<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:28348.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-576
THE THOMASINA JORDAN INDIAN TRIBES OF VIRGINIA FEDERAL RECOGNITION ACT
AND THE GRAND RIVER BAND OF OTTAWA INDIANS OF MICHIGAN REFERRAL ACT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 437
TO EXPEDITE REVIEW OF THE GRAND RIVER BAND OF OTTAWA INDIANS OF
MICHIGAN TO SECURE A TIMELY AND JUST DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THAT
GROUP IS ENTITLED TO RECOGNITION AS A FEDERAL INDIAN TRIBE
S. 480
TO EXTEND FEDERAL RECOGNITION TO THE CHICKAHOMINY INDIAN TRIBE, THE
CHICKAHOMINY INDIAN TRIBE--EASTERN DIVISION, THE UPPER MATTAPONI TRIBE,
THE RAPPAHANNOCK TRIBE, INC., THE MONACAN INDIAN NATION, AND THE
NANSEMOND INDIAN TRIBE
__________
JUNE 21, 2006
WASHINGTON, DC
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
28-348 WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800
Fax: (202) 512ÿ092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Vice Chairman
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming KENT CONRAD, North Dakota
GORDON SMITH, Oregon DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma
John Tahsuda, III, Majority Staff Director
Sara G. Garland, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
S. 437 and S. 480, text of....................................... 3
Statements:
Adkins, Stephen R., chief, Cickahominy Indian Tribe, Charles
City, VA................................................... 86
Allen, Hon. George, U.S. Senator from Virginia............... 72
Comp, Fran, vice chairman, Grand River Bands of Ottawa
Indians, Grand Rapids, MI.................................. 91
Dorgan, Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota, vice
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 78
Fleming, Lee, director, Office of Federal Acknowledgment,
Department of the Interior, Washington, DC................. 79
Levin, Hon. Carl, U.S. Senator from Michigan................. 70
McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona, chairman,
Committee on Indian Affairs................................ 1
Moran, Hon. James P., U.S. Representative from Virginia...... 75
O'Conner, Michael, president, Virginia Petroleum, Convenience
and Grocery Association, Richmond, VA...................... 94
Rountree, Helen, professor emerita of anthropology, Old
Dominion University, Norfolk, VA........................... 89
Warner, Hon. John W., U.S. Senator from Virginia............. 77
Willerup, David, pastor, Westwood Reform Church, Muskegon, MI 93
Yob, Ron, chairman, Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians,
Grand Rapids, MI........................................... 91
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Adkins, Stephen R.(with attachment).......................... 101
Allen, Hon. George, U.S. Senator from Virginia (with
attachment)................................................ 105
Barton, Rev. Jonathan M., general minister, Virginia Council
of Churches (with attachment).............................. 121
Fleming, Lee................................................. 124
O'Conner, Michael............................................ 127
Rountree, Helen (with attachment)............................ 131
Warner, Hon. John W., U.S. Senator from Virginia.............
Willerup, David (with attachment)............................ 152
Yob, Ron (with attachment)................................... 167
Additional material submitted for the record:
Kildee, Hon. Dale E., U.S. Representative from Michigan
letter to Hon. Peter Hoekstra, U.S. Representative from
Michigan................................................... 221
THE THOMASINA E. JORDAN INDIAN TRIBES OF VIRGINIA FEDERAL RECOGNITION
ACT AND THE GRAND RIVER BAND OF OTTAWA INDIANS OF MICHIGAN REFERRAL ACT
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room
485, Senate Russell Office Building, Hon. John McCain (chairman
of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators McCain, Dorgan, and Thomas
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN McCAIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA,
CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. Good morning. We are here today to receive
testimony on two bills, S. 437, the Grand River Band of Ottawa
Indians of Michigan Referral Act, and S. 480, the Thomasina E.
Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of
2005.
These bills, if enacted, would allow the mentioned Indian
groups to bypass the Department of the Interior Federal
acknowledgement process regulations. According to a status
report sent to the committee by the DOI Office of Federal
Acknowledgement, each of the groups listed in the bills have
submitted petitions for recognition through the DOI
regulations.
The solemnity of Federal recognition which establishes a
government-to-government relationship between the United States
and an Indian tribe demands not only a fair and transparent
process but a process that is above reproach. And, while the
relationship established is Federal, the impacts are felt
locally, as well, as has been reported to this Committee by
States attorneys general and local communities.
Hearings held by this committee in the past have indicated
that the regulatory process, although well intentioned, can be
criticized as too slow, too costly, and too opaque. Recognition
by legislation, on the other hand, has been justly criticized
for being too summary and arbitrary. Therefore, it is Congress'
responsibility to ensure that the decision whether to extend
recognition to an Indian group be conducted in a fair and
transparent fashion, in keeping with the gravity of that
decision.
It has long been my view that Congress is ill equipped to
conduct the rigorous review needed to provide the basis for
such a decision. It is also my view that is substantively
unfair to provide a legislative path short-circuiting the
process for some tribes while others labor for years to get
through the regulations. On the other hand, there are, from
time to time, extenuating circumstances for particular Indian
groups that require Congressional resolution, and I have
supported legislation in those circumstances.
The witnesses today will provide testimony, both pro and
con, as to the unique history of each of the groups listed in
these bills and whether the extenuating circumstances exist
such that Congressional recognition is warranted.
I also welcome our colleagues from the Senate who are here
and those from the House who have sponsored this legislation.
[Text of S. 437 and S. 480 follow:]
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
The Chairman. Senator Thomas.
Senator Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really do not
have a statement. I think you have covered the two points. One
is why does it take so long to do this regularly, and should
there be shortcuts in the Congress. So I think it is important
to have the hearing and I thank you for that.
The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
Could Senator Allen and Senator Levin decide among
themselves as to who would like to go first by age or alphabet,
whichever is appropriate.
Senator Allen. I will let Senator Levin go first, since
seniority, and his bill was introduced 1 or 2 minutes before
mine.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Levin, welcome. I know you are busy with the
authorization bill on the floor, so we appreciate your being
here, and also Senator Allen's courtesy in having you go first.
Senator Levin.
STATEMENT OF HON. CARL LEVIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN
Senator Levin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
Senator Thomas. First let me thank you for holding this
hearing. I add my thanks to Senator Allen for his graciousness
in allowing me to go first, mainly not just because of my age,
which I do not like to emphasize, but because of the floor
responsibility which I am in the middle of, so thank you very
much, George.
Mr. Chairman, thank you and the committee for holding
today's hearing on the status of the Grand River Band of Ottawa
Indians.
In 1994 Congress passed and the President signed
legislation that gave Federal recognition to several Michigan
tribes, including the sister tribe of the Grand River Band, the
Little River Band of Ottawa Indians. The Grand River Band
should have been recognized at that time, but for various
reasons it was not.
To remedy this situation, Senator Stabenow and I have
introduced S. 437, the Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians of
Michigan Referral Act, which would refer the matter of Federal
status of the Grand River Band to the Secretary of the
Interior. The Secretary would then determine whether the Grand
River Band meets the same criteria that Congress used in 1994
to recognize the other tribes, and then act accordingly in an
expeditious manner.
I would note that our bill does not legislatively recognize
the Grand River Band; it does direct the Bureau of Indian
Affairs [BIA] to make a decision on the merits in a timely
fashion. It is a critical difference, but it is an important
difference, particularly in the light of the chairman's opening
statement.
The salient questions would be whether members of the Grand
River Band are descendants of persons who signed the relevant
treaties and whether today's members continue to reside in
their ancestral territory. We believe that the Grand River Band
meets those criteria. The historic record is clear that today's
Grand River Band are direct descendants of those who signed the
relevant treaties.
The Grand River Band are a very traditional Indian people,
and because of their traditional lifestyles they have a high
rate of tribal intermarriage. In addition to signing the
treaties, their ancestors were also instrumental in bringing
their land claims to the Indian Claims Commission in the late
1940's and 1950's. The Federal, State, and local governments
have had dealings with the Grand River Band on a continuing
basis.
The Grand River Band also lives today in the same areas of
Michigan that they have occupied when the first Europeans
arrived. They reside now in Mason, Oceana, Muskegon, and Kent
Counties. Burial mounds of the Grand River Band are located
along the Grand River, itself, from Lansing to Muskegon, and
they conduct their ceremonies and annual Grand River Ottawa pow
wow near these sacred mounds.
I want to mention very briefly there is another tribe in a
similar situation, the Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa
Indians who were signatories to the 1836 and 1855 treaties.
They have not been federally recognized, even though they
submitted their documented petition over 10 years ago. I hope
that the Burt Lake Band will also be the focus of future
Federal recognition.
Mr. Chairman, the importance of this bill is that we need
an expeditious decision by the regulators and the
administrators. That is critical because of land claim
judgments which were settled by Congress which were brought by
the Grand River and other treaty tribes during the Indian
Claims Commission period.
The 1997 act provided that funds will be distributed to
unrecognized tribes whose members are descendants of treaty
signatories, provided--and this is the key issue--the tribes
submitted a fully documented petition by December 15, 2000, and
that the BIA approves recognition by December 2006. That is
what the key issue here is, as to whether we can get the BIA to
make their decision in time to make a deadline which will have
a major financial impact in terms of a claim which was properly
and timely filed by this band.
So we have the Grand River Band that submitted its
petition, including 21 boxes of materials, on December 5, 2000,
in time. Nearly 4 years later the BIA granted the tribe its
first technical assistance meeting in 2004. In January 2005,
the BIA provided a detailed, 29-page letter describing
deficiencies and omissions in the Grand River Band's original
material. After 18 months of work, the Grand River Band now has
delivered its response on June 9.
The materials include certified copies of all of its
membership rolls, 700 members, along with a 63-page legal
response and a 265-page ethno-historical response prepared by
Dr. James McClerkin, who is the most eminent Native American
ethno-historian in Michigan. Each of the 749 citations is
supported by documentation, along with numerous maps, charts,
family trees, and population reports, so this exhausting and
expensive process has gone on.
We can't allow it to go back and forth for years and years.
It is essential that a BIA determination regarding the Grand
River Band be made in a timely way, because if no action is
taken within the next few months the Grand River Band will be
denied millions of dollars that have been specifically set
aside for the band by Federal law. It would be an injustice. It
would be an injustice not to allow the Grand River Band to take
its rightful place among the family of federally recognized
tribes. But, again, this legislation does not decide that; it
calls for an expeditious, prompt determination by the BIA.
I will leave for the record a number of technical changes
to be made in the bill. I won't go through all those now, but I
would, again, simply thank the committee for holding this
hearing. It is urgently necessary. We need to get this decision
made in time so that justice will not be denied a band that has
truly worked hard, done everything that it is required to do,
played by the rules, and now I believe and Senator Stabenow
believe is entitled to a favorable response, but, in any event,
is entitled to a decision within the time period provided by
law.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Levin. I know
you have to leave to go to the floor. Thank you. Your complete
statement will be made a part of the record.
May I also say I know that Senator Warner is on the floor
with this important legislation and he may not be able to be
here. His statement will be made part of the record.
I know that Senator Allen will speak. I think that you and
Senator Warner are basically in agreement on this issue.
Thank you, Senator Levin.
Senator Levin. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE ALLEN, U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA
Senator Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Thomas,
thank you for being here. I very much appreciate, Mr. Chairman,
your holding this hearing on this important issue to consider
what I consider to be the unique and extraordinary stories of
these six Virginia Indian tribes. I think you will see in not
just my testimony but the testimony of Chief Adkins and Dr.
Rountree the extenuating circumstances that call for
legislation and Congressional action insofar as these six
Virginia tribes are concerned.
I, of course, respectfully urge the committee to move as
quickly as possible to extend Federal recognition to the
Chickahominy, the Eastern Chickahominy, the Upper Mattaponi,
the Rappahannock, the Monacan, and the Nansemod Tribes by
voting in favor of this measure, S. 480, the Thomasina E.
Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of
2005.
I am joined in this measure with my colleague and partner
from Virginia, Senator Warner, and I think I speak for him, as
well, in this effort to get long overdue recognition and the
recognized status to a group of Americans who have been a part
of this country's history from before 400 years ago and
continue to be.
The six tribes seeking Federal recognition, Mr. Chairman,
have suffered humiliation and indignities that have gone
largely unnoticed by most Americans because many of these
injustices were not the result of any actions undertook by
these Virginia tribes. Instead, these indignities originated in
Government policies that sought to eliminate their culture and
heritage. I believe the circumstances of their situation
warrants Congressional recognition.
Some express concern about granting Federal recognition
without investigative processes used by the Department of the
Interior. However, if one closely examines the history of these
Virginia Indians they will see why this legislation has been
introduced and why some of my colleagues continue to push for
recognition on the House side, including Congressman Moran,
whom you will hear from shortly.
The history of these six tribes begins well before the
first Europeans landed on this continent. History has shown
their continued inhabitance in Virginia. Through much of the
last 400 years, they have undergone great hardship; however,
many have worked hard to maintain and preserve their tradition
and heritage. To put the long history of Virginia Indians in
context, while many of the federally recognized Indian tribes
have signed agreements with the Government of the United States
of America, the Virginia Indian tribes hold treaties with the
kings of England, including the Treaty of 1677 between the
tribes and Charles II.
Like the plight of many American Indian tribes over the
last 4 centuries, the Virginia tribes were continually moved
off their land and many assimilated into U.S. society. Even
then, the Virginia Indians were not extended the same rights as
were extended or offered to U.S. citizens. The years of racial
discrimination and coercive policies took a tremendous toll on
the population of Virginia Indians. Even while living under
such difficult circumstances and constant upheaval, the
Virginia Indians were able to maintain a consistent culture.
And here is where the extenuating circumstances--Mr.
Chairman, your criteria or burden of proof. Here is the
extenuating circumstances for the Virginia tribes. Following
the turn of the 20th century, members of these six tribes
suffered more injustice. New State mandates in the 20th century
forced Virginia Indians to renounce their Indian names and
their heritage.
They passed in Virginia what was called the ``Racial
Integrity Act of 1924.'' This was a damaging, wrong policy in
Virginia's history. This measure enforced by State officials,
the Registrar of the Bureau of Vital Statistics, in particular
a person named Dr. William Plecker sought to destroy all
records of the Virginia Indians and recognize them not as
Indians but as the designation was then, ``colored.''
People were threatened with imprisonment for noting
``Indian'' on a birth certificate. Mothers were not allowed to
take their newborn children home if they were given an Indian
name. Many generations were, of course, affected by this policy
that was enforced throughout Virginia and left many Indians
searching for their true identity.
A respected journalist who is here in the audience, Peter
Hardin, wrote a comprehensive, thorough article which appeared
on March 5, 2000, in ``The Richmond Times Dispatch,'' and I
would like to have that article made part of the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
Senator Allen. Now, the Racial Integrity Act, Mr. Chairman
and Senators Dorgan and Thomas, left the records of tens of
thousands of Virginia Indians inaccurate or deliberately
misleading until 1997. As Governor--I was Governor then--that
year I signed legislation that directed State agencies and
officials to correct all State records related to Virginia
Indians, reclassifying them as American Indian and not colored.
My administration championed this initiative when we learned of
the pain that this racist policy inflicted on many Virginia
citizens.
I was also briefed on the problem that many Virginia
Indians experienced when trying or attempting to trace their
ancestry or have their records of their children and deceased
relatives corrected. Now, to combat those injustices we want to
make sure that any American Indian whose certified copy of
birth record contains an incorrect racial designation were able
to obtain those for a fee. I think this is the height of insult
that someone to correct their record would then have to be
paying fees to get these old records, and so we made sure that
there wasn't any fee charged to correct a racial designation
that was actually not caused by an Indian individual but rather
by State government policy.
Now, because, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, of
the arrogant, manipulating, and wrongful policies of Virginia's
Racial Integrity Act, the Virginia Indian tribes have had a
difficult time collecting and substantiating official documents
necessary for Federal recognition. Through no fault of their
own, the records they need to meet the stringent and difficult
requirements for Federal recognition are simply not available.
I fear that, unless my colleagues and I take legislative
action, these six tribes will be faulted and denied Federal
recognition for circumstances over which they truly had and
have no control.
The Virginia tribes have filed a petition with the
Department of the Interior's Branch of Acknowledgement and
Research; however, I believe Congressional action is the
appropriate path for Federal recognition.
The six tribes represented today have faced discrimination
and attacks on their culture that are unheard of in most
regions and States of the United States. Federal recognition
brings some benefits to Virginia Indians, including access to
education, grants, housing assistance, and health care services
which are available to most American Indians. The education
grants, in particular, can provide an avenue for Virginia
Indians to improve their prospects for employment and hopefully
secure better-paying jobs.
The benefits of Federal recognition would not be
restitution for years of institutional racism and hostility,
but would provide new opportunities for members of these six
tribes. This recognition is a simple matter of justice, fair
treatment, and honor and pride of heritage and of family.
I can understand some concerns of Members of Congress have
with gambling and property claims that relate to federally
recognized Indian tribes. The issue of gambling is resolved in
this measure. It complies with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
and also the Virginia laws. The tribes presently, if they so
desired, could have bingo. They do not want to have bingo.
People are concerned about casinos. The reality is, if they
want to have casinos or anything they are going to need to have
approval from Virginia's government, and Virginia has horse
racing and the lottery. I do not foresee them having casinos.
If they did have casinos, then everyone could have casinos
under such law, but I do not see that happening and they can't
do it without Virginia government support.
The Virginia General Assembly, Mr. Chairman and members of
the committee, have passed resolutions supporting this
legislation. Governors have supported this legislation. This is
a right that has been stripped for many decades from Virginia
tribes. They are not seeking Federal recognition for
superficial gain, but it is to right a wrong.
I do believe, Mr. Chairman, that the circumstances in these
cases are special, and that is why, with my colleague, Senator
Warner, I have introduced this legislation. I am hopeful that
you and members of the committee will objectively review this
situation, consider the testimony and evidence that Chief
Adkins and Dr. Rountree will present to this committee, and
make the right decision to move this legislation to the floor
as was done by your predecessor chairman, Senator Campbell.
I thank you again, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee, for holding this hearing and your consideration of
this very important matter of justice and equity for Virginia
Indian tribes.
Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Senator Allen and ``Richmond Times
Dispatch'' article appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Allen. We very
much appreciate your advocacy, your knowledge, and your passion
that you bring to this issue. We know you can't stay. We thank
you very much for being here.
Congressman Moran, thank you. Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES P. MORAN, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM
VIRGINIA
Mr. Moran. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. It
is nice to see my former colleagues and now illustrious
Senators, Senator Dorgan and Senator Thomas. I appreciate the
fact that the three of you would come to this hearing.
We have been before this committee, as Senator Allen said,
and Senator Campbell worked to get this legislation favorably
through the committee. The story of the Virginia tribes
represent represents a unique travesty of justice, a national
travesty that we are dealing with today. This hearing is
particularly timely, because this Nation is about to recognize
and celebrate the Jamestown Settlement, which occurred 400
years ago.
That Jamestown Settlement could not have been successful if
it had not been for these Indian tribes teaching survival
skills to the English explorers and settlers. They welcomed
them in. They taught them how to farm, what foods could be
eaten. Many of the Indians were not immune to the diseases that
the English settlers carried, and they died as a result.
Subsequently, the settlers killed, expelled, subdued these
Indian tribes. The Indians lost their land. For much of the
19th and 20th centuries they were treated in the same way that
African slaves were treated: Without any rights. As Senator
Allen just described, this was deliberate policy. One of the
most troubling legislation actually occurred in the first half
of the 20th century. I am going to try to summarize some of
this because Senator Warner has joined us, as well, and I do
think it is quite a testament to the importance of this issue
that both of our Senators are so strongly supporting Federal
recognition.
As I say, this is a unique situation, at least in two ways.
These six tribes signed treaties, but they were treaties with
the kings of England. They still exist, but they, were not made
with the American Government.
Senator Allen suggested that the most important treaty was
the Treaty of 1677 with King Charles II. That treaty has been
recognized by the Commonwealth of Virginia every year for the
last 328 years. The Governor, and when Senator Allen was
Governor he accepted tributes from the tribes, often turkeys
and other game, and it is celebrated at the State capital.
There is no question about the legitimacy of this treaty.
But in the intervening years between 1677 and the birth of
this Nation, these tribes, as I say, were dispossessed of their
land, and they were too weak to pose any threat, so they were
never in a position to negotiate or receive recognition from
the nascent Federal Government. It was the first English
permanent settlement in the New World, and the Virginia Indians
were the ones that enabled it to happen, and yet they have not
been recognized by the U.S. Federal Government.
The second reason that this is unique is that they were the
victims of I guess you would have to call a ``paper genocide''
that was a result of the laws and, at that time, the attitude
of the Commonwealth of Virginia. At the time that the Federal
Government grated Native Americans the right to vote,
Virginia's elected officials were embracing the eugenics
movement and adopted racially hostile laws that were targeted
at those classes of people who didn't fit into the dominant
white society.
Those laws and attitudes culminated with the enactment of
the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. It empowered zealots like
Walter Plecker. He was a State official. He destroyed the
records of these Indian tribes. He reclassified in Orwellian
fashion, as Senator Allen has said, all non-whites as colored.
In order to get your child out of a hospital, you had to check
a box whether you were white or colored, in the term that was
used then. It particularly targeted Native Americans so that
they could deny them their identity.
The letter hasn't shown up, but people talk about a letter
that Mr. Plecker wrote to Adolph Hitler bragging about the fact
that he had eliminated the identity of the Native Americans in
the State. I do not know whether such a letter actually exists,
but that is exactly what it was all about: To eliminate Native
Americans in Virginia.
You could be sentenced to 1 year in jail if you did not
check off the right box. There were only two boxes. So
obviously what happened is that there were no more Native
Americans left in the State.
Now, the Racial Integrity Act was struck down by the
Federal courts, but not until 1967. For up to 50 years the
State officials waged a war to destroy all public and many
private records that would have affirmed the existence of
Native Americans in Virginia. Now, historians have affirmed
that there is no other State in the Nation that compares to
Virginia's efforts to eradicate its citizens' Indian identity.
All of Virginia's State recognized tribes have filed
petitions with the Bureau of Acknowledgement seeking Federal
recognition, but it is a very difficult burden, as you know,
Mr. Chairman, for these tribes to be able to get that kind of
acknowledgement. They have been told that they probably won't
process the paperwork in their lifetimes.
They weren't able to get jobs. They weren't able to get a
public school education. The only education they've got were
from religious groups, missionaries. That is one of the
reasons, as Senator Allen referred to, they believe gambling is
a sin. They do not want to have anything to do with gambling.
They could gamble if they wanted with bingo parlors. They won't
do it, even though the American Legion or the VFW bingo parlor
is down the street. They won't do it. This is a very difficult
and really undignified process for Indians to have to go
through, particularly these tribes where their records were
officially destroyed. That just aggravates the injustice that
has already been visited upon these tribes.
It wasn't until 1997 when then Governor George Allen signed
legislation directing State agencies to correct these State
records that had been deliberately altered to list Virginia
Indians as colored. The law allows living members of the tribes
to try to correct those records, but the law can't correct the
damage done to past generations; 2 years later the Virginia
General Assembly adopted a resolution calling upon us in the
Congress to enact legislation recognizing the Virginia Indian
tribes. Well, that was 7 years ago.
Now, we have submitted that legislation. We have continued
to push it. We are counting on you now, Mr. Chairman and the
members of this committee. There is no doubt that the
Chickahominy, the Eastern Chickahominy, the Monacan, the
Nansemod, the Rappahannock, and the Upper Mattaponi Tribes
exist. They do exist. They've existed on a continuous basis
since before western European settlers first stepped foot in
America. They are here with us today. Helen Rountree will
testify on the next panel.
The Chairman. Congressman Moran, would you please
summarize, because----
Mr. Moran. I will. She spent her lifetime researching this.
You are going to hear from her, Senator.
This is a compelling case, and I hope you will correct this
travesty of justice. We are counting on you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Moran appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Congressman Moran. And
thank you for taking the time to come over today and be a part
of this and add important testimony on this issue.
We now recognize our friend and colleague, Chairman Warner.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. WARNER, U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA
Senator Warner. Thank you, Senator McCain and members of
the committee.
First, I'd like to commend the committee and its leadership
in seeking to rectify obvious wrongs inflicted many years ago
in the history of our State. And I want to commend the members
of the tribes who have joined here this morning, and hundreds
of others who are back in their homes awaiting the outcome of
this very important hearing.
I want you to know that throughout my career here I have
supported Federal recognition of these tribes. I am certain
that we can devise a means where we can do so, albeit
recognizing a lot of the records do not exist. Somehow, we've
got the power, I believe, here in the Congress to do what is
right.
My only concern, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
is the issue of gambling. We've witnessed how gambling in
various parts of the United States has literally transformed
communities, transformed the quality of life sought by so many
people. While the current leadership of these tribes have
represented they have no interest in gambling, we all recognize
we are not immortal, and others will succeed as time marches on
with regard to the management of their tribal desires.
Therefore, I want you to know that, while I strongly will
work to get this Federal recognition, I equally will strongly
work to resist any legislation that does not ensure that these
areas designated by the Federal Government and the people on
them will conduct themselves consistent, as it relates to
gambling, as the law of the Commonwealth of Virginia, whatever
that law may be at such time as that issue may arise.
With that in mind, I join my colleagues this morning and I
implore the committee to exercise every possible way to achieve
our goals, but at the same time achieve them such that the
issue of gaming will be controlled by the State law.
I thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I thank
you for taking the time to be in here this morning.
Senator Dorgan.
STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH
DAKOTA, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, first of all, thank you. I
missed just the first part of Senator Allen's testimony. A bill
that I've introduced is being heard in the Commerce Committee,
so I am sorry I was delayed. But thank you for offering us the
historical perspective and the interest that you have with
respect to justice for these tribes. I think the committee has
to try to work through these issues, and your testimony is very
valuable to us. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Senator Thomas, I thank you for coming this
morning. I appreciate it. And Senator Warner, we certainly
understand your concern on this gambling issue, which seems to
pervade this issue of tribal recognition and has caused
considerable controversy in other States as Indian tribes
achieve recognition or entities receive recognition as
recognized tribes.
I thank the witnesses for coming this morning. I appreciate
your being here. Thanks again.
Our next panel: Lee Fleming is director of the Office of
Federal Acknowledgement of the Department of the Interior.
Welcome, Mr. Fleming. Your complete statement will be made
part of the record. We thank you for being here this morning.
Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF LEE FLEMING, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF FEDERAL
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Fleming. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. My name is Lee Fleming and I am the director of the
Office of Federal Acknowledgement at the Department of the
Interior. I am here today to provide the Administration's
testimony on two bills, S. 437, entitled ``The Grand River Band
of Ottawa Indians of Michigan Referral Act,'' and S. 480, ``The
Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal
Recognition Act of 2005.''
The acknowledgement of the continued existence of another
sovereign is one of the most solemn and important
responsibilities delegated to the Secretary of the Interior.
Federal acknowledgement enables Indian tribes to participate in
Federal programs and establishes a government-to-government
relationship between the United States and the Indian tribe.
Acknowledgement carries with it certain immunities and
privileges, including exemptions from State and local
jurisdictions and the ability of newly acknowledged Indian
tribes to undertake certain economic opportunities.
The Department recognizes that under the United States
Constitution Congress has the authority to recognize a
distinctly Indian community as an Indian tribe, but along with
that authority it is important that all parties have the
opportunity to review all the information available before
recognition is granted. That is why the Department of Interior
supports a recognition process that requires groups to go
through the Federal acknowledgement process, because it
provides a deliberative, uniform mechanism to review and
consider groups seeking Indian tribal status.
Legislation such as S. 437 and S. 480 would allow these
groups to bypass this process, allowing them to avoid the
scrutiny to which other groups have been subjected. While
legislation in Congress can be a tool to accomplish this goal,
a legislative solution should be used sparingly in cases where
there is an overriding reason to bypass the process.
Interior strongly supports all groups going through the
Federal acknowledgement process under 25 C.F.R. part 83. The
Department believes that the Federal acknowledgement process
set forth in 25 C.F.R. part 83 allows for the uniform and
rigorous review necessary to make an informed decision
establishing this important government-to-government
relationship.
Before the development of these regulations, the Federal
Government and the Department of the Interior made
determinations as to which groups were Indian tribes when
negotiating treaties and determining which groups could
reorganize under the Indian Reorganization Act. Ultimately,
treaty rights and land claims litigation highlighted the
importance of these tribal status decisions; thus, the
Department in 1978 recognized the need to end ad hoc decision-
making and adopt uniform regulations for Federal
acknowledgement.
Under the Department's regulations, petitioning groups must
demonstrate that they meet each of the seven mandatory
criteria. The petitioner must:
One, demonstrate that it has been identified as an American
Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900;
Two, show that a predominant portion of the petitioning
group comprises a distinct community and has existed as a
community from historical times until the present;
Three, demonstrate that it has maintained political
influence or authority over its members as an autonomous entity
from historical times until the present;
Four, provide a copy of the group's present governing
document, including its membership criteria;
Five, demonstrate that its membership consists of
individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or from
historical Indian tribes that combined and functioned as a
single autonomous political entity and provide a current
membership list;
Six, show that the membership of the petitioning group is
composed principally of persons who are not members of any
acknowledged North American Indian Tribe; and, last,
Seven, demonstrate that neither the petitioner nor its
members are subject of Congressional legislation that has
expressly terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship.
A criterion shall be considered met if the available
evidence establishes a reasonable likelihood of the validity of
the facts relating to that criterion. A petitioner must satisfy
all seven mandatory criteria in order for the Department to
acknowledge the continued tribal existence of a group as an
Indian tribe. Currently, the Department's workload of 19 groups
seeking Federal acknowledgement consists of 10 petitions on
active consideration and nine petitions on the ready waiting
for active consideration.
Now, with respect to S. 437, the Grand River Band of Ottawa
Indians, and another petitioning group, the Burt Lake Band of
Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Incorporated, both of these groups
are affected by the timing of deadlines for the distribution of
judgment funds under the Michigan Indian Land Claims Settlement
Act. Both groups have applied for Federal acknowledgement under
the regulations.
The Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians, which would receive
recognition under this bill, has not submitted a complete
documented petition demonstrating its ability to meet all seven
mandatory criteria. The group did submit partial documentation
in December 2000, and received a technical assistance review
letter from the office in January 2005. The purpose of the
technical assistance review is to provide the group with the
opportunity to supplement its petition due to obvious
deficiencies or significant omissions. As of last week, the
Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians submitted additional
documentation in response to the technical assistance review
letter.
Under section 110 of the Settlement Act, if the Grand River
Band of Ottawa Indians or the Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and
Chippewa Indians, Incorporated, are acknowledged before
December 15, 2006, each could receive a significant lump sum
from the judgment fund in excess of $4.4 million, provided that
the group and its membership meet the eligibility criteria set
forth under the Settlement Act.
If no new tribes are recognized before that date, the money
is, instead, distributed per capita to the Indians on the
descendent roll. The Secretary would have 90 days to segregate
the funds and to deposit those funds into a separate account
established in the group's name.
Section 205 of this bill provides that, notwithstanding
section 110 of the Michigan Indian Land Claims Settlement Act,
effective beginning on the date of enactment of this act any
funds set aside by the Secretary for use by the tribes shall be
made available to the tribe.
Under S. 437 and the Settlement Act, funds are not set
aside for the Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians until they are
recognized. Although not clear, we interpret section 205 of S.
437 to mean that, if the Grand River Band is acknowledged prior
to December 15, 2006, any funds set aside for them under
section 110 of the Settlement Act would not be subject to plans
approved in accordance with the Settlement Act.
We do not support section 205 because it takes away the
membership's right to participate in the development of the use
and distribution plan for the judgment funds. If S. 437 is
enacted, we suggest that section 205 be amended.
The Department also has concerns over the three different
membership lists referenced in sections 102 and 202. It is
unclear why three different lists would be required. In
addition, S. 437 appears to be ambiguous concerning the nature
and extent of jurisdiction and possible conflicts with treaty
rights of other Federally recognized tribes. The Department
would like to work with the committee in order to find an
equitable solution to all parties connected to the Settlement
Act.
Now, with respect to S. 480, the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian
Tribes of Virginia Recognition Act of 2005, this bill provides
Federal recognition as Indian tribes to six Virginia groups:
The Chickahominy Indian Tribe; the Chickahominy Indian Tribe
Eastern Division; the Upper Mattaponi Tribe; the Rappahannock
Tribe, Incorporated; the Monacan Indian Nation; and the
Nansemod Indian Tribe.
Under the regulations, these six groups have submitted
letters of intent and partial documentation to petition for
Federal acknowledgement as Indian tribes. Some of these groups
are awaiting technical assistance reviews under the
Department's regulations. As stated above, the purpose of the
technical assistance review is to provide the groups with
opportunities to supplement their petitions due to obvious
deficiencies and significant omissions. Today, none of these
petitioning groups have submitted completed documented
petitions demonstrating their ability to meet all seven
mandatory criteria.
The Federal acknowledgment regulations provide a uniform
mechanism to review and consider groups seeking tribal status.
S. 480 and S. 437, however, allow these groups to bypass these
standards, allowing them to avoid the scrutiny to which other
groups have been subjected.
We look forward to working with these groups and assisting
them further as they continue under the Federal acknowledgment
process.
This concludes my prepared statement, and I would be happy
to answer any questions the Committee may have.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Fleming appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Fleming.
You just mentioned that they have not submitted the
documentation for the Federal recognition process under your
responsibilities?
Mr. Fleming. All of these groups have submitted partial
documentation, some more than others. And with respect to the
Grand River Bands, they just recently submitted about 10
archival boxes last week.
The Chairman. What about the Virginia tribes?
Mr. Fleming. The Virginia tribes have provided
documentation over time. We have been in the midst of
developing their technical assistance review letters, but they
are far from completing their documented petitions.
The Chairman. Was your office involved in the drafting of
either of the bills before us today?
Mr. Fleming. No, sir.
The Chairman. In the Virginia case, there is overwhelming
evidence that there has been substantial destruction or
corruption of documentation. Is it realistic to believe that
they could meet the Federal acknowledgment process criteria?
Mr. Fleming. The regulations allow for all kinds of
evidence, and evidence is found on the Federal level, the State
level, the county level, the local level--church records, for
example--and tribal group and family records. We have had many
groups provide that type of documentation.
In doing cursory review of records in many of these
counties where these groups reside, there are records for these
groups to research and provide under the process. We certainly
would like to provide technical assistance to show what these
documents will show to help each group as they prepare their
petitions.
The Chairman. How do you respond to criticism of your
office that the process takes so long?
Mr. Fleming. It is a necessary thorough process. We have
been reviewed by the Government Accountability Office [GAO]. We
have understood the length of time it takes for petitioning
groups, but it is a process also burdened by the number of
groups that are already lined up in the process.
The Chairman. What was the GAO's conclusions?
Mr. Fleming. The GAO's conclusions were that they recommend
that we improve on the timeliness and the transparency of this
process, because this process affects many----
The Chairman. Are you implementing those recommendations?
Mr. Fleming. Yes; we are.
The Chairman. How soon can you let us know of your
implementation of those recommendations?
Mr. Fleming. We can certainly provide the committee with--
--
The Chairman. I mean when will it be completed?
Mr. Fleming. The overall process?
The Chairman. The implementation of those recommendations
by the GAO.
Mr. Fleming. Those recommendations have been----
The Chairman. They have already been implemented?
Mr. Fleming [continuing]. Implemented.
The Chairman. Finally, under the conditions, the normal
situation as it prevails today, if both of these entities were
federally recognized tribes, what is the situation as to regard
to both of them being able to engage in gaming?
Mr. Fleming. If these tribes are recognized, they would
have the same equal footing as the other 561 federally
recognized tribes. With regard to the Virginia groups, however,
there is a provision that addresses the ability of these groups
with regard to gaming.
The Chairman. And the case prohibiting it?
Mr. Fleming. Prohibiting.
The Chairman. In the case of the Michigan legislation,
there is none?
Mr. Fleming. I believe that is correct.
The Chairman. I thank you, Mr. Fleming.
Senator Thomas.
Senator Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you have
asked most of the question.
I guess you said, of course, you are concerned about going
through the Congress, but 437 doesn't go through the Congress,
it simply asks for your department to get the job done, doesn't
it?
Mr. Fleming. That is correct. The bill has deadlines that
are stale. Most of those deadlines in the proposed bill have
already passed, so something would need to be addressed with
regard to a new schedule or dates.
Senator Thomas. Why would you say that you haven't come to
some decision prior to now? Why is it taking so long to come up
with a final decision?
Mr. Fleming. Senator, we have so many groups that are ahead
of some of these other petitioning groups. They have been lined
up, and we have nine groups, for example, that are under
various phases of what is known as ``active consideration.''
This is a period of time where our professionals are looking at
the evidence of these nine particular groups. Once those groups
are cleared off of active consideration, then we have ten
groups that are lined up that are ready, that have completed
documentation, and then we are able to apply our resources to
reviewing those 10 petitioning groups.
Senator Thomas. How long have you been considering the
Michigan group?
Mr. Fleming. The Michigan groups, the Burt Lake Band
submitted their letter of intent in 1985, the Grand River Band
group submitted their letter of intent in the midnineties. Now,
a letter of intent simply says we are interested in the
process. Under the Settlement Act and those deadlines, those
petitioning groups did meet some of these intermediary
deadlines for getting a documented petition into our office. In
fact, Burt Lake is one of the groups that is further along.
They are expecting a final determination in September of this
year.
Senator Thomas. Well, I agree with the idea that it really
shouldn't go around this, but can there be groups that have
been longer than 10 or 12 years ago that are still pending? I
do not understand the administrative process that you are 10
years off and you still are behind a bunch of other groups.
What is the story?
Mr. Fleming. This is a concern that I think we all----
Senator Thomas. Well what are you doing about it? I mean,
having a concern doesn't solve the problem.
Mr. Fleming. Let me give you an example. One group
submitted their letter of intent in 1978. The regulation allows
the group to then research documentation. Twenty years later
the group submitted their material. No fault of their own other
than it is a process that takes time to research and find the
documents to provide in the process. So the Department gets
blamed for those 20 years that the group is working on its
petition. Then we issue a technical assistance review letter.
Senator Thomas. I do not think we are talking about how
long it takes for them to do it; it is when it gets to the
department, how soon does that decision come?
Mr. Fleming. When the petitioner goes on active
consideration, then the regulation provides certain regulatory
due process periods of time. For example, 12 months is involved
in the review of the evidence to make sure that the evidence is
applied to all 7 mandatory criteria. When we propose a finding,
either to acknowledge or to not acknowledge, that allows for
then a 6-month public comment period to allow the petitioner
and the public to comment on our finding.
Then the petitioner is allowed to months to respond to any
comments that may have come in from an interested party. Then
the Department has 2 months to work on the production of the
final determination. So right there you are just under the
regulatory process of these various phases of due process. That
is 22 months.
Senator Thomas. Okay. Well, I understand the difficulty,
but I just think we need to be as watchful as we can to make
sure that these things do not go on for years standing in line.
What would you do then in 480, finally, if, because of the
age of the years involved here, that some of these documents
that you require are not available but that the evidence is
still there that should happen? I guess----
Mr. Fleming. I would state that the records are there. The
records are available on the Federal level. For example, the
Federal census is taken every 10 years. You have the 1930 being
the most available right now. These groups should look for
their families and members on the Federal Census. In fact, in a
cursory look some of the individuals are even identified as
Rappahannock, Mattaponi, or Pamonky. This is 1930 in the middle
of that period of time when Virginia had some of its policies
affecting vital records. But even vital records, the names of
the parents and the names of the children are listed with their
dates of birth, place of birth, and so on and so forth. These
are the types of records that help demonstrate the genealogies
of these families.
Sure enough, you may find different designations in these
records, but even when you do a cursory look of records on the
county level you are finding hunting and gaming documents where
individuals are listed as ``IN'' or ``IND,'' standing for
Indian. Church records, these records are very helpful in
demonstrating events that are taking place in the communities.
You almost have to follow the genealogy of a church, because
some members will disassociate from a mother church and create
another church and then another church, but then you go back
and you look at those types of records.
Our staff is ready to assist these groups in identifying
these various records at these various levels. Civil War
destroyed some of the courthouse records, but from 1865 to the
present there are records there to help document those time
periods. Prior to that there are other records on the other
levels that I had just mentioned.
Senator Thomas. Well, I know it is difficult, but I just
think we have to come to some decisions, and it can't go on
endlessly without some decision-making.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Allen, would you like to ask
questions?
Senator Allen. First of all, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
letting me be an ex officio member of the committee.
The Chairman. You are always welcome here.
Senator Allen. Well, I wanted to hear the testimony of
Chief Adkins, who will explain, as well as Dr. Rountree, on why
it is so difficult to get these records, mostly because of
vital statistics, the best records, of course, purged any
reference to Indian or American Indian or whatever, anything
other than white or colored.
One can say that this is a simple thing to do, but I would
simply ask Mr. Fleming, you have read our legislation here. As
you go through the documentation, the treaties, the
Chickahominy, the Nansemod, the Rappahannock, all these
different tribes, it is very interesting history, really, of
Virginia. Some of these treaties were entered into in 1614
before the Pilgrims even landed up at Plymouth Rock. And you
just see trying to reconstruct, it is more than just the last
few years. It is even prior to that.
Do you have any question whatsoever that these tribes do
exist, or people have the bloodlines, that there are
Chickahominy, there are Rappahannock Indians, there are Monacan
Indians or Upper Mattaponi and the others that are involved in
our legislation?
Mr. Fleming. The groups exist, and we know they exist
because they have petitioned under our process. We also have,
in total, actually 12 groups from Virginia that have petitioned
for Federal acknowledgment. What struck me in looking at the
bill--and when you cursorily look at all the events that were
listed chronologically, it raised a yellow flag in my mind
because there are evidentiary gaps that are in these findings.
We would advise then, under technical assistance to these
groups, find documents to help supplement these periods where
there are gaps. Our staff did do a cursory look at the various
types of records that could be found at the State archives, the
State library, in the counties, in the churches, in the
families of these groups, and, as you start to gather the
evidence, you align the evidence chronologically under the
seven mandatory criteria to help demonstrate that there is a
continued tribal existence socially and politically and that
they do, indeed, descend from an historical tribe or tribes.
I think what other concern I have is in the bill, as we
compare it to our petitioners in the process, there are two
Rappahannock groups, there are two Chickahominy groups, there
are two Mattaponi groups that, when you have two groups, there
are questions with regard to then membership. What is going on
here? These issues are ironed out through the acknowledgment
process and it allows for clear definition of who is who and
who belongs to whatever group.
Senator Allen. How long do you think it would take to go
through your processes to have these tribes recognized using
your agency?
Mr. Fleming. It depends on the group in doing research,
because a lot of that time is involved with the research. It
would be interesting to see if there could be some cooperation
between not only our office in providing technical assistance,
but other institutions. The Commonwealth of Virginia has
tremendous research institutions, and one can foresee some kind
of coordination between the groups and academia, where most of
these records are kept in their institutions, such as William
and Mary, for example. The Brafforton School for Indians was
established in the early 1600's and ran and then eventually
became William and Mary. Those records have references to
Indian students who came from these various groups of today.
Senator Allen. What's the average for a tribe to be
recognized using your agency, as opposed to a----
Mr. Fleming. The GAO did an analysis of that. They looked
at the various groups. Our regulation went through revisions in
1994, but we can provide you the data on that, because not only
do you have work that is being done by each group, but you are
also having work done by the Department of Interior. They broke
down some of those time frames to give an idea of how long it
took a group to document versus how long did it take a group to
go through our process.
Senator Allen. So what is the answer to the question?
Mr. Fleming. I'd have to get back to you on that.
Senator Allen. Roughly.
Mr. Fleming. Roughly probably 6 to 10 years.
Senator Allen. Total?
Mr. Fleming. Some groups less, some groups more.
Senator Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Fleming.
Our next panel is: Stephen Adkins, who is the chief of the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe; Helen Rountree, who is the professor
emerita of anthropology at the Old Dominion University; Ron
Yob, who is the chairman of the Grand River Bands of Ottawa
Indians; Reverend David Willerup, the pastor of the Westwood
Reform Church in Muskegon, Michigan; and Michael O'Connor, who
is the president, Virginia Petroleum, Convenience, and Grocery
Association in Richmond, VA.
Chief Adkins, we will begin with you, sir.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN R. ADKINS, CHIEF, CHICKAHOMINY INDIAN
TRIBE, CHARLES CITY, VA
Mr. Adkins. Thank you, Senator McCain, Chairman McCain, and
members of the committee for allowing me to testify here today.
I will omit some of my prepared oral testimony. Senator
Allen has spoken to some of my points, as well as Senator
Warner and Congressman Moran. But I would like to say that one
of the bright spots in our history occurred in 1997 when
Senator Allen signed that legislation that compelled the State
to go back and change the vital statistics, the birth records
of my tribe and several other tribes in Virginia, and also I
would thank the Senator for his unflagging support from the
State House to the Halls of Congress.
You, Senator McCain, I would like to thank you for the fact
that you told Chief Ken Adams and myself in February of this
year at the winter conference of the National Congress of
American Indians that you would give consideration to and look
at the bill that we have before this committee, and I thank you
for honoring that commitment and having us here today. This is
the third time, in fact, that I have appeared before the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee, so my story really hasn't changed. It
hasn't changed since 1607 when we actually greeted the English
settlers as sovereign nations. The Senator, Senator Allen,
talked about our treaties.
The first treaty engaged with the colonists was in 1614,
that being between the Chickahominy and English settlers. Then
we had treaties in intervening years. In the 1640's, the treaty
that Congressman Moran alluded to delineated some of the
responsibilities of the tribes and the officials regarding what
the tribes would do and what the governing body would do. One
provision of that treaty was that a tribute would be made every
year to the State House as a condition of that treaty. That
tradition has continued for over 3\1/2\ centuries, which I
think would lend some compelling evidence to some of the points
that Mr. Fleming brought up regarding the continuity of our
people for those years.
I would like to say a little bit about Walter Plecker. I
won't go into the whole thing because that has been talked
about today. I would like to mention that we have gotten
support from three Governors--Governor Allen, Governor Warner,
Governor Kane--letters that have come pledging their support
for our efforts around Federal recognition.
But when I think about Walter Plecker, the rabid separatist
that he was, and those things that were done to my people, it
is not something I like to talk about, but what that caused us
to do was unite more strongly as tribes and to really work hard
to preserve our heritage.
Now, the obvious barriers that we had were barriers that
were created that caused the public to look at us as something
other than Indian, so we fought the system and the image that
we had in the public. No other State had officials that were as
rigid, as zealous enforcers of such a vile act as Virginia had,
so we faced the bureaucratic obstacles as well as the scrutiny
of the public in maintaining our heritage. Very hard to do. But
I would say it made us stronger. Some people under adverse
conditions wither and die away; I would say this made us
stronger and gave us a more compelling desire and urge and more
deliberateness in pursuing our rightful place as recognized
tribes within these great United States of America.
I am glad to be here today to offer this testimony.
I have with me today Dr. Helen Rountree, who is prepared to
assist with any questions you may have about our history.
Senator McCain, I could tell you much about the publicized
stories of 17th century Virginia, and you have heard much of
that, so I won't talk much about that. But I would say that
well known is the story of Chief Powhatan, and more widely
known is the story of his daughter, Pocahontas, whose very
picture hangs in the Capitol Building here in D.C., along with
her husband, her English husband John Rolfe.
I would say that without the hospitality of my forebears,
the first permanent English settlement would not have been
Jamestown. To be sure, there would have been one, but it
wouldn't have been Jamestown.
People know about the 17th century and how that early
history so callously denied our Indian heritage, but I want you
to remember most and recognize most is that myself, along with
the chiefs here today, stand on the shoulders of those people
who gave their lives, whose very lives were destroyed because
of the harsh realities that existed in the 17th century and
have carried on through the 20th and now the 21st century. I
stand here on the shoulders of Chief Wowinchopunk, who was
chief of the Paspahegh, whose whole tribe was annihilated by
1610. Some of those descendants found refuge with the
Chickahominy Tribe, but as a tribal group they were destroyed.
That is 3 years after the English settlement.
As we commemorate Jamestown 2007, the birth of this great
Nation, those of Indian heritage in Virginia are reminded of
this history and it is painful. We are actively involved in the
commemoration of the birth of this great Nation and we think it
is the right thing to do. We know that one of the legacies of
this effort will be that our story will be told the way it
happened. The legacy will find its way into the history books,
the textbooks of our schools, so that is a good thing.
But we are seeking recognition through an act of Congress
rather than the BIA because we think the actions taken by the
Commonwealth of Virginia during the 20th century erased our
history by altering key documents as part of a systematic plan,
a systematic plan to deny our existence. We think this state
action separates us from other tribes of this country that were
protected from this blatant denial of Indian heritage and
identity, so it distinguishes us from those tribes.
The Senator talked about the article from Peter Hardin, so
I won't mention that, but I do concur that I would like to see
that in the records.
It was socially unacceptable to kill Indians in Virginia,
but we became fair game to this documented genocide, the
eugenics movement, and all of the attendant things that
occurred under the leadership of Walter Plecker that sought to
destroy who we are, that Racial Integrity Act of 1924.
Now, the thing about it, that law stayed in effect half of
my life. My Mom and Dad traveled to Washington, DC, on February
20, 1935, to be married as Indians because they couldn't do it
in the Commonwealth of Virginia. People ask me why I do not
have an Indian name. The answer is quite simple. My Mom and Dad
weighed the risks of naming me what they would have loved to
name me and said it is not worth the risk of going to jail.
Now, I am not alone in that plight. There are people here today
who do not carry Indian names because of the threat of going to
jail for a year if that happened. Again, no other ethnic
community was probably denied in that way.
I would like to talk a little bit about----
The Chairman. Chief, you have got to talk a little bit
faster. We are well over time. I have been informed we have a
vote at 11:15, so we want to be able to give all of the----
Mr. Adkins. Okay. Give me 1\1/2\ minutes.
We think that recognition through Congress because of the
history of racism in very recent times that intimidated our
people, prevented us from believing that we could fit into a
petition process that would either understand or reconcile the
State action with our heritage. We fear the process would not
be able to see beyond the corrupted documentation that was
designed to deny our heritage.
Mr. McCain, the story I just told you I do not like to
tell. It is very painful. But that is how we got here to day.
I would like to end this testimony with a quote from Chief
Powhatan. I think it is very timely and I would like for you to
hear that. I used this quote last year but I want this year to
specially honor him. Last summer I was one of two chiefs to be
hosted by the British Government. We went to England and we
were honored, first time a Virginia Indian had been honored in
England since Pocahontas visited there with her husband, John
Rolfe. But here is that quote:
I wish that your love to us might not be less than ours to
you. Why should you take by force that which you can have from
us by love? Why should you destroy us who have provided you
with food? What can you get by war? In such circumstances, my
men must watch, and if a twig should but break all would cry
out, `Here comes Captain Smith.' And so, in this miserable
manner to end my miserable life. And, Captain Smith, this might
soon be your fate too. I, therefore, exhort you to peaceable
councils, and above all I insist that the guns and swords, the
cause of all our jealousy and uneasiness, be removed and sent
away.
Senator McCain, our bill would give us this peace that
Chief Powhatan sought, it would honor the treaty our ancestors
made with the early colonists and the Crown, and at this time
in our history when we are commemorating the 400th anniversary
of the birth of the greatest nation in the world, it would show
respect for our heritage and our identity, that through
jealousy perhaps has never before been acknowledged.
Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Adkins appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
The written statements of all the witnesses will be
included in the record completely. We are going to have to
stick fairly close to the 5-minute rule here because of the
vote that is going to take place so we have time to hear your
testimony as well as answer questions. I apologize for any
inconvenience that may cause you.
Dr. Rountree, thank you, and thank you for all the hard
work you have done for many years on this issue.
STATEMENT OF HELEN ROUNTREE, PROFESSOR EMERITA OF ANTHROPOLOGY,
OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY, NORFOLK, VA
Ms. Rountree. Thank you, sir. I will make this very
succinct and count on questions afterwards. I am going to cut
down even the few pages I have.
I am Dr. Helen Rountree, an ethno-historian trained in both
anthropology and history, but my primary area is cultural
anthropology.
I started working with American Indians in Nevada and
worked with people who were more fluent in Shoshone than they
were in English, but in 1969 I became acquainted with Virginia
Indians, saw serious parallels, and said I had better get to
work and begin researching here. I have been doing it ever
since.
I not only have spent time visiting and living with the
modern people, but I have literally scoured the published and
unpublished records in Virginia, including the speed reading
the often unindexed county records from 1607 onward. I have
found the records that Mr. Fleming is looking for. I hope you
will ask me what I have done with them besides publishing them,
for I have produced no less than six books on the subject of
the Powhatan Indians of Virginia. Number seven is in the
hopper. The one that is most germane to this hearing came out
16 years ago, ``The Powhatan Indians of Virginia Through Four
Centuries.'' Roughly one-third of the book is end notes and
bibliography which gives the resources of the records I found
to prove I didn't make anything up. These records are going to
be easy to throw in a Xerox machine and send to Washington if I
ever get the word to do it. I have yet to get a word to do it.
Do please ask me about that. It is a point of bitterness with
me. Sorry. It is on behalf of the Indians I work with.
I am not the first social scientist to work with these
tribes in Virginia. There have been social scientists,
including anthropologists like me who specialize in American
Indians, North American Indians, working with them for 120
years, just under 120. So it is not as if I am the first, and
it is not as if they are recently appearing. They are not.
I learned early on what it was going to take to show that
ethnic groups were actually here. The criteria I was using were
subsequently codified by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. They
were not news to me. I knew those criteria, too. In my opinion,
the six tribes represented here today meet those criteria. Why
they did not choose the BIA route is their own business and
they can answer that, but they do meet the criteria. The people
are authentic. On that basis, I will stand firm.
There are several things that make the Indian groups in
Virginia an exception, and many of them, in my opinion as an
outsider, have to do with Pocahontas, believe it or not. When
the icon of Indianness in your State is a legendary figure from
400 years back and an internationally famous turncoat who has
been Disneyfied, it is a little hard for modern-day tribal
people to look Indian in the eyes of the general public. And
talk about being overshadowed, these people I work with have
been overshadowed badly for as long as the Pocahontas legend
has been going on. People would much rather talk about
Pocahontas to me. I work with Virginia Indians. ``Well, tell me
about Pocahontas.'' It goes on all the time.
This has blinded people in Virginia, many people, to the
fact that there have been Indian tribes all along in their
midst. They didn't want to look at the reality. They preferred
to look at the legend. It has gone on for 400 years now.
Pocahontas also played into the difficulties of the 20th
century with that racial integrity legislation. The one drop
rule--one drop of non-white ancestry makes you colored--was
believed in by many Virginia people, including my ancestors
there, back in the 19th century when they began to try to make
it a matter of law of racial definitions. The first thing they
discovered was that some of the aristocratic Virginians traced
their ancestry back to Pocahontas, and therefore some of the
State's aristocrats would be the very first people put onto the
Jim Crow Coach. ``We cannot allow that to happen,'' so they
wrote an exception right from the beginning of the 20th century
for, as they were called, the ``Pocahontas descendants.'' But
for the die-hard white supremacists in the State--Plecker was
only one of several--for those die-hards, they saw that as a
hole in the dike that had to be plugged, and the quickest way
to plug it was to say the only people with Indian ancestry are
those Pocahontas descendants today, and all these other people
claiming to be Indian are only using the Indian label as a
``waystation to whiteness.'' That is a direct quote, a
``waystation to whiteness.''
So the stridency that you heard all across the south in the
first one-half of the 20th century was much magnified in
Virginia, and the attacks on people saying publicly they were
Indian, like Steve's ancestors, were that much more public and
that much more relentless.
When the racial definitions were repealed----
The Chairman. Dr. Rountree.
We have run out of time. Please summarize.
Ms. Rountree. I will summarize.
It is not a waystation to whiteness they've claimed. They
are still saying they are Indian. Anybody can be anything they
want to in Virginia now. They are still saying they are Indian,
so I think they deserve recognition on that basis.
Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Rountree appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Rountree. Thank you
for your passion.
Chairman Yob, welcome back.
STATEMENT OF RON YOB, CHAIRMAN, GRAND RIVER BANDS OF OTTAWA
INDIANS, GRAND RAPIDS, MI, ACCOMPANIED BY FRAN COMP, VICE
CHAIRMAN
Mr. Yob. Sir, thank you.
[Remarks in Native tongue.]
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, my name is Ron Yob and I am
chairman of the Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians of
Michigan. I would ask the committee that Vice Chairman Fran
Comp will be allowed to assist me if there are any questions
from the committee.
Thank you very much for holding this hearing today on bill
S. 437 that would expedite review of the Grand River Band of
Ottawa Indians to secure timely and just determination on
whether the tribe is entitled to recognition as a Federal
Indian tribe. I want to be clear that this is not a recognition
bill. This would allow the tribe to participate in an expedited
process through the Office of Federal Acknowledgment and allow
the OFA to make a final determination.
We'd like to take this opportunity to express our deep
appreciation to Senator Levin and Senator Stabenow for their
interest and support of our tribe. For many good and valid
reasons, the tribe is very hopeful that the committee will
favorably consider S. 437.
The story of our tribe is long and varied, as is the story
of recognition of all the Michigan Indian treaty tribes, of
which the Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians is the only one
that remains unrecognized. The Grand River Bands of Ottawa
Indians is the largest unrecognized treaty tribe in Michigan,
and perhaps the United States. Our members live primarily in
western Michigan in the same area we have lived since before
the Europeans first arrived there. Our prehistoric burial
mounds are located along the Grand River near the city of Grand
Rapids, and in many other areas of the river, from below
Lansing to Grand Haven.
As we are pressed for time, I would like to focus the
testimony on the legislation and why we are pursuing an
expedited process to pursue Federal acknowledgment.
The Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians of Michigan is
comprised of 19 bands of Ottawa Indians who occupy the
territory along the Grand River Valley and other river valleys
in what is now southwest Michigan, including the cities of
Grand Rapids and Muskegon. There are about 700 tribal members,
the majority living in and around the counties of Kent,
Muskegon, and Oceana. We are signatories to five treaties, and
all successor tribes have now been recognized by the United
States except for the Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians.
In 1997 Congress passed the Michigan Indian Lands Claim
Settlement Act to implement distribution of several land claim
awards. The law provides that to be eligible for the set-aside
a non-recognized tribe must file its documented petition by
December 15, 2000. We have done so. The act provides 6 years
for the BIA to issue a final determination on that petition.
The BIA has not done so. If the Grand River Band of Ottawa
Indians is not recognized by March 15, 2007, we are going to
lose millions of dollars for tribal programs that would
otherwise be available.
S. 437 was introduced by Senators Levin and Stabenow to
ensure that our petition would be acted on in time for the
Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians to qualify for the funds
set aside by Congress for the tribe. After making our
submission on December 8, 2000, the Grand River Bands did not
hear from the Bureau of Indian Affairs [BIA] until April 2004,
when they granted us a technical assistance meeting at the
request of Congressman Peter Hoekstra. It was another 9 months
before we received our technical assistance letter on January
26, 2005. The Grand River Bands have spent the past 17 months
collecting materials, preparing a 63-page legal response
supported by a 265-page ethno-historical response, additional
documents, and two certified copies of our membership
documents. We filed this as our response to the TA letter on
June 9, 2006.
My conclusion: The Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians has
the support of its community and other Michigan tribes, and
thankfully our Senators. This bill does not directly recognize
the tribe, but instead refers the matter to the BIA for a
determination with time lines for deciding the tribe's status
and filing a report to Congress. The Congress has directly
reaffirmed the existence of four other Michigan tribes, so
there is an ample precedent for direct reaffirmation of our
status.
The Grand River Bands have always been an active leader in
the Michigan Indian community. We participate, though often
unofficially, in Indian child welfare cases, repatriation
matters, and other dealings with other State, local, and
private entities. We have spearheaded the return of the
original 1855 Treaty of the Grand Rapids to be exhibited in the
museum named for our great former President Gerald Ford.
If S. 437 is not passed and Grand River Bands of Ottawa
Indians remains in the Federal acknowledgment process, not only
will Grand River lose millions of dollars, we estimate it will
take 15 to 25 years to complete this process.
Thank you again for your attention to S. 437, and we pray
that the committee will act favorably on this legislation.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Yob appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Chairman Yob.
Reverend Willerup, welcome.
STATEMENT OF DAVID WILLERUP, PASTOR, WESTWOOD REFORM CHURCH,
MUSKEGON, MI
Mr. Willerup. Thank you very much, Chairman McCain.
I am here today as a pastor of Westwood Reform Church, the
former president of Positively Muskegon, which was a ballot
action committee formed in 2003 to face one referral question
that was put before the city of Muskegon. We faced a single
question referral in September 9, 2003, whether the city of
Muskegon should host a casino or not. Most of the reason why we
are here today has to do with that particular referral and
activities after that referral in September 2003.
Prior to September 2003 the Archimedes Group, LLC, was
involved in some redevelopment claims for our downtown. Our
downtown in Muskegon--and Muskegon is only a population of
40,000 residents with a beautiful beach. We have significant
investment from Grand Valley State University in a
technologically advanced Michigan Alternative and Renewable
Energy Research Center, and also Water Research Facilities
Institute. Both of these represent millions of dollars of
investment.
Well, the Archimedes group approached the Downtown Muskegon
Redevelopment Corporation with a proposal to put a casino on 23
acres of defunct mall property which was rejected. For the next
several months the Archimedes group published their plan on
this mall property. I attended one of those meetings where they
said that the casino would be the economic savior of Muskegon
and, as a reverend, that got my ire up. So when I stood up at
the meeting to ask what avenue they would take, because in
Michigan there are only two ways to get a casino, one is
through a private corporation which was enacted only for three
casinos in the city of Detroit, or tribal. At that point I was
silenced and told to sit down.
It took the next several months of public debate to get the
Archimedes group to even admit that this would be done through
a tribal process, and not until after the vote, which went 52
percent to 48 percent in favor of the referendum from Muskegon
city residents only, that the tribe became active politically.
There was a political action committee formed by the
Archimedes Group called Yes Muskegon. This group has been
behind the tribe since the introduction of the idea of a casino
for downtown Muskegon. I do have testimony here. I district
have proof of my claims that I would like to have included in
the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
Mr. Willerup. Thank you. They include letters from business
and community leaders stating their objection to a casino as an
economic engine.
In September 2003, as I stated, the referral went in favor
where more people turned out for this one non-binding election
than voted for the Governor. In November 2003 the ``Muskegon
Chronicle'' reported that a deal had been struck between the
Archimedes Group and the tribe. In December 2003 I called
Senator Stabenow's office to see if she was at all interested
in expediting the procedure, at which point I was told no. And
then in February 2004 I find that she sponsored legislation.
Also in 2004 a tribe that had been previously politically
inactive began investing in lobbyists, and over the next 2
years over $200,000 was invested with firms that are mentioned
in my testimony.
So I would like to make clear to the committee today that
my point in being here is to let you know that it is casino
interest which is driving this time line. The Archimedes Group
had made a public promise that they would have a casino up and
running in 3 to 5 years. That will not happen without tribal
recognition.
I would also like to state that I am not--if that casino
were not part, if casino were not part of this effort, I would
be in support of the tribe's search for recognition. I do not
believe that any people should be denied what has been promised
to them, should be denied their culture or their heritage or
the avenue through which those things are protected. But
because casino is clearly behind it, I ask that this committee
consider that, as a progenitor of this bill, we have something
that looks a whole lot less like ``Of the people, by the
people, for the people,'' and a whole lot more like ``Of Las
Vegas, by the lobbyists, and for the management company.''
Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Reverend Willerup appears in
appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr. O'Connor, welcome.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL O'CONNOR, PRESIDENT, VIRGINIA PETROLEUM,
CONVENIENCE AND GROCERY ASSOCIATION, RICHMOND, VA
Mr. O'Connor. Good morning, Senator. I will summarize.
I appreciate Senator Allen for his efforts in including our
views in the hearing this morning, as well.
I am president of the statewide trade association that
represents petroleum marketers and convenience store operators
in the State of Virginia. All of our members stand to be
affected by S. 480, the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of
Virginia Federal Recognition Act should it be enacted.
While honorable in its intention, S. 480 poses a serious
threat to small businesses across our State. If passed, S. 480
could create an anti-competitive marketplace for goods such as
tobacco and gasoline and strain the State budget by reducing
excise tax revenue from those products. In fact, if passed, the
impact of S. 480 could be multi-faceted.
The U.S. Government and the government of the Commonwealth
of Virginia would recognize the referenced tribes as sovereign
entities. The groups would no longer be subject to the taxing
power of the Commonwealth. Pursuant to S. 480, these groups
would be permitted to purchase and to take into trust land in
some of the most populous areas of our State. In fact, it
appears that one of the groups could acquire land anywhere in
the State of Virginia and turn it into a reservation. This
would create havoc for State laws and for law enforcement.
For our members, the single greatest concern is that these
tribes will have the ability to establish retail business
outside of the jurisdiction of traditional State powers to
collect taxes. That means that any convenience store, truck
stop, or smoke shop established by one of the recognized tribes
could sell gasoline and tobacco to the public free of State
taxes.
The type of tax evasion I am referencing today is not
conceptual. It is occurring today in many States and has led to
high-profile disputes in New York, Oklahoma, Kansas, and New
Mexico, among others. In these States, Native American tribes
have used recognition to open convenience stores and truck
stops that sell gasoline and tobacco products tax free to non-
Native Americans. This is in spite of the U.S. Supreme Court
ruling saying that such sales can be subject to State taxes.
For example, in New York it is estimated that $360 to $400
million per year is not recouped due to cigarette excise tax
evasion.
Let me be clear in summing up about our position. We are
not opposed to recognition of Virginia's tribes; however, the
people whom I represent do not deserve to have a life's
investment threatened by a marketer selling gasoline to non-
tribal members at a 17\1/2\ cent price advantage, an advantage
that would be gained solely through tax evasion.
Because this legislation is not just about recognizing
existing reservations but pulls in other areas of the State
into new reservations, the competitive disadvantage large
numbers of convenience store retailers would feel is
exacerbated.
Mr. Chairman, any legislation of this kind must ensure that
tribal members are required to pay all excise taxes on
gasoline, tobacco, and other products. Accordingly, unless
strong protections against excise and sales tax evasion are
included in S. 480, VPCGA must oppose the bill in its current
form; however, we would welcome the opportunity to work with
the committee, Senator Allen, and any of the proponents to
address the concerns that we have aired today.
I appreciate your time.
[Prepared statement of Mr. O'Connor appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. O'Connor.
Mr. O'Connor, in many States the tribes and the States have
sat down and worked out agreements so that these impacts are
mitigated. In some of the States the tribes collect taxes equal
to those imposed by the State, etc. Would you be supportive if
such agreements could be worked out?
Mr. O'Connor. I think the answer to that is if the
agreements were embedded in the legislation it would certainly
give a great deal more comfort to the people that I represent.
The Chairman. How do you feel, Chief Adkins, about that
issue?
Mr. Adkins. First, I'd like to say this is the first time
I've seen Mr. O'Connor, and if he is sincere about working with
the tribes I am just kind of amazed that this is the first time
I've heard anything that he's talking about today. But the
tribes would be willing to work with the State in a way that we
honor the sovereignty and respect the laws of the State of
Virginia.
The Chairman. Chairman Yob, how do you respond to Reverend
Willerup's concern that this is simply a casino-driven deal;
that the funding that you have received is primarily from
developers who would like to see a casino in operation? And I
say that because, as you know, in other parts of the State of
Michigan there has been great controversy about casinos and its
impact on the local communities. How would you respond to
Reverend Willerup's concerns?
Mr. Yob. Well, basically our tribal council doesn't--as you
noticed, our letter of intent was in 1994. The Archimedes
people agreement is in 2003. That is 9 years later. Our tribal
council do not even talk casino. We do not want casinos. We
never brought up casinos. We have been approached over the
years by numerous people from Nevada, from Florida. They wanted
to fly us to Florida and show us operations in New Jersey,
North Dakota. I can go on and on, monthly. I will say no. We
were approached by the Archimedes people several times and we
still would say no to them.
The Chairman. Have the Archimedes people funded some of
your efforts?
Mr. Yob. Yes; they have, sir.
The Chairman. Out of altruism?
Mr. Yob. Excuse me?
The Chairman. Because they support your effort for
recognition or because they think there's some financial gain
that they would eventually realize?
Mr. Yob. I can't talk for the Archimedes people, but the
only thing I can say is that I have seen the nature of the
Archimedes people change when they started seeing the plight of
our people and they started seeing our priorities. Our casinos
are way down the list. We've got too many other things that we
need to correct in our State with our own people that have
nothing to do with gaming. You know, the only reason that we
even worked things out with Archimedes is once, when they
brought us to Muskegon, for instance, the person drove by a
cemetery and told me that is where his mother was and that is
where his brother was buried, and that showed me that
connection to that community. He did mention the county-wide
vote which was 60-some percent to 40-some percent, actually,
that showed that they were in favor of doing that.
When that point comes along, that is--our tribal council
truly does not want--I mean, I won't say we won't have one, but
that is not our intentions, that is not our priority. We have
many, many other things that concern the welfare of our people,
whether it be education, health care, care for our elders,
housing, et cetera.
The Chairman. I understand that, but there's a clear record
and it is not illegal, but there is a clear record of gaming
industry people funding tribes' recognition process, helping
fund them, and in return there have been casinos set up. I am
not saying there's anything illegal about it, but it certainly
is a charitable instinct on the part of this group whose
general purpose is to make money. I guess we will have to see.
Ms. Rountree, are your criteria for what constitutes a
tribe the same as the Federal Government's criteria?
Ms. Rountree. Yes, sir; they are.
The Chairman. With regard to the Virginia groups, has your
research provided evidence of an ongoing tribal government?
Ms. Rountree. Yes; it has.
The Chairman. There's no gaps?
Ms. Rountree. Not since 1850 when the better records came
about.
The Chairman. There seems to be some difference of opinion
between that view and that of Mr. Fleming.
Ms. Rountree. I have tried communicating with Mr. Fleming
and he does not readily answer letters and does not answer
questions directly. I have offered to send him any or all
documents that are relevant. He has not communicated to me what
to send. That is why I sent him nothing.
The Chairman. Mr. Fleming, I hope you will be in receipt of
and take in consideration the documents that Dr. Rountree has.
Will you do that?
Mr. Fleming. Yes.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Chief Adkins, it is not your responsibility, but if we in
the Congress were to grant recognition based in part on the
destruction of records, what should we tell a group whose
family histories were destroyed by fire?
Mr. Adkins. I think what distinguishes us from those groups
and what I would offer is that the State systematically worked
to destroy us, and I call it paper genocide. If ours were
simply destroyed by fire--and I do not trivialize that--it
would be much easier to go back and fill in the gaps than it is
to go through records that have been given the official seal of
designating us in some class that we are not. That is the
argument, sir, that I would give.
The Chairman. I think that is an excellent point.
Senator Dorgan.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, I had to go back to the
Commerce Committee, so I missed a part of the presentation. I
will review those that I missed and I want to thank the panel
for being here. This is a hearing that is very important, and
one in which we have a lot to learn. I think we have learned a
lot today from the submissions of the statements, so thank you
very much for being with us.
The Chairman. Senator Allen.
Senator Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Rountree, in your research--and you mentioned this--you
paraphrased or summarized your testimony, but in your written
testimony you talked about how much more difficult it was to
hunt for the personal names and associations in the records
because they didn't have the accurate racial labels, and that
the law that was passed in 1924 insofar as records where you
are either white or colored was the term that was used was
repealed. What year was that repealed?
Ms. Rountree. In 1975.
Senator Allen. All right. So you have over 50 years, 51
years of records that way. Now, with all your research you have
done, how does that affect you as a researcher trying to put
together a record of a continuity, plus the names weren't the
previous names because you couldn't use Indian names, as Chief
Adkins mentioned, and his parents had to get married in the
District of Columbia to be able to have a proper record. How
does that affect the research and record?
Ms. Rountree. It draws the research out quite a lot longer,
for starters, because I have to try to find James Mooney's list
of family heads, for instance, circa 1900, and work back from
that using family names, rather than going the quick and dirty
route and just looking for Indian references in the column
under race. It took a great deal longer. I was working with
names.
It also means that for individuals that are not obviously
connected by genealogy to some of those family heads but are
still part of the tribes, I may be missing them. I could very
well, unless somebody comes along and points out, ``Oh, yes, he
was Indian, too.''
Senator Allen. What's the likelihood of something like that
happening?
Ms. Rountree. Once in a while it does, actually.
Senator Allen. Once in a while.
Ms. Rountree. The big holdup in the 20th century--and this
is liable to drive me nuts. It will take the modern people
getting more courage and sharing the information with me. I've
constructed the genealogies from the public records. The modern
people, especially the old-timers in the 1970's, were simply
scared to death of talking about any of this with me. They
didn't trust me, an outsider. Why should they trust an
outsider?
And anybody who got married outside of their home county I
was likely to miss and not know some of those connections. I do
not have complete genealogies on some of the tribes as a
result, even now. They will be submitting their own, obviously,
and they will know better. But I haven't got Steve's parents'
dates. I didn't see it until his testimony when I read it last
night to know when his parents were married. That is not in my
records. They married elsewhere. I was having to go on local
records.
And in the case of the Eastern Chickahominy, none of them
married locally, thanks to Plecker and his campaign, between
1923 and 1946. So I've missed a whole generation of people
there in the public record.
Senator Allen. To answer the Chairman's question which gets
to his burden of proof of extenuating circumstances, the
question he asked, when you are doing research, let's assume,
say, during the War Between the States records are burned at a
courthouse, what's the difference between records being
destroyed in a county courthouse versus this racial
designation, this eugenics movement of 51 years, versus, say,
county records in Gloucester being burned?
Ms. Rountree. It is a difference of degree. When a county
courthouse is burned in the 19th century that takes everything
out. You cannot replace it. There's no way I can get around
some of these things. Family tradition will only take you back
so far. I mean, these people are not coming from a culture that
memorizes, as in traditional Hawaii, memorizing all their
genealogy back 25 generations. So the records are gone and they
just are gone.
In the case of the things Plecker did, he changed racial
designations to make people harder to find. He made them go
elsewhere to do some of these public record things. The records
are going to be elsewhere. Washington, DC and Philadelphia were
favorite spots. It is possible to track down those people with
extra time and trouble and retrieve that information. The
information is harder to retrieve but it is retrievable. But
when a courthouse burns completely you have lost it. It is
gone.
Senator Allen. Chief Adkins, we heard from Mr. O'Connor on
some of these issues. On the gambling issue, it is your
understanding, speaking for your tribe and others, that in the
event that you all are Federally recognized, the only way that
you conduct any sort of gambling--casinos, blackjack, slot
machines, and all the others--would be if it was agreed to by
the State government, the Governor of Virginia and laws passed
by the General Assembly. Is that your understanding?
Mr. Adkins. We have agreed to that. That is true.
Senator Allen. I just wanted to make that part of the
record. Mr. Fleming mentioned that, as well.
Insofar as gas taxes, in the event on any tribal lands that
you all had a convenience store and a filling station,
gasoline, ethanol, whatever it may be that is sold there, would
it be your view that you would be paying the road taxes, the
gas taxes to any sales made to someone who is not a member of
the tribe?
Mr. Adkins. That is my view and in no way would we attempt
tax evasion. Even in the tribal communities we perceive that as
being illegal. I do not know how the larger community looks at
that, but we are not inclined to break the law, so tax evasion
is not within the scope of things we plan to do. And if we did
engage in any kind of retail activity, you know, there would be
negotiations and dialog between the government and the tribes.
So we are not trying to circumvent the State laws.
Senator Allen. Well, the chairman, Senator McCain,
mentioned, and obviously where he is from in Arizona there are
recognized tribes, Navajo, Pima, and others. Would you all
envision such compacts or contracts or agreements with the
Commonwealth of Virginia, whether it is gas taxes or tobacco
taxes, taxes on beer or any other item that may be sold there?
Mr. Adkins. We haven't looked that far ahead, but I think
it is logical to assume that somewhere in our future we would
engage in activities that we would have to negotiate with the
State, but I think those laws clearly delineate that taxes must
be collected from non-Natives. I have little knowledge of that
because we haven't even looked at that. You know those things
that we are interested in.
Senator Allen. Understood.
Thank you, Chief. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for allowing me
to participate in this way on this important matter.
The Chairman. We hope you will become a permanent member of
this Committee, Senator Allen.
Dr. Rountree, are you compensated by the Chickahominies for
your work?
Ms. Rountree. Nary a penny.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
These are obviously, as I said in my opening statement,
very difficult issues and hard to ascertain exactly the right
way to go on them. I certainly understand the desire of people
to see action, particularly when 6 and 10 years is a minimum
some cases have been on the books, or going through the process
for a long period of time.
We will probably mark up both of these bills subject to the
vote of the committee and see if we can't move the process
forward. I understand the impatience of both tribes. I also
understand the concerns of people like Rev. Willerup and people
in the communities who are affected by gaming operations. It
has become more and more controversial as gaming operations
have grown rather dramatically.
I understand that that is not an issue with your tribe, yet
I think there are many people who would like to see that in the
law, Senator Allen, because there have been cases where tribes
have appeared before this committee and said, ``We will not
engage in gaming,'' and then a few years later a new tribal
council is elected, which is the right of the tribe, and then
they have decided to change their policy. So I think if people
of the Commonwealth of Virginia are concerned, maybe a compact
or agreement such as you talk about and is envisioned might be
helpful.
I thank the witnesses. Thank you very much.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of Stephen R. Adkins, Chickahominy Indian Tribe
Thank you Chairman McCain and other distinguished members of this
committee for inviting me here today to speak on S. 480 which is
pending before your committee. The bill, introduced by Senator George
Allen is titled the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia
Federal Recognition Act of 2005-S. 480. A hearing on our Federal
recognition bill was held by this committee on October 9, 2002 [S.
2694] before Chairman Campbell. In addition, as you may remember I
appeared before your committee last May and entered the testimony and
evidence from the 2002 hearing into record. I am proud to appear again
before the committee in this session of Congress for a more complete
hearing on our legislation on behalf of the six tribes named in S. 480,
the Eastern Chickahominy, the Monacan, the Nansemond, the Upper
Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, and my tribe the Chickahominy. That
evidence included a strong letter of support from our Governor, Mark
Warner, testimony from the Virginia Council of Churches and our
anthropologist and many others supporting our Federal recognition
through Congress. As part of the record today I am submitting the
letter from our current Governor, Timothy Kaine, who at his recent
inaugural address pledged his strong support for the Federal
recognition of the Virginia tribes. Beside me today is Dr. Helen
Rountree, who is a renowned anthropologist specializing in the heritage
of the Virginia tribes, who worked on the petitions we filed with the
BIA, and is prepared to assist with any questions you may have about
our history.
Senator McCain, I could tell you the much publicized story of the
17th Century Virginia Indians, but you, like most Americans, know our
first contact history. Well known is the story of Chief Powhatan and
his daughter Pocahontas, her picture being in this very capitol
building with her English husband John Rolfe. I often say this country
is here today because of the kindness and hospitality of my forebears
who helped the English Colonists at Jamestown gain a foothold in a
strange and new environment. But what do you know or what does
mainstream America know about what happened in those years between the
17th century and today. The fact that we were so prominent in early
history and then so callously denied our Indian heritage is the story
that most don't want to remember or recognize. I, and those chiefs here
with me, stand on the shoulders of the Paspahegh led by Chief,
Wowinchopunk whose wife was captured and taken to Jamestown Fort and
``run through'' with a sword, whose children were tossed overboard and
then their brains were ``shot out'' as they floundered in the water,
and whose few remaining tribal members sought refuge with a nearby
tribe, possibly the Chickahominy. With this horrific action in August
1610, a whole Nation was annihilated. A Nation who befriended
strangers, and, ultimately died at the hands of those same strangers.
As we commemorate Jamestown 2007 and the birth of our Nation today,
those of Indian heritage in Virginia are reminded of this history.
We are seeking recognition through an act of Congress rather than
the BIA because actions taken by the Commonwealth of Virginia during
the 20th Century erased our history by altering key documents as part
of a systematic plan to deny our existence. This State action separates
us from the other tribes in this country that were protected from this
blatant denial of Indian heritage and identity. It has now been well
documented in an article written by Peter Hardin of the Richmond Times
dispatch in 2000, the documentary genocide, the Virginia Indians
suffered at the hands of Walter Ashby Plecker, a rabid separatist, who
ruled over the Bureau of Vital Statistics in Virginia for 34 years,
from 1912-46. Although socially unacceptable to kill Indians outright,
Virginia Indians became fair game to Plecker as he led efforts to
eradicate all references to Indians on Vital Records. A practice that
was supported by the State's establishment when the eugenics movement
was endorsed by leading State Universities and when the State's
legislature enacted the Racial Integrity Act in 1924. A law that stayed
in effect until 1967 and caused my parents to have to travel to
Washington DC on February 20, 1935 in order to be married as Indians.
This vile law forced all segments of the population to be registered at
birth in one of two categories, white or colored. Our anthropologist
says there is no other State that attacked Indian identity as directly
as the laws passed during that period of time in Virginia. No other
ethnic community's heritage was denied in this way. Our State, by law,
declared there were no Indians in the State in 1924, and if you dared
to say differently, you went to jail or worse. That law stayed in
affect half of my life.
I have been asked why I do not have a traditional Indian name.
Quite simply my parents, as did many other native parents, weighed the
risks and decided it was not worth the risk of going to jail.
On that note, I would like to honor Senator Allen who as Governor
sponsored legislation in 1997 that acknowledged this injustice.
Unfortunately while this law allows those of the living generations to
correct birth records, the law has not and cannot undo the damage done
by Plecker and his associates to my ancestors records.
We are seeking recognition through Congress because this history of
racism, in very recent times, intimidated the tribal people in Virginia
and prevented us from believing that we could fit into a petitioning
process that would understand or reconcile this State action with our
heritage. We feared the process would not be able to see beyond the
corrupted documentation that was designed to deny our Indian heritage.
Many of the elders in our community also feared, and for good reason,
racial backlash if they tried.
My father and his peers lived in the heart of the Plecker years and
carried those scars to their graves. When I approached my father and
his peers regarding our need for State or Federal recognition they
pushed back very strongly. In unison they said. ``Let sleeping dogs lie
and do not rock the boat''. Their fears of reprisal against those folks
who had risked marrying in Virginia and whose birth records accurately
reflected their identity outweighed their desire to openly pursue any
form of recognition. Those fears were not unfounded because the threat
of fines or jail time was very real to modem Virginia Indians.
Senator McCain, the story I just recounted to you is very painful
and I do not like to tell that story. Many of my people will not
discuss what I have shared with you but I felt you needed to understand
recent history opposite the romanticized, inaccurate accounts of 17th
century history.
Let me tell you how we got here today. The six tribes on this bill
gained State recognition in the Commonwealth of Virginia between 1983-
89. In 1997 as I mentioned, Governor Allen passed the statute that
acknowledged the State action but it couldn't fix the problem--the
damage to our documented history had been done. Although there were
meager attempts to gain Federal acknowledgment by some of the tribes in
the mid-20th century, our current sovereignty movement began directly
after the passage of Governor Allen's legislation acknowledging the
attack on our heritage. In 1999 we came to Congress when we were
advised by the Bureau of Acknowledgment and Research [BAR] now the
Office of Federal Acknowledgment [OFA] that many of us would not live
long enough to see our petition go through the administrative process.
A prophecy that has come true. We have buried three of our chiefs since
then.
Given the realities of the OFA and the historical slights suffered
by the Virginia Indian tribes for the last 400 years, the six tribes
referenced in S. 480 feel that our situation clearly distinguishes us
as candidates for Congressional Federal recognition.
As Chief of my community, I have persevered in this process for one
reason. I do not want my family or my community to let the legacy of
Walter Plecker stand. I want the assistance of Congress to give the
Indian Communities in Virginia, their freedom from a history that
denied their Indian identity. Without acknowledgment of our identity,
the harm of racism is the dominant history. I want my children and the
next generation, to have their Indian Heritage honored and to move past
what I experienced and my parents experienced. We, the leaders of the
six Virginia tribes, are asking Congress to help us make history for
the Indian people of Virginia, a history that honors our ancestors who
were there at the beginning of this great country.
I want to end with a quote credited to Chief Powhatan. I use this
quote last year, but I want this year especially to honor him. Last
summer I was one of two Chiefs to be hosted by the British Government;
this was the first time a Virginia Indian had been honored since
Pocahontas visited England with her English husband John Rolfe. I was
moved that Pocahontas has been regarded with honor and distinction far
beyond what America has afforded her father the paramount chief in this
country. To date no chief in Virginia that lived in that era or since
has received as much honor as Pocahontas. This quote, from Chief
Powhatan to John Smith, maybe has been forgotten but ironically the
message still has relevance today:
I wish that your love to us might not be less than ours to you.
Why should you take by force that which you can have from us by
love? why should you destroy us who have provided you with
food? What can you get by war? In such circumstances, my men
must watch and if a twig should but break, all would cry out,
``Here comes Captain Smith.'' And so, in this miserable manner
to end my miserable life. And, Captain Smith, this might soon
be your fate too. I, therefore, exhort you to peaceable
councils, and above all I insist that the guns and swords, the
cause of all our jealousy and uneasiness, be removed and sent
away.
Senator McCain, our bill would give us this peace that Chief
Powhatan sought, it would honor the treaty our ancestors made with the
early Colonists and the Crown, and at this time that we are
commemorating the 400th anniversary of the birth of the greatest nation
in the world it would show respect for our heritage and identity, that
through jealously perhaps has never before been acknowledged.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.020
Prepared Statement of R. Lee Fleming, Director, Office of Federal
Acknowledgment, Department of the Interior
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is
Lee Fleming and I am the director for the Office of Federal
Acknowledgment at the Department of the Interior. I am here today to
provide the Administration's testimony on S. 437, the ``Grand River
Band of Ottawa Indians of Michigan Referral Act'' and S. 480, the
``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act
of 2005.'' The acknowledgment of the continued existence of another
sovereign is one of the most solemn and important responsibilities
delegated to the Secretary of the Interior. Federal acknowledgment
enables Indian tribes to participate in Federal programs and
establishes a government-to-government relationship between the United
States and the Indian tribe. Acknowledgment carries with it certain
immunities and privileges, including exemptions from State and local
jurisdictions and the ability of newly acknowledged Indian tribes to
undertake certain economic opportunities.
The Department recognizes that under the U.S. Constitution Indian
Commerce Clause, Congress has the authority to recognize a ``distinctly
Indian community'' as an Indian tribe. But along with that authority,
it is important that all parties have the opportunity to review all the
information available before recognition is granted. That is why the
Department of the Interior supports a recognition process that requires
groups go through the Federal acknowledgment process because it
provides a deliberative uniform mechanism to review and consider groups
seeking Indian tribal status. Legislation such as S. 437 and S. 480
would allow these groups to bypass this process--allowing them to avoid
the scrutiny to which other groups have been subjected. While
legislation in Congress can be a tool to accomplish this goal, a
legislative solution should be used sparingly in cases where there is
an overriding reason to bypass the process.
Interior strongly supports all groups going through the Federal
acknowledgement process under 25 CFR part 83. The Department believes
that the Federal acknowledgment process set forth in 25 CFR part 83,
``Procedures for Establishing that an American Indian Group Exists as
an Indian Tribe,'' allows for the uniform and rigorous review necessary
to make an informed decision establishing this important government-to-
government relationship. Before the development of these regulations,
the Federal Government and the Department of the Interior made
determinations as to which groups were Indian tribes when negotiating
treaties and determining which groups could reorganize under the Indian
Reorganization Act (25 U.S.C. 461). Ultimately, treaty rights
litigation on the West coast, and land claims litigation on the East
coast, highlighted the importance of these tribal status decisions.
Thus, the Department, in 1978, recognized the need to end ad hoc
decisionmaking and adopt uniform regulations for Federal
acknowledgment.
Under the Department's regulations, petitioning groups must
demonstrate that they meet each of seven mandatory criteria. The
petitioner must:
(1) demonstrate that it has been identified as an American
Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900;
(2) show that a predominant portion of the petitioning group
comprises a distinct community and has existed as a community
from historical times until the present;
(3) demonstrate that it has maintained political influence or
authority over its members as an autonomous entity from
historical times until the present;
(4) provide a copy of the group's present governing document
including its membership criteria;
(5) demonstrate that its membership consists of individuals who
descend from an historical Indian tribe or from historical
Indian tribes that combined and functioned as a single
autonomous political entity and provide a current membership
list;
(6) show that the membership of the petitioning group is
composed principally of persons who are not members of any
acknowledged North American Indian tribe; and
(7) demonstrate that neither the petitioner nor its members are
the subject of congressional legislation that has expressly
terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship.
A criterion shall be considered met if the available evidence
establishes a reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts
relating to that criterion. A petitioner must satisfy all seven of the
mandatory criteria in order for the Department to acknowledge the
continued tribal existence of a group as an Indian tribe. Currently,
the Department's workload of 19 groups seeking Federal acknowledgment
consists of 10 petitions on ``Active Consideration'' and 9 petitions on
the ``Ready, Waiting for Active Consideration'' lists.
S. 437 The Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians [Petitioner #146] and
another petitioning group, the Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa
Indians, Inc. [Petitioner #101] both are affected by the timing of
deadlines for the distribution of judgment funds under Public Law 105-
143, the Michigan Indian Land Claims Settlement Act [Settlement Act].
Both groups have applied for Federal acknowledgment under 25 CFR part
83. The Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians, which would receive
recognition under S. 437, has not submitted a complete documented
petition demonstrating its ability to meet all seven mandatory
criteria. The group did submit partial documentation in December 2000
and received a technical assistance review letter from the Office of
Federal Acknowledgment in January 2005. The purpose of the technical
assistance review is to provide the group with opportunity to
supplement its petition due to obvious deficiencies and significant
omissions. As of last week, the Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians
submitted additional documentation in response to the technical
assistance review letter.
Under section 110 of the Settlement Act, if the Grand River Band of
Ottawa Indians or the Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians,
Inc. are acknowledged before December 15, 2006, each could receive a
significant lump sum from the judgment fund, in excess of $4.4 million,
provided that the group and its membership meet the other eligibility
criteria set forth under the Settlement Act. If no new tribes are
recognized before that date, the money is instead distributed per
capita to the Indians on the descendant roll. The Secretary would have
90 days to segregate the funds and to deposit those funds into a
separate account established in the group's name.
Section 205 of S. 437 provides that:
Notwithstanding section 110 of the Michigan Indian Land Claims
Settlement Act (111 Stat. 2663), effective beginning on the
date of enactment of this act, any funds set aside by the
Secretary for use by the Tribe shall be made available to the
tribe.
Under S. 437 and the Settlement Act, funds are not set aside for
the Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians until they are recognized.
Although not clear, we interpret section 205 of S. 437 to mean that if
the Grand River Band is acknowledged prior to December 15, 2006, any
funds set aside for them under section 110 of the Settlement Act would
not be subject to plans approved in accordance with the Settlement Act.
We do not support section 205 because it takes away the
membership's right to participate in the development of the use and
distribution plan for the judgment funds. If S. 437 is enacted, we
suggest that section 205 be amended as follows:
Notwithstanding section 105 of the Michigan Indian Land Claims
Settlement Act (111 Stat. 2663), the Grand River Band shall
have 1 year from the date of its Federal recognition to submit
a plan to the Secretary for the use and distribution of any
funds it receives under section 110 of the Michigan Indian Land
Claims Settlement Act.
The Department also has concerns over the three different
membership lists referenced in section 102 and section 202. It is
unclear why three different lists would be required. In addition, S.
437 appears to be ambiguous concerning the nature and extent of
jurisdiction, and possible conflicts with treaty rights of other
federally recognized tribes.
The Department would like to work with the committee in order to
find an equitable solution to all parties connected to the Settlement
Act.
S. 480, the ``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal
Recognition Act of 2005,'' provides Federal recognition as Indian
tribes to six Virginia groups: The Chickahominy Indian Tribe, the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division, the Upper Mattaponi Tribe,
the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc., the Monacan Indian Nation, and the
Nansemond Indian Tribe.
Under 25 CFR part 83, these six groups have submitted letters of
intent and partial documentation to petition for Federal acknowledgment
as Indian tribes. Some of these groups are awaiting technical
assistance reviews under the Department's acknowledgment regulations.
As stated above, the purpose of the technical assistance review is to
provide the groups with opportunities to supplement their petitions due
to obvious deficiencies and significant omissions. To date, none of
these petitioning groups have submitted completed documented petitions
demonstrating their ability to meet all seven mandatory criteria.
The Federal acknowledgment regulations provide a uniform mechanism
to review and consider groups seeking Indian tribal status. S. 480 and
S. 437, however, allow these groups to bypass these standards--allowing
them to avoid the scrutiny to which other groups have been subjected.
We look forward to working with these groups and assisting them further
as they continue under the Federal acknowledgment process.
This concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to answer any
questions the committee may have.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8348.116
<all>