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) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

67–655 PDF 2011

S. HRG. 112–31

THE PRESIDENT’S FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET

FOR TRIBAL PROGRAMS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 15, 2011

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

LORETTA A. TUELL, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

DAVID A. MULLON JR., Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on March 15, 2011 ............................................................................ 1

Statement of Senator Akaka ................................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Barrasso ............................................................................... 2

Statement of Senator Franken ............................................................................... 3

Statement of Senator Murkowski ........................................................................... 24

Statement of Senator Tester ................................................................................... 3

Statement of Senator Udall .................................................................................... 29

WITNESSES

Allen, Hon. W. Ron, Treasurer, National Congress of American Indians; 

Chairman, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe ............................................................. 32

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 34

Barbry, Sr., Hon. Earl J., Chairman, Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana; Chairman, United South and Eastern Tribes, Inc. Carcieri Task Force .................. 81

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 83

Blackhawk, Hon. John, Chairman, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska ..................... 112

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 113

Dasheno, Hon. Walter, Governor, Pueblo of Santa Clara .................................... 115

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 118

Echo Hawk, Hon. Larry, Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior ............................................................................................. 5

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7

Finley, Hon. Michael O., Chairman, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation ................................................................................................................. 107

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 110

Oatman-Wak Wak, Mary Jane, President, National Indian Education Association ........................................................................................................................ 41

Prepared statement with attachments ........................................................... 45

Roubideaux, Hon. Yvette, M.D., M.P.H., Director, Indian Health Service, U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services; accompanied by Randy 

Grinnell, Deputy Director .................................................................................... 11

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13

Steele, Jr., Hon. James, First Vice-President, Affiliated Tribes of Northwest 

Indians; Council Member, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes ............. 93

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 95

APPENDIX

Alaska Federation of Natives, prepared statement .............................................. 138

Barnett, D’Shane, Executive Director, National Council of Urban Indian 

Health, prepared statement ................................................................................ 133

Causley, Hon. Cheryl A., Chairwoman, National American Indian Housing 

Council, prepared statement ............................................................................... 130

Gschwind, Russell, Director, National Ironworkers Training Program for 

American Indians, prepared statement .............................................................. 137

Murphy, Hon. Charles W., Chairman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 127

(1)

THE PRESIDENT’S FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET 

FOR TRIBAL PROGRAMS 

TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2011

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 o’clock a.m. in 

room 628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA,

U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

The CHAIRMAN. Aloha maika’i ko’u. And welcome to the Committee on Indian Affairs. 

As Chairman, it is my great pleasure to welcome you to this special place in the Senate. And I want to tell you, I am delighted to 

have a partner here with me on this Committee. And Senator 

Barrasso, of course, has served real well the years that he has been 

here in the Senate. 

Mahalo or thank you to all of our witnesses for being here to 

share your views on the President’s budget priorities for tribal programs. I want to extend a special mahalo to those who have traveled so far to be here with us today. 

We have limited time to receive oral testimony, but the record on 

this hearing will continue to be open for two weeks, and I want to 

encourage tribes, Native organizations and other interested parties 

to share your views with us in the form of written testimony. 

Before we begin, I want to share the Hawaiian concept of aloha 

with you to help you understand how I, as Chairman, intend to 

lead on this Committee. Aloha is a word that in Hawaiian is love. 

And each of you, I know, knows that word so well. And aloha is 

more than just a greeting or a farewell. When we say it to each 

other and when we work together, it means we do so in the spirit 

of caring for each other, and out of a mutual respect for one another. 

It is my goal to conduct the business of this Committee in the 

spirit of aloha, to encourage stakeholders to participate in the process, to listen to varying viewpoints, and to work together to address 

important issues. 

The Federal policy of supporting self-determination and self-governance is vital for honoring our Nation’s unique relationship with 

America’s first people. Tribal programs are tasked with delivering 

on promises made, promises made implementing the Federal reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
2

sponsibility to be a good trustee and more importantly, partner for 

tribal nations as they exercise self-determination and enhance the 

self-sufficiency of their communities. 

While I am concerned with several areas where funding requests 

do not adequately address the known needs, I am happy to see that 

the President’s budget reflects the longstanding priority of tribes to 

strengthen self-governance in practical and meaningful ways. 

I would like to take a moment to introduce you to the newest additions to my hard-working team at the Committee. My Staff Director and Chief Counsel is Loretta Tuell. Serving as General Counsel 

is Lenna Aoki and Jade Danner is our new Policy Director. 

Also new to the team are Josh Pitre and Christiane Cardoza. 

Vice Chair Barrasso has served his State well and also our Country, and I am delighted to be working with him. And at this time, 

I ask him for any opening remarks he has. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I 

look forward to working with you. We have had a number of very 

successful and productive meetings and discussions, and I look forward to continuing to work with you as we have through the history of this Committee in a bipartisan way, looking for the best results. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for holding 

this important hearing today. This Congress, our work begins by 

examining the President’s budget and the requests regarding Indian programs. All of us on this Committee recognize that the Federal Government has important responsibilities in Indian Country. 

And Mr. Chairman, I think you started by mentioning the responsibilities and obligations, and I concur with you. 

The United States provides law enforcement, land management, 

health care, education services on Indian reservations and communities across the Country. And we all know that the government 

cannot carry out these responsibilities without adequate finances. 

We are all aware that the deficit is spiraling out of control and 

all Federal agencies are going to be called upon to address this 

problem. What that means is more than ever, Federal agencies 

need to prioritize the use of resources and must use the resources 

effectively, as well as efficiently. 

So I am looking forward to hearing from our Federal and tribal 

witnesses today about how best to do that, how to establish the priorities and use Federal resources with greater efficiency, greater effectiveness. 

I also want to hear, Mr. Chairman, how the Department of Interior intends to roll out the Indian Land Consolidation Program 

under the Claims Resolution Act of 2010. The court has not yet approved that settlement. That has to happen before the money gets 

spent. I understand that, but $1.9 billion is a lot of money and how 

it gets spent is critical to the success of that program. So I hope 

to hear something at least in general terms about how the Department thinks it may carry out that program. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, along with you, I want to welcome our 

witnesses, some of whom you and I know have traveled long disVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
3

tances to be here and to share their best thoughts today in testimony. So I look forward to their testimony and I want to thank you 

again, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Barrasso. 

Would any of my colleagues like to comment? 

Senator Franken? 

STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

In a very tight budget year, we see that the President’s budget 

proposes constant funding or relatively small cuts to Indian programs across agencies. In many important areas like contract 

health services, tribal law enforcement, and Indian energy development, this budget proposes increases that are sorely needed by 

Minnesota tribes and across Indian Country. 

So that is good. But while these increases are welcome, they 

don’t come close to meeting the dire needs in Indian Country. Once 

again, the cuts in this budget come at the expense of critical programs like the construction budget for schools and detention facilities. The truth is that Indian programs just aren’t a high priority 

for the Federal Government. We see that in this budget. 

On schools and detention facilities this year, it is my understanding that no new schools will be built with the requested funds 

for education construction. That is a shame for the students at the 

Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School at the Leech Lake Reservation in Minnesota. That school is literally falling apart with exposed wires, 

mold, and ceilings that are caving in. None of us, none of us would 

feel comfortable sending our own children to these schools. And it 

is shameful that we ask parents in Indian communities to do so. 

I am also concerned about the administration of various programs at the BIA and the Indian Health Service. We need to see 

more money for programs like contract health services and Indian 

energy financing, but only if the agencies responsible for these programs are administering them in a timely and transparent manner. I am concerned that this isn’t always the case and I am looking forward to discussing these issues more in depth today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Franken. 

Senator Tester? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator TESTER. Chairman Akaka, thank you very much for 

holding this hearing. I, too, look forward to working with you on 

this very important Committee as we move forward. And I want to 

welcome all our distinguished guests. It is good to see you all 

again. 

A special welcome to James Steele, from the Confederated Salish 

and Kootenai Tribe in northwestern Montana. I can’t guarantee 

that I will be here when you testify, James, on the second panel, 

but I certainly appreciate you being here to lend your perspective. 

You have been a dynamic leader on the Flathead Reservation at 

4

the Montana-Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council, and now with Affiliated Tribes of the Northwest Indians. 

No matter what the job title, you have shown how important it 

is to build strong partnerships. I have known James since I was 

in the State Senate and a good example of partnerships is the National Bison Range. The range is located completely within the 

boundaries of the Flathead Reservation and it only makes sense 

that the tribe would have a hand in managing that natural resource because they have been doing it forever. 

Although they were once enemies, James and I worked with the 

Fish and Wildlife Service and other locals to figure out a way for 

everybody to work together. Today, the tribe and the government 

support an annual funding agreement to manage the National 

Bison Range. 

So I want to thank you for your good work, James, and I look 

forward to hearing your thoughts today. And I will apologize ahead 

of time if I have to duck out, but hopefully we will catch up either 

here in D.C. or in Montana or maybe on the plane ride between 

the two. 

Mr. Chairman, this is undoubtedly the most important hearing 

of Indian Country this year. The Federal budget impacts no other 

group of citizens more than Native Americans. And although I continue working to make sure that the tribes don’t have to rely on 

the government, we still have important responsibilities. 

Congress was very productive in Indian affairs last year. As we 

all know, passing laws is only the first step. Implementing them 

requires solid leadership, a workable budget, and sound oversight. 

I look forward to hearing from different panel members today on 

how you plan to implement the Indian Health Care Improvement 

Act, Tribal Law and Order Act, legal settlements including Cobell

and others. 

But in addition to improving health care, housing and education 

and public safety, I am also working to create jobs and increase 

economic opportunities in Indian Country, as I know is a high priority on your guys’ list. And I look forward to hearing your ideas 

on how we get that accomplished. It is a huge challenge. 

Some of the most exciting opportunities we have out there involve energy. Indian Country contains vast potential of both renewable and traditional forms of energy development. I look forward to 

working with tribal leaders, the Administration, my colleagues on 

this Committee and in the Senate as a whole to craft this year’s 

Indian Energy Parity Act and other job-related bills. 

While we work to make tribes self-sufficient through self-determination, the United States still has trust responsibilities. I look 

forward to hearing from the members of President Obama’s Administration on how they prioritize their budget to carry out those important duties. 

Mr. Chairman, we live in interesting times, and I look forward 

to hearing from all our witnesses today on what they think our priorities should be as we put together next year’s budget. From agency folks, I would like to hear how you plan to do your work with 

a little bit less money than in the past. From advocacy groups and 

tribal representatives, I want to hear about what you are doing to 

5

become strong, independent nations that have to rely less on the 

Federal Government. 

From everybody, I would like to hear your ideas on how government can become more effective. Make no mistake about it, we 

need to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse so we can invest in the 

activities that create jobs and improve our families. 

As we all know, the Federal Government is at best a safety net 

in Indian Country. Many argue that it is not even very good at 

that. I want to try to have more than just a safety net. 

I look forward to the hearing today and your suggestions on how 

we can empower progress in Indian Country. I look forward to 

being a partner in that process as we move forward. 

So Mr. Chairman, congratulations on the Chairmanship and I 

look forward to working with you, as always. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Tester. 

I would like to welcome our first panel to the witness table. Joining us from the Department of Interior, we have the Honorable 

Larry Echo Hawk, Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs. And he 

is accompanied by Michael Black, Director of the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, and Keith Moore, Director of Bureau of Indian Education. 

Also testifying from the Department of Health and Human Services, we have the Honorable Yvette Roubideaux, Director of the Indian Health Service, accompanied by Deputy Director Randy 

Grinnell. 

Welcome Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk and Director 

Roubideaux to this hearing. 

And at this time, I would like to ask you to deliver your testimony. So we will begin with Larry Echo Hawk with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY ECHO HAWK, ASSISTANT

SECRETARY FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY: MICHAEL S. BLACK,

DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS; KEITH MOORE,

DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION; AND RAY A.

JOSEPH, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY SPECIAL TRUSTEE FOR

AMERICAN INDIANS 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Chairman Akaka and Vice Chairman Barrasso 

and Committee Members, thank you for this opportunity to provide 

the Department of the Interior’s statement on the President’s 2012 

budget request for Indian Affairs. The President has requested $2.5 billion for Indian Affairs within 

the Department of the Interior. And through the work of the Tribal-Interior Budget Council, this budget has been crafted after careful consideration with American Indian and Alaska Native government representatives. 

The President has called upon members of his Administration to 

meet important objectives, while also exercising fiscal responsibility. And consistent with that directive, difficult choices have 

been made in formulating the 2012 budget request for Indian Affairs. 

The budget request is $18.9 billion or 4.5 percent below the fiscal 

year 2010 enacted budget level. I point out that the majority of 

6

these reductions, however, are due to one-time program increases 

provided in prior appropriations, completion of projects, and completion of payments to settlements. 

Still, Indian Affairs had to make tough decisions that reflect the 

President’s commitment to fiscal responsibility. We have made 

strategic cuts at the central office of Indian Affairs in order to fund 

tribal priorities. Thus, the proposed budget has $89.6 million in 

targeted increases to tribal programs. I would like to highlight 

some of those targeted increases which are part of the President’s 

Strengthening Tribal Nations Initiative. 

Under the first category of advancing nation-to-nation relation- ships, there is a $42.3 million increase which includes $25.5 million 

for contract support costs. And I point this out to note that this 

was the top priority identified by the Tribal-Interior Budget Council. 

Along with that is another $4 million request to increase the Indian Self-Determination Fund, which is funding to assist tribes 

who want to contract or compact new programs. There is also included within this initiative support for small and needy tribes in 

the amount of a $3 million increase. This helps those small tribes 

meet the very basic responsibilities of tribal government. This will 

affect 114 tribes, 86 of which are in the State of Alaska. 

Under the second category of protecting Indian communities, there is an increase of $20 million, which includes $5.1 million for 

law enforcement operations and a total of $11.4 million for detention center operations and maintenance. There is also an increase 

of $2.5 million for tribal courts. 

Under a third category of improving trust land management, there is an increase of $18.4 million, which includes $2 million for 

grants directly to tribes for projects to evaluate and develop renewable energy resources on tribal trust lands. There is also an increase of $7.7 million for trust natural resource management. 

And the fourth category to highlight is improving Indian edu- cation. And here we have a request to increase expenditures of $8.9 

million. And one of the things that are included in this request 

would be an initiative to advance safe and secure schools. That is 

in the amount of $3.9 million, which will implement safety and security programs at 10 schools and two dormitories to mitigate 

issues identified by the Inspector General last year. 

And there is also $3 million requested as an increase for the tribal grant support costs, and this funds administration and indirect 

costs at about 126 tribally controlled schools and residential facilities. 

There are decreases, including in the operation of Indian programs, a decrease of $43.3 million in construction; a decrease of 

$65 million; and there is $7.9 million in program eliminations, and 

there is $64.4 million in program completions. And also another reduction is in administration of $22.1 million. 

This budget will serve more than 1.7 million American Indian 

and Alaska Natives. And I emphasize that almost 90 percent of all 

appropriations are expended at the local level. And 63 percent of 

these appropriations are provided directly to tribes. 

What is good about the increases that are proposed in this budget is a 5 percent increase in the tribal priority allocation, and there 

7

is also an increase for fixed costs that will affect tribal governments of $8.2 million. 

So I recognize that there are certainly great needs in Indian 

Country and this budget will not meet all of the needs that we 

have. But President Obama’s Administration has been faithful in 

seeking to meet those needs by following the priorities of tribal 

leaders. 

We would be happy to respond to questions from the Committee. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Echo Hawk follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY ECHO HAWK, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR

INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Good morning Chairman Akaka and Vice-Chairman Barrasso, and members of 

the Committee on Indian Affairs. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department of the Interior’s (Department) statement on the fiscal year (FY) 2012 

President’s Budget request that was released on February 14, 2011 for Indian Affairs’ programs. The FY 2012 budget request for Indian Affairs programs within the 

Department totals $2.5 billion in current appropriations. This reflects $118.9 million, a 4.5 percent decrease, from the FY 2010 enacted level. The budget includes 

a reduction of $50.0 million to eliminate the one-time forward funding provided in 

2010 to Tribal Colleges and Universities; a reduction of $41.5 million for detention 

center new facility construction due to a similar program within the Department of 

Justice; and a reduction of $22.1 million for administrative cost savings and management efficiencies. 

Overall, the 2012 Indian Affairs budget reflects a fiscally responsible balance of 

the priorities expressed by the Tribes during consultation and broader objectives of 

the Administration, as well as demonstrated program performance, and realistic administrative limitations. The 2012 budget focuses on core responsibilities to American Indians and Alaska Natives through programs and services that are vital to 

Indian Country and that benefit the greatest number of Indian people on a nationwide basis. The budget focuses on priority areas in Indian Country and honors the 

Federal Government’s obligations to tribal nations in a focused and consulted manner. As the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, I have the responsibility to oversee 

the numerous programs within the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Bureau 

of Indian Education (BIE), along with other programs within the immediate office 

of the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs. The Office of the Assistant Secretary 

for Indian Affairs, BIA, and BIE programs expend over 90 percent of appropriations 

at the local level. Of this amount, at least 62 percent of the appropriations are provided directly to tribes and tribal organizations through grants, contracts, and compacts for tribes to operate government programs and schools. Indian Affairs’ programs serve the more than 1.7 million American Indian and Alaska Natives living 

on or near the reservation. 

The Indian Affairs FY 2012 budget request provides funding for three of the Department’s priority initiatives: Strengthening Tribal Nations, New Energy Frontier, 

and Cooperative Landscape Conservation. 

Strengthening Tribal Nations 

The Strengthening Tribal Nations initiative is a multi-faceted approach to enhance Nation-to-Nation relationships, improve Indian education, protect Indian communities, and reform trust land management, with the ultimate goal of greater tribal self-determination. This initiative was highlighted over a year ago when President Obama and his Administration engaged in direct dialogue with Tribal Nations 

in November 2009 at the White House Tribal Nations Conference held at the Department’s Yates Auditorium, with over 400 tribal leaders in attendance. The President held a second successful conference in December 2010 to continue dialogue and 

work with Tribal Nations. 

Nation-to-Nation Relationship 

The Administration, in believing that investing in Indian Country is the key to 

advancing our Nation-to-Nation relationship, seeks $42.3 million in programmatic 

increases for contract support, self determination contract specialists, and social 

workers. At the forefront of this investment is contract support, which was identified by many Tribal Nations as their top priority. 

8

Funding contract support costs encourages tribal contracting and supports Indian 

self-determination. Contract support funds are used by Tribes that manage Federal 

programs to pay a wide range of administrative and management costs, including 

finance, personnel, maintenance, insurance, utilities, audits, communications, and 

vehicle costs. 

The requested FY 2012 increases will also allow the BIA to fund Self-Determination Specialist positions to ensure proper contract oversight. In addition, it will 

allow the BIA to add more social workers to assist tribal communities in addressing 

problems associated with high unemployment and substance abuse. Through this 

assistance, and by addressing these problems, there will be positive indirect impacts 

on public safety and education in these tribal communities. We also plan for $3.0 

million of this request for approximately 86 Alaska and 17 ‘‘lower–48’’ Small and 

Needy Tribes that both have populations below 1,700 and receive less than the recommended threshold for base funding. These funds will bring these Tribes to the 

minimum funding necessary to strengthen their tribal governments ($160,000 in the 

lower–48 and $190,000 in Alaska). 

In addition, reflecting a top priority of President Obama, Secretary Salazar and 

I, the budget request includes language confirming the Department of the Interior’s 

authority to acquire land in trust for all federally recognized tribes. Taking land 

into trust is one of the most important functions that the Department undertakes 

on behalf of Indian tribes. Since 2009, the Department has acquired more than 

34,000 acres of land in trust on behalf of Indian nations. Tribal homelands are essential to the health, safety and welfare of American Indians and Alaska Natives. 

Protecting Indian Country 

For the past several years, Tribal Nations have consistently identified public safety as one of their top priorities. The BIA supports 193 law enforcement programs 

throughout the nation. Within the 193 programs, there are 6 district offices and 187 

programs performing law enforcement services consisting of: 36 BIA-operated programs and 151 tribally-operated programs. Approximately 78 percent of the total 

BIA Office of Justice Services (OJS) programs are outsourced to tribes. 

President Obama, Secretary Salazar and I have prioritized public safety based on 

feedback from the respective tribes. The FY 2012 budget request seeks an additional 

$20.0 million in public safety funding over the FY 2010 enacted level. Within the 

increase, $5.1 million is for tribal and bureau law enforcement operations and $10.4 

million for tribal and bureau detention facilities operations. The funding will be 

used for staffing, training, implementation of the Tribal Law and Order Act, and 

equipment to increase staffing capacity for law enforcement and detention programs 

and ensure communities can support efforts to combat crime in Indian Country. The 

budget requests an additional $1.0 million, for a total of $13.8 million in funding 

for detention facilities operations and maintenance throughout Indian Country. 

The budget includes $2.5 million for tribal courts to support the enhanced capabilities given to tribal courts in the Tribal Law and Order Act. The increases to tribal courts and corrections will augment recent increases to the size of the tribal police forces over the last several years, which is part of a multistep plan to strengthen tribal justice systems. 

The budget also includes $1.0 million for tribal Conservation Law Enforcement 

Officers (CLEO). The CLEO’s primary responsibility is the protection of tribal natural resources; however, officers are often cross-deputized with local law enforcement agencies providing CLEOs with the authorization to enforce criminal law. 

Advancing Indian Education 

The BIE is one of only two agencies in the Federal government that manages a 

school system, the other being the Department of Defense. Education is critical to 

ensuring a viable and prosperous future for tribal communities and American Indians. It is this Department’s goal to improve Indian education and provide quality 

educational opportunities for those students who attend the 183 BIE funded elementary and secondary schools and dormitories located on 64 reservations in 23 states 

and serving approximately 41,000 students. 

The FY 2012 request maintains the President’s, Secretary Salazar’s, and my ongoing commitment to improve Indian education for students in bureau-funded schools 

and tribally controlled colleges. The budget provides an increase of $8.9 million to 

improve the state of BIE schools. We plan to use $3.9 million to promote safe and 

secure schools by implementing safety and security measures at 10 schools and 2 

dormitories. This request also includes an increase of $2.0 million, which will provide funds for additional professionals to conduct environmental audits at BIE 

schools. 

9

Another component of BIE funding is Tribal Grant Support Costs, which cover administrative and indirect costs at 126 tribally controlled schools and residential facilities. Tribes operating BIE-funded schools under contract or grant authorization 

use these funds to pay for the administrative overhead necessary to operate a 

school, meet legal requirements, and carry out other support functions that would 

otherwise be provided by the BIE school system. The budget increases funding for 

these activities by $3.0 million. 

Improving Trust Land Management 

In addition to the human services components of Indian Affairs, the United States 

holds 55 million surface acres of land and 57 million acres of subsurface mineral 

estates in trust for tribes and individual Indians. Trust management is vital to tribal and individual economic development. The management of Indian natural resources is a primary economic driver in many regions within the country. For example, some of the larger forested tribes operate the only sawmills in their region and 

are major employers of not only their own people, but of the non-tribal members 

who live in or near their communities 

This Administration seeks to continue advancing the Strengthening Tribal Nations initiative by assisting tribes in the management, development and protection 

of Indian trust land, as well as natural resources on those lands. The FY 2012 budget request includes $18.4 million in programmatic increases for land and water 

management activities. Those activities include: $1.2 million for land development 

in the former Bennett Freeze area in Arizona on the Navajo Nation reservation and 

$1.0 million for the Forestry program. 

The 2012 budget provides $2.0 million for the Rights Implementation program 

and the Tribal Management and Development program to support fishing, hunting, 

and gathering rights on and off reservations. The request provides $2.0 million for 

Fish, Wildlife, and Parks programs and projects to support fisheries management 

at BIA and tribal levels. The budget also provides an additional $500,000 for the 

Invasive Species/Noxious Weed Eradication program to provide weed control on 

20,000 acres. 

The budget proposes an additional $1.0 million for the Water Management and 

Pre-Development program to assist tribes in the identification and quantification of 

water resources; $1.0 million for Water Rights/Litigation to defend and assert Indian water rights. The budget also provides an increase of $3.8 million to help BIA 

address dam safety deficiencies and ensure public safety near high hazard dams in 

Indian Country. 

Additional increases for Improving Trust Land Management are included in the 

New Energy Frontier and the Cooperative Landscape Conservation initiatives. 

New Energy Frontier Initiative 

The Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED) works closely 

with tribes to assist them with the exploration and development of tribal lands with 

active and potential energy resources. These lands have the potential for renewable 

and conventional energy resource development. The FY 2012 budget includes an increase of $3.5 million in Indian Affairs for conventional and renewable energy 

projects as part of the Department’s New Energy Frontier initiative, which will 

allow Indian Affairs and tribes to explore and develop 1.8 million acres of active and 

potential energy sources on tribal land. The IEED provides funding, guidance, and 

implementation of feasibility studies, market analyses, and oversight of leasehold 

agreements of oil, gas, coal, renewable and industrial mineral deposits located on 

Indian lands. 

This increase includes $2.0 million in the Minerals and Mining program to provide grants directly to tribes for projects to evaluate and develop renewable energy 

resources on tribal trust land, a vital first step before energy development can 

begin. The budget also contains a $1.0 million increase for conventional energy development on the Fort Berthold Reservation. To further expedite energy development on the Fort Berthold Reservation, Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, and the 

Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians created a ‘‘virtual’’ one-stop shop. 

The IEED—Division of Energy and Mineral Development, at the one-stop shop, has 

been proactive in using technology and technical assistance to process permits on 

the Fort Berthold Reservation. In 2010, the number of wells went from zero wells 

at the start of 2010 to over 100 producing wells at the end of 2010. It is anticipated 

that in 2011 this number will double to over 200 producing wells on Indian trust 

lands. The budget includes a $500,000 increase to support staff onsite, as well as 

provide on-call access to the full range of the Department’s operational and financial 

management services. 

10

In addition, IEED supports economic growth in Indian Country and assists Indian 

Tribes in developing economic infrastructure, augmenting business knowledge, increasing jobs, businesses, capital investment, as well as developing energy and mineral resources on trust lands. IEED has initiated many programs, projects, technical 

conferences and training programs to address the lack of employment, and intends 

to continue these efforts. 

Cooperative Landscape Conservation Initiative 

Indian Affairs will co-lead the North Pacific Landscape Conservation Cooperative 

(LCC) with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and support tribal outreach efforts 

of other LCCs, particularly those in the northwestern U.S. In the North Pacific Cooperative, Indian Affairs will seek tribal input and perspective from tribes with traditional ecological knowledge; and both Indian Affairs staff and local tribal members 

will be involved to develop strategies to address adaptation. 

Requested Decreases 

The initiatives described above, and the related increases in the Administration’s 

request, mark a continued step toward the advancement of the Federal Government’s relationship with tribal nations. These initiatives focus on those programs 

geared toward strengthening tribal nations and reflect the President’s priorities to 

support economic development in Indian Country. 

The President has also called upon members of his Administration to meet important objectives while also exercising fiscal responsibility. Consistent with that directive, we made several difficult choices in the FY 2012 appropriations request for Indian Affairs. 

The 2012 request includes $43.3 million in program decreases for the Operation 

of Indian Programs account including administrative central office reductions of 

$14.2 million for streamlining and improving oversight operations and to correspond 

to other programmatic cuts within the 2012 request. The budget reduces Real Estate Projects by $10.9 million; the remaining funds will be used to focus program 

operations on cadastral surveys as a catalyst for economic development for tribes. 

The budget reduces Land Records Improvement by $8.5 million; the remaining 

funds will maintain core operations for the Trust Asset and Accounting Management System. The budget reduces the Probate Backlog by $7.5 million as over 

18,000 cases are expected to be completed. 

The Indian Affairs 2012 budget includes $32.9 million for ongoing Indian land and 

water settlements, which includes a reduction of $14.5 million reflecting completion 

of the Pueblo of Isleta, Puget Sound Regional Shellfish, and Soboba Band of Luiseno 

Indians settlements. The budget includes $9.5 million for the sixth of seven required 

payments for the Nez Perce/Snake River Settlement. The Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act of 2009 authorized payments to Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the 

Duck Valley Reservation; this budget includes $12.0 million for the third payment 

for that settlement. The Act also authorized settlement payments to the Navajo Nation; the budget includes $6.0 million for Navajo Nation Water Resources Development Trust Fund and $4.4 million for the San Juan Conjunctive Use Wells and San 

Juan River Navajo Irrigation Rehabilitation Project which are part of the NavajoGallup Settlement. 

The Construction program contains program reductions of $65.0 million. Of this 

programmatic decrease, $41.5 million for Public Safety and Justice new facility construction has been reduced from the Construction budget. The budget is reduced by 

$8.9 for Education Replacement Facility Construction, $5.0 million for Public Safety 

and Justice Employee Housing; the Department has taken a strategic approach to 

not fund new construction in 2012. At the requested level, the Education Construction budget redirects funding from new construction activities to Facility Improvement and Repair to achieve greater flexibility in maintaining existing facilities and 

employee housing. 

The budget includes a reduction of $9.0 million for the Navajo Indian Irrigation 

Project. Indian Affairs is evaluating continuing construction on the Navajo Indian 

Irrigation Project. Additionally, $57.3 million was transferred from Construction to 

the Operation of Indian Programs account so to better align and consolidate operations and maintenance funding. 

The request takes into consideration the $285.0 million that was provided to Indian Affairs for school and detention center construction activities and $225.0 million provided to the Department of Justice for detention center construction in Indian Country under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act). 

With funding from the Recovery Act, Indian Affairs will complete a number of high 

priority projects. 

11

Although there are decreases to the construction programs in the appropriations 

request, the appropriations request does contain the following construction items: 

$52.1 million for Education, $11.3 million for Public Safety and Justice, $33.0 million for Resource Management, and $8.5 million for Other Program Construction. The budget provides $3.1 million for the Indian Guaranteed Loan program, a re- duction of $5.1 million from the 2010 Enacted level. The program will undergo an 

evaluation, develop a comprehensive performance metric framework, and improve 

efforts to work with other Federal agencies that assist tribes in loans. The 2012 budget includes a reduction of $3.0 million for the Indian Land Consolidation Program. The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 included the Cobell v. Salazar

settlement agreement. The agreement includes $1.9 billion for land consolidation 

within the Office of the Secretary. This new funding will utilized to consolidate fractionalized land interests to be more economically viable for tribes. 

Conclusion 

We are aware of the current fiscal challenges our nation faces. This Administration understands the need to take fiscal responsibility, and also understands the 

need to strengthen tribal nations, foster responsible development of tribal energy resources, and improve the Nation-to-Nation relationship between tribal nations and 

the United States. It is our sincere belief that we have struck a balance in this FY 

2012 budget request for Indian Affairs that achieves the President’s objectives of fiscal discipline while at the same time meeting our obligations to tribal nations with 

which our Federal government has a Constitutionally-based government-to-government relationship. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Secretary Echo Hawk. 

And now we will ask Director Roubideaux to proceed with your 

statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. YVETTE ROUBIDEAUX, M.D., M.P.H.,

DIRECTOR, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; ACCOMPANIED BY RANDY 

GRINNELL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, 

good morning. I am Dr. Yvette Roubideaux and I am the Director 

of the Indian Health Service. I am accompanied by Mr. Randy 

Grinnell, the Deputy Director. 

I am pleased to have the opportunity to testify on the President’s 

2012 budget request for the Indian Health Service. 

While the President’s fiscal year 2012 budget for the entire Federal Government reflects hard choices necessary to control the deficit, the IHS budget request reflects the same commitment by 

President Obama to honor treaty commitments made by the United 

States, reflects Secretary Sebelius’ continued priority to improve 

IHS, and represents one of the largest annual percent increases in 

discretionary budget authority compared to other operating divisions within the Department of Health and Human Services. 

This budget was built upon tribal priorities and maintains current services and focuses program funding increases to be distributed broadly across as many patients and communities as possible. 

Our agency priorities are to renew and strengthen our partnership 

with tribes; to reform the IHS; to improve the quality of and access 

to health care; and to make all of our work transparent, accountable, fair and inclusive. 

The fiscal year 2012 President’s budget request and discretionary budget authority for the IHS is $4.6 billion, an increase of $571.4 

million or a 14 percent increase over fiscal year 2010 enacted funding levels. The request includes increases to maintain current servVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
12

ices, including pay costs for Commission Corps personnel, inflation 

and population growth, and funding to start and operate newly 

constructed health facilities, including facilities completely constructed by tribes under the Joint Venture Construction Program. 

The success of the Joint Venture Program demonstrates the strong 

commitment of this Administration and the tribes to reduce the 

backlog of health facility construction projects and staffing needs. The IHS proposed budget also includes a total increase of $169.3 

million for contract health services, the top tribal priority for program increases. And this increase will help meet the significant 

needs for referrals for medical services in the private sector. The budget request also includes $54 million for the Indian 

Health Care Improvement Fund and will allow approximately 88 

of our lowest-funded hospitals and health centers to expand health 

and primary care services. To fund the shortfall in contract support 

costs, a $63 million increase is included for tribes for the management of health programs previously managed by the Federal Government. 

The budget request also includes modest increases for health information technology security, prevention of the principal risk factors for chronic diseases, smoking and obesity, and expands access 

to and improving quality of substance abuse treatment in our primary care settings. 

For the facilities appropriation, the total health care facilities construction budget is $85.2 million for construction to continue on 

the replacement hospital in Barrow, Alaska; the San Carlos Health 

Center in Arizona; and the Kayenta Health Center on the Navajo 

Reservation. It will also fund the design and site-grading of the 

Youth Regional Treatment Center for Southern California. 

This budget helps us continue our work to bring reform to the 

Indian Health Service. In my first year as Director, I sought input 

from tribes and staff on where improvements are needed in IHS. 

In this past year, input from external stakeholders have reinforced 

the need for change and improvement in IHS, improving the way 

we do business, and to focus more on our oversight responsibilities 

to assure accountability in providing quality health care in the 

most effective and efficient manner. 

We are working hard to make improvements and implement the 

recommendations of this Committee from the Aberdeen Area investigation. The budget includes funding increases for direct operations and business operations support to improve our business capacity and oversight. 

We are making progress on implementing the Indian Health 

Care Improvement Act with permanent reauthorization included in 

the Affordable Care Act. This budget proposes funding for two 

high-priority demonstration projects: youth telemental health 

project and innovative health care facility construction. 

IHS is predominantly a rural, highly decentralized Federal, tribal and urban Indian health system that provides health care services under a variety of challenges. However, IHS has proven its 

ability to improve the health status of American Indians and Alaska Natives over the years. This budget request for the IHS is a 

necessary investment in winning the future that will result in 

healthier American Indian and Alaska Native communities. 

13

Thank you for the opportunity to present the President’s fiscal 

year 2012 budget request for the Indian Health Service. I would be 

happy to answer questions. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Roubideaux follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. YVETTE ROUBIDEAUX, M.D., M.P.H., DIRECTOR, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES;

ACCOMPANIED BY RANDY GRINNELL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

Good morning. I am Dr. Yvette Roubideaux, Director of the Indian Health Service. 

I am accompanied today by Mr. Randy Grinnell, Deputy Director. I am pleased to 

have the opportunity to testify on the President’s FY 2012 budget request for the 

Indian Health Service (IHS). 

While the President’s FY 2012 budget for the entire federal government reflects 

hard choices necessary to control the deficit, the IHS budget request reflects a sustained commitment by President Obama to honor treaty commitments made by the 

United States and to provide for a necessary investment in our future. In addition, 

the FY 2012 budget request reflects Secretary Sebelius’ continued priority to improve the IHS, and represents one of the largest annual percent increases in discretionary budget authority, compared to other operating divisions within the Department of Health and Human Services. This request will help IHS further meet its 

mission to raise the physical, mental, social and spiritual health of American Indians and Alaska Natives to the highest level. 

Agency and Tribal Priorities 

This budget request was built upon tribal priorities identified during the IHS 

budget formulation process. Tribes have consistently expressed that maintaining 

current services must be addressed before programs are expanded, and they have 

consistently identified the need for program funding increases to be distributed 

broadly across as many patients and communities as possible. The agency priorities 

provide a framework for responding to the Tribes and improving what we do and 

how we do it. Specifically, our agency priorities are:

• Renew and strengthen our partnership with Tribes • Reform the IHS • Improve the quality of and access to health care • Make all of our work transparent, accountable, fair and inclusive

Budget Request 

The FY 2012 President’s budget request in discretionary budget authority for the IHS is $4.6 billion; an increase of $571.4 million, or 14 percent, over the FY 2010 

enacted funding level. 

Maintaining Current Services 

The request includes $327.5 million in increases for pay costs for Commissioned 

Corps personnel, inflation and population growth that will cover the rising costs of 

providing health care to maintain the current level of services provided in IHS, 

Tribal, and Urban Indian Health Programs. This amount also includes $71.5 million 

to staff and operate newly constructed health facilities, including facilities completely constructed by Tribes under the Joint Venture Construction Program, one 

facility constructed primarily from Recovery Act funds, and one facility constructed 

by the Army Corps of Engineers. The success of the Joint Venture program demonstrates the strong commitment of this Administration and the Tribes to reduce 

the backlog of health facility construction projects and staffing needs. 

Funding Increases to Improve Quality of and Access to Care 

The IHS proposed budget includes a $243.9 million increase for a number of programs and initiatives that will increase access to care, and strengthen the capacity 

of the Indian health system to provide clinical and preventive care. This budget will 

also help address longstanding unmet needs and inequities in funding levels within 

the Indian health system. The budget request includes a total increase of $169.3 

million for the Contract Health Services (CHS) program, the top Tribal priority for 

program increases. This increase will help meet the significant need for referrals for 

medical services in the private sector. The increase provides $79.6 million to maintain current services and $89.6 million to expand the program. Within the programmatic increase, $10 million will be targeted to the Catastrophic Health EmerVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
14

gency Fund (CHEF), for a total funding level of $58 million for the CHEF to help 

pay for very high-cost cases. The budget request also includes $54 million for the 

Indian Health Care Improvement Fund and will allow approximately 75 of our lowest funded hospitals and health centers to expand health and primary care services. 

To fund the shortfall in Contract Support Costs (CSC), a $63.3 million increase is 

included for Tribes that have assumed the management of health programs previously managed by the Federal government. These increases represent some of the 

highest priorities identified by Tribes over the past several years, as well as by me 

to increase the recurring base budget for our patients’ provide needed healthcare 

services. 

In this budget request we also target modest but important funding increases to 

specific activities to improve quality and access to care. A request of $4 million for 

Health Information Technology will address critical security maintenance and enhancements, and facilitate IHS participation in external exchanges and support 

meaningful use requirements. Prevention of chronic illness, currently widespread 

and costly in the American Indian and Alaska Native population, will be enhanced 

by the request for $2.5 million in competitive awards to reduce the principal risk 

factors of chronic diseases, i.e., smoking, obesity, and a sedentary lifestyle. IHS also 

has an important role in the national drug control strategy, as behavioral health 

issues are pervasive throughout Indian communities. Therefore, the budget requests 

$4 million for a competitive grant program to expand access to and improve quality 

of substance abuse treatment in our primary care settings. 

For the Facilities appropriation, the overall request is $457.7 million, with an increase of $62.9 million over the FY 2010 funding level. Within this increase, the 

total Health Care Facilities Construction budget is $85.2 million, for construction 

to continue on the replacement hospital in Barrow, Alaska, the San Carlos Health 

Center in Arizona, and the Kayenta Health Center on the Navajo Reservation. It 

will also fund the design and site grading of the Youth Regional Treatment Center 

for Southern California. 

Funding Increases to Reform the IHS 

This budget helps us continue our work to bring reform to the IHS. In my first 

year as Director, I sought input from Tribes and staff on where improvements are 

needed in IHS. Tribal priorities for reform focused on broad issues such as the need 

for more funding, the distribution of resources, and improving how we consult with 

Tribes. Staff priorities focused on how we do business and how we lead and manage 

people. In this past year, input from external stakeholders have reinforced the need 

for change and improvement in the IHS and to focus more on our oversight responsibilities to assure accountability in providing quality health care in the most effective and efficient manner possible. We are working hard to make improvements and 

implement the recommendations of this committee from the Aberdeen Area investigation. 

This budget includes funding increases for Direct Operations and Business Operations Support to improve our capacity for performing the functions highlighted 

above. The funds for Direct Operations will allow us to focus on improvements in 

the hiring process, recruitment and retention, performance management, and more 

effective financial management and accountability. The funds for Business Operations Support will allow IHS and Tribal health programs to focus on ensuring effective and efficient processes in billing and collecting from third party payers, processing CHS claims, and ensuring the best rates are negotiated for health care provided through CHS programs. All of these reforms are being conducted as we make 

all our work more transparent, accountable, fair and inclusive. 

We are making progress on implementing the Indian Health Care Improvement 

Act’s permanent reauthorization included in the Affordable Care Act. This budget 

proposes funding for two high priority demonstration projects: youth telemental 

health project; and innovative healthcare facility construction. 

Savings 

This budget request for IHS demonstrates actions to achieve fiscal responsibility 

without endangering patient care. Two areas of proposed savings have been identified that allow funds to be targeted to higher priority activities. One area is in the 

small grant programs funded within the Hospitals and Clinics budget, where $7 million of savings can be accomplished. These grant programs have a small number of 

grantees, ranging from 1 to 11 Tribes or Urban Indian Health Programs receiving 

the awards. Tribes have expressed a preference for direct funding rather than competitive grant programs that benefit only a few Tribes, and the savings achieved 

here can be redirected towards priority budget items that benefit all Tribes. Another 

area identified for savings in FY 2012 is the Sanitation Facilities Construction proVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
15

gram. Although the overall need for water, sewage and solid waste disposal facilities 

remains significant, funds received in FYs 2009 and 2010, including Recovery Act 

funds, totaled nearly $350 million compared to an annual appropriation of approximately $96 million for both FY 2009 and FY 2010. Redistribution of these funds 

will, thus, lessen the impact of this decrease in base funding. 

Indian Health System—Accomplishments 

The FY 2012 budget proposal will provide resources to help the IHS further meet 

its mission. The IHS provides high quality, comprehensive primary care and public 

health services through a system of IHS, Tribal, and Urban Indian Health operated 

facilities and programs based on treaties, judicial determinations, and acts of Congress. This Indian health system provides services to nearly 1.9 million American 

Indians and Alaska Natives through hospitals, health centers, and clinics located in 

35 states, often representing the only source of health care for many American Indian and Alaska Native individuals, especially for those who live in the most remote 

and poverty stricken areas of the United States. The purchase of health care from 

private providers is also an integral component of the health system for services unavailable in IHS and Tribal facilities or, in some cases, in lieu of IHS or Tribal 

health care programs. Unlike many other health delivery systems, the IHS is involved in the construction of health facilities, including the construction of staff 

quarters necessary for recruitment and retention of health care providers, as well 

as being involved in the construction of water and sewer systems for Indian homes 

and communities that lack this basic infrastructure. I know of no other health care 

organization that accomplishes such a wide array of patient care, public health and 

community services within a single system. 

Addressing Health Disparities 

For several years since its inception in 1955, IHS made significant strides in reducing early and preventable deaths from infectious or communicable diseases. 

However, deaths due to chronic diseases and behavioral health conditions have been 

more challenging to address since they result primarily from lifestyle choices and 

individual behaviors. Progress in addressing these disparities will be a sure investment in winning the future, as more youth are ushered into adulthood without engaging in the risky behaviors that are so prevalent in the population today, and as 

more adults become tribal elders without succumbing to the complications of chronic 

disease. 

Performance through GPRA measures indicates that the Indian health system is 

making progress in addressing health disparities. For example, the agency achieved 

its FY 2010 performance targets for mammography and colorectal cancer screenings 

performed, increasing the portion of the population screening by three and four percentage points respectively; however, the end result for both indicates less than half 

the user population received these important screenings. Also, while the IHS did not 

fully meet its FY 2010 performance targets for diabetic patients with ideal blood 

sugar control or with controlled blood pressure, there were improvements over the 

previous year’s results. With this budget proposed for FY 2012, we anticipate seeing 

a positive impact on the lives of American Indian and Alaska Native people and 

progress towards improving the health status of the communities we serve. 

Closing 

The IHS is a predominantly rural, highly decentralized federal, Tribal, and Urban 

Indian health system that provide health care services under a variety of challenges. However, IHS has proven its ability to improve the health status of American Indians and Alaska Natives over the years. The President’s FY 2012 budget 

request for the IHS is a necessary investment in winning the future that will result 

in healthier American Indian and Alaska Native communities. 

Thank you for this opportunity to present the President’s FY 2012 budget request 

for the Indian Health Service and helping to advance the IHS mission to raise the 

physical, mental, social, and spiritual health status of American Indians and Alaska 

Natives to the highest level, and I look forward to working with you over the next 

year.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Director Roubideaux. 

Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk, last year, Congress passed the 

Cobell settlement. It is now up to the court to approve the settlement. I understand that you are recused from answering questions 

about the Cobell decision, but do you have someone with you today 

16

who could answer some critical questions about how the settlement 

is being implemented? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Chairman Akaka, I believe that Ray Joseph is 

in the room and I would be happy to have him take a place here 

at the table to respond. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Assistant Secretary. 

Mr. Joseph, welcome and let me ask you, part of the Cobell settlement includes $1.4 billion for individual Indians whose trust accounts were mismanaged. Those individuals eligible for the settlement need to opt out of the settlement by April 20th if they choose 

not to participate. 

Can you tell this Committee what type of outreach the Department has done to make sure all account-holders are identified and 

made aware of the opt-out provisions in the settlement? Also, can 

you tell the Committee what the opt-out rate is so far? And in 

which regions are the individual account-holders opting out at the 

highest rates? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Good morning, Chairman, Vice Chairman Barrasso 

and Members of the Committee. My name is Ray Joseph. I am the 

Principal Deputy Special Trustee for American Indians. It is a 

pleasure to be here before you today to answer and address your 

questions. 

The opt-out period is April 20th. You are correct, sir. That optout rate that you asked about is not information that I have readily 

available, but I can obtain it and provide it to you in a short time 

frame. 

As it relates to specific regions and to the highest rate per region, I don’t have that information readily available to me today, 

but I will be able to provide that to you in a short time afterward. 

As it relates to the outreach that is being done to the tribal members to ensure they are being contacted, that is being done by 

Kinsella Media, as well as a company called the Garden City 

Group. That is a group that is being managed by the plaintiff’s attorneys organization providing television ads, outreach through 

magazines, radio communication and a variety of different media 

outlets that are targeted at specific Indian members to make sure 

they are aware of these issues and aware of what their rights are, 

as well as the procedures to follow. 

There is also a website under Indiantrust.com that also addresses these matters and has a complete list of questions, FAQs, frequently asked questions to address this matter. A phone number 

as well can be provided to members to contact that don’t have access to the Internet, and that is 1–800–961–6109. 

So there are a variety of different mechanisms that have been 

utilized to contact members. In addition, Judge Hogan has exempted Secretary Ken Salazar, Deputy Secretary Hayes, and the Solicitor Hilary Tompkins from the no-contact order. There are monthly 

calls with tribal leaders at this time that Deputy Secretary Hayes 

and Solicitor Tompkins participate in and they speak with tribal 

leaders to address this issue and other issues that come up. 

The CHAIRMAN. I have also asked about what the rate is so far 

and which regions are individual account-holders opting out at the 

highest rates. 

17

Mr. JOSEPH. Mr. Chairman, at this time there have been only 28 

individuals that have opted out. I don’t have that information as 

determined by region. We can obtain that information and provide 

it to you. I think it is a very small percentage based upon the numbers out of 300,000 or approximately 300,000 individual member 

accounts. 

The CHAIRMAN. Please provide us with that information. 

Mr. JOSEPH. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Echo Hawk, the budget recommends a de- crease of $5.1 million in the Indian Loan Grant Program. This program has proven successful in allowing tribes to build reservation 

businesses and provide access to capital that would otherwise be 

unavailable. I understand that the reason for the decrease is because the program may be duplicative at other Federal agencies. 

My question to you is, has the Department identified other agency programs and funding opportunities available to tribes? And 

have you communicated with tribes about where these programs 

are located? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Mr. Chairman, this is a good program and it 

has strong support among tribal leaders. There are concerns that 

have been raised not only with the fact that some feel that this is 

duplicate of what is offered primarily by the FDA and also by 

USDA. But there was also concern that under the ARRA program 

funds that were allocated to loan guarantee that those were not obligated fast enough. 

But we are working to preserve this program and are presently 

evaluating and coming up with a plan to correct whatever concerns 

have been raised so that we can have this program continue to 

serve Indian Country. 

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Roubideaux, I am pleased to see that the 

President’s budget proposal includes an increase in funding for the 

Indian Health Service. As you know, this agency has historically 

been under-funded. However, I was surprised that the budget requests $16 million less than the fiscal year 2010 enacted level for 

sanitation facilities construction. 

These funds are used to build water supply, sewage and solid 

waste disposal facilities for American Indian and Alaska Native 

homes. The agency’s documents indicated that there were 230,000 

homes in need of these facilities. Why does the budget request a 

decrease in funding for this program? 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Well, the reduction in the sanitation facilities 

construction was proposed in the budget as a way to have grant 

savings, and the reason for that was we, like everyone, had to find 

ways to help reduce the debt and to find ways to save. 

Waste water, sewage, solid waste disposal is so incredibly important and we have actually been very fortunate to receive a lot of 

ARRA funding, $68 million, and we also received EPA funding of 

$90 million. And we are still implementing projects with that funding. And so we felt that we could absorb a minor decrease in this 

funding, given that those projects are ongoing. 

In addition, the funding that we have available will still provide 

those services for 18,000 homes. So we are still making sure that 

we are making progress on an incredible need we have for sanitation facilities construction. 

18

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Roubideaux, the Committee’s December 2010 

investigation of part of the Indian Health Service included a statement from you describing some of the actions you were taking to 

address the problems that were identified during the investigation. 

Can you provide the Committee with an update on your efforts 

to address those problems, either here or later? 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Yes. Thank you, Chairman. I can give you a 

brief update now and I am happy to brief staff on the details. 

We take the report of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on 

the Aberdeen investigation very seriously. We have acknowledged 

that these problems should not have occurred and we are doing everything we can to make sure they are not occurring in the Aberdeen area, as well as throughout the rest of the system. 

For example, the first thing I did was establish a strong tone at 

the top that we will address these issues and that there will be no 

excuses by staff for not addressing them. The second thing was to 

have a strong improvement in how we hold people accountable for 

taking actions and making these improvements. And we have included measures in this year’s performance plan so the entire agency can make sure that we are making progress so people will be 

held accountable. 

After the hearing, after I heard some of the very serious issues 

that were brought up, I took immediate action and asked our Area 

Directors and everybody throughout the system to make improvements. One example is the horrible problem of I guess a couple of 

people had been hired who appeared on the OIG exclusion list, 

which says they are not eligible for Federal hire. I immediately established a policy where no one can be hired in the Indian Health 

Service unless the OIG exclusion list has been checked and there 

has been a background investigation. 

And we also just to be sure, checked the OIG exclusion list for 

all 15,740 employees at the Indian Health Service. And I can say 

as a result of that revealed no on is on the OIG exclusion list in 

the Indian Health Service. 

We are also addressing the Aberdeen Area concern specifically 

with corrective action plans, training of staff, new policies, reviews, 

new electronic tools for accountability, and also trying to increase 

the number of providers, which is a big issue. 

And then finally, as directed by the Committee, we are expanding these investigations to the other IHS areas. We just completed 

our first investigation of the Albuquerque area and the Billings 

area is next. And we have been working very carefully with the Department of Health and Human Service Program Integrity Coordinating Council to make sure that we are doing reviews that will 

make sure that the findings of the Aberdeen area investigation are 

not occurring in the rest of the system. And we are putting in sort 

of long-term improvements that will ensure this doesn’t occur 

again. 

So I am grateful to the Committee for that report. It has given 

us a lot of good information to help us make improvements. We 

want to spend our Federal dollars wisely and we want to make 

sure we are as efficient and effective as possible. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your response. 

Senator Barrasso? 

19

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

Mr. Echo Hawk, I read your testimony fully and enjoyed the 

parts where you talked specifically about New Energy Frontier Initiatives, and I found there were some encouraging words in there. 

And then your conclusion at the end was you wanted to foster responsible development of tribal energy resources, and I agree completely. 

The President’s budget for fiscal year 2012 proposes a number of 

fees, though, for oil and gas development on Indian lands. One of 

these is a processing fee for the APD, the applications for permit 

to drill. And the Department is now charging $500 for this, and has 

been doing that since last year, which is a 62 percent increase in 

fees charged on oil and gas development in Indian lands. 

There are other fees as well, like inspection fees ranging from $600 to $5,700 for oil and gas leases, that is up 400 percent from 

the year before. 

In light of the recent international developments driving up the 

price for gasoline at the pump, I am compelled to ask: How do 

these hefty fees contribute to the development of oil and gas resources on Indian lands? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Vice Chairman Barrasso, I am aware of the 

problems that we have out there with these fees that are added on 

because it inhibits the development of energy resources within tribal communities. I was recently on the homelands of the Crow Nation in Montana and they raised this issue once again. I heard it 

when I was in North Dakota. And so this is something that we 

have to work with with the BLM because they are the agency that 

is charging the $6,500 fee and we are going to try to resolve this 

within the Department. 

Senator BARRASSO. Because it is interesting when you take a 

look at on-shore versus off-shore, the application to drill on-shore 

on an Indian reservation right now is actually three-and-a-half 

times, three-and-a-quarter times the cost for an off-shore permit. 

And you would think in terms of how much it costs to actually go 

and do the evaluation, the off-shore permit is $1,959; on-shore on 

reservations, $6,500. It just doesn’t seem like a fair application. So 

I appreciate you taking a look into that. Thank you. 

I wanted to get to Wind River Reservation Law Enforcement 

Pilot Program. The BIA’s high-priority performance goal pilot program was developed to reduce violent crime by 5 percent over a 

two-year period on specifically four reservations, including the 

Wind River Reservation in Wyoming. From all indications, it has 

been a very successful program. 

The proposed 2012 budget indicates that this effort may be extended to four additional reservations, and I would encourage that. 

My question is: Will this extension in any way affect the effort and 

resources provided to the four reservations that are already being 

served successfully by the program? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Vice Chairman Barrasso, first of all, I will be 

visiting Wind River, Wyoming on April 4th, and specifically to visit 

with all of the people that are involved in the high-priority performance goal that we are operating there. 

That has been a very tremendous success on the four reservations that we have worked on. It is a program that is designed to 

20

reduce violent crime by 5 percent within a 24-month time period. 

Already at this point, we have the latest figure showing that the 

decrease in violent crime has exceeded 11 percent cumulatively on 

these four reservations. And we are hoping that we can expand 

that now into other communities. 

We need to demonstrate that given adequate resources, we can 

really reduce crime, and this, of course, affects the quality of life 

of people in those communities. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much. 

If I could, I was going to ask Mr. Joseph a question about the 

Cobell settlement. 

As I noted earlier, I am interested in hearing, at least in general terms, how the Department plans to carry out the $1.9 billion buyback program included in that settlement. I know it still has to be 

approved by the courts, and that has not happened yet. But I 

would just like to hear how the Department plans to implement 

this program in terms of is it going to be in-house, will you use the 

existing Land Consolidation Program staff, are you thinking of hiring contractors? 

If you could just have a little overview and a discussion on those 

aspects of this. 

Mr. JOSEPH. Thank you for your question, Vice Chairman 

Barrasso. 

I think it is important for us to state that we agree with you. 

We are greatly concerned about this endeavor. It is a very large 

program to go after and I think it is something we take very seriously. 

But I do want to stress that we do not have a plan at this time. 

I think the most important thing that we need to focus is that we 

don’t want to jeopardize beneficiaries’ ability to participate in this 

landmark settlement, all the hard work that has gone into this settlement, and the efforts by Congress as well as the Administration 

to make this thing happen. 

So the first thing we want to do is put their interests first, if you 

will, as a fiduciary. And without being able to contact them, we 

can’t do consultation for this plan. But that doesn’t preclude us 

from doing a lot of, if you will, thinking, evaluating, looking at 

other programs that have been done of similar nature, and pre-positioning ideas and concepts. But we don’t want to in any way dismiss the idea that we are focused on tribal consultation. 

So until that settlement that has been finalized by Judge Hogan, 

we cannot put forth a plan. But again from a concept, I think it 

leads to some ideas. There is a lot of good concepts out there that 

we can share upon. We have looked at a number of scenarios to do 

this. 

We are also asking others to present ideas in the outreach programs or the outreach discussions that Deputy Secretary Hayes 

and Solicitor Tompkins have had. We have asked those individuals 

to put forth ideas and concepts they might have. 

Again, we don’t have a plan, but I think we have a number of 

scenarios in which to attack this problem. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much for that response. 

Mr. Chairman, this is a question that I know you and I are both 

going to continue to come back to and look at and monitor this very 

21

closely to make sure that everyone is fairly represented and taken 

care of. 

If I could just have one more question for Dr. Roubideaux, if I 

may, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

And it is along the line we have discussed before in my office, 

as well as here, the significant concerns with diabetes and your 

landmark research on diabetes among Indian people. And I wanted 

to get into the proposed budget request for the contract health 

services program. I know it is going to increase funding by about 

$169 million over the current level of $780 million. The new funding would be distributed based on a formula driven by user population, cost of purchasing care, access to care. 

Anything that you are thinking of in terms of taking in and 

weighing into this morbidity, mortality rates and other issues as 

how you try to plan to implement this additional spending? 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Thank you, first, for your suggestions for the 

contract health services formula. We actually recently consulted 

with tribes on their ideas for how to improve that formula. It has 

a number of factors, but some areas get relatively more than other 

areas, and so everybody wants to find a way to get these resources 

because they are so important. They pay for very much medically 

needed referrals. 

We brought together a Federal-Tribal Work Group in 2010 which 

looked at the formula that was originally developed in 2001, and 

they felt that we needed to see the impact of the formula because 

we really hadn’t had the increases in contract health services since 

2001. 

So the Work Group is going to review this formula, review the 

results of the tribal consultation, see what was recommended, and 

then they will make recommendations to me probably later in the 

year. So I am looking forward to seeing that and interested in any 

ideas you may have. 

Senator BARRASSO. Perhaps we can have an additional discussion 

on morbidity, mortality issues and how they have an impact on 

that. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Barrasso, for 

your questions. 

And now I would like to call on Senator Tester for his questions. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I will have to have Ray Joseph up again, too, but my first question is for Larry Echo Hawk. 

Larry, I talked in my opening statement about the unemployment in Indian Country and how it is very high. On some reservations in Montana, it is 80 percent. One of the programs that is out 

there is the Indian Loan Guarantee Program. How would you assess its abilities to work? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Tester, this program has operated in 

my view very well. It leverages private investment funds. I think 

the ratio is about 13 to 1. For every dollar we put up in the loan 

guarantee, we are able to get $13 out of private investment, and 

this has had huge impact. 

It has had a fairly low default rate and so it has served Indian 

Country well, but there are concerns in the very tight budget cliVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
22

mate that we are living in about whether or not there are other 

agencies of the Federal Government that should be operating. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Well, let me just back up a little bit, then. The Indian Loan Guarantee Program was given $7 million in 

the Recovery Act. That money was later rescinded because those 

funds were never obligated, after we worked pretty darn hard to 

get them in. 

I mean, if the program works well, can you explain why those 

funds were never used? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Tester, I know something about this, 

but I would be happy to have a more detailed response given to you 

to address your question. But in the time frame that we are dealing with here with the ARRA funding that went into this program, 

banks were faulted for making risky loans, and so they were a bit 

reticent. 

Senator TESTER. Yes, but isn’t this backstop for those banks? I 

mean, isn’t this fund a backstop to give them some guarantee? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. I think that is just one of the issues and I think 

the banks were very cautious. But also on the tribal side in terms 

of borrower equity, there were problems that we were facing there. 

And a lot of the banks that would normally be lending were the 

smaller banks, and they were not receiving a lot of Federal assistance. 

Senator TESTER. I don’t want to put you on the spot, but I will. 

What you are saying is that the banks weren’t ready to lend the 

money? Or are you saying there weren’t the applications to get the 

banks to lend the money? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. What I am saying is that there were smaller 

banks that we normally would have been doing business through 

the loan guarantee and they were not receiving as much assistance 

as the larger banks would, and that they were just averse to making bad loans. 

Senator TESTER. Just let me ask you point blank. Were the requests that you got for the Loan Guarantee Program processed and 

were banks approached and were you turned down? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Tester, I don’t have the detailed information. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. If I could get that, it would be good because then what I am getting at Larry, and I know your commitment to Indian Country. Make no mistake about it. It has been 

solid. But if in fact this program works and if in fact it will help 

reduce unemployment in Indian Country, why the $7 million 

wasn’t spent and why there is a reduction of $5 million, those two 

issues go hand in hand. 

And I understand it is tight budget time. Trust me. We are dealing with it. And so that it is. Please get back to me on that, if you 

could. 

Mr. Ray Joseph, real quick. You answered a question from the 

Chairman and the Ranking Member and you said that there was 

no plan at this time for the Cobell settlement, that you would have 

a plan at some point in time after Judge Hogan made his decision. 

I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but is that basically what 

you said? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Thank you for your question, Senator Tester. 

23

That plan will be devised after consulting with the tribal members. That is a collaborative effort. 

Senator TESTER. Okay, so a couple of things have to happen. 

Number one, the judge has to make a decision. Right? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Yes, sir. 

Senator TESTER. And then you consult with the tribes. Right? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Yes. 

Senator TESTER. Anything else? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Obviously, that is going to be consulting with Congress as well. 

Senator TESTER. Okay, that is good. When can we anticipate a 

plan after the judge makes his decision? Do you have any sort of 

time frame on when that could go? And by the way, the fact that 

the Chairman and the Ranking Member and myself have called 

you back up to the table on this, this is a big issue with a lot of 

dough, and we want to make sure it gets to the ground. 

But if we don’t have some time frames, I am very, very concerned 

that it might not get to where it needs to be. So can you give me 

some time frames on what you anticipate after the judge makes his 

decision? 

And the gentleman, you can come up if you want and address 

that. It is up to you. I don’t want to put you on the spot either, 

but I am just curious. What kind of time frames are we looking at? 

Are we looking a year after the judge makes his decision, or six 

months, three months? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Senator Tester, that individual is Mike Berrigan 

from the Solicitor’s office, so I was asking him for clarification on 

this matter. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Sure. 

Mr. JOSEPH. At this point, we are still waiting for the judge to 

render his opinion. 

Senator TESTER. I have got you. 

Mr. JOSEPH. And that has not been set in date after the fairness 

hearing. So it is obviously up to the judge’s discretion at that time 

frame of when he sets that hearing, or I am sorry, he sets the final 

settlement date. 

After that settlement date, we are also focused on if there is an 

appeal, that precludes the ability for the funds to flow to start looking at this. 

Senator TESTER. Do you anticipate an appeal? 

Mr. JOSEPH. I can’t say I anticipate or don’t anticipate. I am not 

an attorney and this is far out of my level of responsibility. 

Senator TESTER. Go ahead. We are taking too much time. You 

just need to tell me when it is going to happen. That is all. After 

the judge’s opinion, if there is no appeal, when do you anticipate 

there will be a plan? I don’t think that is an unfair question. If it 

is, you can tell me and I will do it again later. 

Mr. JOSEPH. Senator Tester, I don’t believe your question is unfair. I just think it is a very complex question to answer because 

we only control one part of that equation. That is what the Department of Interior’s effort is to resolve this matter, which we take 

very seriously. 

The other two members are, of course, Congress and the tribal 

consultation piece. We will set forth an overlay of the dates we will 

24

go out and perform tribal consultation. The challenges are going to 

be for those organizations, consulting with a number of these 

tribes, which are over 500, and then getting meaningful feedback 

and incorporating it into an overall structure. 

Senator TESTER. And my time is long past. But here is what I 

would ask you. Could you go back, and assuming there is no appeal, what kind of time frame are you looking at for implementation, to have a plan? What kind of time frame before you have a 

plan? Because it ain’t never going to happen if you don’t have a 

plan, right? 

Mr. JOSEPH. I believe it will happen, Senator Tester. 

Senator TESTER. But you have to have a plan or it won’t happen, 

right? 

Mr. JOSEPH. Yes, Senator Tester, you have to have a plan, but 

you also have to understand we have to make sure we take into 

account——

Senator TESTER. I understand. You are exactly right, but there 

is a level of accountability here that I am after. Okay? I need to 

know once the judge makes his decision, I don’t know when that 

is going to be, when you anticipate you will have a plan. That is 

all, assuming there is no appeal. 

Okay, so you must have it laid out how long it is going to take 

you to get input from the tribes, you anticipate, and so we can 

move the ball down the court. Okay? That is all. If you can get 

back to me, I would appreciate it. 

I have run out of time. Ms. Roubideaux, I will tell you that you 

have answered many of the questions before. There is an issue that 

deals with youth suicide in Indian Country. Hopefully, you can tell 

me how this budget is going to deal with that. It is a big issue, and 

it involves more than health care, for sure. But if you could get 

back to me on it, that would be good. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Tester. 

Now, I will ask for questions from Senator Murkowski, and following that I will ask Senator Franken. 

Senator Murkowski, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good to be back 

with you. 

Dr. Roubideaux, a couple of questions for you first this morning. 

As you know, Tanana Chiefs Conference, South Central Foundation 

and the Copper River Native Association have been successful in 

their efforts for joint venture health facilities. We are very encouraged with that. But there is some anxiety given what we are facing 

with the budget and budgetary constraints that IHS will not be 

able to meet its commitment to provide the equipment and the 

staffing packages in fiscal years 2012 and 2013. 

I have had multiple meetings with folks from these three entities, all quite concerned about the timing of this. Can you give me 

any confidence that we are going to be Okay with the staffing packages? 

25

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Well, thank you, Senator Murkowski, for your 

concern about the joint venture projects. The deal is the tribe 

builds the facility and then IHS requests the appropriations for 

staffing and equipment. And we intend to keep our deal and continue to request the staffing and the equipment. 

In 2012 budget, we have several joint venture projects and a 

placeholder in place if one of the Alaska joint venture projects becomes available and completes construction. And so we believe in 

joint venture. We think it is a great example of how tribes and IHS 

can work together to help reduce the backlog of facility construction needs in Indian Country. 

So we will continue to request these funds from Congress. We 

will continue to support the Joint Venture Program and we will do 

everything we can. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, we appreciate your support. We certainly think that it is advantageous as well. The concern here is 

all about timing. It is one thing if we are able to advance some 

good infrastructure, some facilities that are most desperately needed. But as we have seen in the YKHC region, you have a facility 

and we are still waiting for staffing packages. 

So we are very, very concerned about this timing and we need 

to have a little more assurance that in fact this is all going to work 

together. If there is a schedule going forward, I think that that 

would provide for some confidence. 

On the same lines then, as it relates to facilities, the Barrow 

Hospital remains your top facility on the in-patient priority list, 

presently under construction. We are very pleased with that. But 

we also recognize that it is just tough to get the construction materials to Barrow; that the construction season is extremely short. 

Do you have any thoughts on how or what we need to do in Congress to ensure that this project is seen through to completion, 

IHS’s commitment to doing just that? 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Yes, we are committed to completing that 

project. We have met with the tribes. We know how important it 

is to them. And the challenges, you are right, of trying to purchase 

enough materials to get on the barges before the ice comes and you 

can’t get the materials up there, plus the cost of doing the actual 

construction. 

In fiscal year 2011, we are hopeful that we will have a budget 

soon and that we can continue to do the planning to be able to help 

with our health facilities construction. However, we did make a decision to allocate some funding to purchase the materials for the 

barge so at least we can get the materials up there. And we are 

hopeful with the rest of the appropriations this year we can continue construction. And when we also have proposed a large increase that would help us complete the construction on the Barrow 

project. 

So we are very committed. We are doing everything we can to try 

to keep that moving along, given the unique challenges it has with 

construction and the weather and the transportation issues, and 

the employment issues as well. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. And I think we recognize that with the 

challenges that we have faced with the Continuing Resolution, that 

doesn’t respect the fact that you have a very, very brief window to 

26

get those materials on to the barge that will make it up there. I 

don’t think most people in the rest of the world realize that you 

have one barge in the spring, one barge in the fall, and if you miss 

it, you miss it. 

Mr. Echo Hawk, question for you this morning, and thank you 

all for your testimony here today. We have tribal courts that exist 

in Public Law 280 States like Alaska and States that are not subject to Public Law 280. Alaska tribes have told me that the BIA 

does not provide funding to tribal courts in Public Law 280 States 

even though those tribal courts clearly play an important role. 

Is this the case? And if so, what is the justification for not providing funding for one and funding for another? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Murkowski, the Public Law 280 goes 

back to the termination era in the 1950s, 1953. And as a result of 

that, the Federal Government backed away from providing these 

kinds of services in Public Law 280 States. I think there is a trend 

that is changing that. 

I notice the provisions in the Tribal Law and Order Act call for 

the United States on I would call it maybe a pilot program basis, 

to reenter responsibility in those Public Law 280 States and I think 

that there is an opportunity perhaps for the United States to start 

providing more funds back into communities. I am hoping that that 

is the direction that the budget will be going, paying more attention to law enforcement and judicial services in Public Law 280 jurisdiction. But you are correct, it has not been the way that the 

budget has been allocated in the past. Those States have been left 

out. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. So it is not a situation, then, of not being 

able to do it. It is just that historically we haven’t seen that play 

out that way. But it sounds, based on your comments, that you 

don’t see a reason that it could not change so that in the future 

those Public Law 280 States could take advantage of that funding. 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Murkowski, like I said, I think it is the 

trend, and personally it is the direction that I would like to go. But 

without additional resources, what we would be doing if we provide 

service in Public Law 280 States is taking away from those tribes 

that are presently receiving funds. 

And so it is a delicate matter, but I certainly think that that is 

the direction we are going in is for the United States maybe to reassume responsibility in Public Law 280 jurisdictions. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I have one more question, if I may, Mr. 

Chairman, and this relates to the 477 programs. I understand that 

DOI and HHS were in Alaska and in Washington State last week 

for consultations regarding some changes, and some changes that 

we think would be pretty major. 

Eleven of the 12 regional tribes in Alaska, or excuse me, of the 

regional nonprofits run the 477 programs and there is some real 

concern that these proposed changes might undermine the progress 

that the tribal consortium within the State have been made as it 

puts people to work and really has been very helpful to them. 

Can you tell me where these changes originated? How your Department justifies moving forward with some of these changes? The 

folks in Alaska, many of them have come to me and said, look, this 

27

is something that has worked successfully for a long period of time. 

Why now? Why are we seeing this? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Murkowski, I think I am supposed to 

know everything about everything, but I don’t have the detailed information on this. Jodi Gillette from our Indian Affairs in Interior 

recently attended a consultation on this, and I think rather than 

try to guess about this, I ought to just get back to you in writing 

to give you details about what we are learning from this. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. You can do that, or if Jodi can contact us 

with an update, I would appreciate knowing a little bit more. But 

I would also appreciate your response in writing just in terms of 

what you feel the justification of these changes are. 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Okay. I will do that, Senator. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Echo 

Hawk. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. 

Senator Franken? 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Echo Hawk, we have discussed school construction several 

times before, and as we have discussed previously, many schools 

are on the waiting list that are in dire need of repair. For example, 

the Bug-O–Nay-Ge-Shig High School on the Leech Lake Reservation is literally falling apart, as I mentioned in my opening statement. 

Can you explain why the administration has proposed decreasing 

funding for school construction and repairs when there is at least 

a $1.3 billion backlog of school construction and repair needs? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Franken, that is a very good question. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you. 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Going back to 2001, I think at that time we 

had 120 schools that were in poor condition. We appreciate the 

funding that has been channeled into this area because that has 

been now reduced to 64 schools that are considered in poor condition. And we especially appreciated the infusion of about $284 million that came in through the ARRA funding, which allowed us to 

construct some new schools. 

But the reality in this 2012 budget is it is about belt-tightening, 

and with the limited funds that we had available, we have made 

the strategic decision not to build new schools because new schools 

cost between $20 million and $60 million. I am just reminded of 

the two schools that were built at Navajo. I went to cone of them 

for the groundbreaking, Rough Rock, and there is one at Kaibeto. 

Between those two schools, that was $95 million. 

And I am, of course, very happy. A lot of people rejoice when we 

are able to build a new school that is desperately needed, but with 

limited funds, our strategic decision is to try to have an impact on 

a broad basis. So the money that we have available that we could 

have used it to build one or two schools, our judgment in these 

tight budget times is to spread that out and try to impact as many 

students as we can through improvement of the schools that are 

existing. It is not to replace the school, but to renovate it and to 

repair it. 

28

Senator FRANKEN. I understand. I think in the long run that repairing schools that are in incredibly awful condition may be less 

cost-effective than building new schools. 

But speaking of building new things, we have talked before about 

the beautiful juvenile detention facility at the Red Lake Reservation that has stood empty. So here is something that was built and 

it is a beautiful structure and it has been unused for the past seven 

years because BIA won’t provide funding for staffing the place. 

And as you know, the lawsuit over this was settled last year, but 

the building remains empty for lack of permanent program funding. Now, for nearly two weeks, my staff has been trying to get 

hold of your criteria for funding operations at detention centers 

under your corrections/detention programs. Yet, we still haven’t 

gotten an answer from your agency. 

So I will take this opportunity to ask directly. Can you tell me 

the criteria for the corrections/detention programs? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Franken, I am sorry that we haven’t 

been forthcoming with a timely response according to your comment, but I assure you that we will respond immediately to that 

information. I don’t have it to give to you today, but we will respond very soon. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay, thank you. I appreciate that. You can’t 

know everything about everything. Thank you for agreeing to have 

your staff get back to me. 

Let me go to Dr. Roubideaux. Thank you for being here. Thank 

you both for your service. 

Senator Murkowski and I in a hearing on this were very adamant about dental therapists. They work very well in Alaska, and 

one problem we have encountered in Minnesota is the lack of dentists available to serve on tribal lands. And access to dental care 

has been such a problem that in our State we passed legislation 

allowing mid-level dental providers to practice. 

Given the success of dental therapists in Alaska and the actual 

failure to recruit enough dentists in Indian Country, shouldn’t 

funding be available for mid-level providers so that we can increase 

access to quality dental care? 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Certainly in Alaska, they have shown it is a 

very valuable health care provider to add to the team to provide 

important services. What we are doing is reviewing the new provisions in the Indian Health Care Improvement Act and we are also 

reviewing the Kellogg Report, which talked about the evaluation of 

the dental health aide therapists. And staff are going to be making 

some recommendations to me soon, and then we will determine 

next steps. 

Senator FRANKEN. Well, can you get back to us as soon as you 

have those conclusions? Because in the hearing we had, it became 

very clear that we aren’t providing enough dentists and that the 

program in Alaska has worked wonderfully because during that 

testimony we heard that in certain tribal villages in Alaska, they 

would basically see a dentist only once a year who would fly in. 

And now they have dental therapists who are there all year and 

can talk to the kids about the importance of brushing and it reduced the cavities and reduced the damage to their dental health 

tremendously. 

29

And it seemed from that hearing that we were pretty clear that 

we came to the conclusion that we weren’t getting the dentists and 

that dental therapy has been tremendously successful in Alaska, 

and I suggest it will be tremendously successful in the rest of Indian Country. So I thank you for that. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Franken. 

Let me call on Senator Udall. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Sorry to 

be visiting with staff so that you didn’t see me there. 

Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk, it is my understanding that the President’s budget includes a decrease of $9 million in funding for 

the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and that it is justified by the 

creation of a team to determine the long-term plan for that project. 

Has such a team been formed yet? Has the Navajo Nation been 

consulted in this process? What reaction to the cut in funding and 

justification have you received from the Navajo Nation? And what 

is your sense of where we are headed on this project? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Udall, with your permission, I would 

like to ask our BIA Director to respond to your question. 

Senator UDALL. Sure, that would be great. 

Mr. Black, go ahead. 

Mr. BLACK. Thank you, Senator. 

Yes, in fiscal year 2010 at the tribe’s request, there was a team 

developed. 

Senator UDALL. At the Navajo Nation’s request? 

Mr. BLACK. Yes, at the Navajo Nation’s request the Assistant 

Secretary formed a team. The Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Del Laverdure, is part of the team. And as well, we will be 

convening that team here shortly, hopefully with the Nation. And 

again on I believe it is March 25th, I will be meeting with the Nation personally to discuss some of the alternatives regarding the 

overall total completion of NIIP, the cost-benefits of a full build-out 

of NIIP, and alternatives to a build-out of NIIP. 

I have received the agenda from the Nation on that meeting, so 

those discussions will be ongoing here shortly. 

Senator UDALL. And your understanding is the Nation has 

agreed to all of this? 

Mr. BLACK. No. 

Senator UDALL. Yes, they haven’t. 

Mr. BLACK. I don’t believe so. No, sir. 

Senator UDALL. Okay. Did they even agree to the formation of 

the team with the discussion of the idea that there may not be a 

full build-out of NIIP? 

Mr. BLACK. We have not even had the opportunity to sit down 

with the Nation and talk about the budget reduction and the options and the alternatives. 

Senator UDALL. Okay. Well, we want to stay on top with you in 

terms of what the Nation wants. My understanding they have been 

over the years very frustrated with the funding and the development of NIIP and the failure to build-out. So I hope you will keep 

30

us apprised as we move along and of those meetings that are going 

on out there. Thank you. 

Mr. BLACK. Yes, sir. I would be glad to do that. 

Senator UDALL. Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk, could you address the President’s cut in funding for the construction of schools? 

I know that Senator Franken asked you about this and you may 

have already answered. It seems to me that, and one of the tribal 

officials, Governor Dasheno is sitting almost exactly behind you or 

right back there in the back, and Santa Clara School is one of the 

64 schools that is in the list that is not getting attention right now. 

And I am just wondering what is the criteria? Why not that school 

as opposed to another school? What is going to happen to those 

schools waiting for a new school to be built? That kind of situation. 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Udall, I won’t repeat the comments 

that I have already made about school construction and the 

progress that we have made and the fact that we are all in a belttightening mode right now. But the good news is that we have been 

involved in a negotiated rulemaking progress that is focused directly on cataloguing all school facilities and reporting about the 

need for school replacement and construction, and also reporting on 

major and minor renovation needs, and also formulas for equitable 

distribution. 

And what will be arrived at eventually is a priority list that will 

guide us in how we distribute funding for repair, renovation and 

new schools. We will be going through consultation. There have already been five meetings that have been held. There will be another couple of them coming up and then we will be doing additional consultation on this. 

So I think in the long term, there is a plan to identify which 

schools need to be replaced, which ones need to be repaired and 

renovated, and then we all need to start praying that we are going 

to have the resources to actually execute the plan. 

Senator UDALL. I will be in with you on that prayer, and I hope 

you also have an opportunity to visit with Governor Dasheno before 

you leave about where Santa Clara is on that. 

Just one final question, Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk. It is my 

understanding that in the last six or seven years, the BIA and the 

DOI Inspector General have done reports on tribal detention facilities, both of which had alarming findings. The 2004 Inspector General’s report found that, and I am quoting from it, ‘‘BIA has failed 

to provide safe and secure detention facilities throughout Indian 

Country. Our assessment revealed a long history of neglect and apathy on the part of BIA officials, which has resulted in serious safety, security and maintenance deficiencies at the majority of the facilities.’’ 

Can you speak on the $46.5 million in reduction in tribal jail construction in the President’s budget? And how you are trying to 

move forward on these Inspector General reports, which I know 

that you are very interested in the law enforcement side of this? 

Mr. ECHO HAWK. Senator Udall, I think we are all aware of the 

significant infusion of funding that has gone into law enforcement 

in Indian Country in recent years and this budget continues to establish that as a priority. Most of that money to this point has gone 

into police services. Hiring additional law enforcement officers is 

31

not just putting more police on the ground to make arrests. They 

have to be processed through the courts, and thus we have requested an increase for tribal courts this year, and also they have 

to be housed once they are sentenced to some detention facility. 

And so the Tribal Law and Order Act addresses that. We have 

some responsibilities working with the Department of Justice to 

come up with long-term plans for detention facilities, so there is an 

orderly process that is beginning to work forward as a result of 

that enactment by the Congress. 

With regard to the $46.5 million reduction, we had to make 

tough choices and we know that the Department of Justice has 

similar program money available, so it is not like there is nothing 

out there that can meet these needs. They are the primary department that provides funding for detention facilities. The main responsibility that we have is the operation and maintenance. 

So yes, there is a reduction there, but that is a strategic reduction that we had to make in order to free up money to meet other 

tribal priorities. The $89.6 million I think tribes are very happy 

about that go basically into their tribal priority allocations. We 

have to make some sacrifices, so that was a strategic call that we 

made in this budget. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you for that answer. I very much appreciate all the testimony from this panel today. I haven’t been able 

to get through all my questions, so I will submit some of them for 

the record. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Udall. 

I want to thank this panel very much for your responses. I look 

forward to continuing to work with you and to try to help the indigenous people of our Country as much as we can. We want to do 

that as rapidly as possible. I thank you so much for your responses 

and also want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for all 

of their work in preparing for these hearings and doing the work 

of the Indian Affairs Committee. 

So thank you very much and we will certainly see you again. 

Dr. ROUBIDEAUX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to welcome our second panel to the 

witness table. 

The Honorable Ron Allen, who is the Treasurer of the National 

Congress of American Indians in Washington, D.C., and the Chairman of the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe of Sequim, Washington. 

We also have with us Mary Jane Oatman-Wak Wak. She serves 

as the President of the National Indian Education Association here 

in Washington, D.C. 

Also joining us is the Honorable Earl Barbry, Sr., from the 

United South and Eastern Tribes in Nashville, Tennessee. He also 

serves as Chairman of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana in 

Marksville, Louisiana. 

Finally, we have the Honorable James Steele, Jr., who is the 

First Vice President of Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, located in Portland, Oregon, and also a Council Member in the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of Pablo, Montana. 

Mr. Allen, will you please begin with your statement. 

32

* The information referred to has been retained in Committee files and can be found at http:/

/www.ncai.org/fileadmin/ncailevents/2010soin/NCAIlFY2011lBudgetlRequest.pdf. 

STATEMENT OF HON. W. RON ALLEN, TREASURER, NATIONAL 

CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS; CHAIRMAN, JAMESTOWN 

S’KLALLAM TRIBE 

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Chairman Akaka. 

As you stated, my name is Ron Allen. I am Chairman for the 

Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe located in western Washington State 

and Treasurer for NCAI. It is always an honor to come before the 

Committee and we join the chorus of congratulations in your new 

Chairmanship and we look forward to working with you and the 

Committee on the myriad of issues that face our native communities throughout America. 

We know you are well aware of those challenges and inclusive of 

that we are highly anticipating the passage of the Native Hawaiian 

bill that you came close to last session and hope that that will happen this session. 

On behalf of President Jefferson Keel, NCAI, and our Executive 

Board, we have submitted to you our testimony. And we thank you 

for accepting the testimony and putting it in the record. We would 

also like to ask that our book that we put out every year called ‘‘Indian Country Budget Request,’’ * that NCAI coordinates with the 

other national Indian organizations, including NIEA and so forth, 

that that would also be submitted for the record. 

Without a doubt, when Indian Country comes to Congress and 

makes requests with regard to our respective community needs, the 

needs are great. And so often over the past years, we are used to 

focusing on the BIA and IHS. Well, that is just simply not the case 

anymore. 

HUD has a role. EPA has a role. Energy has a role. Transportation has a role. Agriculture has a role and so forth, even to the 

Department of Defense with regard to the interests of Indian Country. 

We are very delighted that Congress passed a couple of major 

bills last session, the Affordable Health Care Act which included 

the reauthorization of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act 

which you have so noted already in the previous panel. That was 

a big deal to us. The Law and Order Act is a big deal to us in 

terms of the authority of the tribes, our ability to take care of our 

own people, and care for the safety, the public safety of our people. 

There are a lot of issues that are important to us, but nothing 

is more important than the exercise of our sovereignty, the exercise 

of our governmental authority in our jurisdiction to care for the future of our people, their current condition, as well as the future. 

And the issue for us is not just that the legislation is meaningful, 

but also how you appropriate the resources in order to implement 

the commitment in the laws. The laws are meaningful, but unless 

they can act to make a difference within our communities, they are 

rhetoric. And so these budget requests that we have put out are 

important to us to make a difference. 

We want to express our appreciation to the Administration that 

they have fought hard for our Indian budget. You have heard from 

IHS that they have a very substantial increase of $458 or so milVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
33

lion increase into their $4.6 billion budget. It sounds impressive, 

but when you measure that against the conditions of our Indian 

citizens across America, we have a long way to go. And we know 

you have heard countless testimony about what those needs are. 

Now, the IHCIA improves that situation for us, and what is the 

IHS’s role with CMS and with regard to implementation of the 

Health Care Improvement Act, so that we can reach out to the 

other 60-plus percent of our Indian citizens across America that are 

not served by the antiquated IHS system that serves only in the 

service area and not outside the service area. So those are going 

to be big issues for us. 

We want to note to you that the Department of Interior and the 

BIA have made a major step in moving our agenda forward in 

terms of implementing the trust obligation. One of their fundamental goals is the empowerment of tribal government. 

So the BIA budget needs to reflect that commitment. And if you 

look to the Department of Interior over the past number of years, 

you see the substantial increases for parks and reclamation and 

minerals and fish and wildlife. At the bottom of the pecking order 

of the priority for the budget system is the BIA budget. Over the 

years, we have the lowest growth of any agency of the Department 

of Interior. 

So the budget doesn’t reflect the goal. It doesn’t reflect that kind 

of a commitment; 565 Indian Nations, from the largest tribe of 

Navajo Nation to the smallest tribe, that has a myriad of issues. 

And the budget needs to reflect our ability to become self-reliant. 

So if we can’t become self-reliant, if you are not empowering the 

tribal governmental infrastructure, the legal infrastructure, the 

physical infrastructure, if you don’t empower us to be able to create 

jobs and create businesses, to create revenues outside of the Federal Government, then we will never be able to accomplish our 

goals. 

The treaties and the trust obligation have many commitments to 

Indian Country, but quite frankly, we know you can’t get there. So 

help us get there together. And these budgets with regard to loan 

guarantee programs, surety bonding guarantee programs, things 

that will empower our governments and our businesses so we can 

make meaningful progress to this agenda. 

I will close since I see my time is up. It is always difficult to try 

to capture the complex issues. Our testimony and our budget request I think capture those important issues that are in here. We 

can certainly get into details with you. I am looking forward to 

working with you and answering any questions we might. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Allen follows:]

34

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. W. RON ALLEN, TREASURER, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF

AMERICAN INDIANS; CHAIRMAN, JAMESTOWN S’KLALLAM TRIBE


315a1.eps
35


315a2.eps
36


315a3.eps
37


315a4.eps
38


315a5.eps
39


315a6.eps
40


315a7.eps
41

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Allen. 

Now, we will receive the statement of Mary Jane Oatman-Wak 

Wak. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF MARY JANE OATMAN–WAK WAK,PRESIDENT, 

NATIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 

Ms. OATMAN-WAK WAK. Thank you, Chairman Akaka. [greeting 

in native tongue]. 

Thank you to the Creator for gathering us all here today. Thank 

you to the Committee for inviting the National Indian Education 

Association to participate in this hearing. 

NIEA has been tirelessly dedicated to promoting native education issues and embracing every opportunity to advocate for the 


315a8.eps
42

unique education and culturally related needs of all of our native 

students. 

In February, I had the opportunity to provide the State of Native 

Education Address, and through this address, we focused on the 

trust responsibility, its breach, the resulting poverty in Indian communities of the results of that breach, and shared with Indian 

Country our vision, as well as mechanisms, for restoring that trust 

through education through collaborative efforts and partnership 

with the tribes, Federal agencies, and State governments. 

A part of that restoration and the reason that we address you 

today is to address the Federal budget, which is most likely the 

most tangible manner in which we can address the restoration of 

that trust responsibility and the breach of that trust. 

Because it all begins and ends with culture. Culture is our identity as native peoples, our languages, our traditions. If our schooling for our native students does not reinforce culture within the 

classrooms, our students tend to become disengaged within that 

school and within their community. 

I say this without diminishing any other aspect of the education 

process because NIEA embraces a 200 percent education philosophy; 100 percent of their traditional cultures and values merged 

with 100 percent high-quality content academia. So we see the 

emergence of those being how our native students are going to 

thrive and succeed in the 21st century. 

Our statistics are also very harsh. Ironically, native education 

has well-documented statistics that paint a bleak picture of native 

student outcomes. Yet at the same time, we have inadequate research to focus on promising practices and models that can work 

on that transformation and turnaround throughout Indian Country. 

Among the most telling statistics in the Nation is the graduation 

rate for American Indian high school students, which was 50 percent in 2005–2006, compared to 69.2 percent overall and 76.1 percent for white students. 

Addressing the dropout issue, we feel we cannot be realistic without examining some of the other issues around adequate yearly 

progress and high school completion. We also have to look at the 

racial discrimination in the school environment that many of our 

native students are being situated and that lead to some of the concerns addressed earlier with detention facilities, and many of our 

native-serving schools being that school-to-prison pipeline. 

We also understand that addressing native education in the time 

of tight budgets causes us to have to make those difficult decisions 

in this critical funding area for Indian education. What we ask and 

what we continue to advocate for in these tight times is to hold native education harmless. We also understand the situation that you 

are all up against, and are looking at areas where there might be 

duplication or replication of services. 

We have also taken time to do that throughout Indian Country. 

And so the proposals that I bring before you today have been examined through that lens of the tight budget considerations, as well 

as the perception or any reality of duplication or replication of Indian-serving programs. 

43

Because it has been the mark of the history of this Country to 

have some very anti-Indian policies that kind of led us to the situation where we are with our bleak statistics, we embrace the No 

Child Left Behind Title 7 policy which has been a more humane 

policy for Indian Country to address the unique educational and 

culturally related needs of native students. 

The National Indian Education Association urges Congress to 

fulfill the promises made within No Child Left Behind Act and 

stand strong for native youth in the 2012 budget. If the Federal 

Government should cut its investment in Indian education initiatives, not only will this be a violation of that trust responsibility, 

but it will also be setting Indian education back for generations 

with an untold loss among our native youth. 

When you weigh the budget issues against the needs of native 

education, even President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget is insufficient to bring about the transformational change that we need for 

native education. We ask that the Committee make every effort to 

seek increases in this budget, even as we understand the work that 

you must succeed at the end of the day in the budget cuts. 

In that context, it is all the more important to marry the budget 

to the smart policies that multiply the value of every dollar and to 

promote an emphasis on the culture and language instruction and 

increase in local and tribal control over education as we look to 

steward our greatest natural resource in our Indian Country, our 

children. And promote an emphasis on increasing effective collaborations and partnerships among tribes, education organizations, 

governmental agencies, and State education agencies in order to accomplish what is best for our children. 

Because the budget is made up of very specific programs, NIEA 

believes that the recommendations that we will focus with you on 

today are in regards to Title 7, education facilities construction, 

tribal grant support costs, addressing concerns within the BIE 

budget, as well as some no-cost proposals or initiatives that will 

yield huge improvements throughout native education. And before 

I close, we will also address some concerns with the Continuing 

Resolution as well. 

A growing body of research through the Kamehameha Schools 

and studies that have been done on culturally based education in 

Hawaii are showing resounding results that the well being, selfworth, resiliency and identity of native students correlates to an increase in academic achievement and school success. We urge that 

Title 7 national activities research dollars have a heavy emphasis 

and focus on the correlation between culturally based education 

programs and the classroom, and that success in core content areas 

within the academic components. 

We also urge your support, and not just level funding, but increased funding within those Title 7 programs so that we can address the unique cultural and academic needs within the classroom, as well as the research that is needed to show that those programs work. 

Unfortunately, Indian education has been studied to death with 

a deficit model, and we know that there are successful programs 

that are out there working in our Indian Country and we urge supVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
44

port so that we can undertake those kind of studies with a large 

end-size so that we can say this is what works for Indian Country. 

Education construction is a huge concern for the National Indian 

Education Association. This assures an adequate facility to learn. 

Safe and secure schools are a huge concern, but we also realize 

that most of our schools that are serving native students within the 

BIE school system have severe concerns. Of the 4,495 education 

buildings in the BIA inventory, half of them are more than 30 

years old; 20 percent are older than 50 years old. And on average, 

the BIA education buildings are 60 years old. Yet, 40 years is the 

average life for a public school condition. 

Sixty-five percent of school administrators report that the physical conditions of one or more school buildings are inadequate. We 

have seen situations where detention facilities were closed due to 

having poorer conditions than the facilities that our students are 

being forced to be educated in. 

We know that the Department of Interior in developing the 2012 

budget request was forced to make those difficult decisions. Although we understand that this is the situation, redirecting funding for replacement school construction is a concern because we realize that not only do we have the concern with the backlogs with 

the BIE school construction, but that deferring the critically needed 

build-up of the new facilities could bring higher costs in the future 

when we take into account the cost of inflation and construction 

costs in the future. 

We also want to address tribal grant support costs within the 

scope of increasing tribal control. These tribal grant support costs 

foster tribal self-determination and enable both the transfer of the 

responsibility and the means for tribal entities to run their own 

schools and control the education of our youth. 

The fiscal year 2012 budget asks for the same amount of tribal 

grant support cost funding requested in the fiscal year 2011 budget, even though there are two and perhaps as many as five more 

schools that would be sharing the slice of the pie of the $46.3 million requested. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Wak Wak, would you please summarize your 

statement? 

Ms. OATMAN-WAK WAK. In closing, I would like to bring forward 

a few of those no-cost initiatives within the bureau, within our recommendations. One of those is to require the Secretary of the Department of Education, as well as Interior, to align their agency 

budgets and policies to ensure more adequate access to general 

education opportunities, as well as perhaps a call for a new Government Accounting Office review of some of the concerns within 

the agency, not the schools themselves, but within the agency at 

the Department of Interior and some of the concerns around school 

construction funding. 

In closing, concerns around the Continuing Resolution, specifically in regards to the elimination of Perkins funding, which would 

substantially devastate two tribally operated technical colleges. 

So with that, thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Oatman-Wak Wak follows:]

45

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARY JANE OATMAN-WAK WAK, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL

INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION


315b1.eps
46


315b2.eps
47


315b3.eps
48


315b4.eps
49


315b5.eps
50


315b6.eps
51


315b7.eps
52


315b8.eps
53


315b9.eps
54


315b10.eps
55


315b11.eps
56


315b12.eps
57


315b13.eps
58


315b14.eps
59


315b15.eps
60


315b16.eps
61


315b17.eps
62


315b18.eps
63


315b19.eps
64


315b20.eps
65


315b21.eps
66


315b22.eps
67


315b23.eps
68


315b24.eps
69


315b25.eps
70


315b26.eps
71


315b27.eps
72


315b28.eps
73


315b29.eps
74


315b30.eps
75


315b31.eps
76


315b32.eps
77


315b33.eps
78


315b34.eps
79


315b35.eps
80

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your statement. 

Chairman Earl Barbry, would you please proceed with your 

statement? 


315b36.eps
81

STATEMENT OF HON. EARL J. BARBRY, SR., CHAIRMAN, 

TUNICA–BILOXI TRIBE OF LOUISIANA; CHAIRMAN, UNITED 

SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBES,INC. CARCIERI TASK FORCE 

Mr. BARBRY. Mr. Chairman, Committee Members, thank you for 

the opportunity to testify here today. I am Chairman Earl Barbry 

of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe from Louisiana. I am also Chairman of 

the United South and Eastern Tribes Carcieri Task Force. 

As you know, the President’s budget includes a legislative fix for 

the Carcieri decision and I am very pleased to testify in strong support of that provision. USET firmly believes the Supreme Court decision is a fundamental attack on tribal sovereignty. The Court’s 

decision creates two classes of federally recognized tribes that 

would be treated differently under Federal law: tribes that were 

under Federal jurisdiction in 1934 and tribes that were not. 

The decision also opens the door to confusion about the status of 

tribal lands, tribal businesses and civil and criminal jurisdictional 

issues. 

Mr. Chairman, my written testimony provides a number of technical points about why the President’s proposal is needed. Today, 

I will share some personal thoughts from Tunica’s perspective. 

At the time of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Tunica-Biloxi 

owned tens of thousands of acres of land in Louisiana. Through 

fraud, deceit, encroachment and cold-blooded murder, and that is 

what I said, cold-blooded murder, our landholdings dwindled to a 

fraction of that amount. 

In 1826, the Federal Land Commissioner said that we were savages unable to manage our own land and stripped of a Tunica settlement that included thousands of acres. 

In the 1840s, a local landowner who regularly encroached onto 

the land shot and killed Chief Melancon, who confronted the landowner and protested his encroachments. Mr. Chairman, sadly, the 

Chief lost his life because he was doing something that the Federal 

Government failed to do, and that is to provide protection for our 

lands and the rights of the Tunica people. 

By the time the local courts considered this incident, Tunica 

landholdings had been reduced to 134 acres. That individual got 

away with cold-blooded murder and our land, and that was wrong. 

This is the amount of Tunica landholdings when we were federally recognized in 1980. Since that time, through trust application 

acquisitions, we have been able to ensure a land-base for current 

tribal members and for future generations. So to me, the Carcieri

fix is about Tunica survival. 

Mr. Chairman, the Carcieri fix proposed here does nothing more 

than restore the understanding of the IRA held by the Department 

of Interior and tribes around the Country for 75 years before the 

Carcieri decision. However, Congress’ failure to act may have dire 

consequences. For example, it creates a significant threat to public 

safety. The decision complicates Federal prosecution of crimes committed in Indian Country, as well as civil jurisdiction over much of 

Indian Country. 

Again, I must emphasize the role of IRA in protecting tribal 

homelands and promoting tribal self-determination. Under IRA, 

tribes have been able to rebuild the land bases that are the very 

foundation of tribal governance. Tribal trust acquisitions have 

82

helped protect traditional practices and have also helped spur tribal economic development. This has created much-needed financial 

resources, including jobs for tribal communities and surrounding 

non-Indian communities. 

I urge the Committee to quickly move the proposed IRA amendments through the Senate. 

Likewise, USET urges the Committee to support funding increases substantially above the inflation rate in several key areas. 

First, tribal priority allocation or TPA is the principal source of 

funds for many tribal governments and is used across many areas 

of need. Past reports indicate that the TPA falls well short of identified need. We ask that funding for the Eastern Region tribes’ TPA 

increase by at least $9.4 million. 

Tribal courts are another area of concern. In the Eastern Region, 

only 46 percent of those tribes receive BIA funding for the operation of their tribal courts. Without tribal courts, tribes are often 

unable to provide for the protection and well being of tribal members. Many programs, including Indian child welfare, adult protection and child support enforcement require tribes to have established judicial systems before taking on these programs. 

Finally, contract support costs are a key area for this Committee 

to consider. When contract support costs are not fully funded, 

tribes must use limited direct program service dollars or tribal resources to cover shortfalls, thus forcing tribes to cut or under-fund 

other important programs. The President’s proposed increase 

brings BIA to 94 percent of fully meeting the obligation. 

Other bureaus within the Department of Interior, as with other 

Federal agencies, have achieved their obligations, paying 100 percent of contract support to their non-native contractors. This discrepancy cannot continue. I might add, it also is discriminatory. 

Again, thank you to this Committee for giving me the opportunity to testify here today. I would be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Barbry follows:]

83

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. EARL J. BARBRY, SR., CHAIRMAN, TUNICA-BILOXI

TRIBE OF LOUISIANA; CHAIRMAN, UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBES, INC. 

CARCIERI TASK FORCE


315c1.eps
84


315c2.eps
85


315c3.eps
86


315c4.eps
87


315c5.eps
88


315c6.eps
89


315c7.eps
90


315c8.eps
91


315c9.eps
92


315c10.eps
93

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Barbry. 

Now, I will call on Mr. Steele for your statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES STEELE, JR., FIRST VICE–

PRESIDENT, AFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS; 

COUNCIL MEMBER, CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI 

TRIBES 

Mr. STEELE. [greeting in native language]. Good morning, Chairman and Committee Members. I especially want to congratulate 

Senator Akaka on his new Chairmanship of the Committee. 

Also, I would like to thank Senator Tester for the warm greeting 

and welcome earlier. I very much appreciate it and appreciate his 

work on behalf of us in Montana and Indian Country. 

My name is James Steele, Jr. I am the First Vice President of 

Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, and I am also Council Member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. 

ATNI appreciates the opportunity to testify on the President’s 

2012 budget affecting Indian tribes in the Northwest. As of course 

many of you may know or many may not that the tribes in Montana, Wyoming, Oregon, Idaho, the Northwest are a diverse bunch, 

a diverse group of tribes that rely on a variety of natural resources 

from timber, agriculture. Some of our tribes are involved in mining, 

hydroelectric projects and such. 

A variety of our tribes have their founding relationships with the 

United States Government based on treaties, and it is from that responsibility of the United States Government that we in the Northwest believe that our relationships starts with the Federal Government. 

I want to mention a little bit about the Honorable Congressman 

Mike Simpson from Idaho, the Chairman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee in which he committed to try and protect BIA and IHS funding. And he indicated the desire to, ‘‘hold 

programs within the Bureau of Indian Affairs and IHS harmless.’’ 

He wrote that the Federal Government has the responsibility to 

help tribes meet needs and solve problems in Indian Country. We 

hope his views are shared by others. 

Due to the diversity of our economies in the Northwest, it is difficult to suggest what top priorities within the Federal budget 

might be as well varied from tribe to tribe. The responsibilities and 


315c11.eps
94

the priorities are different from tribe to tribe. And to determine 

what should be cut is difficult. 

I will say one thing about the Federal budget that is going 

through Congress right now. The talk of shutdowns and radical 

budget cuts scares our people. Due to the tremendous influence of 

the Federal Government that it has on our Indian reservations and 

the people of our Indian Reservations, a shutdown would hit us 

harder than any other segment of the American population. 

Our BIA-funded schools, our IHS-funded clinics would apparently 

close down very quickly. It really is a large concern and I hope 

Congress, particularly your colleagues in the House, really consider 

the consequences of their action. 

Mr. Chairman, we understand about budget deficits and the need 

to reduce them, and I believe the Indian people would be willing 

to contribute their fair share of reductions needed. But first, we 

need to get to the point where we have something even resembling 

parity with the rest of the population. 

No more clear example of this can be found in what the Federal 

Government spends on health care for various Federal beneficiaries. The Indian Health Service spends $1,900 per tribal member. The Federal Government spends $3,700 on Federal employees 

for health care, $3,800 for Federal prisoners for health care, and 

almost $6,000 for veterans for health care. 

Are we really worth half of a Federal prisoner and a third of a 

veteran, even when so many of our tribal people have bravely 

fought for this Country? What other explanation is there. 

There are similar comparative figures relative to law enforcement and natural resource management. Please point these horrible disparities out to your colleagues on the Budget and Appropriations Committees and ask them if they can be cutting these 

funds for our people. 

One of the things I want to just real quickly mention off of my 

prepared statement here is that one thing we really need in Indian 

Country in terms of self-determination and self-governance is that 

we need regional offices and directors of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to come alongside and help the tribes. Recently, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes converted more than 37,000 feeacres to trust, more than any region in the Country in a Bureau 

of Indian Affairs region. 

How was that accomplished? One, we had a Regional Director 

named Stan Speaks that came along with tribes and helped us get 

it accomplished. Two, we compacted and ran our own tribal plan. 

And with that, you have to have a partnership between the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs and the tribe to get things done. 

Many times in many regions, the tribe wants to do something, 

but the Bureau of Indian Affairs does not want them to do it. Our 

tribe is an example. We were in the Billings area region. We were 

a self-governance tribe. The Billings area didn’t want to help us in 

the 1980s. We moved to the Northwest region because the Northwest region was willing to help our tribe be self-sufficient and selfdetermining. 

Mr. Chairman, we had a good example this morning from Senator Tester’s questions to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. That is an 

example of what tribes go through every day when we ask the BuVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
95

reau of Indian Affairs for a straight question. You can’t get it. And 

with all due respect to Mr. Echo Hawk and Dr. Roubideaux, they 

are trying very hard, but you have an entrenched anti-progressiveness in the Bureau of Indian Affairs that doesn’t want Indians to 

prosper and be successful. Some regions, yes; in a lot of regions, no. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Steele follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES STEELE, JR., FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT,

AFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS; COUNCIL MEMBER, CONFEDERATED

SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES


315d1.eps
96


315d2.eps
97


315d3.eps
98


315d4.eps
99


315d5.eps
100


315d6.eps
101


315d7.eps
102


315d8.eps
103


315d9.eps
104

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Steele, for your statement. 

Mr. Allen and Mr. Barbry, as you know, unfortunately we were 

unable to pass the Carcieri fix last year. My question to you is this 

fix a priority in Indian Country? 


315d10.eps
105

Mr. Allen? 

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, unequivocally yes, it is a high priority 

for the tribes. Reacquiring our homelands is a high priority for 

multiple reasons, culturally, housing, economic development and so 

forth. And Carcieri unfortunately created two sets of tribes and created a very complex process for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

To the credit of the Bureau, it is breaking through in creating 

a process for many tribes, but not all tribes. And it is simply not 

providing a fair process for all tribes. And a clean, simple fix to 

Carcieri is an essential priority for Indian Country. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. Barbry? 

Mr. BARBRY. Mr. Chairman, it is the top priority. I have served 

my people for 33 years this month. This is the most vicious attack 

on tribal sovereignty that I have witnessed since I have been serving. Every year, there is someone chipping away at our sovereignty, 

but this is the worst attack I have ever witnessed. 

And it seems like it would be a fairly simple fix. Why create two 

classes of federally recognized tribes? I don’t think that question 

ever came up when the white man was taking our lands. They 

didn’t care whether we were under Federal jurisdiction or not. 

They took it anyway. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your response. 

Ms. Oatman-Wak Wak, the President’s budget includes an in- crease of $29.5 million for contract support costs for those tribes 

who choose to take over government functions for tribal programs. 

I commend the Administration for this increase because I know 

this has been a priority for tribes for many, many years. 

However, as a former educator, I notice that there is only a small 

increase proposed for tribal grant support costs for those tribes who 

take over the operation of their Bureau of Indian Education 

schools. 

My question to you, what is NIEA’s position on why there is not 

a larger increase requested for the tribal grant support costs program for tribal schools? 

Ms. OATMAN-WAK WAK. At the current spending level request, 

that is only about 65 percent of the amount required by law. NIEA, 

again, when we were picking and choosing on some of the areas 

where we were going to be really ambitious, and some of our increases are areas where we were going to look at maintaining level 

funding. 

NIEA would definitely like to see tribal grant support costs fully funded, but that would take $72.3 million to fully fund. And again, 

this is just kind of one of those areas where we felt like, not necessarily an area of sacrifice within the budget, but as we were really combing through with a fine-toothed comb, we realized that tribal grant support costs, it is an area where tribes are definitely 

stepping up to the plate and filling that void and that need within 

their own tribal budget through other means. 

But NIEA, as an organization, supports fully funding tribal grant 

support costs. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for the response. Mr. Steele, the President’s budget proposes a $5.1 million decrease in the Indian Loan Guarantee Program at the Department 

106

of Interior. Can you describe some of the projects that ATNI members have been able to fund with this program? And what impact 

will it be if this program funding is decreased? 

Mr. STEELE. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. Some of 

the programs that I am aware of I know from ATNI’s perspective 

and maybe some of the other members. I know our tribe has used 

the funding for startup of our resort-casino years ago. And so it is 

a variety of things from different tribes. Some of it is resorts. Some 

of it is small businesses, larger businesses. 

I think the impact is basic avenues of funding for tribes to do 

small business or entrepreneurial things is limited. And so anytime 

you are decreasing a pot of money, particularly loan programs, for 

the tribes, it is troubling. 

And I appreciate Senator Tester’s questions earlier because there 

is money that the tribes aren’t using and in my personal opinion 

it is the red tape to be able to use those funds that is in the way. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Let me ask Senator Udall for his questions. 

Senator Udall? 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Chairman Akaka. Thank you very 

much. 

First of all to this panel, I just want to thank you for your advocacy. I think that it has been an excellent panel. I think the more 

that we have advocacy from Indian Country like yours, the more 

we have a better chance here in Washington to do what we have 

to do to fulfill trust responsibilities. And so I would just encourage 

you to keep it up. 

I am going to submit my questions for the record because I have 

a commitment I have to go to. But I did want to just thank you 

for your excellent advocacy. 

I also want to apologize to Governor Dasheno who is here from 

New Mexico representing the Santa Clara Pueblo. 

Governor Dasheno, the most important thing for you to know 

about this hearing is that Larry Echo Hawk stayed here the whole 

time and I was going to encourage you in my questioning when you 

came forward to talk about self-governance, because I think the 

Santa Clara Pueblo has a remarkable record in terms of self-governance and how you do that under the laws that are in place right 

now. 

And so my question was going to focus on that. I know either in 

your opening statement or answering questions, you will be able to 

do that. 

And I would just tell all of you that the thing that is encouraging 

to me about the Department is having somebody like Larry Echo 

Hawk there. And when he comes to these hearings, it isn’t unusual, in fact it is almost the routine, that he stays here. He listens 

to all the panels. He keeps people here so that he can assign things 

and jump on them. 

So I once again thank you, Larry, for being here and thank you. 

I know the commitment that you have. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I very much appreciate these hearings, these oversight hearings, and for your commitment to indigenous people around the world. 

Thank you. 

107

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Udall, for your 

remarks. And I thank you for your work with the Committee. 

I want to thank this panel very much for your statements and 

your responses as well. And without question, it will help us do our 

work legislatively as well, but we have to do this together. And we 

will keep in contact with you and your staff, and continue to work 

to improve the conditions of the indigenous people of our Country. 

Thank you very much for being here. 

Now, I would like to welcome our third panel to the witness 

table. I understand you may be pressed for time. First, we will 

hear from the Honorable Michael Finley of the Confederated Tribes 

of the Colville Reservation from Washington; the Honorable John 

Blackhawk, who is Chairman of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska. 

And finally, we will hear testimony from the Honorable Walter 

Dasheno from the Pueblo of Santa Clara of New Mexico. 

I want to thank you very much for being here, and let me call 

on Mr. Finley to proceed with your statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL O. FINLEY, CHAIRMAN, 

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION 

Mr. FINLEY. [greeting in native language] Thank you, Chairman 

Akaka, for calling this hearing today and allowing me the opportunity to provide testimony. I did submit mine in writing and I will 

highlight a few of those areas right now. 

The Colville Confederated Tribes which I am Chairman of is located in northeast Washington State, at the size of about 1.4 million acres. On a side note, let me back up. I also serve as Chairman 

to the Intertribal Monitoring Association on Indian trust funds. It 

is a consortium of 65 tribes based out of Albuquerque, but I am testifying on behalf of Colville today. 

The Colville Reservation is in northeast Washington State, the 

size of about 1.4 million acres. We are a timber resource tribe. We 

are rich in natural resources, and so obviously a lot of the things 

that we look to do are economic endeavors include things that we 

can use in our natural resources. 

Having said that, we have had difficulty converting some of our 

lands into trust under the 151 fee-to-trust regs. And thankfully, 

with the new Administration, we have been able to work through 

some of those problem areas on the components of the 151 regulations. 

And so when the President’s budget was unveiled, we were saddened to see that $7.5 million that was used to address the cadastral surveys and the fee-to-trust process was cut from the budget 

entirely in the process of pushing that responsibility down to 

tribes. In many of our fee-to-trust applications, that was one of the 

things that was holding up a lot of our applications on the fee-totrust. And many of those areas are the same areas where we do 

our timber resources management activities and the process for 

economic development, as well as the ag leases, to name a few. 

We are also looking at energy economic development opportunities in the way of wind farms, as well as our biomass demonstration project. 

So I will just state that if this is cut from the budget, it will severely curtail all fee-to-trust applications across the Country, not 

108

just at Colville. So that in itself I think is something that I hope 

is reconsidered as this process moves forward because it is going 

to continue to stifle economic development for larger land-based 

tribes who have fee-to-trust applications. We are also concerned about the $2.1 million that is cut from the 

attorneys fees in the litigation program. The $2.1 million isn’t a 

whole lot, but for us at Colville, it has helped us out with our Teck 

Cominco litigation. The largest lead, zinc and copper smelter in the 

world is located just north of the 49th parallel in Canada, who for 

100 years have been dumping contamination into the Columbia 

River, which in the process floats down the river down to the 

Colville Reservation and further downstream. 

The Colville Tribes have been actively pursuing a cleanup of that 

area and we have actually sued Teck Cominco in court to get them 

to be accountable to the contamination that they have put into the 

river over the years. And it has been in large part the Colville 

Tribe has been doing this on our own with a little bit of help from 

Washington State. Although we have asked the Federal Government for assistance, we are yet to see that in the way of litigation 

support from DOJ or any other entity under the Federal Government. 

Lake Roosevelt has stated that this same contamination is being 

dumped into this area that borders our reservation. We currently 

patrol about 161 miles of riverfront property that bounds our reservation. And right now, we receive about $560,000 to do that that 

we split with the Spokane Tribe. Together, we manage and we patrol about 45 percent of the shoreline of Lake Roosevelt. 

But in stark contrast, you have National Park Service who is 

also charged to do the very same thing that within the President’s 

budget, they have an allocation of $5.83 million to carry out some 

of the same activities. 

However, I would argue that the Colville Tribes, as well as the 

Spokane Tribe, do the lion’s share of the patrol at Lake Roosevelt. 

We are the only entity that responds to calls after dark. We get 

over 1.5 million visitors to Lake Roosevelt annually, and obviously 

their well being and their safety are of utmost importance to us because they are visiting our homelands and that is a responsibility 

we take very seriously. 

The increases that we have seen within the BIA law enforcement 

is welcoming. We are happy to see increases. However, I have difficulty seeing where a lot of that money is hitting the ground. I 

have talked to many other tribes, other Chairmen, and they are expressing some of the same concerns. With the huge increase of over 

$58 million over the last budget cycle, I thought we would have 

seen a larger increase. At Colville, unfortunately, we have only 

seen $22,000. On that list, there are about 17 other tribes who 

have increases that are listed as low crime and no staffing and 

need, they received about $20,000, and there is even one that received over $100,000. 

As I state, we are Colville, we usually have one or two officers 

on a land-base of 1.5 million. And as I reminded Vice President 

Biden, that our reservation is bigger than his State of Delaware. 

You know that is a large task for our law enforcement to take on. 

And with limited resources, as it stands, the tribe supplements 

109

that to a tune of about $1 million a year and sometimes it is more 

than that based on need. 

And I would also like to point out that we have a lot of problems 

with smuggling on Lake Roosevelt as well. That is a difficulty that 

our natural resources officers face on a yearly basis, trying to get 

a better handle on that because of the ruralness of the Colville Reservation. It is a hot spot for planes coming in and out of British 

Columbia. 

And we also have marijuana groves that we have had several 

busts over the last three or four years. A lot of those have ties to 

the Mexican cartels which, again, are finding our reservation in a 

rural area an ideal place to carry out these activities. Again, we try 

to combat this with limited resources. 

Lastly, I would like to talk about the Indian Land Consolidation Program and $1.9 billion that is slated to be allocated through that 

program through the Claims Resolution Act. And I would like to 

share the sentiment of my colleague, Jim Steele. I found it almost 

ironic witnessing the field of questions that Senator Tester was 

asking relative to the progress that is being made and the direction 

it is going in, whether or not there is a plan in place and whether 

or not the Colville Tribes, as well as the ATNI Tribes and the 

NCAI Tribes passed resolutions as this legislation was moving 

through Congress asking for certain things to be included in the 

settlement before it was given final consideration. 

And unfortunately, many of those terms that were proposed on 

the House side by Doc Hastings, on the Senate side by Senator 

Barrasso, went largely ignored. And the tribes echoed those same 

concerns and wanted some of the same terms in there. 

So I found it ironic now that the tribes voiced that through resolutions to ATNI and NCAI, that certain people are now asking the 

same questions that the tribes were asking the whole time. And we 

want transparency. We want to be involved. We have concerns that 

if there is no plan in place now after the 10-year window elapses 

that the money is going to go back to Treasury. 

For all the problems I expressed earlier of the fee-to-trust, we see 

the same problem happening now. Are there things that are going 

to be done to ensure that this money doesn’t go back to Treasury? 

That it is going to be used in an effective, meaningful manner that 

the tribes hope it will be? But at the same time, a lot of tribes have 

some insight and some discussion on how this money is going to 

be expended. I think the tribes know best how the money should 

be spent to deal with fractionated interests on their own lands. 

But unfortunately, during this process when the tribes were asking questions when they were trying to push this through the 

House and Senate side, we were told that this wasn’t about individuals. I beg to differ. I think it is apparent now and it was apparent 

the whole time that this deals with Indian tribes, particularly on 

the $1.9 billion that is going to deal with the fractionated lands 

that are on our reservations. 

I hope that now that this is even more apparent to the people 

who will be administering the Indian Lands Consolidation Program 

and that they do reach out to tribes. 

And lastly, I would like to make a comment on a statement that 

was made earlier by Mr. Joseph who said there are monthly calls 

110

to tribal leaders on the settlement. I am a Chairman of my tribe. 

I also serve as Chairman of the Intertribal Monitoring Association. 

I am not aware of these monthly calls. I haven’t been asked. I 

haven’t been notified. I haven’t seen any e-mail or propaganda on 

that. So I have concerns about that and I would like to be included 

on it because it is something that is of utmost importance to us on 

Colville. 

So with that, I stand for questions and I appreciate the opportunity. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Finley follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL O. FINLEY, CHAIRMAN, CONFEDERATED

TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION

Good morning Chairman Akaka, Vice-Chairman Barrasso, and members of the 

Committee. On behalf of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation 

(‘‘Colville Tribes’’ or the ‘‘Tribes’’), I would like to thank the Committee for convening this hearing on the FY 2012 Budget Request for tribal programs and allowing me to testify. My name is Michael Finley and I am the Chairman of the Colville 

Tribes and am testifying today in that capacity. In addition, I also serve as the 

Chairman for the Intertribal Monitoring Association on Indian Trust, a national organization comprised of 65 federally recognized tribes from all regions of the country. 

Today, I am pleased to share the Colville Tribes’ views on the President’s 2012 

budget request for Tribal programs. As a rural, land-based Indian tribe, the Colville 

Tribes and similarly situated Indian tribes rely heavily on the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ land and natural resources programs. My remarks today will focus on these 

and other programs of interest to land-based Indian tribes. 

Background on the Colville Tribes 

Although now considered a single Indian tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the 

Colville Reservation is, as the name states, a confederation of 12 aboriginal tribes 

and bands from all across eastern Washington State. The present-day Colville Reservation is located in north-central Washington State and was established by Executive Order in 1872. At that time, the Colville Reservation consisted of all lands within the United States bounded by the Columbia and Okanogan Rivers, roughly 3 million acres. In 1891, the North Half of the 1872 Reservation was opened to the public 

domain. The North Half consists of approximately 1.5 million acres between the Canadian border and the northern boundary of the present-day Reservation. Colville 

tribal members exercise reserved hunting, fishing, and gathering rights on the 

North Half and the Colville Tribes maintains strong political and economic interests 

in this area. 

Today, the Colville Tribes has nearly 9,400 enrolled members, making it one of 

the largest Indian tribes in the Northwest. About half of the Tribes’ members live 

on or near the Colville Reservation. Between the tribal government and the Tribes’ 

enterprise division, the Colville Tribes collectively accounts for more than 1,700 

jobs—making it one of the largest employers in north-central Washington. 

Trust and Natural Resources Management Programs 

For land-based Indian tribes like the Colville Tribes that are not near major highways or interstates, our natural resources are our primary source of revenue. Our 

ability to generate economic development opportunities is closely tied to our ability 

to have fee-to-trust applications, timber sales, grazing permits, and other land 

transactions processed and approved in a cost efficient and timely manner. Most of 

these programs are funded in the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Natural Resources Management and Real Estate accounts. 

With the funding that Indian tribes receive for these activities, tribes have proven 

that they are superior land managers and use the funds far more efficiently than 

comparable activities on other federal lands. For example, it often takes the U.S. 

Forest Service many months to procure a salvage log sale after a forest fire. The 

Colville Tribes and other tribes with timber resources, however, are usually able to 

complete this process in as little as two weeks—with a per acre forest management 

budget that is a fraction of what the U.S. Forest Service has traditionally enjoyed. 

Similarly, the Colville Tribes’ Natural Resource Officers jointly patrol the 161 

shoreline miles of Lake Roosevelt, the reservoir of the Grand Coulee Dam and a National Recreation Area with more than 1.5 million visitors annually. Although the 

111

National Parks Service also conducts patrols, the Colville Tribes’ officers have exclusive responsibility for 35 percent of Lake Roosevelt and are the most visible presence on the Lake. The FY 2012 Budget contains a total of $560,000 for both Colville 

Tribes and the Spokane Tribe for these activities. In stark contrast, the President’s 

Budget for FY 2012 for the National Park Service for Lake Roosevelt is $5.83 million.

As these examples illustrate, Indian tribes have demonstrated time and time 

again that they can do more with less. It is therefore understandable that the 

Colville Tribes is disappointed that decreases are proposed for several of the natural 

resource programs in the FY 2012 Budget. Significantly, a $7.5 million cut is proposed for cadastral surveys. Cadastral surveys are often required for routine on-reservation fee-to-trust applications, and where they are not required, these funds pay 

for other associated survey requirements. It appears that these costs will now be 

passed down to tribal governments and individual Indians, which will further delay 

land into trust and associated economic development endeavors. 

The FY 2012 Budget also proposes the elimination of the attorney’s fees and litigation support program (-$2.1 million). Although this program may seem like a 

small amount of money against the backdrop of the total Indian Affairs budget, 

tribes nationwide rely on it to protect their trust resources. The Colville Tribes is 

a case study in this regard. 

For at least 100 years, through the mid-1990’s, the largest lead-zinc-copper smelter in the world dumped hundreds of thousands of tons of ‘‘slag’’ directly into the 

Columbia River from a location 10 miles north of the U.S./Canadian border. These 

contaminants traveled downstream, across the international border, and settled in 

not only the Colville Tribes’ on-reservation trust lands, but also federal lands administered by the National Park Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Despite the obvious interests of the Department of the Interior and its federal 

land management agencies to ensure that these federal lands are safe for the public 

at large, only the Colville Tribes (and later, the State of Washington) stepped forward to file suit in order to compel the company to clean up the contamination it 

caused. The Department of the Interior has never been a party to the litigation despite the Colville Tribes’ formal request that it intervene. The Colville Tribes’ efforts 

to protect this critical watershed for all U.S. citizens would not have been possible 

without funding from the attorney’s fees and litigation support program. 

Law Enforcement 

The Colville Tribes and other large land-based tribes are pleased that funding for 

BIA law enforcement activities is again proposed for a significant increase in the 

President’s Budget. While these increases are always welcome, what is needed, in 

the Colville Tribes’ view, is transparency in how these increases are allocated to Indian tribes. 

As the Committee is well aware, large land-based tribes usually lack a sufficient 

number of police officers, which leads to response times often in excess of two hours. 

There are occasions when the Colville Tribes has only a single officer on duty for 

the entire 1.4 million acre reservation. To make matters worse, the Colville Tribes 

has seen a rash of gang violence and drug smuggling activity in recent years, including airborne drug smuggling and trafficking activity with ties to Mexican cartels. 

Other Indian tribes have similar or even more harrowing stories. 

The Colville Tribes was, therefore, understandably surprised to learn that for FY 

2010—a year that BIA law enforcement received a nearly $59 million increase over 

FY 2009 enacted levels—the Colville Tribes received only a $22,000 increase. We 

were even more surprised to learn that the same year, 17 Indian tribes that the 

BIA identified as having ‘‘Low Crime’’ and ‘‘No Staffing Need’’ received increases of 

at least $20,000, with one receiving a six figure increase. A rational explanation of 

why the BIA distributed these increases in this manner may well exist, but neither 

the Colville Tribes nor any other Indian tribes that we have communicated with 

have heard one. The Colville Tribes hopes the Committee will direct the BIA to ensure that these and other law enforcement funding methodologies are transparent, 

adequately explained, and made readily available to Indian tribes and to the Committee. 

Indian Land Consolidation 

Indian country is understandably very interested in the $1.9 billion that was appropriated last year for the Indian Land Consolidation program (ILCP) as part of 

the Claims Resolution Act of 2010. This may be the largest sum of money ever appropriated for a single Indian program in the Department of the Interior. Tribal interest in the ILCP, however, is tempered by an overriding concern that the DepartVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
112

ment may not be equipped to spend all of this money within the 10-year period after 

which the funds revert back to the U.S. Treasury. It is also tempered by a frustrating lack of information from the Department on the planning processes and 

timeframes for tribal consultation on the program. 

The sooner information is disseminated the sooner tribes can provide meaningful 

input and assist in getting the program ready. Tribes are weary that the costs of 

appraisals, surveys, environmental site assessments, and other requirements that 

the Department may deem necessary prior to acquiring fractionated interests will 

result in a slow moving logjam that consumes the bulk of the ILCP funds. Final 

approval of the Cobell settlement could be years away if appeals are lodged, so it 

makes little sense to delay tackling these important issues now. 

The Colville Tribes appreciates the Committee convening this hearing and is 

grateful of its consideration of these and other issues. We very much look forward 

to working with the Committee on these issues in the 112th Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Finley. 

Let me call on Chairman Blackhawk for your statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BLACKHAWK, CHAIRMAN, 

WINNEBAGO TRIBE OF NEBRASKA 

Mr. BLACKHAWK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

To begin with, I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak 

before the Committee, but I must confess that it was a little bit 

short notice and today I kind of looking at my colleagues, I feel a 

little bit better, but I was called last Thursday to testify and my 

initial reaction was no. 

When there is a budget battle that claims we are going to eliminate $100 billion from the budget and you don’t touch defense 

spending, that sounds like a train wreck that is waiting to happen. 

So initially, my response was no. But thankfully to your staff, 

they insisted that I come here. And so today, I decided to come because as we were talking about the budget, one of the things that 

occurred to me is that I have testified a number of years. I have 

been serving my tribe for about 26 years, and you come in and you 

have the fancy charts and you do this and that, and you show. And 

they are all very, very good, but as I talked with your staffer, I 

said, you know, it is going to take me all of five seconds to testify 

because I am the same as everyone else. We need more money. 

But the more I thought about it, and to the credit of your staffer, 

I thought I might add just a little bit more to that because what 

we talked about is, and it has been mentioned here today so it is 

very, very appropriate in terms of how this discussion goes on. Because we all know the budgets are fair and they are a little bit better, and we think we win when we lose less. 

I remember the Reagan years when we lost 10 percent across the 

board. I remember that decimated our CHRs. For Winnebago, it 

meant losing about seven and retaining about seven. So actually it 

was half. 

But in thinking of all of that, I thought there are some ways that 

we need to really collectively plan because when we lose dollars in 

terms of our own budgets and the things that we are doing for economic development, we have to come back to the drawing board. 

There are some things that I think warrant some consideration. 

First of all, the idea of prevention. I had this discussion with Dr. 

Grimm many years ago when he first became the IHS Director. 

And I shared with him that I wanted to see us move into the area 

of prevention a little bit more because actually there are no real 

113

dollars in prevention, but that is something that has to happen because when you look at the prevention efforts and what they can 

save, it does make some sense to do those kind of things. So that 

is one. 

The other is that the Law and Order Act which is something that 

is very, very positive. But within all of that, the discussion that I 

have not participated in and have not heard us talk any more 

about is this thing that we went through line authority some years 

ago. It was called line authority because this was a new structure 

that was supposed to make law enforcement better. 

And quite honestly, Mr. Chairman, it has not. It has caused a 

bottleneck. It has caused our area, District One, serves seven 

States. And just within our own Aberdeen area, there are over 

150,000 people that you are talking about. There are millions and 

millions of miles to cover, which can’t be done. So I think the idea 

of line authority needs to be revisited. 

And then I guess lastly, in terms of what Mr. Allen was saying, 

we do need more of the agencies to participate. Right now, we have 

a battle of sorts with the Corps of Engineers. We litigated against 

the Corps in the early 1970s and gained some line back and lost 

some. But one of the things was there was a section of land that 

the Corps was supposed to return to the tribe, but they have not. 

Their idea is, and I can’t figure this out because I have seen at 

least three different Colonels with the Corps of Engineers. Initially, 

they said sure, and the 25 years that comes up in March, actually 

the end of this month. 

So we are scrambling to try and do something about that because 

the Corps has changed their mind and I am not sure why. So I 

think they have to be within the context of this consultation with 

us as tribes. And that is something we are sharing with the Administration. 

And lastly, the testimony that was prepared for me, very quickly 

I want to commend my staff and Winnebago for doing that. I am 

very, very proud of the fact that one of the people that participated 

is the CEO of our Economic Development Branch, and that is 

something we launched in 1994. We are looking at approximately 

$200 million in revenue since that creation. So I am very, very 

proud of that, as well as my Health Director who has very recently 

received her doctorate and is native and we are very, very proud 

of that fact. 

So with that, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Blackhawk follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BLACKHAWK, CHAIRMAN, WINNEBAGO TRIBE OF

NEBRASKA

Over the years, numerous accounts of testimony have been provided by Tribal 

leaders and organizations representing Native people. Many have provided statistics 

on well documented health disparities for American Indians. Government officials 

have also recognized these inequalities in services. We all know, without a doubt, 

many of these disparities are a direct result of inadequate funding: inadequate funding that continues to be jeopardized as a result of discretionary funds status. The 

inequitable allocation of funds is not based on population or need. Formulas for appropriations should be based on the trends of population growth and medical inflation. The negative effects of the insufficient funds appropriated continue to disrupt 

the well-being of Native American Nations. 

114

Although American Indians are reported to have a shorter lifespan, the populations on reservations continue to rise not only due to the increase in number of 

births, but also on the number of tribal members returning to reservations to receive appropriate healthcare that is unfortunately operating with limited resources 

and high demand. The domino effect from this quagmire perpetuates a cycle of inadequacy. The process begins with poor funding which leads to poor delivery, frustrated employees and therefore, horrendous outcomes that can and have resulted in 

death. Patients experience the turmoil of prolonged hiring processes, executive vacancies and territorial behaviors of programs. This unfortunate cyclical pattern of 

inadequacy is perpetuated by the failure to increase funding or modify the formula 

in which appropriations are determined. 

This severe lack of funding also strengthens the resistance to collaboration with 

Tribal Programs and the deleterious effects of such institutionalized oppression are 

witnessed and experienced through poor patient care. Contract Health Services is 

an excellent example of how this takes place as a territorial nature ensues when 

the inability to provide expected services is questioned. 

In addition to the limited funding for CHS, systemic issues erode the possibility 

of efficacious referrals. And although the Federal Government recognizes the importance of prevention services we have not experienced adequately funded efforts. 

Major efforts for prevention programs are neglected and providers are spending 

enormous amounts of time on acute issues. Contract Health Services does not fund 

prevention services such as colonoscopies, mammograms or routine screenings. By 

covering prevention services, we can decrease the cost of long term chronic care by 

addressing these concerns before they become chronic. 

The stagnant nature of funding has resulted in losing quality employees and providers. Retention and recruitment of quality care professionals also continues to be 

an unmet need for our facilities. We are often limited to physician assistants who 

must refer out for appropriate medical attention. Having adequate staff would reduce the number of referrals and increase the appropriateness of service. Staffing 

should therefore be based on population and need. 

There are two more important points I want to make while I have the opportunity. Our goal is to figure out short term ways to fund Indian Health Care, but 

I must remind you that the best way to address the long term problem is for tribes 

to break out of their grinding poverty and develop their emerging economies. Instead of asking for a bigger budget, our goal would be for our people to have employer provider health care insurance. If given the choice, I would rather complain 

about the cost of health insurance than declining federal support of IHS. 

The Federal Government has created a system that makes it incredibly difficult 

to develop our reservations economically. The legal system is universally feared by 

tribes and going to the U.S. Supreme Court is the last thing any tribal leader wants 

to do. The states are growing increasingly aggressive in fighting tribal growth of all 

kinds, especially land acquisition and taxation issues. 

Within this context, tribes are trying to develop their economies. The four largest 

industries in Indian Country are Natural Resources, Gaming, Government Contracting and Native American Tobacco. There are several systemic problems to be 

dealt with, but Federal Government is doing everything it can to help us develop 

our natural resources. Gaming has provided a much needed capital injection into 

tribes, but it has reached a plateau and the Indian Gaming Industry declined last 

year for the first time in its 25 year history. 

The third largest industry is Government Contracting, primarily driven by the 

SBA 8a business development program. The Federal Government placed a restriction on tribes last year, called Section 811, which requires burdensome and highly 

unlikely approval requirements on tribal contracts over $20 million. Twenty million 

dollars sounds like a lot, but it isn’t when you consider most large contracts are for 

multiple years. Section 811 was developed behind closed doors and passed without 

any input from tribes. This law hasn’t even been fully implemented yet and is already having a stifling effect on tribes. 

Senator McCaskill has also introduced a bill to eliminate the tribal specific provisions for Alaska Native Corporations and has publically stated she will do the same 

to tribes as soon as she can find evidence she knows must exist proving tribal malfeasance. When questioned by an Alaska newspaper about this hurting individual 

tribal people, she callously referred the tribal people to the federal and state welfare 

system—something we are already familiar with. 

The SBA 8a program has been one of the most successful economic development 

programs in tribal history. The 8a program is a prime contracting program, not a 

sub-contracting program. It has allowed tribes to transform themselves over the last 

30 years from being the low cost, low value added sub-contractor with low paid emVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
115

ployees toiling with mundane tasks, to become prime contractors that can compete 

with larger companies on a head to head basis. 

The program’s very success is why it is under criticism. New regulations just published should go a long way towards addressing the criticisms raised, ironically, by 

our competitors. I ask that you support the SBA 8a program’s tribal provisions because it has been one of the primary ways for tribes to break out of the negative 

economic cycle and begin providing for ourselves. 

The Native Tobacco industry is the fourth largest industry in Indian Country and 

the recent passage of the much despised Pact Act has put that entire industry in 

jeopardy. The PACT Act was supposed to stop the internet tobacco mail order business and it did just that. I realize it is hard to defend the mail order tobacco business, but I do strongly believe that tribes should have the right to manufacture, distribute and sell their own tobacco products on their own land without state interference. 

The 12 year old Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) between the States and Big 

Tobacco has dramatically complicated the regulatory and tax issues between the 

states and tribes. Big Tobacco has threatened the states with the withholding of settlement payments if the states do not aggressively enforce the terms of the settlement on the tribes. The tribes were not part of the lawsuit, nor do we receive any 

settlement funds. There is no legal or logical reason we should be subject to its 

terms. 

The Pact Act ended the mail order business, but the on-going threats from Big 

Tobacco has now resulted in the reservation business is coming under assault too. 

The states also want tribes to collect state taxes and MSA fees for non-Indians sales 

on our reservations. We refuse to use race to determine price in our own stores in 

our territory to create a price advantage for a non-Indian company. Such a system 

is completely out of date and offensive to us as sovereign governmental entities. 

The states working with Big Tobacco have already introduced ‘‘model legislation’’ 

in multiple states to use the information required to be reported to states by the 

Pact Act to figure out ways to isolate and control tribes. The Pact Act should now 

rightly be called the MSA Enforcement Act. The Pact Act purported to have protections for tribes, such as protecting our sovereign immunity. But one state introduced 

legislation which stated that if a tribe exercised its legal right by claiming sovereign 

immunity to an MSA enforcement action, then that tribe would be put on a ‘‘list’’ 

and it would be illegal for anyone to sell them any tobacco products or tobacco manufacturing products. These ‘‘economic sanction’’ bills and the arrogance of their introduction is astounding. 

These are direct attempts to circumvent the protections provided to tribes under 

the Pact Act and the Department of Justice and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and 

Firearms are complicit in this problem by interpreting the Pact Act, under heaving 

lobbying from states, to help them achieve their goals. We have asked the Department of Justice and the ATF for another consultation to explain what is happening 

to tribes, but we have yet to get a response and would appreciate your help in being 

heard. 

Thank you for your time.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chairman Blackhawk, for 

your testimony. 

Now, I will call on Governor Dasheno for your statement. Please 

proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER DASHENO, GOVERNOR, PUEBLO 

OF SANTA CLARA 

Mr. DASHENO. Aloha, Chairman Akaka. 

The CHAIRMAN. Aloha. 

Mr. DASHENO. I extend greeting from the tribal elders to the 

youngest. It is so important for us to be here in the great hall to 

present to you our concerns that we have. And obviously, every 

tribal leader that has come before us has eloquently so stated. And 

so I am here to follow in their footsteps, and certainly your position 

as the Chairman is going to provide us the direction where we go 

in regards to Indian issues. 

116

My name is Governor Walter Dasheno from the Pueblo of Santa 

Clara, and certainly what every individual has said prior to myself 

is important. I certainly recognize all of the things that are being 

done. And I am here to give you my story as a tribe and the experience in the self-governance that mirrors what many of our self-governance tribes overall have done and been so successful with. 

Self-governance works, Mr. Chairman, and I hope that self-governance is just a step in the direction that other tribes will go. My 

question is, what comes after self-governance? I think it is going 

to be important for us as tribes to begin to formulate where we go 

after this next step that we take. 

Self-governance has provided accountability. It has strengthened 

tribal planning and management capacities. It invests in our local 

resources. It strengthens our reservation economies. It allows for 

flexibility in a firm sovereignty. 

I think the last key message is it affirms sovereignty. This is the 

partnership that we have with the United States Federal Government and it should always be upheld as far as I see and as far as 

our tribal leaders have provided for times past. 

Santa Clara Pueblo is happy to see that the President’s budget 

proposal continues investment in self-governance. In the IHS budget, the President has proposed an increase of $363,000 to the 

$6,323,000 funds from the fiscal year 2011 Continuing Resolution 

levels, which covers the administrative costs. And of course, far 

more than that is actually awarded to tribes under HHS self-governance. 

For the self-governance line in the BIA budget, the President has proposed an increase of $7.3 million for a total of $155 million from 

the fiscal year 2010–2011 Continuing Resolution level, and this is 

an increase of approximately 5 percent. Overall, the President obligates $425 million to some 225 federally recognized tribes self-governance compacts, and this is just the 

beginning, Mr Chairman. I see that more tribes are going to pursue 

the issue of self-governance. It allows for flexibility and it allows 

for the true government-to-government relationship that we seek 

and so direly need. 

Now, we are starting to increase the self-governance program. In 

reality, overall funding for self-governance tribes does not keep 

pace with non-self-governance tribes. It has been the experience of 

the self-governance tribes that when Indian Affairs has received 

funding increases, self-governance tribes do not receive their relative fair share. I would urge this Committee to examine closely 

this issue. 

I would also urge this Committee to support the reintroduction 

and passage of the proposed Self-Governance Amendment legislation, H.R. 4347 in the last Congress. H.R. 4347 contains several 

proposed amendments to Title IV of the Indian Self-Determination 

and Education Act that advance important purposes. Most significantly, they create a consistency between Title IV self-governance 

in DOI and Title V self-governance in the Department of Health 

and Human Services. 

I understand that in the last Congress, there was some concern 

that there were no offsets for the estimated $5 million cost of implementing the legislation. In fact, we believe that the $5 million 

117

estimate is essentially a fiction, and to the extent that there is any 

significant cost, some officials have said it could be absorbed by the 

BIA’s own budget for this year’s funds, so no offset is necessary. 

Our request from Santa Clara Pueblo is illustrative of national 

concerns. Santa Clara Pueblo is submitting grant applications to 

fund various feasibility studies for a range of energy projects. Both 

the Department of Energy Office of Tribal Affairs and the BIA Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development have been very 

helpful and their programs should receive more funding. 

Santa Clara desperately needs a new and expanded health clinic. 

Santa Clara does not believe that the Indian Health Service has 

the funds to pay the costs for construction of a new facility and so 

it plans to finance its own facility if necessary. 

Still, Congress should support funding for more hospital construction and also continue to support and provide favorable grants 

and loan guarantees for tribes that seek to construct their own facilities. 

Investments in irrigation infrastructure. Rio Grande Pueblo Infrastructure Improvement Act funding. This Act authorizes the 

funding of projects to correct deficiencies identified by a secretarial 

study. The implementation of this Act will favorably affect the 

Pueblo’s traditional lifestyle and culture, which for hundreds of 

years has been based on agriculture and irrigating lands. So far, 

almost no money has been spent implementing this Act. 

In the late 2009, the Santa Clara Pueblo completed construction 

of a 10,800 regional adult daycare center that will be able to serve 

a growing population of tribal seniors from the Eight Northern 

Pueblos. Although the Center has been completed, the adult 

daycare program has not been completed or implemented due to severe funding restraints. Congress needs to expend funding for programs that serve Indian elders. 

And the Santa Clara Pueblo wastewater system is in an advanced state of decay and threatens community health and the 

quality of water of the Rio Grande. The system was largely constructed in the 1960s and 1970s and has served out its useful life. 

The need to upgrade wastewater and water facilities is common 

throughout Indian Country. 

Thank you for this opportunity to present the budget perspective 

of Santa Clara Pueblo. 

And Mr. Chairman, I also want to say that the Southwest Regional Office, Mr. Walker, Mr. Riley and in particular Ms. Janet 

Blacker have been very, very helpful to our Pueblo. We just need 

to partner more strongly with the bureau agency staff and the bureau regional offices. They have the resources. They have the personnel. We need to put them out into the field. They need to work 

with tribal governments and they need to be more accountable and 

more effective. 

And so with that, I want to extend my appreciation to you, to 

your staff. God bless you, God bless America, and we look forward 

to working with each and every one of you, particularly in Indian 

Country. We have suffered long enough. We need your assistance. 

We need your blessing and we need your money. 

Thank you. Mahalo. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Dasheno follows:]

118

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER DASHENO, GOVERNOR, PUEBLO OF SANTA

CLARA


315e1.eps
119


315e2.eps
120


315e3.eps
121


315e4.eps
122


315e5.eps
123


315e6.eps
124


315e7.eps
125

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Governor, for your statement. And I 

think that is an excellent statement to close the hearing today. 

I want to thank all of the witnesses for testifying here today. 

And I want to thank Secretary Echo Hawk for staying throughout 

the entire hearing. We really appreciate that. 

We will submit written questions to witnesses and we will keep 

the record open for one week for any Member to submit statements 

or questions as well. 

And I want to say mahalo nui loa for your time and your contributions to the hearing today. 

I look forward to continuing to work with you and let’s keep in 

close contact. 

Thank you very much. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 


315e8.eps
(127)

APPENDIX

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES W. MURPHY, CHAIRMAN, STANDING ROCK

SIOUX TRIBE

On behalf of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, I am pleased to submit testimony 

concerning the President’s FY 2012 budget for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) 

and Indian Health Service (IHS). I want to express my appreciation to the Senate 

Committee on Indian Affairs for its strong support of Indian tribes. I would like to 

focus my remarks on education, public safety, health care, and infrastructure. 

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is situated in North and South Dakota. The Reservation comprises 2.3 million acres, including 1.4 million acres of trust land owned 

by the Tribe or Tribal members. About 10,000 Tribal members and non-members 

reside on the Reservation in eight communities and in smaller towns. The Tribe’s 

primary industry is cattle ranching and farming. We are remote, rural Indian reservation. 

As Congress addresses the needs of the Indian country in light of the Budget deficit, I would urge you to consider three fundamental questions. First, what is the 

impact of funding Indian programs on jobs? While Indian tribes like Standing Rock 

are often among the largest employers in their areas, unemployment in Indian country remains at levels that are unimaginable elsewhere. Federal investments in education, public safety, and infrastructure in Indian country are crucial to providing 

jobs in these chronically high unemployment areas. 

Second, what kind of country are we? The federal government has a special trust 

obligation to tribes, arising from the Constitution, treaties and other documents. 

Much has been promised to Indian tribes in return for the loss of our lands. Are 

we a country that keeps its promises? Maintaining needed funding for programs aiding Indian country is one way to demonstrate the integrity of the United States in 

honoring its commitments. 

Third, is it fair to limit the debate on the Budget to only discretionary spending? 

Certainly not. The only way to fairly address the Budget deficit is to put everything 

on the table. Social security, Medicare, tax reform and other key issues need to be 

included. It is simply not right to undermine necessary programs for Indian country, 

while the major reasons for the Budget deficit remain unaddressed. With these 

questions in mind, we turn to Standing Rock’s specific recommendations. 

The Sioux Nation ceded millions of acres of land to the United States. As recently 

as the 1950’s, the United States Army Corps of Engineers flooded more than 56,000 

acres of prime Tribal farmland on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation to create 

the Oahe Dam to increase navigation along the lower Missouri River and to provide 

cheap hydro-electric power to the north-central United States. Millions of Americans 

benefit from the Oahe Dam, but it brought great hardship to our Tribe. These hardships continue to this day. 

The Oahe Dam devastated our Tribe, displacing more than 25 percent of our reservation’s population. We lost our best farmland and are still working to reclaim irrigable lands on our reservation. The creation of Lake Oahe further isolated our reservation. It established over a 100 mile transportation barrier from Bismarck, North 

Dakota to Mobridge, South Dakota, where the first bridge crossing over the Missouri River south of Bismarck is located. Our rural location and lack of infrastructure (roads, safe drinking water, sewers, and electricity) contribute to the economic 

challenges our Tribe faces. But working in partnership with the United States and 

our neighbors, we can turn challenges into opportunities for economic growth and 

job creation on our Reservation. 

The Tribe is working steadily to expand opportunities for economic development 

to provide jobs for our members and improve the standard of living on our Reservation. We operate the Standing Rock Farms, a Parts-on-Demand operation, two modest Tribal casinos, and a sand and gravel operation which helps us supplement services and programs for our more than 14,000 enrolled members. Despite the measures we are taking at the local level to improve living conditions on our reservation, 

we have persistent unemployment above 50 percent, and a high dropout rate among 

128

our high school students. Over 40 percent of Indian families on our reservation live 

in poverty. Yet, the Administration has proposed cutting discretionary spending for 

the BIA by $118.9 million or 4.5 percent over the FY 2010 enacted level. 

Education 

Native Americans are poorly represented in colleges across the country. Investment in Indian education—at every level—is critical to the future success of our 

children. 

Scholarships and Adult Education (+$32.0 mil.)—I recommend that Congress double the funding for the BIA Scholarship and Adult Education Program by $32 million. Our Tribe has provided $3 million in Tribal funds over three years to support 

a scholarship program to provide over 300 students with grants of between $3,000–

$3,500/semester which allow them to pursue degrees from accredited colleges, universities and vocational schools. BIA financed scholarships total about $500,000 per 

year. This meets 25 percent of our need. More of our members are seeking advanced 

degrees and job training. Scholarships help offset costs of attending accredited colleges. The Adult Education component enables adults to obtain their GED or the 

required skills needed to transition to a community college or job placement. Job 

training and improved literacy are key skills our members require to secure competitive jobs. 

Johnson O’Malley Act (+$11.0 mil.)—I urge Congress to Increase funding for the 

Johnson O’Malley Act program to $24.3 million to address the unique educational 

and cultural needs of Native children attending public schools (an increase of $11 

million above the Administration’s request). JOM was funded at $24 million in 

1994. JOM is a critical program that fully involves local communities and Native 

parents in the education of our children. 

Public Safety Needs 

Living conditions on Standing Rock are difficult. According to most recent statistics of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in 2010, over 

1,163 reservation households on Standing Rock had family incomes between 30 percent–80 percent of median family income in the area. On the North Dakota portion 

of our reservation (Sioux County, ND), the median family income is only $27,473. 

This figure is 57 percent of North Dakota’s overall median family income of $47,898. 

On the South Dakota portion of our reservation (Corson County, SD), the median 

family income is only $27,591. This figure is about 59 percent of the South Dakota 

average median family income of $46,244. On Standing Rock, 485 households, or 42 

percent of our least well off households, earn 30 percent of median family income. 

We have far too few BIA public safety officers patrolling our eight districts and 

small communities on our 2.3 million acre reservation. Police officers in Indian 

country are our primary first responders. BIA equipment and technology are outdated, including police cruisers, radios and communications infrastructure. We do 

not have access to computerized law enforcement statistics. 

In the spring and summer of 2008, following the deaths of several Tribal members, at our request and with the help of our Congressional delegation, the BIA 

began ‘‘Operation Dakota Peacekeeper’’ as part of the Interior Department’s Safe Indian Communities initiative to reduce crime, target illegal drug activities and provide much needed investigative support to prosecute domestic violence and crimes 

against children. A total of 56 BIA officers were detailed from their reservations to 

Standing Rock over a seven month period. 

Operation Dakota Peacekeeper more than quadrupled our normal BIA Police 

force. Before the surge, we had only ten BIA public safety officer positions filled. 

This was enough for only two officers per 24-hour shift to patrol a 2.3 million acre 

reservation encompassing four towns, eight separate communities, 2,500 miles of 

roads, and a population of 10,000 residents. The public safety surge was an overwhelming success. Tribal elders felt safe in their homes and began to leave their 

doors unlocked and windows open at night. It also highlighted the glaring need for 

greater numbers of patrol and other public safety personnel on our reservation. Congress enacted and President Obama signed the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA) 

in law which creates a number of important mandates to strengthen tribal courts 

and justice systems. 

Criminal Investigations and Police Services (+25 mil.)—In order for the Administration to fully implement the TLOA and to address the shortfall of more than 1,800 

police officers in Indian country cited in a 2006 GAP report, we encourage the Congress to increase funding for Criminal Investigations and Police Services to $215 

million, or $25 million above the 2.2 percent increase ($4.2 mil.) proposed by the 

Administration above the FY 2010 enacted level of $185 million. 

129

Detention/Corrects (+15 mil.)—Until the BIA addresses the shortages of corrections officers cited in the 2006 GAP report and to implement requirements of the 

TLOA, we recommend that Congress increase funding for BIA-funded detention/corrections by $15 million above the Administration’s proposed budget of $85 million. 

Tribal Courts ($+20 mil.)—We urge Congress to increase the modest funding of 

$25 million appropriated for the Tribal Courts Program. Our Tribe cannot effectively carry out criminal proceedings, let alone civil cases, with our small BIA allocation, even when heavily subsidized by the Tribe. Our Tribal courts are crowded, 

cramped and outdated and limit our ability to administer a comprehensive criminal 

justice system on the Reservation. 

Facilities, Operation and Maintenance (+$5.0 mil.)—We urge Congress to add an 

additional $5 million to the BIA-funded Public Safety and Justice’s Facility, Operation and Maintenance budget of $13.7 million. Adequate maintenance and repair 

is essential to extend the useful life of facility infrastructure and make needed repairs until Indian tribes can invest in adequate infrastructure for Tribal Courts, Police Stations, and detention facilities. 

Health Care 

The majority of our Tribal elders continue to suffer from diabetes, heart disease 

and hypertension. Accidents are the leading cause of death among our members. On 

the North Dakota portion of our reservation, 6.6 percent of our tribal members are 

age 65 and older. In North Dakota generally, 14.7 percent are age 65 and older 

(more than double our figure). On the South Dakota portion of our reservation, 9.6 

percent of our tribal members are age 65 and older. In South Dakota generally, this 

figure is 14.5 percent, more than fifty percent higher than on our reservation. More 

is needed to serve our elders properly. Our Tribal members deserve the opportunity 

to live full and productive lives and compete successfully in today’s global economy. 

We are pleased to see the Administration acknowledge the large health disparity 

that exists between Native Americans and the rest of the population. The FY 2012 

funding of $4.166 billion for IHS Services is recognition that Indian country still has 

a long way to go to improve the health of our members. Far too many of our members live with debilitating diseases and illnesses that shorten their lives. We urge 

the Committee to protect the Administration’s proposed increase of $508 million 

above the FY 2010 enacted level for IHS Services, which includes an increase of $89 

million for Contract Health Services (CHS) and $63 million for Contract Support 

Costs. On Standing Rock, many members go without needed health care services 

each year because of inadequate CHS dollars. The proposed increases will better enable tribes and the IHS to implement provisions in the permanent extension of the 

Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA) that are designed to redress health 

disparities in Indian country. 

Taking Care of Existing Infrastructure Needs 

(+$75 mil.)—I strongly oppose the $1.0 million cut the Administration proposes 

for the BIA Road Maintenance Program and flat line funding this program has received over the last 20 years. The decision to underfund this program will cost taxpayers millions of dollars as tribes and the BIA must reconstruct roads far sooner 

due to poor maintenance. With inadequate maintenance, roads which should last 20 

years, last only 7–10 years. Limited to $25 million, Tribes operating the Road Maintenance Program cannot hope to tackle the large backlog of deferred road maintenance needs that make our roads and bridges unsafe and impede travel on our reservations. Our Tribe invested $26.5 million, which we borrowed from Wells Fargo 

Bank, to reconstruct nearly 20 miles of community streets. We installed sidewalks, 

curbs, gutters and street lights throughout the reservation for the first time. We are 

struggling to maintain our investment because we expend most of our Road Maintenance funds during the winter months to pay for snow removal (labor, fuel, salt, 

sand, truck repairs and truck rentals, etc.) and to respond to other road emergencies 

such as floods. 

Lack of adequate funding for Road Maintenance and new construction (IRR Program) undermine our ability to achieve every major program priority we have (public safety, health care, education, housing, and economic development). All of these 

programs depend on and require a modern infrastructure. Road maintenance is a 

public safety program. Poor road conditions contribute to the unacceptably high levels of serious injury and death on Indian Reservation Roads each year. We urge 

Congress to appropriate $100 million annually for the Road Maintenance Program 

so that we can better maintain our BIA and Tribal road systems as we reconstruct 

them. 

130

1There are approximately 565 federally-recognized Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages 

in the United States, all of whom are eligible for membership in NAIHC. Other NAIHC members include state-recognized tribes that were deemed eligible for housing assistance under the 

1937 Act and grandfathered in to the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act. 2See http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm.

3 Bureau of Indian Affairs Labor Force Report (2005). 

4Many of these reservations are in the State of South Dakota, which has one of the lowest 

unemployment rates in the nation. However, on some SD reservations, the unemployment rate 

exceeds 80 percent. 5 U.S. Census Bureau, American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month: November 2008. 

See http://www.census.gov.

Economic Development 

We urge the Congress to appropriate $5 million for the BIA’s Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development to help tribes build their reservation economies. Increased appropriations will allow this program to serve more reservations. Thank 

you for providing our Tribe the opportunity to present testimony. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CHERYL A. CAUSLEY, CHAIRWOMAN, NATIONAL

AMERICAN INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL

Introduction 

Good morning Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and distinguished 

members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. My name is Cheryl Causley 

and I am the Chairwoman of the National American Indian Housing Council 

(NAIHC), the only national tribal non-profit organization dedicated to advancing 

housing, physical infrastructure, and economic development in tribal communities 

in the United States. I am also the Executive Director of the Bay Mills Housing Authority and an enrolled member of the Bay Mills Indian Community. I want to 

thank the Committee for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the President’s FY 2012 Budget Request. 

At the outset, NAIHC would like to thank Housing and Urban Development Secretary Donovan for his commitment to Indian Country, not only in the form of support for reasonable funding levels for tribal programs, but in the form of consistent 

outreach to tribal communities and his stated commitment to reaching out to other 

federal agencies to enhance communications at the federal level so that tribes may 

best use and leverage their limited federal funds. We have enjoyed building our relationship with Secretary Donovan’s office during the past year and a half and look 

forward to continued collaboration. 

Background on the National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) 

The NAIHC was founded in 1974 and has, for 37 years, served its members by 

providing valuable training and technical assistance (T&TA) to all tribes and tribal 

housing entities; providing information to Congress regarding the issues and challenges that tribes face in terms of housing, infrastructure, and community and economic development; and working with key federal agencies in an attempt to address 

such issues and meet such challenges. The membership of NAIHC is expansive, 

comprised of approximately 271 members representing 463 1 tribes and tribal housing organizations. The primary goal of NAIHC is to support tribal housing entities 

in their efforts to provide safe, quality, affordable, and culturally relevant housing 

to native people. 

Brief Summary of the Problems Regarding Housing in Indian Country 

While the country has been experiencing an economic downturn in general, this 

trend is greatly magnified in tribal communities. The national unemployment rate 

has risen and has hopefully passed its peak at an alarming rate of nearly 10 percent; 2 however, that rate does not compare to the unemployment rates in Indian 

Country, which average 49 percent. 3 The highest unemployment rates are on the 

Plains reservations, where the average rate is 77 percent. 4 Because of the remote 

locations of many reservations, there is a lack of basic infrastructure and economic 

development opportunities are difficult to identify and pursue. As a result, the poverty rate in Indian Country is exceedingly high at 25.3 percent, nearly three times 

the national average. 5 There is no question that tribal members are among the nation’s most vulnerable citizens. 

The above-stated employment and economic development challenges exacerbate 

the deplorable housing conditions in Indian Country. Our first Americans face some 

of the most distressing housing and living conditions in the country, and the availVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:38 Aug 02, 2011 Jkt 067655 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\67655.TXT JACK
131

ability of affordable, adequate, safe housing in Indian Country falls far below that 

of the general U.S. population. Consider the following:

• According to the 2000 U.S. Census, nearly 12 percent of Native American 

households lack plumbing compared to 1.2 percent of the general U.S. population;

• According to 2002 statistics, 90,000 Indian families were homeless or underhoused;

• On tribal lands, 28 percent of Indian households were found to be over-crowded 

or to lack adequate plumbing and kitchen facilities. The national average is 5.4 

percent;

• When structures that lack heating and electrical equipment are included, 

roughly 40 percent of reservation housing is considered inadequate, compared 

to 5.9 percent of national households;

• Seventy percent of the existing housing stock in Indian Country is in need of 

upgrades and repairs, many of them extensive; and

• Less than half of all reservation homes are connected to a sewer system.

There is already a consensus among many members of Congress, HUD, tribal 

leaders, and tribal organizations that there is a severe housing shortage in tribal 

communities; that many homes are, as a result, overcrowded; that many of the existing homes are in need of repairs, some of them substantial; that many homes lack 

basic amenities that many of us take for granted, such as full kitchens and plumbing; and that at least 200,000 new housing units are needed in Indian Country. 

These issues are further complicated by Indian land title status. Most Indian 

lands are held in trust or restricted-fee status; therefore, private financial institutions will not recognize tribal homes as collateral to make improvements or for individuals to finance new homes. Private investment in the real estate market in Indian Country is nearly non-existent. Tribes are almost wholly dependent on the Federal Government for financial assistance to meet their growing housing needs, and 

the provision of such assistance is consistent with the federal government’s centuries-old, Constitutionally-based trust responsibility to American Indian tribes and 

Alaska Native villages. 

The Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

In 1996, Congress passed the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) to provide federal statutory authority to address the 

above-mentioned housing disparities in Indian Country. NAHASDA is the cornerstone for providing housing assistance to low-income Native American families on 

Indian reservations, in Alaska Native villages, and on the native Hawaiian Home 

Lands. The Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG) is the funding component of 

NAHASDA. Since NAHASDA was first funded in 1998, it has been the single largest 

source of funding for tribal housing. IHBG funds support new housing development, 

acquisition, rehabilitation, and other housing services that are critical for tribal 

communities, as well as essential planning and operating expenses for tribal housing programs. 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and FY 2010 Indian 

Housing Funds 

NAIHC would like to thank Congress for its increased investment in Indian housing in FY 2010. ARRA provided over $500 million for the IHBG program. This additional investment in Indian Country supported hundreds of jobs, allowed some 

tribes to start on new construction projects, and assisted other tribes in completing 

essential infrastructure for housing projects that they could not have otherwise afforded with their IHBG allocations. Tribes have complied with the mandate to obligate and expend funds in an expedient manner, thus helping stimulate tribal and 

the national economies. In addition to ARRA funding, Congress appropriated $700 

million for the IHBG in FY 2010, the first significant increase in funding since the 

inception of NAHASDA. This positive step reversed a decade of stagnate funding 

levels that neither kept pace with inflation nor addressed the acute housing needs 

in tribal communities, and NAIHC is thankful for this powerful step in the right 

direction. 

The President’s FY 2012 Budget Request for the Indian Housing Block 

Grant 

NAIHC supports the President’s FY 2012 Budget Request, which maintains the 

FY 2010 level of funding of $700 million for the IHBG program. While NAIHC believes that the IHBG needs to be funded, at a minimum, at $875 million just to keep 

132

pace with increasing costs for housing development, energy efficiency initiatives, 

and other inflationary factors, we recognize that the current budget situation requires some difficult choices on the part of the Administration and the Congress. 

We ask that Congress support funding for the IHBG program in an amount not less 

than the President’s request of $700 million. 

NAIHC also supports the inclusion of $65 million in the President’s FY 2012 

Budget Request for the Indian Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) program. This program provides funds for essential infrastructure for tribal communities. As the ICDBG program is one of the few sources of funds that tribes can access for the purpose of infrastructure development, NAIHC consistently requests 

$100 million per fiscal year be made available for this program. 

Training and Technical Assistance (T&TA) 

The President’s FY 2012 Budget Request does not include the much-needed, exceptional T&TA that has been provided by NAIHC since NAHASDA was implemented. The provision of T&TA is critical for tribes to build their capacity to effectively plan, implement, and manage tribal housing programs. Eliminating funding 

for T&TA would be disastrous for tribal housing authorities and would be a huge 

step in the wrong direction. Tribes need more assistance in building capacity, not 

less. Since NAIHC’s funding for T&TA was restored in 2008, requests for T&TA 

have steadily grown. The funding that NAIHC is currently receiving is insufficient 

to meet the steady, growing demand for T&TA. Therefore, we are forced to make 

difficult decisions regarding how to provide the most effective T&TA to our membership. The NAIHC membership has repeatedly taken the position that a portion of 

the Indian Housing Block Grant funding should be made available to NAIHC for 

T&TA, therefore, NAIHC and its member tribes recommend that $4.8 million be 

provided to a national organization for T&TA. 

Conclusion 

NAHASDA was enacted to provide tribal communities with new and creative tools 

necessary to develop culturally relevant, safe, decent, and affordable housing. It has 

been remarkably successful in view of the limited funding over the past 13 years. 

It is our aspiration that tribes will be able to build on those successes in the future, 

which requires sufficient funding. NAIHC is thankful for proposed level funding for 

the IHBG and ICDBG programs, given the current budget climate, and we are hopeful that Congress will protect the IHBG and the ICDBG, programs that help provide 

the most fundamental of services–housing—to some of the nation’s most vulnerable 

citizens. 

Thank you, Chairman Akaka and Vice Chairman Barrasso, and the members of 

the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, for giving us the opportunity to express 

our views about the President’s FY 2012 Budget Request. Your continued support 

of tribal communities is acknowledged and truly appreciated. The NAIHC is eager 

to work with you and your professional staff on any and all issues pertaining to tribal housing programs and living conditions for America’s indigenous people. 

133

PREPARED STATEMENT OF D’SHANE BARNETT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL

COUNCIL OF URBAN INDIAN HEALTH


315f1.eps
134


315f2.eps
135


315f3.eps
136


315f4.eps
137

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RUSSELL GSCHWIND, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL IRONWORKERS

TRAINING PROGRAM FOR AMERICAN INDIANS


315g1.eps 315g2.eps
138

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES


315h1.eps
139


315h2.eps
140


315h3.eps
141

Æ


315h4.eps