```

[Senate Report 106-368]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 745
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     106-368

======================================================================

 
AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RECONCILIATION PLACE IN FORT PIERRE, 
                  SOUTH DAKOTA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                August 25, 2000.--Ordered to be printed

   Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of July 26, 2000

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Campbell, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1658]

    The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the 
bill (S. 1658) to authorize the construction of the 
Reconciliation Place in Fort Pierre, South Dakota, and for 
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and 
recommends that the bill as amended do pass.

                                Purposes

    The purpose of S. 1658, introduced by Senator Daschle on 
September 29, 1999, and cosponsored by Senator Johnson, are (1) 
to promote a better understanding of the history and culture of 
the Sioux people, and by doing so, achieve better relations 
between Indian and non-Indian peoples; (2) to promote economic 
development on the reservations; (3) to establish a Sioux 
Nation Supreme Court to help increase legal consistency among 
the reservations, and thus create a legal environment more 
conducive to business investment and to building respect for 
the law; (4) to establish a training center to train tribal 
personnel in conflict resolution and alternative dispute 
resolution; and, (4) to locate all of these entities at a 
single facility to minimize administrative and building costs. 
To achieve these purposes, S. 1658 would authorize funds for 
the construction of a multipurpose center to be known as 
``Reconciliation Place'' in Pierre, South Dakota, at which 
would be located and operated a Sioux Nation Supreme Court, at 
which would be located and operated a Sioux Nation Supreme 
Court, a National Native American Mediation Training Center, a 
Native American Economic Development Council, and an Historical 
Archive and Display Center.

                          Background and Need

    In 1997, the chairmen of all nine South Dakota Sioux tribes 
joined in a letter to Senator Daschle seeking assistance for 
the Wakpa Sica Historical Society's efforts to develop plans 
for construction and development of a ``Reconciliation Place'' 
with attending programs in Fort Pierre, South Dakota, on the 
bank of the Missouri River where, in 1804, leaders of the Teton 
Sioux Tribes first met representatives of the United States of 
America--Meriwether Lewis and William Clark.
    As envisioned by the Historical Society, a non-profit 
community of tribal and non-tribal leaders dedicated to forging 
understanding between tribal and non-tribal cultures, the focus 
of the Reconciliation Place would be fostering awareness, 
learning, understanding, and professional development in the 
promotion of reconciliation between non-tribal people--most of 
U.S. society--and tribal people or persons with Native American 
ancestry. It would do so by pursuing three initiatives. One 
initiative would be to create a center for tribal cultural 
history and a Sioux Nations Archives, to display and interpret 
tribal history, art, and culture for all visitors, to provide a 
repository for tribal history and tribal members' family 
histories, and to assist in the return of cultural and 
spiritual artifacts to tribes under Federal law. The second 
initiative would be to establish an interpretative center that 
would feature the Sioux Nation's first encounter with 
Americans--Lewis and Clark--and the economic history of the 
Missouri River Valley, with emphasis on contrasting the 
different economic systems indigenous to the tribes and to the 
incoming U.S. citizens, and on illuminating the natural 
misunderstanding and conflict that these differences prompted. 
The third initiative would be to provide a home for a Sioux 
Nation Tribal Supreme Court, which would provide additional 
professional guidance and support for existing tribal local and 
appellate courts in dealing with increasing caseloads 
associated with the growth of tribal commerce, finance, and 
economic development. This initiative reflects a consensus 
among Sioux tribal leaders that a supreme court is key not only 
to promoting tribal socio-economic well-being, but also 
effective tribal government.
    The establishment of the Wakapa Sica Historical Society and 
a need for reconciliation between tribal and non-tribal peoples 
is part of the legacy of the contentious and bitter history of 
the United States' dealings with the Sioux Nation since the 
time of Lewis and Clark. That legacy embraces a broad array of 
economic, social, and governmental problems, including often 
tense and uneasy race relations between Indians and non-Indians 
in South Dakota, characterized by misunderstanding and 
mistrust, and poor economic conditions on the reservations, 
characterized by low per capital income rates and high 
unemployment rates. To appreciate the need for reconciliation 
in these circumstances, a brief summary of some of the more 
notable events in the United States' dealings with the Sioux 
Nation is necessary.
    In 1803, President Jefferson commissioned the Lewis and 
Clark expedition to explore the lands acquired through the 
Louisiana Purchase. On September 24, 1804, Lewis and Clark 
anchored their three riverboats where the Wakpa Sica, or Bad 
River, flows into the Missouri River. The next day, half of the 
party of 44 men landed on the west bank of the Missouri and 
formally paraded on the river plain under the flag of the 
United States. They then joined Chief Black Buffalo and braves 
of the Teton Sioux for council in the chief's buffalo skin 
lodge. This was one of the first meetings between 
representatives of the Sioux tribes and representatives of the 
United States.
    In 1815, the United States entered into treaties with the 
Dakota and Lakota tribes of the Sioux Nation, in which the 
United States pledged to protect the tribes.\1\ In 1825, the 
United States entered into treaties of peace, friendship and 
commerce with the tribes of the Sioux Nation to promote the fur 
trade and the safe passage of American citizens through Sioux 
Nation territory.\2\ In 1851, to facilitate trade and reduce 
intertribal conflict that sometimes threatened safe passage, 
the United States entered into a treaty with the Sioux and 
neighboring Indian tribes, which described their respective 
aboriginal areas.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Treaty with the Teton (Lakota), 1815; 7 Stat. 125.
    \2\ See e.g., Treaty with the Hunkpapa Band of the Sioux Tribe, 
1825; 7 Stat. 257.
    \3\ Treaty with the Sioux, 1851; 11 Stat 749.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After the Civil War, the United States' westward expansion 
led to conflict with the Sioux Nation, who saw their buffalo 
herds, and consequently their economic livelihoods, begin to 
decline with the passage of settlers along the Oregon Trail. In 
1866, the United States sought to build a road through Sioux 
Nation hunting grounds in the Powder River valley, despite the 
objections of the Sioux tribes. Over the next two years, the 
tribes fought the Powder River or Red Cloud's War to protect 
their hunting grounds. The war ended with the signing of the 
Treaty with the Sioux, 1868, in which the United States set 
aside lands in South Dakota west of the Missouri River as the 
Great Sioux Reservation as a ``permanent home'' for the Sioux 
Nation and delineated tribal hunting grounds in the Powder 
River valley.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Treaty with the Sioux, 1868; 15 Stat 635.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1874, gold was discovered in the Black Hills of South 
Dakota, and a gold rush began. After unsuccessfully attempting 
to maintain the reservation boundaries that had been 
established only six years before, President Grant's 
Administration made repeated offers to purchase the Black 
Hills, but the Sioux, to whom the Black Hills were (and still 
are) sacred, refused to sell. Late in 1875, the United States 
ordered the Sioux to report to Indian agencies along the 
Missouri River and in Nebraska, away from the Black Hills. 
Though few Sioux actually received notice of the order, the 
United States Army was sent to enforce it in the spring of 
1876. This led to the Battles of the Rosebud and the Little Big 
Horn. After Custer's defeat at the Little Big Horn, the United 
States sent more troops to force the Sioux to report to the 
Indian agencies. Many other battles ensued and many Sioux were 
killed.\5\ In 1877, Congress enacted legislation taking more 
than 7.2 million acres of land, including the Black Hills, from 
the Sioux Nation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ United States v. Sioux Nation, 448 U.S. 371, 379-80 (1980.
    \6\ Act of Feb. 28, 1877; 19 Stat. 254.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the 1880's, the United States sought more land from the 
Sioux. In an 1889 Agreement, the United States divided the 
Great Sioux Reservation into the Cheyenne River, Crow Creek, 
Lower Brule, Pine Ridge, Rosebud, and Standing Rock Sioux 
Reservations. Under the General Allotment Act of 1887, the 
United States opened up these reservations to non-Indian 
homesteaders, and set in motion a process through which Indian 
ownership of land throughout the United States was reduced by 
approximately 100 million acres before the allotment policy was 
abandoned in 1934. Through this process non-Indians settled 
within the boundaries of Sioux reservations, resulting in 
checkerboarded land ownership and further reductions in the 
tribes' land base.
    Also in the late 1880's, what became known as the Ghost 
Dance religion, which was believed to render its practitioners 
impervious to bullets, became popular among Indians on several 
reservations. In response to non-Indian alarm over the practice 
of the Ghost Dance in large Indian encampments, the U.S. Army 
was summoned, and in December, 1890, more than 300 Sioux 
Indians, mostly unarmed elderly, women and children, were 
massacred at Wounded Knee.\7\ From the Indian perspective, the 
United States added insult to injury when the Army subsequently 
awarded the Medal of Honor to 17 soldiers for their actions 
during the massacre.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States, 7 Cl. Ct. 468, 476 
(1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    With enactment of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (58 Stat. 
827), Congress authorized the construction of five massive 
earthen dams on the Missouri River as part of the Pick-Sloan 
plan for water development in the Missouri River Basin. The 
lands affected by construction of these dams and reservoirs 
were, by and large, Indian lands. Six Sioux reservations in 
North and South Dakota and Nebraska lost a combined total of 
more than 375,000 acres, much of it prime bottomland of huge 
economic and cultural significance to the tribes, to these 
projects. Entire tribal communities were relocated and their 
economies crippled or destroyed. Much of the land taken by the 
United States for these projects was by condemnation 
proceedings later found by the courts to have been unauthorized 
by law. Despite the enormous tangible and intangible adverse 
impacts suffered by these tribes, compensation for their losses 
from the United States was for the most part belated and 
incommensurate with the value of the losses.
    The accrued physical and psychological impacts resulting 
from the abrogation of solemn treaties, war, the taking of the 
Black Hills, the breakup, fractionation and reduction of tribal 
lands via allotments, the disruption of communities and 
economies by the construction of Federal dams and reservoirs, 
among other events, continue to contribute to feelings of 
bitterness and loss among the people of the Sioux Nation. In 
turn, these feelings and the attitudes associated with them 
tend to aggravate and complicate the tribes' relationships with 
the United States and local and state governments as well as 
relations between individual Indians and non-Indians. This is 
true despite efforts by the Congress and others to address some 
of these past wrongs, such as formally apologizing for the 
Wounded Knee Massacre and by enacting legislation to provide 
additional compensation for the losses suffered from the Pick-
Sloan dam projects. In 1981, after thirty years of arduous 
litigation in the Indian Claims Commission, the U.S. Claims 
Court and the U.S. Supreme Court, the Sioux Nation obtained an 
$81 million judgment, including interest, for the loss of the 
Black Hills. With interest since 1981, that judgment is now 
worth approximately $500 million; however, the money remains in 
the U.S. Treasury because the tribes of the Sioux Nation 
continue to seek the return of the Black Hills. About the 
manner by which the United States obtained the Black Hills, the 
United States Claims Court observed that ``A more ripe and rank 
case of dishonorable dealings will never, in all probability, 
be found in our history''.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ United States v. Sioux Nation, 20 Ct. Cl. at 241 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From the perspective of the tribes of the Sioux Nation, 
evidence of the many adverse consequences of major events in 
their history, and the effects of these events on their 
people's present-day relations with non-tribal people and 
entities, are far more pervasive around their reservations than 
perhaps anywhere else. Awareness of this history and 
perspective were key factors leading to the establishment of 
the Wakpa Sica Historical Society and to the Society's efforts 
to help foster a healing spirit of reconciliation among the 
Sioux Nation and other citizens of South Dakota, and to promote 
a better understanding of Native American history and culture 
throughout the United States.
    With great assistance from the Office of Tribal Justice of 
the U.S. Department of Justice, the Wakpa Sica Historical 
Society has developed detailed plans for a Reconciliation 
Place, which would be located on 80 acres of land acquired from 
private individuals and public entities. In the course of 
developing these plans, the project was expanded to include a 
Native American Economic Development Council to provide a 
continuing source of funds and focus on the overwhelming need 
to promote economic development on the reservations. On 
September 29, 1999, Senator Daschle introduced S. 1658, a bill 
to authorize the construction of a Reconciliation Place in Fort 
Pierre, South Dakota, and for other purposes.

                     S. 1658: Summary of Provisions

    Reconciliation Place--As amended and reported by the 
Committee on Indian Affairs, S. 1658 would authorize the 
Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
in cooperation with the Secretary of the Interior, to provide a 
grant of up to $18,258,441 to the Wakpa Sica Historical Society 
to construct a facility, known as the Reconciliation Place, to 
house an Historical Archive and Display Center, the Sioux 
Nation American Mediation Training Center, and a Sioux Nation 
Economic Development Council.
    Historical Archive and Display Center--The majority of 
documents and artifacts pertaining to the history of the Sioux 
Nation are kept in government facilities that are scattered 
across the United States and are not easily accessible to the 
public. The Historical Archive and Display Center at 
Reconciliation Place would provide a central repository for 
such documents and artifacts. By providing easier access to 
these materials and by displaying and interpreting the history, 
art, and culture of the Lakota, Nakota, and Dakota tribes of 
the Upper Midwest, the Center could enhance the knowledge and 
understanding of the history of the Sioux, and promote 
reconciliation among Indians and non-Indians.
    Sioux Nation Supreme Court--The bill directs the Attorney 
General to use available funds to provide technical and 
financial assistance to the Sioux Nation to develop and operate 
a Sioux Nation Tribal Supreme Court.
    National Native American Mediation Training Center--In 
response to a suggestion made in testimony by the 
Administration's witness before the Committee's hearing on S. 
1658, the bill was amended to include a direction to the 
Attorney General to use available funds to provide technical 
and financial assistance to the National Native American 
Mediation Training Center. This center would address the need 
for Native American mediators trained in conflict resolution 
techniques to address conflicts that arise between Indian 
tribes and neighboring communities and within tribal 
communities themselves throughout Indian country.
    Native American Economic Development Council--S. 1658 would 
establish a Native American Economic Development Council, which 
would be a charitable nonprofit corporation not considered to 
be an agency of the United States. The Council would be 
comprised of eleven members; one from each South Dakota Sioux 
Tribe, one nominated by the Government of South Dakota, and one 
nominated by the senior member of the South Dakota 
congressional delegation. Each member would serve a two-year 
term.
    The council would be authorized to accept private gifts of 
property and to raise funds from private entities for use as 
matching funds for Federal assistance, to provide expertise and 
technical support to help Indians establish successful 
businesses and in obtaining Federal assistance for economic 
development activities, and to provide scholarships to Indian 
students pursuing a business education.
    The Council would be subject to annual auditing and 
reporting requirements, and the United States would not be 
liable for any debts, defaults, acts or omissions of the 
Council. Finally, S. 1658 authorizes $10 million for five 
fiscal years, beginning with FY 2000, for the Secretary of the 
Interior to make grants to the Council to fulfill its purposes.

                          Legislative History

    On September 29, 1999, Senator Daschle introduced S. 1658 
and the bill was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. 
On May 17, 2000, the Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing 
on S. 1658. Senator Johnson, on behalf of the South 
Congressional delegation, and witnesses from the 
Administration, the United Sioux Tribes of South Dakota 
Development Corporation, and the Chairman of the Lower Brule 
Sioux Tribe testified in strong support of the bill. The 
witness from the Wakpa Sica Historical Society submitted 
letters of support from the current Governor and a former 
Governor of South Dakota, the State Bar Association, the State 
Chamber of Commerce, the State Retailers Association, the 
Mayors of the cities of Ft. Pierre and Pierre, and the County 
Commissioners of the relevant local counties. On June 21, 2000, 
the Committee on Indian Affairs adopted an amendment-in-the-
nature-of-a-substitute to S. 1658 that includes new provisions 
providing for the establishment of the Native American 
Mediation Training Center at the Reconciliation Place.

            Committee Recommendation and Tabulation of Vote

    The Committee on Indian Affairs, in an open business 
session on June 21, 2000, adopted an amendment-in-the-nature-
of-a-substitute to S. 1658 by voice vote and ordered the bill, 
as amended, reported favorably to the Senate.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 1. Findings

    Section 1 sets forth seven Congressional findings.
    The first and second findings are that there is a 
continuing need for reconciliation between Indians and non-
Indians that may be met partially through the promotion of the 
understanding of the history and culture of Sioux Indian 
tribes.
    The third finding is that the establishment of a Sioux 
Nation Tribal Supreme Court will promote economic development 
on reservations of the Sioux Nation and provide investors that 
contribute to that development a greater degree of certainty 
and confidence by reconciling conflicting tribal laws and 
strengthening tribal court systems.
    The fourth finding is that the reservations of the Sioux 
Nation contain the poorest counties in the United States and 
lack adequate tools to promote economic development and the 
creation of jobs.
    The fifth finding is that the establishment of a Native 
American Economic Development Council will assist in promoting 
economic growth and reducing poverty on reservations of the 
Sioux Nation by coordinating economic development efforts, 
centralizing expertise concerning Federal assistance, and 
facilitating the raising of funds from private sources to meet 
matching requirements under certain Federal assistance 
programs.
    The sixth finding is that there is a need to enhance and 
strengthen the capacity of Indian tribal governments and tribal 
justice systems to address conflicts which impair relationships 
within Indian communities and between Indian and non-Indian 
communities and individuals.
    The seventh finding is that the establishment of the 
National Native American Mediation Training Center, with the 
technical assistance of tribal and Federal agencies, including 
the Community Relations Service of the Department of Justice, 
would enhance and strengthen the mediation skills that are 
useful in reducing tensions and resolving conflicts in Indian 
communities and between Indian and non-Indian communities and 
individuals.

Section 2. Definitions

    Section 2 sets forth definitions of the terms ``Indian 
Tribe'', ``Secretary'', and ``Sioux Nation''.

                     Title I--Reconciliation Center

Section 101. Reconciliation Center

    Subsection (a) requires the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development (HUD), in cooperation with the Secretary of the 
Interior, to establish a reconciliation center, to be known as 
``Reconciliation Place''.
    Subsection (b) requires the Secretary of the Interior to 
take into trust for the benefit of the Sioux Nation the parcel 
of land in Stanley County, South Dakota, described as ``The 
Reconciliation Place Addition'', that is owned by the Wakpa 
Sica Historical Society, Inc., for the purpose of establishing 
and operating The Reconciliation Place.
    Subsection (c) states the purposes of Reconciliation Place 
to be (1) to enhance the knowledge and understanding of the 
history of Native Americans by displaying and interpreting the 
history, art, and culture of Indian tribes for Indians and non-
Indians; providing an accessible repository for the history of 
Indian tribes and the family history of members of Indian 
tribes; (2) to provide for the interpretation of the encounters 
between Lewis and Clark and the Sioux Nation; (3) to house the 
Sioux Nation Supreme Court; (4) to house the Native American 
Economic Development Council; and, (5) to house the National 
Native American Mediation Training Center to train tribal 
personnel in conflict resolution and alternative dispute 
resolution.
    Subsection (d) requires the Secretary of HUD, after 
consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, to offer to 
award a grant to the Wakpa Sica Historical Society for the 
construction of Reconciliation Place. As a condition to 
receiving the grant, the Society shall enter into an agreement 
with the Secretary of HUD which shall specify the duties of the 
Society under this section and arrangements for the maintenance 
of Reconciliation Place. This subsection also authorizes to be 
appropriated to the Department of HUD $18,358,441 to be used 
for the grant under this section.

Section 102. Sioux Nation Supreme Court and National Native American 
        Mediation Training Center

    Subsection (a) provides that to ensure the development and 
operation of the Sioux National Tribal Supreme Court and the 
National Native American mediation Training Center, the 
Attorney General of the United States shall use available funds 
to provide technical and financial assistance to the Sioux 
Nation.
    Subsection (b) authorizes to be appropriated such sums as 
are necessary to carry out this section.

         Title II--Native American Economic Development Council

Section 201. Establishment of Native American Economic Development 
        Council

    Subsection (a) provides authority for the establishment of 
the Native American Economic Development Council (hereafter 
``Council'') as a charitable, nonprofit corporation that shall 
not be considered to be an agency or establishment of the 
United States.
    Subsection (b) states the purposes of the council to be (1) 
to encourage, accept, and administer private gifts of property; 
(2) to use those gifts as a source of matching funds needed to 
receive Federal Assistance; (3) to provide tribal members with 
the skills and resources necessary for establishing successful 
businesses; (4) to provide grants and loans to tribal members 
who are students pursuing an education in business or a 
business-related subject; and, (6) to provide technical 
assistance to Indian tribes and tribal members in obtaining 
federal assistance.

Section 202. Board of Directors of the Council

    Subsection (a) provides that the Council shall have a 
governing Board of Directors (hereinafter ``Board'') consisting 
of 11 directors who shall be citizens of the United States 
appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. Each of the nine 
directors shall represent one of the nine reservations of South 
Dakota and shall be selected from among nominations submitted 
by the appropriate Indian tribes. One director shall be 
selected from nominations submitted by the Governor of South 
Dakota and one director shall be selected from nominations 
submitted by the most senior member of the South Dakota 
Congressional delegation.
    Subsection (b) requires the Secretary to appoint the 
directors of the Board no later than December 30, 2000, to 2-
year terms. A vacancy on the Board shall be filled no later 
than 60 days after a vacancy occurs, in the same manner as the 
original appointment, and no individual may serve more than 3 
consecutive terms as a director.
    Subsection (c) provides that the Chairman of the Board 
shall be elected from its members for a term of 2 years.
    Subsection (d) provides that a majority of the members of 
the Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of 
business.
    Subsection (e) provides that the board shall meet at the 
call of the Chairman at least once a year. If a director misses 
3 consecutive regularly schedules meetings, he may be removed 
by the Secretary and the vacancy filled in accordance with 
subsection (b).
    Subsection (f) provides that members of the board shall 
serve without pay, but may be reimbursed for actual and 
necessary travel and subsistence expenses incurred in the 
performance of Council duties.
    Subsection (g) grants the Board powers to appoint officers, 
to adopt a constitution and bylaws consistent with the purposes 
of the Council under this Act, and to carry out such other 
actions as necessary to carry out the Council's purposes under 
this Act. Appointment to the Board shall not constitute 
employment by or holding of an office of the United States for 
the purposes of any Federal law. Officers and employees of the 
Council may not be appointed until the Council has sufficient 
funds to pay them for their service; shall be appointed without 
regard to the provisions of title 5, United States code, 
governing appointments in the competitive service; and may be 
paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and 
subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to 
classification and General Schedule pay rates. The first 
officer or employee appointed by the Board shall be the 
Secretary of the Board, who shall serve, at the direction of 
the Board, as its chief operating officer and be knowledgeable 
and experienced in matters relating to economic development and 
Indian affairs.

Section 203. Powers and Obligations of the Council

    Subsection (a) provides that the Council shall have, in 
addition to the powers otherwise given it under this Act to 
carry out this purposes, the usual powers of a corporation 
acting as a trustee in South Dakota, including the power (1) to 
accept any gift devise or bequest, absolutely or in trust, of 
real or personal property of any income therefrom or other 
interest therein; (2) to acquire by purchase or exchange any 
real or personal property or interest therein; (3) to sell, 
donate, lease, invest, reinvest, retain or otherwise dispose of 
any property or income therefrom unless otherwise required by 
the instrument of transfer; (4) to borrow money and issue 
bonds, debentures, or other debt instruments; (5) to sue and be 
sued, and complain and defend itself in any court of competent 
jurisdiction, except that the directors shall not be personally 
liable, except for gross negligence; (6) to enter into 
contracts or other arrangements with public agencies and 
private organizations and persons and to make such payments as 
may be necessary to carry out its functions; and, (7) to carry 
out any action that is necessary and proper to carry out the 
purposes of the Council.
    Subsection (b) provides that the Council shall (A) have 
perpetual succession; (B) may conduct business throughout the 
several States, territories, and possessions of the United 
States and abroad; (C) shall have its principal offices in 
South Dakota; and (D) shall at all times maintain a designated 
agent authorized to accept service of process for the Council, 
service to whom shall be deemed as service on or notice to the 
Council.
    Subsection (c) provides that the Council shall have an 
official seal selected by the Board, which shall be judicially 
noticed.
    Subsection (d) provides that the Council may accept a 
current or future interest in a gift, even if that gift is 
encumbered, restricted, or subject to beneficial interests of 1 
or more private persons.

Section 204. Administrative Services and Support

    Subsection (a) provides that the Secretary may provide 
personnel, facilities, and other administrative services to the 
Council, including reimbursement of expenses under section 202, 
not to exceed then current Federal government per diem rates, 
for a period ending not later than 5 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act.
    Subsection (b) permits the Council to reimburse the 
Secretary for any administrative service provided under 
subsection (a), and the Secretary shall deposit any such 
reimbursement into the Treasury to the credit of the 
appropriations then current and chargeable for the cost of 
providing such service. The Secretary is authorized to continue 
to provide facilities and necessary support services for such 
facilities to the Council after the date specified in 
subsection (a) on a space available, reimbursable cost basis.

Section 205. Volunteer Status

    Subsection (a) provides that, notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Secretary may accept, without regard to 
the civil service classification laws, rules, or regulations, 
the services of the Council, the Board, and the officers and 
employees of the Board, without compensation from the 
Secretary, as volunteers in the performance of the functions 
authorized under this Act.
    Subsection (b) authorizes the Secretary to provide for 
incidental expenses, including transportation, lodging, and 
subsistence to the officers and employees serving as volunteers 
under subsection (a).

Section 206. Audits, Report Requirements, and Petition of Attorney 
        General for Equitable Relief.

    Subsection (a) provides that the Council shall be subject 
to auditing and reporting requirements under section 10101 of 
title 36, United States Code, in the same manner as is a 
corporation under part B of that title.
    Subsection (b) requires the Council, as soon as practicable 
after the end of each fiscal year, to transmit to Congress a 
report of its proceedings and activities during such year, 
including a full and complete statement of its receipts, 
expenditures, and investments.
    Subsection (c) provides that if the Council engages in, or 
threatens to engage in, any act, practice, or policy that is 
inconsistent with the purposes of the Council under section 
201(b), or refuses, fails, or neglects to discharge its 
obligations under this Act or threatens to do so, then the 
Attorney General of the United States may petition the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Columbia for such equitable 
relief as may be necessary or appropriate.

Section 207. United States Release From Liability

    This section declares that the United States shall not be 
liable for any debts, defaults, acts, or omissions of the 
Council, and that the full faith and credit of the United 
States shall not extend to any obligation of the Council.

Section 208. Grants to Council; Technical Assistance

    Subsection (a) provides that, not less than annually, the 
Secretary shall award a grant to the Council, to be used to 
carry out the purposes specified in section 201(b) in 
accordance with this section. As a condition of receiving a 
grant, the secretary of the Board, with its approval, shall 
enter into an agreement with the Secretary that specifies the 
duties of the Council in carrying out the grant and the 
information that is required to be included in the agreement 
under this section. Each such agreement shall specify that the 
Federal share of a grant under this section shall be 80 percent 
of the cost of the activities funded under the grant. No such 
grant may be made to the council unless the Council has raised 
an amount from private persons and State and local government 
agencies equivalent to the non-Federal share of the grant. Each 
agreement shall also specify that a reasonable amount of the 
Federal funds made available to the Council under such 
agreement, but not more than 15 percent of such funds, may be 
used by the Council for administrative expenses, including 
salaries, travel and transportation expenses, and other 
overhead expenses.
    Subsection (b) provides that the Secretary of HUD, the 
Secretary of the Interior, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
the Assistant Secretary for Economic Development of the 
Department of Commerce, the Administrator of the Small Business 
Administration, and the Administrator of the Rural Development 
Administration shall provide to the Council such technical 
assistance as may be necessary for the Council to carry out the 
purposes specified in section 201(b).

Section 209. Authorization of Appropriations

    Subsection (a) authorizes to be appropriated to the 
Department of the Interior $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 to be used in accordance with 
section 208.
    Subsection (b) provides that the amounts authorized to be 
appropriated under this section are in addition to any amounts 
provided to the Council under any other provision of Federal 
law.

                   Cost and Budgetary Considerations

    The cost estimate for S. 1658, as amended, as provided by 
the Congressional Budget Office, is set forth below:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, July 26, 2000.
Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1658, a bill to 
authorize the construction of a reconciliation place in Fort 
Pierre, South Dakota, and for other purposes.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact for this 
estimate is Lanette J. Keith.
            Sincerely,
                                        Steven M. Lieberman
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

S. 1658--A bill to authorize the construction of a reconciliation place 
        in Fort Pierre, South Dakota, and for other purposes

    Summary: S. 1658 would authorize the construction of a 
building--to be known as Reconciliation Place--in Fort Pierre, 
South Dakota. It would house displays on the history of the 
Sioux Nation, and the offices of the Sioux Nation Tribal 
Supreme Court and National Native American Mediation Training 
Center, the Native American Economic Development Council, and 
the Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center.
    Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing S. 1658 would cost $60 million over 
the 2001-2005 period. Because enactment of S. 1658 would not 
affect direct spending or receipts, pay-as-you-go procedures 
would not apply. S. 1658 contains no intergovernmental or 
private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act (UMRA) and would have no significant impact on the 
budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of S. 1658 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 750 
(administration of justice) and 450 (community and regional 
development).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars
                                 ---------------------------------------
                                   2001    2002    2003    2004    2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Construction of Reconciliation
 Place:
    Authorization level.........      18       0       0       0       0
    Estimated outlays...........       8      10       0       0       0
Sioux Nation Supreme Court and
 National Native American
 Mediation Training Center:
    Estimated authorization            1       1   (\1\)   (\1\)   (\1\)
     level......................
    Estimated outlays...........       1       1   (\1\)   (\1\)   (\1\)
Native American Economic
 Development Council:
    Authorization level.........       0      10      10      10      10
    Estimated outlays...........       0      10      10      10      10
        Total Spending Under S.
         1658:
            Estimated                 19      11      10      10      10
             authorization level
            Estimated outlays...       9      21      10      10      10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Less than $500,000.

    Basis of estimate: S. 1658 would direct the Secretary of 
the Interior to take land into trust that is currently the 
property of the Wakpa Sica Historical Society, a private 
nonprofit corporation. The bill would authorize the 
appropriation of $18 million to the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development for a grant to the Wapka Sica Historical 
Society to construct Reconciliation Place on the land taken 
into trust. Reconciliation Place would serve as a visitor 
center, museum, educational center, and theater. It also would 
house the Sioux Nation Tribal Supreme Court, the National 
Native American Mediation Training Center, and the Native 
American Economic Development Council. Based on information 
from the Administration, CBO estimates that this provision 
would cost $18 million over the 2001-2002 period.
    S. 1658 would authorize the appropriation of such sums as 
necessary for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to provide 
technical and financial assistance to the Sioux Nation Tribal 
Supreme Court and National Native American Mediation Training 
Center. Based on information from DOJ, CBO estimates that this 
provision would cost $1 million in each of fiscal years 2001 
and 2002 to establish a law library, develop training and 
support materials, and train staff. After 2002, CBO estimates 
the cost of paying staff and maintaining the law library and 
support materials would be less than $500,000 each year.
    Finally, the bill would establish the Native American 
Economic Development Council to provide technical and financial 
assistance to Indians and Indian tribes in obtaining federal 
financial assistance to establish new businesses. S. 1658 would 
authorize the appropriation of $10 million for each of fiscal 
years 2002 through 2006 for grants to the Native American 
Economic Development Council. CBO estimates that this provision 
would cost $40 million over the 2002-2005 period, subject to 
the appropriation of the authorized amounts.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1658 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would have no significant impact on the 
budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Lanette J. Keith and 
Ali Aslam. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments; 
Susan Sieg Thompkins. Impact on the Private Sector: Sarah 
Sitarek.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                        Executive Communications

    The views of the Administration on S. 1658 are set forth in 
the following statement of Mark C. Van Norman, Director, Office 
of Tribal Justice, United States Department of Justice, on May 
17, 2000, to the Committee on Indian Affairs:

  Statement of Mark C. Van Norman, Director, Office of Tribal Justice

    Good Afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. 
My name is Mark C. Van Norman and I am the Director of the 
Office of Tribal Justice, Department of Justice. Thank you for 
inviting us to testify on S. 1658, a Bill to authorize the 
construction of a Reconciliation Place in Forte Pierre, South 
Dakota, and for other purposes.
    At the outset, I should emphasize the importance of the 
government-to-government relations. Congress has a longstanding 
policy of promoting Indian Self-Determination and in 
recognition of Indian sovereignty, promotes government-to-
government relations with Indian tribes. The Executive Branch 
also respects the sovereignty of Indian tribes and works with 
the tribes on a government-to-government basis. In 1998, the 
President Executive Order 13084, on Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, which explains 
fundamental principles of Federal-tribes relations:

          The United States has a unique legal relationship 
        with Indian tribal governments as set forth in the 
        Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, 
        Executive orders, and court decisions. Since the 
        formation of the Union, the United States has 
        recognized Indian tribes as domestic dependent nations 
        under its protection. In treaties, our Nation has 
        guaranteed the right of Indian tribes to self-
        government. As domestic dependent nations, Indian 
        tribes exercise inherent sovereign powers over their 
        members and territory. The United States continues to 
        work with Indian tribes on a government-to-government 
        basis to address issues concerning Indian tribal self-
        government, trust resources, and Indian tribal treaty 
        and other rights.

63 Fed. Reg. 27655 (1998).
    In our Department of Justice Policy on Indian Sovereignty 
and Government-to-Government Relations with Indian Tribes, we 
have pledged to work with Indian tribes on a government-to-
government basis, guided by respect for tribal sovereignty, and 
to assist Indian tribes as they work to develop strong law 
enforcement, tribal courts, and traditional justice systems. 61 
Fed. Reg. 29424 (1996). The Office of Tribal Justice was 
established in 1995 to provide a permanent channel of 
communication for tribal governments to express their concerns 
to the Department of Justice; to coordinate departmental policy 
on Indian affairs both within the Department and with other 
federal agencies; and to ensure that the Department works with 
the tribes on a basis of government-to-government relations.
    S. 1658 would authorize the construction of a 
Reconciliation Place in Pierre, South Dakota, promote the 
formation of the Sioux Nation Supreme Court to serve as an 
appellate court for the tribes of the Sioux Nation, and 
establish an economic development council.
    The Administration believes that steps have been taken to 
render the construction of a Reconciliation Place and the 
establishment of an economic development council unnecessary. 
The Administration has requested in the FY 2001 budget funds 
for the planning and design of the Lakota Sioux Heritage 
Cultural Center at Badlands National Park. Planning for the 
Center's construction is well underway and road construction is 
ongoing in this Fiscal Year. The Center will promote the 
public's understanding of the history of the Sioux Nation and 
act as a repository for cultural and historical items.
    Similary, the Administration has established Native 
American EDGE. Native EDGE is HUD's Native American Economic 
Development Access Center which will, for the first time, link 
over twelve Federal agencies through a single toll-free number 
and web-site so that lending institutions, non-profits, 
foundations, Native American business owners, and private 
businesses can collaborate to achieve sustainable economic 
development in Indian country. The Access Center will provide 
personalized research, initiate dialogue among entrepreneurs, 
coordinate with other Federal agencies, and share knowledge and 
experience to ensure the expansion of economic development in 
Indian country.
    Pursuant to our mission, the Office of Tribal Justice 
consulted with tribal representatives who have told us that 
they view efforts to promote the unity of the Sioux Nation as 
an important objective and support the concept of the Sioux 
Nation Supreme Court. The Department of Justice joins the Sioux 
tribes and the State of South Dakota in supporting a strong 
tribal court system as envisioned by section 102 of S. 1658.
    Before turning to a discussion of the history and 
circumstances of the Sioux Nation, I would like to touch 
briefly on some of our general work in the areas of tribal law 
enforcement, tribal justice and reconciliation between the 
United States and Native Americans.
    The Department of Justice has been working on both civil 
rights concerns and tribal justice concerns among Native 
Americans generally, and the tribes of the Sioux Nation in 
particular. The Department of Justice, for example, 
participated in the hearing that the South Dakota Advisory 
Committee to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission held in Rapid 
City, South Dakota in December, 1999 to address the concerns of 
Native Americans. In keeping with the S. 1658 policy that 
promotes the formation of a Sioux Nation Supreme Court, the 
State Advisory Committee made a number of recommendations to 
assist tribal courts in administering justice. Among other 
things, the Committee recommended,

          The Department of Justice and Interior should expand 
        their efforts to provide funding, training, and 
        technical assistance to tribal courts and tribal law 
        enforcement. Tribal governments should make every 
        effort to insulate their professional law enforcement 
        entities and courts from the pressures of political 
        influence and patronage.

    Three years before this recommendation, the Department of 
Justice--together with the Department of the Interior--
undertook the Indian Country Law Enforcement Improvement 
Initiative. The State Advisory Committee's recommendation 
reinforces the importance of our FY 2001 budget request. The 
Department of Justice requested $173 million to improve tribal 
law enforcement and justice systems, including $45 million for 
tribal police, $34 million for tribal detention, $20 million 
for tribal juvenile justice, and a $15 million request to 
enhance tribal courts, among other things. This request is 
essential because effective tribal law enforcement is a 
necessary adjunct to effective Federal law enforcement in areas 
of Indian country, like South Dakota, that rely on the Justice 
Department to prosecute general felony crimes by or against 
Indians. Furthermore, tribal courts are necessary partners with 
the tribal police maintaining public safety on Indian 
reservations.
    The Department of Justice promotes the formation of 
intertribal courts, consistent with tribal self-determination. 
The Sioux tribes have a vital need for assistance in the area 
of tribal law enforcement and tribal courts, and the Department 
of Justice, in cooperation with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
has been working actively with the tribes of the Sioux Nation 
under the Indian Law Enforcement Improvement Initiative.
    The Civil Rights Division also actively protects the civil 
rights of American Indians and Alaska Natives through its 
enforcement of various civil rights statutes, including the 
criminal statutes that allow for federal prosecution of hate 
crimes and police misconduct, the Voting Rights Act, the Fair 
Housing Act, and the Equal Opportunity Credit Act. For example, 
the Civil Rights Division has brought lending discrimination 
cases against banks which charge Indians higher interest rates 
than other customers. In May 1997, the United States and a 
Nebraska bank that serves the Oglala Sioux community entered a 
consent decree, which provides that the bank will pay $175,000 
for victim compensation, pay $100,000 towards application fees 
on new loans to Indians, actively recruit Indian employees, and 
provide an education program for Indian borrowers. Positive 
working relationships with tribal governments play an important 
part in the success of the Division's work to protect the civil 
rights of Native Americans.

     the history of the sioux nation & the need for reconciliation

    Historically, the United States adopted a policy to protect 
Indian tribes, Indian lands, and Indian rights. In the 
Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Continental Congress declared:

          The utmost good faith shall always be observed to the 
        Indians, their lands and property shall never be taken 
        from them without their consent; and in their property, 
        rights and liberty, they never shall be invaded or 
        disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorised by 
        Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity 
        shall from time to time be made, for preventing wrongs 
        being done to them, and for preserving peace and 
        friendship with them. *  *  *

Consistent with this policy, President Jefferson commissioned 
the Lewis and Clark Expedition in 1803 to explore the Louisiana 
Purchase.
    As the expedition made its way up the Missouri River 
through South Dakota, Lewis and Clark stopped and visited the 
Yankton Sioux Tribe. Among the Yankton Sioux, a young baby was 
wrapped in an American flag by the expedition members. That 
baby later grew up to be the famous Yankton Chief, Struck by 
the Ree, and he led his people on a course of friendship with 
the United States. See Struck by the Ree, Yankton Daily Press & 
Dakotan (Sept. 12, 1994); http://www.yankton.net/stories/
091599/bus__struck.html. In 1858, Chief Struck by the Ree 
signed the Treaty of 1858 with the United States on behalf of 
his tribe, preserving the peace and securing the Yankton Sioux 
homeland. See Treaty with the Yankton Sioux, 1858; 11 Stat. 
748. This event is just one example of the profound effect that 
the Lewis and Clark expedition had on the Sioux Nation. The 
Lewis and Clark expedition met the Sioux people at other places 
along the Missouri River, notably near the present day site of 
Fort Pierre along the Bad River. Yankton Area Chamber of 
Commerce, Lewis & Clark Historic Trail: the South Dakota Trail 
http://www.lewisclark.net/sdtrail/index.html. Thus, the Bad 
River, or Wakpa Sica in the Lakota language, is a very 
appropriate site for a Reconciliation Center.
    In 1815, the United States entered into treaties with the 
Dakota and Lakota tribes of the Sioux Nation, which pledged 
federal protection for the tribes. See e.g., Treaty with the 
Teton (Lakota), 1815, 7 Stat. 125. In 1825, the United States 
entered into treaties of peace, friendship and commerce with 
the tribes of the Sioux Nation to promote the fur trade and the 
safe passage of American citizens through Sioux Nation 
territory. See e.g., Treaty with the Hunkpapa Band of the Sioux 
Tribe, 1825, 7 Stat. 257. In 1851, to facilitate trade and 
reduce intertribal conflict that sometimes threatened safe 
passage, the United States entered into treaty with the Sioux 
and neighboring Indian tribes, which described their respective 
aboriginal areas. Treaty with the Sioux, 1851, 11 Stat. 749.
    After the Civil War, the United States' expansion westward 
brought conflict with the Sioux Nation, who saw their buffalo 
herds begin to decline with the passage of settlers along the 
Oregon Trail. In 1866, the United States sought to build a road 
through Sioux Nation hunting grounds in the Powder River 
valley, and the Sioux tribes objected. For the next two years, 
the Sioux tribes fought the Powder River or Red Cloud's War to 
protect their hunting grounds and ultimately, the United States 
determined that the best course would be to enter into a treaty 
that established a permanent reservation for the Sioux Nation 
and delineated their hunting grounds. In the Treaty with the 
Sioux Nation, 1868, the United States set aside South Dakota 
west of the Missouri River as the Great Sioux Reservation as a 
``permanent home'' for the Sioux Nation and delineated tribal 
hunting lands in the Powder River valley. Treaty with the 
Sioux, 1868; 15 Stat. 635.
    Yet, in 1874, gold was discovered in the Black Hills of 
South Dakota, and a gold rush began. After attempting to 
maintain existing reservation boundaries, the Grant 
Administration sought to purchase the Black Hills, but the 
Sioux Nation declined. In 1876, the United States ordered the 
Sioux to report to Indian agencies along the Missouri River and 
in Nebraska, away from the Black Hills. When Sitting Bull, 
Crazy Horse, and several bands of Sioux refused to comply, the 
United States sent out the army to force the issue. This led to 
the Battles of the Rosebud and the Little Big Horn. After 
Custer's defeat at the Little Big Horn, the United States sent 
out more troops to force the Sioux to report to the Indian 
agencies, resulting in the Battle of Slim Butte and many other 
battles where a number of Sioux were killed. United States v. 
Sioux Nation, 448 U.S. 371, 379-80 (1980). In 1877, Congress 
passed an Act taking the Black Hills from the Sioux Nation. Act 
of Feb. 28, 1877, 19 Stat. 254.
    In the 1880s, the United States sought more land from the 
Sioux. In the 1889 Agreement with the Sioux, the United States 
divided the Great Sioux Reservation into the Cheyenne River, 
Crow Creek, Lower Brule, Pine Ridge, Rosebud, and Standing Rock 
Sioux Reservations. The United States acquired several million 
acres of surplus lands. Shortly after this Act, the Ghost Dance 
religion became popular on several of the reservations. Some 
non-Indians were alarmed because the Ghost Dance was practiced 
in substantial encampments, the U.S. Army was called in, and in 
December, 1890, more than 300 Sioux Indians, mostly unarmed 
elderly, women and children, were massacred at Wounded Knee. 
Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States, 7 CI. Ct. 468, 476 
(CI. Ct. 1985). The United States has expressed its sincere 
regret for the Wounded Knee Massacre.
    Many of the Native American people of South Dakota continue 
to feel the loss brought about by these events. Against this 
background, it is appropriate for Congress to establish a 
Reconciliation Place to reflect the history of the Lewis and 
Clark Expedition and to promote knowledge of and understanding 
of the history and culture of the Sioux Nation. This effort 
would help foster a healing spirit of reconciliation among the 
Sioux Nation and other citizens of South Dakota and would 
promote a better understanding of Native American history and 
culture among the Nation as a whole.
    Furthermore, the Committee might consider reconciliation 
among Native Americans in a larger sense. There is a need for 
Native American mediators trained in conflict resolution 
techniques throughout Indian country to address conflicts that 
sometimes arise between Indian tribes and neighboring 
communities and within tribal communities themselves. 
Presently, the Department of Justice Community Relations 
Service (CRS) provides mediation services to tribal governments 
throughout the Nation. There are many situations where CRS 
cannot respond due to jurisdictional restrictions or resource 
allocation issues. The Committee might consider whether these 
needs might be addressed by the establishment of a mediation 
training center at the proposed Wakpa Sica Reconciliation 
Place. Such a mediation center would enable tribal leaders and 
officials to acquire mediation skills useful in mediating 
conflicts that arise in Indian communities and surrounding 
communities. CRS could assist by providing technical assistance 
to such a mediation training center.

                     the sioux nation supreme court

    As I noted earlier, the Department supports the development 
of intertribal courts. There are a number of such efforts in 
place among tribes in the United States, including intertribal 
courts of appeals like the Northwest Inter-tribal Court of 
Appeals. These intertribal courts can produce a number of 
benefits. They promote inter-tribal unity. The resource sharing 
they represent can produce efficiencies. In instances where 
multiple tribes share a common political, historical, and 
cultural experience, they can represent a step towards that 
tradition of political unity. They can provide a means for 
marshaling legal expertise--including expertise in tribal 
customary legal structures--to provide high quality 
adjudication of disputes.
    The Department of Justice supports the efforts of the 
constituent tribes of the Great Sioux Nation to form the Sioux 
Nation Tribal Court. These tribes share a history and tradition 
of unified political structure and action. Many of their 
respective constitutions and by-laws retain a recognition of 
that historical structure by authorizing their tribal councils 
to select delegates to serve on a Sioux Nation Council. 
Moreover, as federally-recognized Indian tribes, each 
constituent tribe of the Great Sioux Nation ``possess[es] the 
inherent authority to establish [its] own form of government, 
including tribal justice systems.'' 25 U.S.C. Sec. 3601(4). 
This authority has been termed ``the first element of 
sovereignty.'' Felix M. Cohen's Handbook of Federal Indian Law 
(1982 ed.) at 247. Their respective decisions to participate in 
the Sioux Nation Tribal Court is an exercise of that authority. 
The Department supports that exercise, consistent with the 
Department's Policy on Indian Tribal Sovereignty and 
Government-to-Government Relations with Indian Tribes, which 
declares the Department's commitment ``to strengthening and 
assisting tribal governments in their development and to 
promoting Indian self-governance.''
    Section 102(a) of S. 1658 would direct the Department of 
Justice to provide technical and financial assistance to the 
Sioux Nation towards the development and operation of the Sioux 
Nation Tribal Supreme Court and this provision falls within the 
Department's commitment to assist Indian tribes as they develop 
strong tribal courts. The language of section 102(a) requires 
technical amendment, however. The current language of section 
102(a) directs the Department to ``provide such technical and 
financial assistance to the Sioux Nation as is necessary.'' 
This language should be amended to provide that: ``To promote 
the development and operation of the Sioux Nation Tribal 
Supreme Court, the Attorney General may provide appropriate 
technical and financial assistance to the Sioux Nation from 
available funds.''

                               conclusion

    In conclusion, the Administration supports the vision of 
strong tribal courts as embodied in S. 1658. Again, thank you 
for the opportunity to testify before the Committee today.

                      Regulatory Impact Statement

    Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate requires each report accompany a bill to evaluate the 
regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in 
carrying out the bill S. 1658, as amended. The Committee finds 
that the regulatory impact of S. 1658, as amended, will be 
negligible.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with subsection 12 of the rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
the bill are required to be set forth in the accompanying 
Committee report. The Committee states that enactment of S. 
1658 will not result in any change in existing law.

                                  

```