.

Thank you for this opportunity.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Garman appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Garman.

May I now call on the deputy associate attorney general at the

Department of Justice, Tracy Henke.
110

Ms. Henke.

STATEMENT OF TRACY HENKE, DEPUTY ASSOCIATE

ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Ms. HENKE. Thank you, Senator Inouye.

My name is Tracy Henke. I am the deputy associate attorney

general for the Department of Justice. It is a pleasure to be here

today to discuss the Justice Department’s proposed fiscal year 2005

budget priorities for Indian country.

As all of us are aware, the needs of Indian tribal governments

in combating crime and violence continue to be great. As the Department stated to this committee last year, the President and the

Attorney General remain committed to addressing the most serious

law enforcement problems in Indian country, including substance

abuse, domestic violence and other violent crimes, and to ensuring

that federally recognized Indian tribes are full partners in this effort.

The Administration’s continued commitment to federally recognized American Indian communities is reflected in the President’s

fiscal year 2005 request of $49 million for the Office of Justice programs and its Office on Violence Against Women, and $20 million

for the Department’s COPS office. The President’s budget request

for fiscal year 2005 will allow the Department to continue most of

our tribal programs near the fiscal year 2004 level.

Many of OJP’s tribal programs focus on alcohol and drug abuse,

which continue to be a major problem in Indian country. The President’s fiscal year 2005 budget request is $4.2 million for the Indian

Alcohol and Substance Abuse Demonstration Program. In addition,

OJP works to ensure that federally recognized Indian tribes and

Native Alaska villages and corporations benefit from the Drug

Court Program which provides funds for drug courts that provide

specialized treatment and rehabilitation for nonviolent offenders.

In the fiscal year 2005 budget, we have requested $67.5 million for

this overall program.

It also, sir, continues to be a sad fact that American Indian and

Alaska Native women suffer disproportionately from domestic violence and sexual assault. For fiscal year 2005, the Department is

requesting a total of $19.8 million for all of our tribal violence

against women programs. This is a $1.3-million increase over the

fiscal year 2004 level.

Tribal communities also benefit from funds available through the

Department’s Victims Assistance in Indian country Discretionary

Grant Program, through our Office for Victims of Crime. These

funds can be used for many different services, including emergency

shelters and counseling. In addition, the Children’s Justice Act Program provides funds to improve the investigation, prosecution and

handling of child abuse cases in Indian country.

For fiscal year 2005, the President’s budget requests $20 million

for the COPS office to address pressing needs in tribal law enforcement. The COPS office with its training partners also has developed specialized culturally relevant basic community policing training for agencies receiving grants from the COPS office. To date, 149

tribal law enforcement agencies have received basic community policing training.
111

One of the many challenges that federally recognized Indian

tribes and Native Alaskan villages and corporations face is collecting reliable data on arrests, victimizations and other criminal justice-related issues. Since 2001, the Department has provided assistance to create the Tribal Justice Statistics Assistance Center,

which became operational last month. The Center works with tribal justice agencies to develop and enhance their ability to generate

and use criminal and civil justice statistics.

OJP plans on continuing its assistance for this project, as well

as the National Tribal Justice Resource Center in Boulder, CO

which provides tribal justice systems with assistance that is comparable to that available to Federal and State court systems.

Finally, one of the most important duties of the Department is

the prosecution of Federal crimes in Indian country. Responsibility

for prosecuting Federal cases in Indian country falls on the U.S. attorneys’ offices. The U.S. attorneys work with and through local

task forces to address the needs of Indian country law enforcement

on pressing issues such as gang violence, drug and gun crimes. In

fiscal year 2003, the U.S. attorneys’ offices filed 679 cases pertaining to violent crime in Indian country. These offenses included

homicides, rapes, aggravated assaults, and child sexual abuse.

Prosecuting crimes in Indian country is estimated to cost $19 million and 145 work years during the 2004 and 2005 fiscal years.

Additional efforts to address Indian country issues include the

Attorney General’s Advisory Committee, the Native American

Issues Subcommittee, which consists of 26 U.S. attorneys who have

significant amount of Indian country in their respective districts.

The committee meets regularly to discuss its current priorities for

Indian country, which include terrorism, violent crime, white collar

crime and resolution of jurisdictional disputes.

In addition, through the Office of Justice Programs, the Department is also working to build State-tribal relations in law enforcement and justice communities. Partnering with the International

Association of Chiefs of Police and its Indian country law enforcement section, OJP is sponsoring regional meetings to highlight

promising tribal–State efforts throughout the Nation. Two meetings have already occurred and for two more, the planning is already underway.

Attorney General Ashcroft has pledged to honor our Federal

trust responsibility and to work with sovereign Indian nations on

a government-to-government basis. The Attorney General and the

entire Justice Department will honor this commitment and continue to assist tribal justice systems in their effort to promote safe

communities. We are confident that our current activities and our

fiscal year 2005 proposed budget reflect these priorities.

Once again, sir, thank you for the opportunity to be here, and I

look forward to answering any questions.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Henke appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Ms. Henke.

Before proceeding, I would like to thank all of you and commend

you for your service to our country.

May I first ask a few questions of Ms. Vasques. What is your rationale for eliminating funds authorized by the use of title VII(b)

funds for construction, renovation and modernization of public
112

schools serving a predominantly Native Hawaiian student body? I

notice that the budget eliminates funding for this purpose.

Ms. VASQUES. In the 2005 budget the Administration is not proposing to continue special appropriations language that was added

by Congress in the 2003 and 2004 appropriations bills so that all

funds can be used to continue the provision of education-related

services to the Native Hawaiian population.

Senator INOUYE. Was that a matter of priorities? Or did you just

decide not to follow the direction of the Congress?

Please identify yourself?

Ms. JONES. I am Lonna Jones, acting director of the Budget Office in the Department of Education for Elementary, Secondary and

Vocational Programs. The request for the education for Native Hawaiian Programs does not include the special language for construction, since the budget priority is on using all the funds requested for programs.

Senator INOUYE. So the program’s congressionally initiated priorities may not be high.

May I now go to Michael Liu, assistant secretary. The Housing

Block Grant Program has been funded at the same level over the

last several years, and the President’s proposal for fiscal year 2005

request is no exception at $647 million. Given the need for habitable and safe housing in Indian country, increasing inflation, new

construction costs, funding at the same level actually represents a

decrease, does it not?

Mr. LIU. Mr. Chairman, given the competing interests that we

have within the Department, within the Administration, we believe

that the proposal of $647 million, which does represent essentially

flat funding in relation to 2004 and 2003, is a very fair offering for

the program. Clearly, there is great need in Indian country. There

is no question about it. But we believe that what we have proposed

here certainly will continue the progress that has occurred in the

program.

I think the amount also has to be associated with looking at how

we can further, and I mentioned this in my earlier comments, the

use of both the section 184 Loan Guarantee Program and title VI

programs, where we have a significant amount of unused credit

subsidy and commitment authority. We have made it a high priority within public and Indian housing and the Office of Native

American Programs to make much greater use of that resource so

that we can leverage our actual budgeted dollars, sir.

Senator INOUYE. There are a couple of elements. First, the population of Indian country has grown exponentially. And second, like

all societies, you will find a spectrum that ranges from the very

wealthy Indians and the very, very poor Indians. Now, wealthy Indians can easily enter into loan guarantee programs, but when you

have Indians with not a single bank account, how do you propose

to help them with loan guarantee programs?

Mr. LIU. Sir, I have engaged personally in discussion with many

of the leaders of the tribal housing authorities. We still need to do

a lot more in educating both the tribal leaders who are involved in

housing and banks as to use of the guarantee loan programs, which

do permit, which can, in association with other programs that are

offered by banks, other programs that are offered by the GSEs, to
113

help reach down to a lower income level than currently exists, in

terms of the perception as to what can be done and what groups

can be used.

We do estimate that we can do over $200 million in section 184

loans this year with the market that is available. We just have not

worked hard enough, and I mean HUD, the tribes and the banks,

to make that happen, sir.

Senator INOUYE. I agree with you. It all sounds good, especially

if someone is going to college and can understand the language, but

not all of us have been so blessed. But one thing we know, Indian

housing is the worst in the United States. No other ethnic group

can compare with it. For that matter, it compares rather favorably

with third world countries. So I would hope that your agency will

take a special look at this, and at least take into consideration the

increasing population and the fact that there are more people in

poverty in Indian country than any other area of the country.

Mr. LIU. Yes, sir; thank you.

Senator INOUYE. I would like to thank you, Mr. Liu. Because of

time, I am just going to ask a few questions of all.

Mr. Garman, the President’s budget request for 2005 for the

intergovernmental activities of the Energy Supply Program is $16

million. Part of this program funds the Tribal Energy Program

which helps Native Americans develop renewable energy resources

on their lands. How does the President’s budget request support

this vital program?

Mr. GARMAN. We propose to increase that funding by 12 percent.

Last year, I believe it was funded at just under $5 million. This

year, we proposed to spend $5.5 million. We would like to increase

that spending.

Senator INOUYE. As one who has been involved in energy programs involving Indian lands and Indian resources, do you believe

that Native Americans are getting a fair return for their resources?

Mr. GARMAN. There is so much more that can be done. Native

Americans, Indian country, probably comprises about 5 percent of

the Nation’s land area, but this land containing 10 percent of the

energy resources in the Nation, and an even higher percentage of

the renewable energy resources in the Nation. Our focus has been

on that renewable energy. The tribes in the Great Plains, the Dakotas, have a tremendous wind energy resource. We have collaborated with the Rosebud Sioux on the construction of the first utility-scale wind project in Indian country.

It is very new. We are all learning. But it is our vision that we

can help Indians become entrepreneurs in renewable energy and

become ones who have this tremendous resource and develop it in

a manner which is consistent with their cultural principles and

their environmental values, to bring a lot more of that renewable

energy on line.

Senator INOUYE. In the meantime, do you believe that they are

being shortchanged or getting their fair share?

Mr. GARMAN. I think the import of your question points essentially to issues of royalty management and getting a fair return on

the investment of energy resources from Indian country. I know

that this is an area under litigation in the Department of the Inte-
114

rior. As a matter under litigation, I would prefer not to speak on

that.

I will tell you, however, the Department of Energy held a tribal

summit, the first of many annual tribal summits that we are going

to be holding, just two days ago. I heard a remarkable story from

Southern Utes who had taken the energy management on their

own lands, into their own hands. They had developed the capacity

to do that. I think that they have done a much better job than anybody else that I am familiar with. They are getting a higher return

on their investment than many other Indian tribes around the

country are enjoying.

Senator INOUYE. I realize this is not in your area of responsibility, but I just wanted to check because I saw not too long ago a

comparison of company A doing business with certain private sector, and so much in returns; the same company doing business in

the same area with an Indian tribe and that Indian tribe gets less

than one-half of the return that goes to others. That seems to be

rather commonplace, doesn’t it?

Mr. GARMAN. I have seen many reports along those lines. Yes,

sir.

Senator INOUYE. I hope that your agency is going to do everything to help alleviate this problem.

Mr. GARMAN. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. May I now ask the Justice Department a few

questions, if I may. You spoke of the COPS program. It is the committee’s understanding that the COPS grants are provided for 3 to

5 years. Am I correct?

Ms. HENKE. Often, sir, yes they are.

Senator INOUYE. How many tribal grants are expected to expire

this year and in the fiscal year 2005?

Ms. HENKE. Sir, I do not have that number with me. I am happy to get that for you, but that is one of the ways that the $20 million

COPS request that is in the President’s budget will be used, to extend some of those grants that are scheduled to expire.

Senator INOUYE. And if no additional grants are provided, all of

these officers, many of them, will be unemployed.

Ms. HENKE. It is a possibility, sir, if the grant is not extended

and if the individual tribe has not identified tribal resources to extend those officers. It is that possibility. The COPS office has

worked, though, and once again it is one of the reasons for the $20

million request, to extend some of those grants that are scheduled

to expire.

Senator INOUYE. Can you go back and see if you can’t add a few

more dollars?

Ms. HENKE. One of the things that the COPS office and the Office of Justice Programs, is doing is working once again with the

Tribal Resource Center and the statistics center, et cetera, to find

ways to address those issues in Indian country. It is another reason

that we are sponsoring the regional meetings with the IACP, the

International Association of Chiefs of Police, to identify best practices so we can identify ways to help Indian country in addressing

those law enforcement issues, including salaries.

Senator INOUYE. I bring this up because your agency just recently issued a report that suggested that American Indians and
115

Alaska Natives experience violence at a higher rate compared to

the country as a whole.

Ms. HENKE. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. And yet we have decreased COPS funding by $10 million. This time we are decreasing it by $5 million. In many

cases, the terms of the grants are expiring. So though we have the

worst violence in the United States, we are going to have no COPS,

unless my mathematics are a little wrong. I hope you are going to

do something about this.

Ms. HENKE. Once again, the $20 million request, as well as resources through the Office of Justice Programs are made available

to the tribal communities to address law enforcement issues, as

well as prosecution and adjudication. So yes, we look forward to

working with the committee and the Congress in addressing those

funding issues.

Senator INOUYE. According to your Justice Department’s most recent report, new admissions to jails in Indian country, increased by

22 percent from June, 2001 to 2002. Over 33 percent of the offenders were held in the detention for violent offenses; 15 percent for

domestic violence; and 11 percent for driving under the influence.

Now, you have eliminated funding for detention facilities. What is

the rationale for this? The incarcerated population seems to grow,

but we are cutting down on the housing.

Ms. HENKE. Sir, a couple of years ago there was a report made

available through the Department of Justice that did address the

bed space in our prisons in Indian country. With the prison construction that we had on line and that was being proposed, we at

the time thought that it would address these issues with once

again what was coming on line.

In addition to that, though, in the past when the Administration

has requested funds for the Tribal Prison Construction Program it

has been 100 percent earmarked by the Congress and we have

worked very hard to address those needs that Congress has identified for us. But it has limited our flexibility in providing some of

those resources to some of the areas that might have greater need.

Senator INOUYE. As you are aware, Congress authorized the Stop

Violence Against Indian Women Discretionary Grant Program in

1994, 10 years ago. Its purpose is to provide government funds to

strengthen the tribal governments in response to violence against

women. Under the law, tribes are eligible for 100 percent of Federal funds because a non–Federal match waiver is contained in the

law. Most recently, your Department has interpreted the statute as

requiring tribes to use only funds appropriated by Congress as

matching funds, when this is not required in the law.

How do you propose to find these matching funds when other

Federal agencies do not specifically appropriate funds to tribes for

violence against women? Where do you go?

Ms. HENKE. What I can tell you right now is I am not familiar

with the complete details of that. I do know that we have a response to the Senate and I believe also to the House that is currently under review. I can work to ensure that response is provided. We are reviewing often, I am certain other agencies as well,

we look at the regulations that have been promulgated for the programs that we operate to ensure that they were done in full com-
116

pliance with the law. That was something that was undertaken

within the OVW programs, the Office on Violence Against Woman.

So what I can assure you is I will go back and double-check the

status of that and ensure that this committee gets a reply.

Senator INOUYE. Wonderful. I am sure the reservations will appreciate it very much.

Ms. HENKE. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. My final one, may we request that the Department provide technical assistance to the committee, because we

would like to draft legislation to establish a commission to address

the framework for law enforcement in Indian country as it relates

to homeland security. As you know, there are many Indian reservations along our international borders. We believe that these Indian

nations should play an active role in homeland security.

Ms. HENKE. I can assure you, sir, that the Department would be

more than happy to provide technical assistance in that manner.

It is something that is of concern to the Department. Many Department officials have visited tribes that have a significant expanse of

border with Mexico and with Canada. For our Native American

Issues Subcommittee with the U.S. attorneys, that issue has been

a prime focus for them. I actually went with them when they visited the border with the tribes down in Arizona and New Mexico.

So it is a priority for the Department. We would be happy to provide technical assistance.

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much, Ms. Henke.

Ms. HENKE. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. I thank all of you very much.

The record will remain open until the March 9. If you want to

have any addendum provided or corrections made, please feel free

to do so.

Until then, the committee is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:22 a.m. the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
(117)

APPENDIX

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GARY J. HARTZ, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PUBLIC

HEALTH, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: Good morning. I am Gary Hartz,

acting director of the Office of Public Health. Today I am accompanied by Mr. Robert G. McSwain, Director, office of Management Support and Mr. Douglas Black, Director, office of Tribal Programs. We are pleased to have this opportunity to testify

on the President’s fiscal year 2005 budget request for the Indian Health Service.

The IHS has the responsibility for the delivery of health services to more than

1.6 million members of federally-recognized American, Indian (AI) tribes and Alaska

Native (AN) organizations. The locations of these programs range from the most remote and inaccessible regions in the United States to the heavily populated and

sometimes inner city areas of the country’s largest urban areas. For all of the AI/

ANs served by these programs, the IHS is committed to its mission to raise their

physical, mental, social, and spiritual health to the highest level, in partnership

with them.

Secretary Thompson, too, is personally committed to improving the health of AI/

ANs. To better understand the conditions in Indian country, the Secretary or Deputy Secretary has visited tribal leaders and Indian reservations in all twelve IHS

areas, accompanied by senior HHS staff. The Administration takes seriously its

commitment to honor its obligations to AI/ANs under statutes and treaties to provide effective health care services.

Through the government’s longstanding support of Indian health care, the I/T/U

Indian health programs have demonstrated the ability to effectively utilize available

resources to improve the health status of AI/ANs. For example, there have been dramatic improvements in reducing mortality rates for certain causes, such as: from the

3 year periods of 1972–74 to 1999–2001, maternal deaths have decreased 58 percent, infant mortality has decreased 64 percent, and unintentional injuries mortality

have decreased 56 percent, between the period 1972–99. More recently, ,the funding

for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians has significantly enhanced diabetes

care and education in AI/AN communities, as well as building the necessary infrastructure for diabetes programs. Intermediate outcomes that have been achieved

since implementation of the Special Diabetes Program for Indians include improvements in the control of blood glucose, blood pressure, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides. In addition, treatment of risk factors for cardiovascular disease has improved as well as screening for diabetic kidney disease and diabetic eye

disease.

Although we are very pleased with the advancements that have been made in the

health status of AI/ANs, we recognize there is still progress to be made. As the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently reported, the AI/AN rates for

chronic diseases, infant mortality, sexually transmitted diseases, and injuries continue to surpass those of the white population as well as those of other minority

groups. The 2002 data show that the prevalence of diabetes is more than twice that

for all adults in the United States, and the mortality rate from chronic liver disease
118

is more than twice as high. The sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) rate is the

highest of any population group and more than double that of the white population

in 1999. Rates of chlamydia are 5.7 times higher than in whites, and the gonorrhea

rate is 4 times higher than in whites. AI/AN death rates for unintentional injuries

and motor vehicle crashes are 1.7 to 2.0 times higher than the rates for all racial/

ethnic populations, while suicide rates for AI/AN youth are 3 times greater than

rates for white youth of similar age. Maternal deaths among AI/ANs are nearly

twice as high as those among white women.

Complicating the situation is the type of health problems confronting AI/AN communities today. The IHS public health functions that were effective in eliminating

certain infectious diseases, improving maternal and child health, and increasing access to clean water and sanitation, are not as effective in addressing health problems that are behavioral in nature, which are the primary factors in the mortality

rates noted previously. other factors impacting further progress in improving AI/AN

health status are the increases in population and the rising costs of providing health

care. The IHS service population is growing by nearly 2 percent annually and has

increased 24 percent since 1994.

This budget request for the IHS will assure the provision of essential primary

care and public health services for AI/ANs. For the 7th year now, development of

the health and budget priorities supporting the IHS budget request originated at

the health services delivery level. As partners with the IHS in delivering needed

health care to AI/ANs, Tribal and Urban Indian health programs participate in formulating the budget request and annual performance plan. The I/T/U Indian health

program health providers, administrators, technicians, and elected tribal officials, as

well as the public health professionals at the IHS Area and Headquarters offices,

combine their expertise and works collaboratively to identifying the most critical

health care funding needs for AI/AN people. The President’s budget request for the IHS is an increase of $45 million above

the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. The request will assist I/T/U Indian health programs to maintain access to health care by providing $36 million to fund pay raises

for Federal employees as well as funds to allow Tribal and Urban programs to provide comparable pay increases to their staff. Staffing for five newly constructed

health care facilities is also included in the amount of $23 million. When fully operational, these facilities will double the number of primary provider care visits that

can be provided at these sites and also provide new services. The budget also helps

maintain access to health care through increases of $18 million for contract health

care and $2 million for the Community Health Aide /Practitioner program in Alaska. The increase for CHS, combined with the additional purchasing power provided

in Section 506 of the recently enacted Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement,

and Modernization Act, will allow the purchase of an estimated 35,000 additional

outpatient visits or 3,000 additional days of inpatient care.

As mentioned previously, the health disparities for AI/ANs cannot be addressed

solely through the provision of health care services. Changing behavior and lifestyle

and promoting good health and environment is critical in preventing disease and

improving the health of AI/ANs. This budget supports these activities through requested increases of $15 million for community-based health promotion and disease

prevention projects, expanding the capacity of tribal epidemiology centers, and providing an estimated 22,000 homes with safe water and sewage disposal. An additional $4.5 million is requested for the Unified Financial Management System. This

system will consolidate the Department’s financial management systems into one,

providing the Department and individual operating division management staff with

more timely and coordinated financial management information. The requested increase will fully cover the IHS share of costs for the system in fiscal year 2005 without reducing other information technology activities.

The budget request also supports the replacement of outdated health clinics and

the construction of staff quarters for health facilities, which are essential components of supporting access to services and improving health status. In the long run,

this assures there are functional facilities, medical equipment, and staff for the effective and efficient provision of health services. As you know, the average age of

IHS facilities is 32 years. The fiscal year 2005 budget includes $42 million to complete construction of the health centers at Red Mesa, AZ and Sisseton SD; and complete the design and construction of staff quarters at Zuni, NM and Wagner, SD.

When completed, the health centers will provide an additional 36,000 primary care

provider visits, replace the Sisseton hospital, which was built in 1936, and bring 24-

hour emergency care to the Red Mesa area for the first time.

The IHS continues its commitment to the President’s Management Agenda

through efforts to improve the effectiveness of its programs The agency has completed a Headquarters restructuring plan to address Strategic Management of
119

Human Capital. To Improve Financial Performance and Expand E-Government, the

IHS participates in Departmental-wide activities to implement a Unified Financial

Management System and implement e-Gov initiatives, such as e-grants, Human Resources automated systems, et cetera. This budget request reflects Budget and Performance Integration at funding levels and proposed increases based on recommendations of the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) evaluations. The

IHS scores have been some of the highest in the Federal Government.

The budget request that I have just described provides a continued investment in

the maintenance and support of the I/T/U Indian public health system to provide

access to high quality medical and preventive services as a means of improving

health status. In addition, this request reflects the continued Federal commitment

to support the I/T/U Indian health system that serves the AI/ANs.

Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the fiscal year 2005 President’s budget

request for the IHS. We are pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195

Æ