[Senate Hearing 114-387]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 114-387
THE TRIBAL LAW AND ORDER ACT_FIVE YEARS LATER: HOW HAVE THE JUSTICE
SYSTEMS IN INDIAN COUNTRY IMPROVED
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 2, 2015
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
22-171 PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
________________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Chairman
JON TESTER, Montana, Vice Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
STEVE DAINES, Montana HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
JERRY MORAN, Kansas
T. Michael Andrews, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Anthony Walters, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on December 2, 2015................................. 1
Statement of Senator Barrasso.................................... 1
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Statement of Senator Heitkamp.................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Statement of Senator Hoeven...................................... 27
Statement of Senator Murkowski................................... 3
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 2
Witnesses
Beadle, Mirtha, Director, Office of Tribal Affairs and Policy,
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services........................ 11
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Gobin, Hon. Glen, Vice Chairman, Tulalip Tribes of Washington.... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Roberts, Lawrence S., Princinal Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior................ 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Toulou, Tracy, Director, Office of Tribal Justice, U.S.
Department of Justice.......................................... 16
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Appendix
Jackson, Ryan P., Chairman, Hoopa Valley Tribal Council, prepared
statement...................................................... 43
Leonhard, M. Brent, Attorney, Office of Legal Counsel,
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Bill
Boyum, Chief Justice, Cherokee Supreme Court, joint prepared
statement...................................................... 41
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Al Franken to
Mirtha Beadle.................................................. 47
Scott, Carol Wild, Legislative Director, Veterans and Military
Law Section, Federal Bar Association, prepared statement....... 45
Written question submitted to Tracy Toulou by Hon. Al Franken.... 50
THE TRIBAL LAW AND ORDER ACT--FIVE YEARS LATER: HOW HAVE THE JUSTICE
SYSTEMS IN INDIAN COUNTRY IMPROVED?
----------
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room
628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Barrasso,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
The Chairman. Good afternoon. I call this hearing to order.
Today the Committee will examine the Tribal Law and Order
Act--Five Years Later: How Have the Justice Systems in Indian
Country Improved?
Congress passed this Act in 2010 to improve criminal
justice and public safety in Indian communities. Federal
responsiveness and accountability was a fundamental principle
underlying this Act. The Act recognized that the Departments of
Justice, Interior, and Health and Human Services play key roles
in the justice systems in Indian communities.
This law required more collaboration, coordination, program
improvements and specific reporting from these departments.
Their active involvement is critical for these communities,
particularly the Department of Health and Human Services.
In the field hearing we held on the Wind River Reservation
in Wyoming earlier this year, every witness stated that drug
and alcohol abuse is involved in nearly every crime occurring
on the reservation and possibly throughout Indian Country. If
we do not address the drug and alcohol abuse, we will not see
improvements in the justice system. So we will examine how
effective the agencies have been in reducing crime and
recidivism rates through their coordination and respective
programs.
The Tribal Law and Order Act also intended that better data
be produced so that resources can be more effectively used.
Annual reports on the Bureau of Indian Affairs, spending and
unmet needs have not been submitted as required by the law. The
last Bureau of Indian Affairs report was issued in April of
2013 on fiscal year 2010 information. The Department of Justice
just submitted the most recent declarations report less than an
hour before the hearing today. Before that, the Department of
Justice issued only its second report in August of 2014.
There is no justification for such delays. This is
something that has been a bipartisan concern that raises
questions regarding the agency's accountability, commitment to
Indian Country justice, and it defeats the purpose of the
creation of this whole piece of legislation in the first place.
So before we hear from the witnesses on these statements, I
want to ask the Vice Chairman, Senator Tester, if he has an
opening statement, then we will ask other members as well.
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. I am going to start by going off script,
then I will probably end by going off script. Mr. Chairman, and
it was that way when I was chairman, oftentimes, we get the
information we asked for at the last minute.
I just want to put something out so that you guys know it.
I know you have a busy schedule. I know you have a lot of stuff
to do. This is the only Committee that has this happen on a
regular basis. The only one. Indian Country is in crisis. What
this tells me is, it is not a priority for you. You have to
make it a priority. Because we not going to solve problems in
Indian Country if we are not working together on this. Quite
frankly, if we don't get the information when we need it, we
can't make the decisions we need to make to help Indian
Country.
That is all I will say on it. It is unacceptable. It is the
only Committee that this happens almost on a regular basis.
Almost every Committee meeting, the chairman says something
like this. And I did when I was sitting in that chair.
So let's fix it. It is not that big a deal.
I want to thank Chairman Barrasso for holding this hearing
today and bringing together the stakeholders involved in tribal
justice to update this Committee on the progress that has been
made over the last five years since we passed the Tribal Law
and Order Act of 2010. It is a crucial function of this
Committee, oversight is, and I am pleased that we are able to
hear today from multiple agencies who impact public safety in
Indian Country, as well as the Tulalip Tribe, which has
utilized new authority under the TLOA, sitting in these chairs
this week. This Committee is well aware of the issues that
impact tribes and how much more needs to be done in order to
ensure public safety and justice in Indian Country.
The Tribal Law and Order Act, although historic and
sweeping, was just beginning the work that needs to be done.
But it is an important step forward.
Another important step was reauthorization of VAWA in 2013,
which affirmed tribal criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians in
special cases of domestic violence. I want to acknowledge the
Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of Montana who are
leading the way in improving public safety. Their community was
one of the first five tribes selected to be part of the VAWA
pilot project to exercise tribal jurisdiction over domestic
violence in Indian Country.
The VAWA provisions, along with the enhanced sentencing
authorized under TLOA are both great tools for tribes to
improve public safety in their communities. My hope is that the
work of Fort Peck and the work of other tribes exercising
jurisdiction under VAWA, like the Tulalip Tribe testifying
today, is laying the groundwork for other tribes to follow. One
issue we will need to address is the maze of jurisdiction
regarding different crimes on tribal lands. VAWA is the right
step in the right direction, but there are still big gaps in
jurisdiction. Expanding criminal jurisdiction further can help
tribes solidify and truly exercise self-determination over
their lands and improve public safety in their communities.
I would like to thank the witnesses we have here today. I
appreciate the work that you do. I look forward to your
testimony to see how we can improve public safety.
I would just close by saying one other thing, because, Mr.
Chairman, you brought up the fact that we have some issue with
drugs in Indian Country and we have some issues with
unemployment in Indian Country. All that feeds into a situation
where law enforcement becomes a big deal. I would just say as
we move forth in this Committee to try and make sure that the
Tribal Law and Order Act works to the best of its ability, we
also take a look at things we can do working with the tribes. I
think these solutions have to come from the ground on how we
can solve the unemployment problems and educate folks about how
disastrous drugs are, not only for the person but for the
community that they live in, too.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Vice Chairman Tester.
Additional statements? Senator Murkowski.
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, before I comment on Tribal Law and Order, I
do have a statement that I would like to submit for the record
regarding your legislation, the Interior Improvement Act. While
I was not here in person when you voted it out, it was
certainly my intention to be supportive of that. I do want to
just note for the record that I want to continue to engage on
this issue. I want to engage with our Alaska stakeholders over
whether or not this bill brings all the appropriate folks to
the table, and when considering an Alaska application, if these
applications can lawfully be considered or whether our
alternate procedures are appropriate for the State.
I do think that we need to be engaging in a level of
consultation in Alaska on this very important issue. As you
probably know, we are awaiting the outcome of some litigation,
the Akiachak case. The situation in our State is perhaps a
little bit different. So again, I just want to note that we
would like to continue working with you on that. I will submit
a comment.
I would beg to differ with the Vice Chairman in his
comments, when he says that this is not that big of a deal, it
shouldn't be that big of a deal. This is a big deal, Mr.
Chairman. And I think it is, and I think the Vice Chairman
acknowledges that, and I am kind of using his words out of
context here.
But this is not something to be taken lightly. In my State,
the issues of tribal justice, the issue of law and order is one
that is primary and paramount. In talking with other colleagues
on this Committee and colleagues that also represent many of
our Native populations, the issue of justice for our First
Peoples is one that is a big deal. We need to be working hand
in glove with the Administration, with the States, with the
tribes.
So when a hearing is called to discuss how this measure
that has been in play now for five years is working, is
performing, I don't think it is too much to ask for testimony
to be submitted for the Committee to review. It was suggested
by my staff that, well, you have all kinds of demands on your
time right now, boss, and since we don't have any idea what is
going to be said, maybe I should be somewhere else. It is just
not appropriate.
So it is a big deal and I know we are just kind of piling
on here. But I do think it is a message that needs to be made
loud and clear, that this is not a partisan, Republicans
attacking the Democrat Administration. This is the Senator from
the State of Alaska, representing half the tribes in the
Country, that is concerned that we are not getting what we need
from the Administration on an Act that many, many of us feel is
very, very important.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. Senator
Cantwell?
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank you for holding this hearing. I would like to welcome the
Vice Chairman of the Tulalip Tribe here, Mr. Glen Gobin, and
thank him for being here to testify. He has been a member of
the tribal council for 16 years, as well as a tribal business
committee member for the last 13 years, and 12 of those years
he was the chair. So he has been very, very active in the
community and a dedicated father and grandfather. I so
appreciate the Tulalip Tribe being represented here today.
I have a much longer statement about, obviously, all of
these issues and what we need to do moving forward, but I will
submit that for the record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Cantwell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Maria Cantwell, U.S. Senator from Washington
Thank you Mr. Chairman, and I thank you for holding this hearing on
such an important topic.
I would like to introduce Vice Chairman Glen Gobin form the Tulalip
Tribe in Washington state. I appreciate you making the trip out here to
testify before the committee today. Vice Chairman Gobin has served as a
member of the Tribal council for the last 16 years, as well as the
Tribal business committee for the last 13 years, 12 of which he was
chair. He is active community member and a dedicated father and
grandfather.
Violent crime and the ability to prevent it remains one of the
biggest issues facing Indian Country today, particularly for Native
American women.
According to the Department of Justice, violent crime reservations
occurs at rate two and a half times greater than the rest of the
country, but is sometimes much higher. In addition, a third of all
Native women will be the victim of sexual assault in their lifetime.
Not only are these statistics startling, they are unacceptable.
Over the last few years, Congress has worked with Tribes to make
their communities safer, and give Tribes the tools they need to develop
robust Tribal justice systems. The Tribal Law and Order Act increased
sentencing authority for Tribes, particularly repeat offenders,
expanded federal support for construction Tribal justice centers, and
reauthorized grants to expand resources for policing as well as youth
centers and treatment for those suffering from drug and alcohol
addictions.
In addition, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013
expanded sentencing authority for Tribes to allow them to prosecute
non-Indian offenders in domestic violence.
The Tulalip Tribe in my home state of Washington has been leading
by example. The Tribal Law and Order Act gave Tulalip the authority to
update and strengthen its criminal codes, and the Tribal liaisons in
the U.S. Attorney's office created by the Tribal Law and Order Act have
strengthened the relationship between the Tribe and the Federal
Government. Tulalip were one of the first Tribes to begin implementing
the Tribal provisions of the Violence Against Woman Act, and successful
in prosecuting and convicting domestic abusers that have sought to harm
Native woman.
However, while these important steps have been made to improve the
justice system in Indian country, there is still more work that needs
to be done. We need to continue to support Tribes with resources and to
fix gaps that leave some victims still vulnerable. I want to thank Vice
Chairman Gobin again for being here today, and I look forward to
hearing his testimony today and the testimony of the other witnesses
today. Thank you Mr. Chairmen, I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. Senator
Heitkamp?
STATEMENT OF HON. HEIDI HEITKAMP,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Heitkamp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When I was Attorney General, we had a boarding school in
Wahpeton, North Dakota, called Circle of Nations. We accepted
kids from all over. We had a young Navajo girl who was going to
school there. When it came time for her to go home in the
summer, she told the supervisor that if she went home she would
be sexually assaulted by family members. She begged to stay at
the school.
We thought about how could we protect her. In order to get
her home, we had to helicopter her to her house. Now, I tell
you that, because we have the double problem of serving and
protecting the most vulnerable in rural America, but also in
Indian Country where jurisdictional issues are not clear
frequently. And so when we don't see a priority being placed on
victims and on protecting people, when that is the fundamental
obligation of government, we are going to be a little
disappointed.
So whatever it takes for you to send that message back that
we are serious about this, because you may not see it, but when
we go home, we see it every day. Senator Murkowski can tell you
horrible stories, just as I have just told you. We are grateful
for all the work that you do. But understand, this is important
business. And so when it is not treated like it is important
business, we get a little upset.
Mr. Chairman, if I can extend my remarks in writing, I
would appreciate it. I just wanted to make that point.
[The prepared statement of Senator Heitkamp follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Heidi Heitkamp, U.S. Senator from North
Dakota
But, you should also know that I'm glad to see a crucial federal
partner, SAMHSA from HHS, included among the witnesses today. I hope
this comprehensive discussion will work to address the many hard issues
addressed by TLOA, including underlying causes of crime and substance
abuse, such as trauma. As you know, tribes in North Dakota are known as
``large land based tribes.'' For example, the Standing Rock Sioux
reservation is approximately 3,682 square miles, or 2.3 million acres--
roughly the size of the State of Connecticut. For all this land mass,
the tribe has limited law enforcement officers, and too often, there is
no federal ``cop on the beat'' to assist tribal communities in
addressing the many symptoms of trauma. So, having SAMHSA here will
broaden the conversation to looking at the root of these issues, since
it is clear that more federal resources are not easy to come by.
Ultimately, we have a big job before us when 34 percent of Native
women will be raped in their lifetimes; 39 percent of Indian people
will be subject to domestic violence; violent crime rates across Indian
Country are twice the national average; and Indian children experience
abuse at rates 50 percent higher than their non-Native counterparts.
Issues of high rates of violence, substance abuse, and
incarceration affect everyone whether they are a tribal member or not.
You simply cannot live in or near these conditions without them taking
a toll on the fabric of the community. I look forward to hearing from
the witnesses and hope to hear about improvements now five years out
from the law's enactment. I also hope to hear about necessary next
steps for building on any successes and ways that you are looking at
trauma as an underlying cause for many of the issues affecting Native
communities. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman for holding this important
hearing.
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Senator Heitkamp.
We have four witnesses here today. I want to remind the
witnesses that your full written testimony will be made part of
the official hearing record, so please keep your statements to
five minutes so that we may have time for questions. I look
forward to hearing your testimony, beginning with Mr. Roberts.
STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE S. ROBERTS, PRINCINAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Roberts. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman
Tester, members of the Committee. I want to thank you for the
opportunity to provide testimony on implementation of the
Tribal Law and Order Act that was signed into law by President
Obama in 2010.
With me today is our Office of Justice Services Director,
Darren Cruzan. Mr. Chairman, he testified at your oversight
hearing in Wind River. He and his members of his dedicated team
are here. They deserve a great deal of recognition for the
Department's work in this area.
My written testimony provides a lot of detail about the
Office of Justice Service's work in Indian Country and across
the Administration to implement TLOA. I want to take a few
minutes just to highlight how TLOA has led to a renaissance of
tribal criminal justice authorities and capabilities and how
BIA has worked with Indian Country on tribal justice systems.
So I would ask the members to consider a hypothetical
situation. A tribal police officer, trained at a tribal
college, who holds a special law enforcement commission, which
includes training taught by an AUSA on patrol in Indian
Country. If that officer came into contact with an individual
suspected of a crime, they would radio a dispatcher over a
tribally-operated frequency to run a criminal history check
from a national data base. Assuming that individual was
arrested, charged and convicted, they could be sentenced for up
to three years in jail and serve that sentence in a tribally-
operated facility.
That unremarkable scenario that I just laid would have been
impossible before TLOA. TLOA recognized the importance of
cross-deputization agreements by providing for BIA special law
enforcement commissions to assist BIA with addressing crime in
Indian Country. Prior to TLOA, this issue was a constant source
of concern between tribes and the BIA.
Based on the good work of TLOA, BIA has developed policies
and procedures in 2011, and today we have a system that works
for tribes and there are more than 1,300 special law
enforcement commission tribal, State and local officers.
TLOA has also fostered the sharing of information between
BIA, DOJ and the tribes. Today tribes and BIA agencies
electronically provide data to FBI's uniform crime report data
collection process. Our OJS staff, Darren Cruzan and his team,
they took the lead role in helping to provide multiple training
sessions to tribes and BIA personnel to use this system.
The Sycuan Tribe in California is an example of the success
that has occurred in information sharing under TLOA. Through
the assistance of BIA, Sycuan now has access to California's
law enforcement telecommunications system. In addition, OJS
recently implemented a program where it will perform name-based
emergency background checks for tribal social service entities
via Federal criminal data bases. So if a tribe's social
services entity needs to run a background check for somebody by
name, for placement of a child in a home in an exigent
circumstance, OJS will do that work.
TLOA has provided for Interior to issue a report on unmet
staffing needs, Chairman Barrasso. You mentioned that in your
opening statement, as did Vice Chairman Tester. In our 2013
report, we estimated the unmet needs at that time of $420
million. We are working very diligently, I want to share with
this Committee, I wish we had gotten it out well in advance to
this Committee. We want to make sure that the numbers are
right, and we want to make sure that it is a comprehensive
report. So in our last report, it looked at those tribes that
had 638 contracts that we serviced directly. We are looking to
provide a more comprehensive report and hope to get that to the
Committee as soon as we can.
Under the act, we have promoted true intergovernmental and
interagency collaboration and training. Today, law enforcement
officers patrolling Indian Country can receive training through
State or tribal police academies, State or tribal college or
universities or other training academies that meet appropriate
standards. We have also under TLOA developed a bridge program.
For those State-trained law enforcement officers that want to
serve in Indian Country, they can take advantage of this
program. So far, this program has trained 108 State-certified
law enforcement officers.
Finally, I just want to touch upon an initiative that I
know was mentioned by many of you during your opening
statements. That is the issue of high rates of alcohol and drug
related offenses. Under Darren Cruzan's leadership, he started
a recidivism project, a pilot project that looks at three
reservations, the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation, the Red Lake
Reservation and the Shoshone Paiutes of the Duck Valley Indian
Reservation. We are pleased to report, as part of that pilot
program over the last couple of years, that those three tribes
are experiencing a double digit percentage reduction in
recidivism under that targeted program.
So the results are largely due to the focus of what is
challenging for these repeat offenders, what assistance they
need. Obviously, tribal leadership has been critical in the
advances on that pilot project. We hope to do more, because it
has been successful in the three locations where we have
implemented it.
So much work remains to be done. I know I have gone over my
time here, and I want to thank you for the opportunity to
testify and am available to answer any questions of the
Committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Roberts follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lawrence S. Roberts, Princinal Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior
Chairman Barrasso, Vice-Chairman Tester, and members of the
Committee, my name is Lawrence Roberts and I am the Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior
(Department). Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony before
this Committee on the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA), Pub. L. No. 111-
211 (2010). On July 29, 2010, President Obama signed TLOA into law with
the goal of improving public safety in Indian Country. I am pleased to
be here before this Committee today, more than five years after the
law's enactment, to provide an update on the Bureau of Indian Affairs
Office of Justice Services (BIA-OJS) work with Tribes to implement
TLOA.
The health, welfare, and safety of our Tribal communities are
priorities of the Obama Administration. TLOA has provided Tribes
additional resources and has fostered greater self-determination and
self-governance of their justice systems. Law enforcement and public
safety in the United States is largely administered on a local level
and TLOA has helped ensure that this is also the situation in Indian
Country.
Indian Country still faces many public safety challenges. As the
Committee knows, far too many tribal communities are experiencing the
devastating effects of alcohol and drugs. However, the Administration
is encouraged by the progress made and believes that public safety has
and will continue to improve in Indian Country. Updates on
implementation and other related services follow.
Law Enforcement Training Standards
TLOA promoted greater flexibility in training law enforcement
officers patrolling Indian Country. TLOA provided that law enforcement
training standards could be satisfied through training at a State or
tribal police academy, a State, regional, local, or tribal college or
university, or other training academy that met appropriate standards.
BIA-OJS has responded by permitting greater flexibility in training of
police officers serving Indian Country. Five years later, training of
law enforcement officers in Indian country is more flexible which
results in a larger pool of eligible applicants and a better trained
workforce.
The Indian Police Academy developed the three-week ``Basic Police
Officer Bridge Training Program'' to meet relevant federal training
standards for state-trained officers serving Indian Country. The bridge
program offers federal law and BIA-OJS policy courses including
training on jurisdiction in Indian Country and TLOA. State-trained
officers submit a basic training waiver to the academy for review and
approval for reciprocity of minimum training standards. Approved
training allows applicants to attend the basic bridge program instead
of the fifteen-week basic police program. To date, the Indian Police
Academy has provided ten sessions of the three-week ``Basic Police
Officer Bridge Training Program'' and has trained 108 law enforcement
officers in the program. Overall, the program has an 89 percent
graduation rate.
Section 231(b) of TLOA provided that BIA-OJS develop policies and
procedures to enter into deputation agreements for the purpose of
issuing BIA Special Law Enforcement Commissions (SLECs). SLECs allow
full time certified Tribal, Federal, state, and local enforcement
officers to assist BIA in the enforcement of Federal criminal statues
in Indian Country. These policies and procedures were developed and
enacted on January 25, 2011. Additionally in 2011, BIA-OJS and DOJ
partnered to update the Criminal Jurisdiction in Indian Country (CJIC)
training curriculum. The course was completely redesigned to provide
current information on law enforcement, jurisdiction and legal topics;
all of which are critical to the successful response, investigation and
prosecution of federal crimes in Indian Country. The new two and half
day CJIC training curriculum was piloted in Oklahoma in March 2012,
followed by a subsequent pilot in California in April 2012 based on
fine-tuning revisions. The standard CJIC curriculum was then rolled out
nationwide.
The course is taught by Indian Country AUSAs and Tribal Liaisons
from DOJ. This is consistent with TLOA's provisions regarding the
duties of Assistant United States Attorney Tribal Liaisons, including:
``Conducting training sessions and seminars to certify special law
enforcement commissions to tribal justice officials and other
individuals and entities responsible for responding to Indian country
crimes.'' The CJIC curriculum and materials were disseminated to the
United States Attorney Offices with Indian Country in their
jurisdiction for familiarization, since their personnel serve as the
actual course instructors. DOJ also reviews the CJIC course curriculum
and materials annually, updating legal issues and case law.
In 2015, BIA-OJS and DOJ collaborated to create and implement a
CJIC Master Schedule approach by disseminating a CJIC training schedule
for the upcoming year, including locations and dates. This allows for
advance planning by all agencies involved, including law enforcement
partners that require training and DOJ Indian Country AUSAs and Tribal
Liaisons within the various districts.
BIA-OJS also assists Tribes with background checks during the
hiring process of tribal law enforcement officers. Section 231(a)(4)(A)
requires BIA-OJS, when requested by a Tribe, to conduct background
checks for tribal law enforcement and correctional officials no later
than 60 days after the date of receipt of the request. BIA-OJS has
developed a new background policy and provided background and
adjudication training throughout the country. During FY 2015 OJS
provided a total of fifty-eight (58) background investigation for
twenty-eight (28) tribes.
Data/Information Sharing
TLOA recognized that accurate data is essential for the development
of effective public safety strategies. It also recognized that data is
a fundamental tool of law enforcement and the need to share such data
among law enforcement agencies. TLOA addressed this issue in a variety
of ways. It provided for BIA-OJS to share with DOJ all relevant crime
data received from tribal law enforcement agencies. BIA-OJS has
accomplished this requirement. Today, Tribes and BIA agencies provide
data to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) data collection process
through electronic submissions. BIA-OJS took a lead role in achieving a
seamless transition for Indian Country. BIA-OJS coordinated multiple
training sessions for tribes and BIA agencies on the FBI's UCR Program.
Furthermore, BIA-OJS followed up with individual technical assistance
and additional training to ensure that deployment of the electronic
reporting was a success for Tribes.
Further, Section 211(b)(2)(D)(13) provided for BIA-OJS to provide
technical assistance and training to tribal law enforcement officials
to gain access and input authority to utilize the National Criminal
Information Center and other national crime information databases. BIA-
OJS has been working with DOJ to identify needs in Indian Country
regarding access to databases with the FBI's Criminal Justice
Information Services (CJIS) Division. BIA-OJS has engaged directly with
tribal leaders to discuss their needs and provide information on CJIS
programs.
There have been a number of successes in implementing the TLOA
information sharing provisions. For example, the Sycuan Tribal Police
Department's officers, all of whom are commissioned by the Bureau of
Indian Affairs-Office of Justice Services (BIA) as special deputy
officers, were approved to access the state's robust law enforcement
telecommunications system, CLETS--a first in the state of California.
In FY 2015, BIA-OJS received authority to perform name-based, emergency
background checks for tribal social service entities that require such
information for child placement purposes, via federal criminal
databases housed within the FBI's CJIS Division. BIA-OJS is piloting a
project wherein tribes may contact BIA-OJS to obtain name based
criminal history information in exigent circumstances where a
fingerprint based check is not feasible.
Section 211(b)(2)(D)(10) provided for BIA-OJS to develop and
provide dispatch and emergency and E-911 services. BIA-OJS has procured
state of the art dispatch equipment to integrate communications systems
and record radio and telephone traffic at 17 direct service agencies.
Five agencies will be complete by calendar year end with remainder
complete in calendar 2016. Technical assistance is also provided to
tribes, when requested, for dispatch, coverage and equipment
requirements. BIA-OJS also provides tribes with technical assistance in
acquiring frequencies for tribally operated and owned systems.
Finally, section 211 of TLOA provided for BIA-OJS to develop an
annual report of unmet staffing needs of the law enforcement,
corrections, and tribal court programs. In April of 2013 BIA-OJS
submitted a report to Congress detailing the allocation and expenditure
of FY 2010 funds appropriated to the BIA for public safety and justice
programs, as well as the estimated unmet needs for public safety and
justice programs. The scope of the April 2013 report was limited to
tribes providing public safety funding by BIA and agency office
locations that expended public safety and justice funds to provide
direct services to tribes. The Department is providing a comprehensive
update to the April 2013 report which is in the final stages of
departmental review.
Section 211 also provided for BIA-OJS to report on: ``the formula,
priority list or other methodology used to determine the method of
disbursement of funds for the public safety and justice programs
administered by the Office of Justice Service.'' To address this part
of TLOA, a description of the BIA-OJS funding methodology was
incorporated into the FY 2016 President's Budget Request. Since the
beginning of the Obama Administration in FY 2008, just over $100
million in BIA public safety appropriation increases have been
allocated using this methodology and the resulting impact on violent
crime in Indian Country shows that with increased resources Tribes are
able to better protect their communities. Applying programmatic
expertise and data-driven analysis, our distribution method enables BIA
to target additional resources to reservations with higher violent
crime rates and larger service populations, indicators of the severity
of public safety needs. Additionally, BIA-OJS is currently discussing
the viability of a tribal advisory group. The advisory group would
focus on public safety and tribal justice funding, and seek tribal
perspectives on current funding distribution methods.
Tribal Courts
BIA-OJS has focused on strengthening Tribal Courts through a number
of different initiatives. TLOA amended the Tribal Justice Support Act
which now identifies funding for specific tribal court personnel
positions through Tribal Justice Systems appropriated funds. To date,
BIA-OJS has provided funding for: 25 Tribal Judges, 20 Tribal
Prosecutors, 15 Tribal Defenders, 5 Tribal Guardians ad-Litem and
provided funding for training and technical assistance for tribal court
support staff as well as training for litigators in tribal courts.
Based upon the need to eradicate illegal narcotics in Indian
Country, BIA-OJS was tasked with the responsibility, in coordination
with the Attorney General, to ensure that BIA-OJS and tribal law
enforcement as well as judicial personnel have access to training
regarding the investigation and prosecution of offenses relating to
illegal narcotics and alcohol and substance abuse prevention treatment.
Since 2011, BIA-OJS has conducted 20 Tribal Court Trial Advocacy
Training sessions which provide hands-on mock trial court training by
skilled litigators including: federal prosecutors (AUSAs), tribal
prosecutors (including those cross designated as SAUSAs), as well as
federal defenders and tribal defenders.
To date, over 600 tribal court personnel have been trained on
illegal narcotics and domestic violence prosecution, as well as
prosecution of sexual assault crimes as identified under TLOA in
Section 241 and 262. These training sessions include discussions
regarding the specific TLOA enhanced sentencing provisions. Moreover,
BIA-OJS is working with the Department of Justice and the
Administrative Office for U.S. Courts to better coordinate specialized
training for those tribal court personnel ready to participate in the
TLOA enhanced sentencing provisions under the Indian Civil Rights Act.
Since 2011, BIA-OJS has provided over 75 state of the art recording
devices to tribal courts in an effort to comply with the requirement
that all tribal courts implementing TLOA must record criminal
proceedings. Further, BIA-OJS has provided funding allowing tribal
courts to impose alternative sentences. For example, alcohol ankle
bracelet monitoring programs have been used to reduce incarceration and
address the severity of alcohol-related crimes. In 2012, the Lower
Brule Sioux Tribe in South Dakota reported a 98 percent success rate
against reoffending in instances where the devices were used. BIA-OJS
is also coordinating with DOJ and IHS to work on providing training for
tribal judges on alternative sentencing options.
Under TLOA, Tribes located in PL 280 states, where jurisdiction is
the primary responsibility of the State, have the opportunity to
request the federal government assume concurrent jurisdiction over
certain crimes on the tribe's reservation. Some Tribes requesting
concurrent jurisdiction have received tribal court assessments. The
Department has provided funding to assist those tribal courts with
addressing infrastructure stability which is essential for enhanced
sentencing purposes, such as drafting criminal codes and rules of
evidence, making rules of criminal procedures available to the public,
providing qualified legal counsel to defendants, employing law trained
judges and recording any criminal proceedings.
Corrections/Treatment
TLOA also sets forth requirements to address incarceration and
substance use disorders in Indian Country. Section 211(b) of TLOA
directed BIA-OJS to develop a long term plan for tribal detention
programs.
To be responsive to this, the BIA published a plan for tribal
detention programs in August 2011. Additionally, the BIA Corrections
Handbook, First Edition, was developed and implemented in February of
2012. The handbook includes detailed policy and procedures that support
the BIA Detention Guidelines and OJS has implemented these standards
throughout the years. BIA-OJS continues to provide additional technical
assistance to Tribes for the start-up and activation of newly
constructed facilities, negotiating contracts with state and local
jails for adult and juvenile bed space, inspection and certification
processes, corrective action plan implementation, and assistance with
grant applications.
Section 241 of TLOA identified the need for training on alcohol and
substance use prevention and treatment and identified a mission of
eradicating criminal acts caused by alcohol and substance use. In
response, BIA-OJS created the Diversion and Re-entry Division (DRD)
within the Tribal Justice Support Directorate. The purpose of the new
Division was to transform current institutional practices and create
alternatives to incarceration which build on existing treatment service
continuums in tribal communities, as well as provide access to long-
term detention-based treatment for all direct-service tribes at Hardin,
Montana, Yuma, Arizona and Casper, Wyoming. These facilities are
outstanding treatment and recovery resources for tribes that fill a
critical need in Indian Country, expanding the overall continuum of
services directly available to tribes.
The focus of the BIA-OJS initiative is to effectively braid
opportunities and services of other federal agencies to address alcohol
and substance use-related offenses. Importantly, BIA-OJS has worked
with tribal courts and correctional facilities to administer a
nationally recognized screening and assessment instrument (GAIN). The
instrument is currently at three pilot sites and BIA-OJS has provided
the training needed to administer the instrument. This instrument and
new protocol for offender placement into service, service engagement
and preparation for community re-entry services has the potential for
serving as the cornerstone for linking all human service elements
within tribal communities onto a common data infrastructure. BIA-OJS
will generate a detailed analysis and year-end report of the Recidivism
Reduction Initiative that includes a predictive analysis of the risk
for offender recidivism, and will serve the need for a common data
infrastructure within Indian Country.
Conclusion
Thank you for holding this hearing on the Tribal Law and Order Act
and for providing the opportunity to discuss what we have done over the
past five years since TLOA's enactment into law. We will continue to
work closely with our Tribal, Federal, and State partners to address
public safety issues in Indian Country and to further fulfill the goals
of TLOA.
I am available to answer any questions the Committee may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Roberts.
Next we will hear from Mirtha Beadle, who is the Director,
Office of Tribal Affairs and Policy, Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, Department of Health and Human
Services. Thank you for joining us.
STATEMENT OF MIRTHA BEADLE, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS
AND POLICY, SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND
MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Ms. Beadle. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso. I also
acknowledge Ranking Member Tester, who was here, and members of
the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. We appreciate the time
to be here and talk about this very important issue. We agree
with you that addressing alcohol and substance use is a
priority.
I am honored to be here with the vice chairman of the
Tulalip Tribes. Their community has gone through difficult
times and we regret their painful losses.
I am also honored to be here with my colleagues from the
Department of Interior and the Department of Justice. We have
collaborated well over the past many years.
We have in coordination and consultation with tribal
governments worked to implement the letter and spirit of the
law focused on Indian alcohol and substance use. I would like
to highlight a few of the coordinative actions that SAMHSA is
responsible for and that each of our partner agencies has
carried out over the past many years. In 2010, SAMHSA
established the Office of Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse
which was subsequently realigned to the Office of Tribal
Affairs and Policy, which I lead. Establishment of OTAP, as we
call it, was a demonstration that SAMHSA believes that tribal
affairs is very important. We are the point of contact for
tribal governments, Federal agencies and others who want to
work on Indian alcohol and substance use issues.
As a component of OTAP, the Office of Indian Alcohol and
Substance Abuse has greater reach across SAMHSA's centers,
which it did not have previously. OIASA has engaged on tribal
policy and consultation efforts, which was more restricted
under the prior structure.
OIASA has served as a very important engine for advancing
collaboration across the Federal partners and sustaining those
efforts to support TLOA. I want to acknowledge Dr. Marcella
Ronyak, who is the OIASA director, and is here with me today.
One of the requirements under TLOA was to establish a
framework for coordinating the Federal partners, which includes
specifically SAMHSA, the Indian Health Service, the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education and the Department
of Justice. Our Federal partners created committees and work
groups and identified 12 specific responsibilities to support
the requirements of the Act.
I will give you a couple of examples of the
responsibilities. They include assessing the scope of Indian
alcohol and substance abuse problems and developing an
inventory of resources. There was not an inventory of what
tribes had available to support their activities such as
supporting tribal action planning to coordinate activities at
the local level; sharing exemplary programs that tribes could
actually model in their communities; providing training where
it didn't occur; compiling data, and lots of other activities.
I do want to highlight some of the progress that we have
made in the coordinative efforts. The first is really critical
to the work that is required under TLOA. That is, we have
developed and are completing a multi-agency comprehensive
report on the scope of Indian alcohol and substance abuse
problems. What is tremendous about this effort is that we have
eight Federal departments and agencies, the first time it has
happened, that have come together and shared their data to
provide an indication of the scope of the problems.
The data that we have gathered, that we are putting
together, comes from SAMHSA, the Indian Health Service, Bureau
of Indian Education, Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of
Health, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and
also the Department of Justice. So it is a massive piece of
undertaking in terms of identifying all these data sets that
will help us get a better sense of that. We expect to release a
report in early 2016.
We have also provided tribes extensive amounts of support
in technical assistance for planning, for community healing,
for training, all the kinds of things that tribes need to be
able to support the work. We also were required to develop
opportunities for sharing information, so we have done that. We
have an implementation website where we post a host of
information around these issues.
One of the things we were required to do was to develop an
inventory. The last inventory that we developed had over 70
federally-sponsored education and alcohol and substance
prevention programs. Tribes now have access to information
about programs that they did not have in the past.
TLOA also required sharing exemplary programs. We have
developed what is called the Prevention and Recovery Newsletter
that provides information on Federal programs and other
programs. Over the past four years, we have published 14
different issues that have been downloaded over 200,000 times.
In the past, we have also done a lot of training on tribal
action planning. We have reached 44 tribes, almost 400 tribal
participants and we have also made available data through the
web and other means.
I have to say that SAMHSA is also trying to align its work
with tribal communities through its programming. In fiscal year
2014, Congress appropriated $5 million to support the new
Tribal Behavioral Health Grant, which is critical to the work
of TLOA. In fiscal year 2016, in the President's budget there
is $30 million for the Tribal Behavioral Health Grant program.
That supports mental health promotion and substance abuse
prevention for tribal youth and their families. It enhances
early detection of mental health and substance abuse disorders
and also increases referral to treatment, which is what we are
looking to do.
So I want to thank you for the opportunity to share this
information with you and look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Beadle follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mirtha Beadle, Director, Office of Tribal Affairs
and Policy, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Tester, and members of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, thank you for inviting me to testify at
this important hearing on the implementation of the Tribal Law and
Order Act of 2010 (TLOA). I am pleased to testify along with colleagues
from the Department of Interior (DOI) and Department of Justice (DOJ).
Substance use is one of the most severe public health and safety
problems facing American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) individuals,
families, and communities, and we must continue to work together to
diminish the devastating social, economic, physical, mental, and
spiritual consequences.
TLOA amended the Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse Treatment Act
of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-570). The amendments called for the Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to establish an
office tasked with improving coordination among the federal agencies
and departments responsible for combating alcohol and substance use
disorders among the AI/AN population. \1\ TLOA also instructs the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to collaborate with DOI
and DOJ on determining the scope of ongoing problems; identifying
resources and programs that would be relevant to combating alcohol and
substance use disorders in tribal communities; and coordinating
existing agency programs. Today, I am pleased to share with you the
myriad ways in which SAMHSA, along with its federal partners and in
coordination and consultation with tribal governments and
organizations, is implementing the letter and spirit of the TLOA
amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While the TLOA refers to alcohol and substance use among the
AI/AN population, alcohol is a powerful substance itself. Given this
distinction, this testimony will discuss this issue in terms of the
prevention of alcohol and drug use and treatment of alcohol and
substance use disorders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse
As required by TLOA, SAMHSA established the Office of Indian
Alcohol and Substance Abuse (OIASA) in 2010. OIASA was originally
established within the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, and in
2015 was realigned as a component of SAMHSA's new Office of Tribal
Affairs and Policy (OTAP). SAMHSA's OTAP serves as the primary point of
contact for tribal governments, tribal organizations, Federal
departments and agencies, and other governments and agencies on
behavioral health issues facing AI/AN populations. The creation of OTAP
brought together SAMHSA's tribal affairs, tribal policy, tribal
consultation, tribal advisory, and Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA)
responsibilities to improve agency coordination and achieve meaningful
progress. As a component of OTAP, OIASA has greater reach across
SAMHSA's centers and offices and is fully engaged in tribal policy and
consultation efforts.
I'm pleased to mention that Marcella Ronyak, the OIASA Director, is
at the hearing with me today. OIASA has three additional staff
positions, including a permanent Indian Youth Programs Officer. To
date, OIASA, along with our Federal partners--Indian Health Service
(IHS), DOI, and DOJ--the Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse
Interdepartmental Coordinating Committee (IASA Committee) has served as
a point of contact for Indian Tribes with respect to the implementation
of TLOA and finalized the Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse Memorandum
of Agreement as a framework for coordinating the resources and programs
of SAMHSA, IHS, DOI, and DOJ, as directed by TLOA.
IASA Committee
For the past four years, the IASA Committee has served as an
interagency forum for Federal partners to collaboratively work to
support AI/AN communities in achieving their goals in the prevention,
intervention, and treatment of alcohol and substance use disorders. The
committee is composed of representatives from Federal agencies with
responsibilities for addressing the consequences of alcohol and drug
use in Indian Country, including SAMHSA, IHS, DOI's Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA) and Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), and DOJ. The
Director of OIASA serves as the Committee Chairperson. In addition, the
Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA),
and National Institutes of Health (NIH)--all within HHS--and the White
House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) are invited to
attend IASA Committee meetings.
The IASA Committee work has and continues to focus on: (1)
determining the scope of Indian alcohol and substance use problems; (2)
advancing development of comprehensive tribal action planning; (3)
identifying opportunities and programs relevant to alcohol and drug use
among Tribal communities; (4) sharing information on practices,
programs, and resources through the Prevention and Recovery Newsletter;
and (5) addressing issues of concern to Tribes related to alcohol and
drug use. The IASA Committee includes seven workgroups: (1) Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA); (2) Tribal Action Plan; (3) Inventory/Resources;
(4) Communications; (5) Native Youth Educational Services; (6) Data;
and (7) Minimum Program Standards. Recently, the IASA Committee voted
to establish a Public Safety and Health Workgroup to further enhance
collaborations and actions related to re-entry services specific to
youth regional treatment and detention centers, model juvenile code,
and implementation of law enforcement and judicial personnel training,
among other MOA responsibilities. Each of the workgroups is chaired by
a TLOA Federal partner agency.
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
In fiscal year (FY) 2015, the MOA Workgroup initiated a significant
effort to unify the TLOA and Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA)
MOAs. Both MOAs address Indian alcohol and substance use and engage
similar Federal partners in accomplishing requirements. The purpose of
the unification effort is to identify areas of overlap and similarity
between the two agreements and pave the way for greater coordination
across Federal agencies. The MOA Workgroup is co-chaired by DOJ and
IHS. OTAP developed background documents and an initial draft of a
unified TLOA and IHCIA MOA for consideration. MOA Workgroup
representatives have provided important input and recommendations not
only for unifying the TLOA and ICHIA MOAs but also for streamlining and
clarifying existing processes. Moving forward, the MOA Workgroup will
provide leadership in the required annual review of the MOA.
Tribal Action Planning (TAP)
A primary focus of the IASA Committee is to advance comprehensive
tribal action planning so that tribes can identify resources,
priorities, and design a systems approach to treating alcohol and
substance use disorders and their co-occurring conditions. The intent
of coordinated Federal TAP is to provide guidance, direction,
coordination, and improved access for tribes to appropriate Federal
resources that may assist them in developing and implementing tribal
action plans. The TAP Workgroup coordinates support for tribes that
choose to develop a TAP to prevent and treat alcohol and substance use
disorders. The Workgroup has established a protocol for tribal requests
for assistance and works with partner agency regional staff to
coordinate assistance and resources for tribes in their areas.
In FY 2015, Tribal Action Plan trainings were held in four
different geographic areas, reaching 44 tribes and 372 tribal
participants. SAMHSA is leading the effort, in collaboration with
Federal partners, to develop a new TAP strategy to advance
comprehensive tribal action planning.
Engagement and Outreach on Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse Issues
Within SAMHSA, OIASA has actively engaged with staff from the
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Center for Substance Abuse
Treatment, the Center for Mental Health Services, and the Center for
Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. OIASA also has provided
updates and sought advice from the SAMHSA Tribal Technical Advisory
Committee, which is composed of 14 elected/appointed tribal leaders.
Reaching far and wide to the tribal community, OIASA staff and I,
as the OTAP Director, have attended, presented, and participated in
tribal consultations and meetings in partnership with DOI, DOJ and IHS
staff and leadership. OIASA also conducted outreach to national AI/AN
organizations, such as the National Indian Health Board (NIHB), the
National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), and the National Council
of Urban Indian Health (NCUIH). In addition, OIASA has engaged with AI/
AN stakeholders including Tribal Epidemiology Centers and tribal
behavioral health staff.
SAMHSA's efforts to address alcohol and substance use are supported
through several technical assistance (TA) centers and providers. The TA
centers most pertinent to supporting alcohol and substance use
prevention in AI/AN communities include:
The Tribal Training and Technical Assistance Center, which
provides TA on an array of tribal behavioral health and
wellness needs and is the primary TA provider for tribal action
planning;
The National AI/AN Addiction Technology Transfer Center,
which supports substance use disorder and other training to
behavioral health providers and individuals from tribal
communities; and
The National Native Children's Trauma Center, which provides
trainings and consultations to community agencies, tribal
programs, clinicians, school personnel, technicians, and
families on the impacts and prevention of childhood traumatic
stress.
OIASA and Federal partners have actively worked to share
information about programs and resources on alcohol and substance use
prevention, intervention, and treatment with tribes and tribal
organizations. The primary modalities are published on the TLOA
Implementation website (http://www.samhsa.gov/tloa/) and Prevention and
Recovery Newsletter. The website includes resources for developing
tribal action plans, addressing issues faced by Native youth, and an
inventory of Federal resources that may benefit tribes. The inventory
was specifically developed in response to TLOA and includes over 70
Federally-sponsored education and alcohol and substance use prevention
support programs; funding opportunity interactive links subdivided by
HHS, DOI, and DOJ agencies and TLOA-related topics (i.e., public
safety, justice systems and alcohol and substance use, corrections and
correctional alternatives, violence against women, juvenile justice);
and, links to grant and contract resources. Over the past four years,
Federal partners have published 14 issues of the Prevention and
Recovery Newsletter, which has been downloaded over 200,000 times.
SAMHSA Grant Program Alignment with TLOA
SAMHSA has made addressing the behavioral health of American
Indians and Alaska Natives a priority. In FY 2014, Congress
appropriated $5 million to support the new Tribal Behavioral Health
Grant (TBHG) program. With this funding, SAMHSA funded 20 tribes or
tribal organizations. Grantees such as the Selawik Village Council in
Alaska, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Tribe in North Dakota, and
the Pueblo of Nambe in New Mexico plan to incorporate evidence-based,
culture-based, and practice-based strategies for tribal youth. Grantees
are required to work across tribal suicide prevention, mental health,
substance use prevention, and substance use disorder treatment programs
to build positive behavioral health among youth. Grantees connect
appropriate cultural practices, intervention services, care, and
information with families, friends, schools, educational institutions,
correctional systems, substance use programs, mental health programs,
foster care systems, and other support organizations for tribal youth.
Technical assistance is provided to grantees through SAMHSA's Tribal
Technical Assistance Center to support their ability to achieve their
goals.
The President's FY 2016 Budget for the TBHG program is $30 million,
including $15 million in the Mental Health appropriation and $15
million in the Substance Abuse Prevention appropriation. This
represents an increase over the FY 2015 Enacted Level of $10 million in
the Mental Health appropriation and $15 million for a newly established
line in the Substance Abuse Prevention appropriation. This funding
supports Generation Indigenous, an initiative focused on removing
possible barriers to success for Native youth. This initiative takes a
comprehensive, culturally appropriate approach to help improve the
lives and opportunities for Native youth. In addition to HHS, multiple
departments, including the Departments of Interior, Education, Housing
and Urban Development, Agriculture, Labor, and Justice, are working
collaboratively with tribes to address issues facing Native youth. The
FY 2016 Budget allows SAMHSA to expand activities that are critical to
preventing substance use and promoting mental health and resiliency
among youth in tribal communities.
The additional funding would expand the TBHG program to
approximately 103 additional tribes and tribal entities. With the
expansion of the TBHG program, SAMHSA aims to reduce substance use and
the incidence of suicide attempts among tribal youth and to address
behavioral health conditions which impact learning in Bureau of Indian
Education-funded schools. The TBHG program will support mental health
promotion and substance use prevention activities for high-risk tribal
youth and their families, enhance early detection of mental and
substance use disorders among tribal youth, and increase referral to
treatment.
Conclusion
Thank you again for this opportunity to share with you the
extensive efforts SAMHSA and its Federal partners are undertaking, in
collaboration with the AI/AN community, in order to implement TLOA, and
to reduce the impact of alcohol and drug use on AI/AN communities. I
would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
The Chairman. Thank you so much for your testimony.
Next we will hear from Mr. Tracy Toulou, who is the
Director of the Office of Tribal Justice, United States
Department of Justice. Thanks for joining us.
STATEMENT OF TRACY TOULOU, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF TRIBAL JUSTICE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Mr. Toulou. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso, members of the
Committee. I am honored to appear before you to discuss the
implementation efforts of the Department of Justice to fulfill
our responsibilities as established in the Tribal Law and Order
Act of 2010.
The Department of Justice views tribes as partners in
ensuring public safety in Indian Country and is committed to
maximizing tribal control over tribal affairs. It is our belief
the challenges faced by tribes are generally best met by tribal
solutions. In support of this commitment and our government-to-
government relationship with tribes, the Department of Justice
has worked to fulfill its responsibilities under the Tribal Law
and Order Act in a way that will ultimately empower tribes to
operate with more autonomy.
For example, in order to support law enforcement activity
by tribal officials in Indian Country, tribes require access to
law enforcement data bases. Under the Tribal Law and Order Act,
the Department of Justice must ensure that tribal officials
have access to national crime information data bases.
Recently, the Department launched a comprehensive access
program based on feedback from tribes and lessons learned from
our earlier efforts in this area. The DOJ Tribal Access Program
for National Criminal Information Databases, which we often
refer to as TAP, was announced in August of 2015. The TAP
program has selected 10 tribal participants to help provide
user feedback on the training, technical assistance and
equipment associated with the program. One of those 10 tribes
is the Tulalip Tribe.
Early responses have been very positive and it is our
intention to eventually make this program available to any
interested tribe.
The TAP program was a result of a 2014 working group which
consisted of representatives from the Department of Justice and
the Department of the Interior. From the same close
collaboration, the Department partnered with Interior's Bureau
of Indian Affairs in a second program entitled Purpose Code X,
which gives tribal officials the ability to perform 24-hour
immediate name-based criminal history record checks. This is a
crucial capability for tribal officials seeking emergency
placement of children in Indian Country.
The provision of high-quality training to tribal
representatives has been an area of increased activity within
the Department since passage of the Tribal Law and Order Act.
For example, the FBI has partnered with BIA to provide joint
training that will focus on the investigation of matters common
to Indian Country, such as domestic violence, child abuse,
violent crime, human trafficking and drug trafficking.
One of the most meaningful displays of the Department's
commitment to the government-to-government relationship with
tribes is our efforts to cross-deputize tribal law enforcement
officials. The tribal Special Assistant U.S. Attorney program,
the SAUSA program, enables tribal prosecutors to bring cases in
Federal court. This program has grown considerably since
passage of the Tribal Law and Order Act. To date, there are 25
SAUSAs representing 23 tribes.
In addition to the SAUSA program, DOJ investigative
agencies have cross-deputized tribal law enforcement officers.
For example, the FBI has deputized 85 tribal law enforcement
officers as part of the Safe Trails task forces, working to
combat violent crime, drugs and gangs in Indian Country.
Moving on to another section of the Tribal Law and Order
Act, the Bureau of Prisons fulfilled the key provision to
accept certain tribal offenders sentenced in tribal courts for
placement in BOP facilities. In addition to increasing access
to critical programs and treatment, the pilot program
facilitated tribes' ability to exercise enhanced sentencing
under the Tribal Law and Order Act. The pilot program was by
all accounts a success, and both tribes and the Department
would be supportive of necessary congressional action to
reauthorize this program.
In parallel to our external efforts, the Department has
made a number of internal changes to ensure our revamped
presence in Indian Country is long-lived. For example, the U.S.
Attorneys offices with Indian Country and the districts play a
primary role in our interaction with tribes. Now every U.S.
Attorney's office whose district includes Indian Country or a
federally-recognized tribe has at least one tribal liaison, and
some districts have more than one.
To further enhance communications with the tribes, U.S.
Attorneys' offices are required now to hold annual
consultations with all the tribes in their district. The
Department of Justice has made progress over the past five
years in bolstering our government-to-government relationships
with tribes. We recognize that there is significant work still
to be done to live up to our responsibilities in Indian Country
and we are committed to seeing this work through.
We appreciate Congress' efforts to foster public safety and
look forward to working closely with our partners in Indian
Country to fulfill and honor our responsibilities. I will be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Toulou follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tracy Toulou, Director, Office of Tribal Justice,
U.S. Department of Justice
Chairman Barrasso, Vice-Chairman Tester, and Members of the
Committee:
I am honored to appear before you to discuss the implementation
efforts of the Department of Justice (the Department, or DOJ) to
fulfill our responsibilities as established in the Tribal Law and Order
Act of 2010 (TLOA) and, ultimately, to improve public safety in Indian
country. In introducing this Act in April 2009, Chairman Dorgan
illuminated some of the hard realities faced by tribes in modern times,
including: astonishingly high rates of violence, criminal exploitation
of complex and sometimes confusing jurisdiction, and crippling
limitations on the legal authorities of tribal governments to ensure
safety on their lands. The introduction of TLOA included a charge to
the federal government to provide tribal governments with the tools
they need to better protect their communities, to live up to our treaty
and trust obligations, and to be more accountable for our efforts to
enhance public safety in Indian country. Thank you for the opportunity
to provide an overview of the Department's efforts over the past five
years to fulfill our responsibilities under this Act and honor our
broader obligations to Indian country.
In October 2009, the Department held a listening session with
tribal leaders to help guide and inform the Department's policies,
programs, and activities affecting Indian country going forward. Our
leadership recognized the need to swiftly and meaningfully improve our
contributions to public safety in Indian country, and as a result of
this listening session, launched a Department-wide initiative to
enhance public safety in Indian country, which is ongoing. With the
passage of TLOA in July 2010, the Department's initiative expanded to
absorb new responsibilities and assumed a renewed sense of urgency. Our
work to enhance public safety has been, and continues to be, shaped by
our commitment to empower tribal governments; to improve coordination
and collaboration at the federal, tribal, state, and local levels; and
to be appropriately accountable for the work we do.
Empowering Tribal Governments
The Department views tribes as partners in ensuring public safety
in Indian country and is committed to maximizing tribal control over
tribal affairs. It is our belief, informed by experience, that
challenges faced by tribes are generally best met by tribal solutions.
In support of this commitment, and the government-to-government nature
of our relationships with tribes, the Department has worked to fulfill
its responsibilities under TLOA in a way that will ultimately empower
tribes to operate with more autonomy.
In order to support law enforcement activity by tribal officials in
Indian country, tribes require access to law enforcement databases.
Under TLOA, the Department must ensure that tribal law enforcement
officials have access to national crime information databases. The
ability of tribes to fully engage in national criminal justice
information sharing via state networks, which are the long-time conduit
for such activities, has been dependent upon regulations, statutes, and
policies of the states that may not consistently enable tribal
participation. In order to improve access for tribes, the Department
has established two new programs and partnered on a third.
First, the Justice Telecommunications System (JUST) program, which
was launched in 2010, provided participating tribes with access to the
National Crime Information Center (NCIC). This program is ongoing and
currently serves 23 tribes. This program, as well as the other two
programs to improve data base access, were the result of on-going,
substantive dialog with tribal governments and law enforcement.
Second, the Department recently launched a more comprehensive
access program based on feedback from tribes and lessons learned from
the JUST program: the DOJ Tribal Access Program for National Crime
Information (TAP). The TAP program, first announced in August 2015, is
designed to provide access to CJIS services, including: Next Generation
Identification (NGI); National Data Exchange (N-DEx); Law Enforcement
Enterprise Portal (LEEP); National Crime Information Center (NCIC);
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS); and Nlets,
the International Justice and Public Safety Network. Nlets is an
interstate public safety network for the exchange of law enforcement,
criminal justice, and public safety information owned by the states.
Nlets supports inquiry into state databases, such as motor vehicle,
driver's license, and criminal history, as well as inquiry into several
federal databases, such as DEA's Drug Pointer Index, ICE's Law
Enforcement Support Center, and FAA's Aircraft Registration, and
Canada's Canadian Police Information Center. With funding from the
Office of Justice Programs' (OJP) Office of Sex Offender Sentencing,
Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART), the TAP
program has selected ten tribal participants to help provide user
feedback on the training, technical assistance, equipment, and
maintenance of this program. Early feedback has been very positive, and
it is our intention to eventually make this program available to any
interested tribe. We will continue to work with Congress for additional
funding to more broadly deploy the program.
The TAP Program was the result of a 2014 working group, which
consisted of representatives from the Departments of Justice and the
Interior. From this same close collaboration, the Department partnered
with Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Justice Services
(BIA-OJS) in a third program known as ``BIA Purpose Code X,'' which
gives tribes the ability through BIA-OJS to perform emergency name-
based background checks for child placement purposes This is a crucial
capability for tribal social service agencies seeking emergency
placement of children in Indian country.
The Department of Justice has increased its efforts to support
tribal governments that are exercising expanded sentencing authority
rooted in TLOA. While TLOA properly does not require the Department to
review or certify a tribe's use of enhanced felony sentencing authority
or the status of a tribe's efforts to amend its codes and court
processes to provide defendants with the due process protections
described in TLOA, we have taken steps to help ensure that tribes
interested in exercising enhanced sentencing authority have knowledge
of and access to relevant resources. For example, OJP's Bureau of
Justice Assistance's Tribal Civil and Criminal Legal Assistance Program
has provided training and technical services to support tribal civil
and criminal legal procedures, legal infrastructure enhancements,
public education, and the development and enhancement of tribal justice
systems. More specifically, training and technical services have
included the following: indigent legal defense services; civil legal
assistance; public defender services; and strategies for the
development and enhancement of tribal court policies, procedures, and
codes.
The provision of high-quality training to tribal representatives
has been an area of increased activity within the Department since the
passage of TLOA. The Department believes that ensuring access to
quality training is a necessary element to bolstering tribal autonomy.
In July 2010, the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA) launched
the National Indian Country Training Initiative (NICTI) to ensure that
federal prosecutors and agents, as well as state and tribal criminal
justice personnel, receive the training and support needed to address
the particular challenges relevant to Indian country prosecutions.
Importantly, the Department covers the costs of travel and lodging for
tribal attendees at classes sponsored by the NICTI. This allows many
tribal criminal justice officials to receive cutting-edge training from
national experts at no cost to the student or tribe. The NICTI has
sponsored approximately 75 training courses, and reached over 200
tribal, federal, and state agencies.
Additionally, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced a
forthcoming training course to be held at the FLETC campus in Artesia,
New Mexico. Jointly taught by FBI and BIA ``mentors'' and FLETC common
core instructors, the course will include instruction in forensic
evidence collection and preparatory instruction on investigations
common to Indian country, such as domestic violence, child abuse,
violent crimes, human trafficking, and drug trafficking. This course
will be held four times each year, with a total of 24 students in each
session. This course, the result of collaboration between FBI, BIA, and
FLETC, was developed out of a recognized need to train federal and
tribal law enforcement officers together. Another recent training was
held by DOJ's Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). In September 2015,
the National Native American Law Enforcement Association held a
collaborative training event where the DEA provided on-site training on
clandestine lab awareness for first responders, emerging technologies,
and money laundering. The training included federal, state, local, and
tribal partners with Indian country responsibility.
One of the most meaningful displays of the Department's commitment
to a government-to-government relationship with tribes is in our
efforts to cross-deputize tribal law enforcement officials. In doing
so, we not only expand their authorities, but we send an important
message that we are partners and allies with tribes in our collective
efforts to enhance public safety in Indian country. The Special
Assistant U.S. Attorney (SAUSA) Program was developed prior to the
passage of TLOA to train tribal prosecutors in federal criminal law,
procedure, and investigative techniques to increase prosecutions in
federal court, tribal court, or both. The program enables tribal
prosecutors to bring cases in federal court and to serve as co-counsel
with federal prosecutors on felony investigations and prosecutions of
offenses originating in tribal communities. The program has grown
considerably since the passage of TLOA. To date, there are 25 SAUSAs
representing 23 tribes. In addition to the SAUSA program, DOJ
investigative agencies have cross-deputized tribal law enforcement
officers through joint task forces. For example, the FBI has deputized
85 tribal law enforcement officers as part of the Safe Trails Task
Forces. There are currently 15 active Safe Trails Task Forces located
around the country, working to combat violent crime, drugs, gangs, and
gaming violations.
In 2014, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) fulfilled a key provision of
TLOA by accepting certain tribal offenders sentenced in tribal courts
for placement in BOP institutions. The pilot program allowed any
federally-recognized tribe to request that the BOP incarcerate a tribal
member convicted of a violent crime under the terms of Section 234 of
TLOA and authorized the BOP to house up to 100 tribal offenders at a
time, nationwide.
A fundamental goal of the BOP is to reduce future criminal activity
by encouraging inmates to participate in a range of programs that have
been proven to help them adopt a crime-free lifestyle upon their return
to the community. Through the pilot program, tribal offenders have
access to the BOP's many self-improvement programs, including work in
prison industries and other institution jobs, vocational training,
education, treatment for substance use disorders, classes on parenting
and anger management, counseling, religious observance opportunities
and other programs that teach essential life skills. BOP has also
ensured that there are culturally-appropriate offerings for native
inmates. In addition to increasing access to critical programs and
treatments, the pilot program facilitated tribes' ability to exercise
enhanced sentencing authority under TLOA, which is an important
indication of support for tribal sovereignty. The pilot program was, by
all accounts, a success, and both tribes and the Department would be
supportive of necessary Congressional action to reauthorize this
program.
An important part of our support to tribes is necessarily tied to
funds. The Department launched the Coordinated Tribal Assistance
Solicitation (CTAS) in 2010, as a response to tribes' request for
increased flexibility. Through CTAS, tribes and tribal consortia are
able to submit a single application to apply for a broad range of DOJ
tribal grant programs. Through CTAS, the Department has awarded over
1,400 grants totaling more than $620 million. Over time, we have
refined this solicitation to enable tribes to take a truly
comprehensive approach to improving public safety in tribal
communities. Under TLOA, the Department was required to offer specific
grants for delinquency prevention and response, and to include
dedicated funding for regional information sharing. To date, we have
awarded more than $44 million in support of tribal youth programs and
more than $108 million to support regional information sharing systems.
The Department continually seeks feedback from tribes on ways to
improve CTAS, and each year with our solicitation announcement we also
communicate steps we have taken during the previous year to improve the
process. The most recent solicitation was released on November 19,
2015, with an application deadline of February 23, 2016. It
incorporates a number of changes, including the elimination of certain
eligibility requirements, broadening allowable activities, and
extending the award period for certain grants. Each year, the intention
is to increase the accessibility and usefulness of CTAS grants.
In parallel to our outward-facing efforts, the Department has made
a number of internal structural changes to ensure our revamped presence
in Indian country is long-lived.
Evolution of Agency Infrastructure
To ensure that the day-to-day operations at the Department are
supportive of the policy and programmatic changes we have made since
the passage of TLOA, we have made a number of internal adjustments
across the Department, from headquarters to field offices. The intent
in making these changes was to absorb the principles that drive the
TLOA and our response to that Act, thus integrating them into the way
we do business at the Department. Indeed, although not a direct
response to TLOA, the Department issued Attorney General Guidelines
Stating Principles for Working with Federally Recognized Tribes
(Statement of Principles) in December 2014 to guide and inform all of
the Department's interactions with federally-recognized tribes. This
Statement of Principles serves as a point of reference for Department
employees and, importantly, a standard to which tribes can hold the
Department accountable.
In 1995, then-Attorney General Janet Reno established the Office of
Tribal Justice (OTJ). OTJ has operated continuously since then,
although it was not made permanent until the passage of TLOA. On
November 17, 2010, less than four months after TLOA's enactment, the
Department published in the Federal Register a final rule that
established OTJ as a permanent, standalone component of the Department.
My office serves as a principal point of contact in the Department for
federally-recognized tribes, provides legal, policy, and programmatic
advice to the Attorney General with respect to the treaty and trust
relationship between the United States and Indian tribes, promotes
internal uniformity of Department policies and litigation positions
relating to Indian country, and coordinates with other Federal agencies
and with State and local governments on their initiatives in Indian
country.
The U.S. Attorneys' Offices with Indian country in their districts
play a primary role in our interactions with tribes. U.S. Attorneys'
Offices often are the nexus of activity when federal involvement on
reservations is necessary, from investigations to prosecutions to
providing services to victims. Every U.S Attorney's Office, whose
district includes Indian country or a federally-recognized tribe, has
at least one Tribal Liaison, and some districts have more than one.
Along with the TLOA-driven requirement that each relevant office
appoint a Tribal Liaison, the U.S. Attorneys are required to hold
annual consultations with tribes in their districts. In order to assist
the U.S. Attorney's Offices and the Attorney General's Advisory
Committee's Native American Issues Subcommittee, as well as to serve as
a liaison to other DOJ components, the Executive Office for U.S.
Attorneys formally established the position of Native American Issues
Coordinator.
These changes to the structure of the Department were driven by the
Department's support for and fulfillment of its responsibilities under
TLOA. There have been a series of policy shifts that are not a direct
response to the Act but are in keeping with the spirit of that
legislation. For example, the issuance of the DOJ Statement of
Principles, discussed earlier, marks an important shift in our approach
at all levels of the Department to interacting with tribes. Similarly,
the DOJ Consultation Policy is based on three guiding principles: that
the Department must engage with tribal nations on a government-to-
government basis; that tribal sovereignty and Indian self-determination
are now, and must always be, the foundations of every policy or
program; and that communication and coordination with our tribal
partners, among federal agencies, and with our state and local
counterparts are essential to accountability and to success.
Greater Accountability
Accountability is a critical element in a true partnership, and the
Department has taken a number of steps to increase our accountability
to tribes. The TLOA-mandated reports were intended to promote greater
transparency of Department activities in Indian country, and the
process of responding has been a useful exercise for our agency to
scrutinize trends and patterns of activity. In some cases, the reports
have revealed a need to expand our agency response to meet specific
needs and organize our resources more effectively, such as those
related to long-term detention. In other cases, the reporting process
highlighted positive impacts that Department activity has had in Indian
country over time and a need to perpetuate beneficial initiatives, such
as the BOP pilot program report and the Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) Report. In tracking prosecutions and crime
data, the Department has benefitted from taking a focused look at our
response to trends in Indian country, and as a result is in a better
position to adjust our resources internally to address emerging trends
and issues.
The Department has made progress over the past five years in
bolstering our government-to-government relationship with tribes and in
honoring our treaty and trust obligations. We are all fully cognizant
that there is significant work still to be done to live up to our
responsibilities in Indian country, and we are committed to seeing this
work through. We appreciate Congress' efforts to foster public safety,
and look forward to working closely with our partners in Indian country
to fully honor our responsibilities. I will be happy to answer any
questions you may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Toulou. Next we are
going to turn to the Honorable Glen Gobin, who is the Vice
Chairman of the Tulalip tribes of Washington State. Thank you
for joining us.
STATEMENT OF HON. GLEN GOBIN, VICE CHAIRMAN, TULALIP TRIBES OF
WASHINGTON
Mr. Gobin. Good afternoon, Chairman Barrasso. I would like
to also recognize Vice Chairman Tester for his presence
earlier, and also recognize our Senator, Senator Cantwell, and
Committee members.
Again, my name is Glen Gobin. I am the Vice Chairman of
Tulalip Tribes. I would like to thank you for the opportunity
to testify on the Tribal Law and Order Act and its effects on
the criminal justice system in Indian Country. First, we thank
the Committee for supporting the Tribal Law and Order Act in
2010 in an effort to better address crime in Indian Country.
In the last decade, after Tulalip retroceded criminal
jurisdiction from Washington State, our justice system has
expanded into a comprehensive system which includes a full
service police department, a court system with prosecutors,
probation officers and public defenders. The tribal police
department is the primary law enforcement within the
reservation.
Incidents range from simple misdemeanors to major crimes.
In 2015, thus far, tribal police have made a total of 835
arrests.
After the passage of the Act, Tulalip amended its criminal
code to increase sentencing authority for major felony crimes.
Under these guidelines, Tulalip has filed approximately 33
charges carrying a sentence of more than a year.
In 2014, Tulalip participated in the VAWA special domestic
violence court jurisdiction pilot project. Today, we continue
to prosecute non-Natives for domestic violent crimes. Since
that time, we have had 11 cases, with 6 convictions, 2
dismissals, 1 transferred to U.S. Attorney's office and 2
pending. Domestic violent crimes are subject to the Act's
enhanced sentencing guidelines.
Also under the Act, one of our tribal prosecutors is
designated as a special assistant U.S. Attorney to prosecute
reservation crimes in Federal court, resulting in improved
collaboration and communication between our respective
agencies.
There is no question that the Tribal Law and Order Act has
enabled Tulalip to better protect its community. But with 835
arrests this year alone and 60 percent of those arrests being
non-Indian, we still need legislation that will allow tribes to
prosecute non-Indians for crimes committed on the reservation,
in order to truly make our communities safe.
But there have been some significant gaps within the Act's
legislation. For example, Tulalip could not fully participate
in the National Criminal Justice information sharing via State
networks, because this was dependent on Washington State
Patrol's regulations and policies. This left open the
possibility that an order does not get entered into the State
system, and this did occur.
But just recently, Justice has instituted a pilot program
in an attempt to deal with the issue through the development of
a tribal access program. This will allow tribes to enter
protection orders directly into the Criminal National Network.
Appropriate funding is needed on the tribal side to fully
utilize this program.
Unlike States and local governments who use tax revenues to
fund their judicial system and still receive direct Federal
funding, tribes are prevented from exercising their taxing
authority because of the imposition of State and local taxes on
Indian lands that lead to double taxation. Tribes lack parity
in accessing Federal funds that are available.
As an example, in 1977, the BIA funded each tribal court in
the Northwest Inter-Tribal Court System in the amount of
approximately $37,000. Today, 30 years later, that funding is
still at the same level.
The Bureau of Prison's tribal prisoner program should be
reinstated under a more expansive and streamlined approach.
Initially, this was a three and a half year program. However,
it took a minimum of two years for many tribes to enact TLOA.
Also, this project limited tribal use to sentencing greater
than two years and one day. And it was limited to violent
crimes. Moving forward, the BOP program needs to be expanded so
that tribes can utilize these jail facilities for sentencing of
over one year and one day, as available for other criminal
justice agencies. This program also needs to be expanded to
include domestic violence and protection order violation
convictions.
We have submitted detailed written comments. I would like
to thank you for taking the time to listen to our comments,
concerns and recommendations.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gobin follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Glen Gobin, Vice Chairman, Tulalip Tribes of
Washington
Good afternoon Chairman Barrasso, Vice-Chairman Tester, and
Committee Members, my name is Glen Gobin, Vice-Chairman of the Tulalip
Tribes. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify on the
Tribal Law and Order Act and its effect on criminal justice systems in
Indian Country.
Introduction
The Tulalip Tribes are the successors in interest to the Snohomish,
Snoqualmie, Skykomish, and a number of allied bands, who have occupied
the Puget Sound region in Washington State since time immemorial, and
were signatory to the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliot. Under the terms of
the treaty, these tribes moved to the Tulalip Indian Reservation and in
1934 under the Indian Reorganization Act, chose to use the name the
``Tulalip Tribes'' which is named for a bay on the Reservation.
We thank the Committee for supporting the Tribal Law and Order Act
of 2010 in an effort to better address crime in Indian County. The
purpose of the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA) is to make US Attorney
and federal agencies more accountable for serving Native communities,
to provide greater authority and autonomy to Tribal Nations to operate
their own justice systems and protect their communities, and to enhance
cooperation between federal and state officials in law enforcement
training and access to criminal justice information. Although Tribal
justice systems still face significant jurisdictional and funding
obstacles, the TLOA is a positive, initial step forward in providing
tribal justice systems with increased authority and tools needed to
keep tribal communities safe.
Tulalip initially expanded its justice system in 2001 when it
retroceded criminal jurisdiction from the State of Washington. In the
last decade, the Tulalip justice system has made great strides,
developing a full service police department and court system as well a
strong support system of prosecutors, probation officers and public
defenders. During the same period, Tulalip incorporated Quil Ceda
Village (Village) to promote Reservation based business development.
The success of this economic development has created thousands of new
jobs and brought in millions of new visitors to the Reservation.
However, our government is still unable to collect the necessary taxes
to support critical governmental functions that other state, federal
and local governments enjoy. The imposition, assessment, and collection
of taxes by the state and county undermine and prevent Tulalip and the
Village from exercising its own sovereign taxing authority. As a direct
result, the tribes must subsidize and finance, with millions of tribal
hard dollars each year, the necessary governmental infrastructure and
services to the Village businesses. The end result, is that the Tribes
cannot devote those revenues to the needs of the tribal community,
including its criminal justice system. Although it has been difficult
to expand the justice system to cover these increased responsibilities
with finite tribal resources, a strong public safety system is vital
for the continued growth of the Tulalip community. Much of the recent
success Tulalip has had would not have been possible without an
effective tribal justice system that community members, visitors and
businesses can rely on.
After the passage of the TLOA, Tulalip amended its criminal codes
to increase sentencing authority for major felony crimes. As other
tribes experienced, these amendments took time to expand the
corresponding infrastructure needs. In 2014, Tulalip requested to
participate and was chosen for the VAWA Special Domestic Violence Court
Jurisdiction Pilot Project, and today we continue to prosecute non-
natives for domestic violence crimes. Since that time we have had 11
cases, with 6 convictions, 2 dismissals, 1 transferred to the US
Attorney's office and 2 pending. Under the VAWA tribal provisions,
domestic violence crimes can be designated as crimes subject to TLOA
enhanced sentencing guidelines. Furthermore, pursuant to the TLOA, with
the support of the Executive U.S. Attorney's office and after many
discussions with the Western District U.S. Attorney, one of our Tulalip
tribal prosecutors is designated as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
(SAUSA) to prosecute reservation crimes in federal court. This SAUSA
appointment has improved collaboration and communication between our
respective agencies, resulting in increased prosecutions of sexual
predators.
Since Tulalip received retrocession and years prior to implementing
greater criminal justice authority under the TLOA, it has been
committed to protecting the rights of the accused. All of the Tulalip
judges, prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers are highly qualified
attorneys. Tulalip provides all indigent defendants with legal counsel
without charge. All basic rights of defendants are recognized and
codified into the Tulalip criminal justice codes. All defendants have
the right to appeal to the Tulalip Court of Appeals. Just as important,
the Tulalip court is best suited to address crime and impose sentences
in a culturally appropriate way, which includes exploring alternatives
that help offenders, victims and the community heal. As a result of
this robust justice system and increased jurisdictional authority, we
have seen an increase in victims coming forward to report crimes as
they are seeing that their perpetrators will be held accountable.
There is no question that the Tribal Law and Order Act has enabled
Tulalip to better protect its community. Although the TLOA still leaves
the tribes reliant on federal prosecution for most serious crimes, even
with the addition of another tribal liaison as TLOA authorized, the
U.S. Attorney will still decline to prosecute some major offenses for a
variety of reasons. In these situations, it is vital for the Tribal
court to have the authority and capacity to appropriately sentence
violent offenders. Under the TLOA enhanced sentencing guidelines,
Tulalip has filed approximately 33 charges carrying a sentence of more
than one year. Federal and state prosecutors are often unwilling to
pursue domestic violence and sexual assault cases on the Reservation
because they are time consuming and inherently difficult to prosecute.
The TLOA enhanced sentencing guidelines have proven especially useful
as a tool for addressing these crimes on the Tulalip Reservation. We
have one person convicted of rape of a child and is serving three years
(the max available) in federal prison, through the Bureau of Prisons
Pilot Project.
The Tulalip Tribes values its relationship with the U.S. Attorney's
Office, which has been an important partner in fighting crime on the
Reservation. The provisions of the TLOA providing for better reporting
and communication between the U.S. Attorney's Office and Indian tribes
have proved helpful in improving this relationship. Since the passage
of the TLOA, Tulalip prosecutors have developed a better working
relationship with the Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the Seattle Office,
and the Tulalip Police Department has forged a better relationship with
federal law enforcement.
While in the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 Congress required the
Attorney General to ensure that tribal agencies that met applicable
requirements be permitted access to national crime information
databases, the ability of tribes to fully participate in national
criminal justice information sharing via state networks has been
dependent upon various regulations, statutes and policies of the states
in which a tribe's land is located. The Washington State Patrol is the
CSA for the state, and it is also the administrator for the state
database. Under Washington law, the Tulalip Tribes access to the
national crime information databases has been limited that at times
endangers officer safety and our community at large. For example our
tribal court domestic violence protection orders were not directly
entered into the database. Instead we had to through a state
intermediary, which introduced extra layers of bureaucracy that
introduced delays, errors, and sometimes prevented orders from being
entered into NCIC-POF. Earlier this year, we began participation in the
JUST pilot project and last month we were notified that we will be
included in the User face of the Tribal Access Program (TAP).
Despite the recent progress, Indian Country continues to face a
crisis of violent crime. A Bureau of Justice Statistics Report covering
the period 1992-2002 found that American Indians are victims of violent
crime a rate more than twice that of the national population.
``American Indians and Crime.'' (U.S. DOJ Publication No. NCJ
203097).Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice (2004). According to
the DOJ-BJS report, American Indians experienced an estimated 1 violent
crime for every 10 residents over age 12. The figures are even worse
for Native American women, who are the victims of rape or sexual
assault at a rate more than 2.5 times that of American women in
general. The DOJ-BJS study concluded that 34.1 percent of American
Indian and Alaska Native women--more than one in three--will be raped
in their lifetime. The enactment of the Tribal Law and Order Act was an
important step toward dealing with crime in Indian country, but much
still needs to be done. Checkerboard jurisdiction and lack of tribal
criminal justice authority over most non-Indian offenders create
unnecessary obstacles to addressing Reservation crime. The need to
build upon TLOA and the VAWA tribal provisions is critical as we move
forward. For example, in 6 of our 11 SDVCJ cases, children were present
and victims of crime. Other Pilot Project tribes experienced the same
phenomena; even where the law has been implemented, tribal prosecutors
are limited in their authority and cannot charge an offender who
simultaneously abuses or endangers his children, commits a drug or
alcohol offense or property crime, interferes with the reporting of the
domestic violence, or who physically or sexually assaults someone other
than an intimate partner. Of our six child victims only one will have
its crime redressed because the case is in the federal system.
Criminal cases are best handled by local law enforcement, which is
tribal law enforcement on the Indian reservation. Tulalip police
officers all possess both tribal and Washington State general peace
officer commissions with authority to arrest under tribal and state
laws. At Tulalip, the Tribal police department responds to all police
calls on the Reservation, from both the Indian and non-Indian
community. Incidents range from simple misdemeanors to major crimes
such as murder and rape. In 2015, Tribal law enforcement has made a
total of 835 arrests. Roughly 60 percent of the arrestees were non-
Indian. Tribal criminal justice systems need full jurisdiction, with
federal assistance, to prosecute persons arrested by local law
enforcement in order to truly keep their communities safe.
The Tulalip Tribes remain committed to operating an excellent and
effective justice system. The same principles of accountability and
fairness recognized in the United States justice system are equally
important in the Tribal justice systems. However, criminal justice
requires substantial and reliable sources of revenues to operate
effectively.
The increased responsibility Tulalip has taken on in addressing
crime has strained tribal budgets. Police, courts, indigent defense and
probation all require significant levels of funding. The expense of
incarceration is one of the highest hurdles for Tribes to implement the
enhanced sentencing authority under the TLOA. Furthermore, prosecuting
cases in which a defendant may face up to three years in custody
carries higher costs, as there will be greater prosecution and defense
expenses, as well as longer trials. In addition, these defendants have
a higher need for appropriate re-entry programs as these crimes are
more severe and the perpetrator needs more reeducation and treatment to
return to the tribal community. Tribal governments must balance these
needs with other important unmet needs such as housing, education and
health care for the Indian community.
Providing tribal courts with greater authority will not be
effective unless the Federal Government steps up and supports Indian
tribes with equal funding and removes limitations to our authority to
generate new revenues. States and other local governments have greater
direct access to federal funding resources that tribes either cannot
access, or the barriers are so great to access, that attempt to obtain
the funding is pointless because of barriers or conditions that a state
places on tribes. A prime example of unequal funding is the recent
increase that states are receiving from the Victims of Crime Act, in
which the state of Washington funding is increased from around 3
million to over 35 million for this year. There is no mandated tribal
set aside or formal system for meaningful consultation for tribes to
benefit from this funding. VOCA provides no meaningful tribal set
aside. We have been encouraged by the introduction of the SURVIVE Act,
but passage is still uncertain. Increased federal funding is necessary
for Tribes to build capacity and operate justice systems effectively.
We call upon the federal government to actively support Tribal
governments in their efforts to gain greater authority to raise
revenues through tribal taxation in order to meet criminal justice and
other important tribal government responsibilities. We also call for
equality in access to all justice system funding programs with a
mandated tribal set-aside that goes directly through to the tribes.
Specific Amendments Needed to TLOA
The Bureau of Prison program. The Bureau of Prisons Tribal
Prisoner Program should be expanded, streamlined, and made
permanent to include other non-violent TLOA and VAWA crimes
that qualify for enhanced sentencing. The Bureau of Prison
project was a 3.5 year program; however, it took a minimum of 2
years for many tribes to enact TLOA. Furthermore, use of the
BOP project was limited to sentencing of 2 years and 1 day, and
limited to violent crimes. Thus, few tribes were able to
utilize the BOP project and it soon went away. The BOP program
needs to be expanded so that tribes can utilize these jail
facilities for sentencing of over 1 year and 1 day similar to
other criminal justice agencies. In addition, Defendants
convicted on Special Domestic Violence Court Jurisdiction
(SDVCJ) should be included as eligible defendants as well as
repeat violators of DV protection orders and stalking crimes.
As the process currently exists, violations of protection
orders and stalking crimes are not characterized as violent
crimes for purposes of BOP Pilot Project participation
criteria. Such a narrow view does not recognize that these
types of crimes can be just as lethal or impactful as
``violent'' crimes. The process could be streamlined and less
burdensome than the past application process.
The value of this program goes beyond the obvious one of not
having the tribe bear the expense of longer-term incarceration.
In addition, use of this program can be used as a prosecutor
tool. There are times when we have a case that could possibly
be filed by the USAO, but that we feel is more appropriately
addressed in Tribal Court. One circumstance is when we feel
it's important to the community, for a variety of reasons, to
have justice done here at Tulalip. Sometimes the conduct is
egregious enough that two, three, or more years seems called
for, but if filed in federal court could result in 30 years--
essentially life in prison in some cases. In addition, we might
have a case that really should be prosecuted by the USAO, but
for some reason they are not willing to take the case. In those
instances we can offer a significant sentence, but the
financial burden on the Tribes would be extreme. Perhaps the
most important benefit to the Tribes is that a sentence served
in federal prison removes the defendant from the community.
Inmates have much less influence on community members and vice-
versa. You can see how a person operating a criminal enterprise
of some kind could continue to do so if s/he had regular
contact with people on the outside. Similarly, DV victims would
be more easily intimidated and manipulated if visitation were
possible. Furthermore, a county jail such as the one utilized
by our Tribe is really intended for much shorter-term
incarceration, and offers much less in the way of
rehabilitative services to inmates that might affect future
behavior and reduce recidivism. Our Tribe only became TLOA-
qualified and VAWA-qualified in the last two years. It is
anticipated that as this enhanced jurisdiction is asserted more
and more over time, the option of sending our prisoners to
federal prison could be utilized more and more.
NCIC/criminal databases and Tribal Access. The Tulalip
Tribes urges the appropriation of financial resources towards
fully implementing the Tribal Access Program (TAP) to Federal
Databases. The TAP program will need to be fully funded as a
permanent program in partnership with Indian Tribes to enhance
delivery to tribal governments and provide ongoing improvements
while keeping all interested tribes informed of the delivery of
this program. The Tulalip Tribes is honored to be selected as a
Pilot project tribe for TAP, but it is potentially already
encountering unnecessary limitations because there is
insufficient funding for our defined need to fully utilize the
program thus databases, as other non-tribal governments are
able to do.
Conclusion
Thank you for taking the time to listen to our concerns, the voices
and needs of our tribe, and for considering our recommendations. We
believe in the continuation of building alliances to enhance and
promote the needs of tribal justice agencies. By working together we
stand stronger in our advocacy efforts for equal access to justice,
local based solutions to local problems, and access to services and
advocacy designed by and for Native communities.
The Chairman. Thank you so much for your testimony. I
appreciate all the witnesses being here for your testimony.
I would like to turn to questions from the Committee. We
will start with Senator Hoeven.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank all the witnesses for being here today.
I will start with Secretary Roberts. The Tribal Law and
Order Act has now been in effect for five years. Let's start
with, what are the biggest challenges that you have in terms of
reducing crime on the reservation?
Mr. Roberts. I think we have made a lot of progress on
collaboration with State and local governments. But I think we
could do more. So I think one area where it is working, what
staff tells us is where it is working really well is in
Oklahoma, where Oklahoma has passed State laws recognizing
tribal and Federal law enforcement officers as peace officers.
So I think if there is anything we have learned since TLOA was
passed and as we are implementing it, it is that TLOA was a
great step forward in collaboration, really opened up lines of
communication both among the Federal family and among tribes
and local governments. But I think we can do more there in that
respect.
Senator Hoeven. Is there a special initiative in Oklahoma
that led to that legislation? Is there something you can
recommend to other States?
Mr. Roberts. My understanding from talking with staff is
that that is an Oklahoma State law. I don't know the history as
to why the State of Oklahoma passed that legislation. But we
can certainly ask our staff to provide some more information to
your staff, to provide background on that.
Senator Hoeven. I would appreciate that. Thank you.
Ms. Beadle, what are the top three things we can do to
reduce substance abuse on the reservations?
Ms. Beadle. I think there are a number of challenges that
we need to address. First, I would say specifically with regard
to Indian alcohol and substance abuse, tribes have said to us
that they need some local planning. One of the things that TLOA
does do is it provides the ability for tribes to develop these
local tribal action plans.
One of the challenges in doing that is the funding the
tribes don't have to do this. They have told us that it takes
funding to be able to create these plans, it takes funding to
be able to implement these plans. And there isn't constant
funding to be able to do that. So I think that is one of the
things that would be helpful to help support tribes' ability to
develop these tribal action plans.
I think a second area is focus on prevention among Native
youth. We hear all the time, in fact, we had the Secretary's
Tribal Advisor Committee meeting this morning where we had
tribal leaders come in. We had a very robust conversation about
alcohol and substance abuse. The challenges are around
supporting programs after school. These young people don't have
places to go. How do we support those programs if those
programs are not in place? We do need to figure out how to do
more of that.
I would say a third piece is around the youth themselves
and helping these youth get a better understanding of the
issues that are happening in their communities. Last year,
SAMHSA had a native youth conference where we had over 125
youth. What they told us is they can actually fix some of the
problems themselves. They recognize that these problems don't
have to exist. They just don't have the information. They want
to be able to be more informed and more active, so SAMHSA is
trying to help them become more engaged through some national
leadership activities.
So funding, after school program activities and getting
youth more engaged in the solution.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
Mr. Toulou, from an enforcement standpoint, what are the
top three things we can do to reduce crime on reservations?
Mr. Toulou. I think one of the first things we can do is,
which is something we are doing as a result of the Tribal Law
and Order Act, is to work better with all of our partners. That
is one of the things we have been able to do better.
Senator Hoeven. That kind of goes back to what Secretary
Roberts was talking about.
Mr. Toulou. Right, exactly. And that is State and local as
well as Federal. It is, as I think one of you mentioned, a
complex jurisdictional scheme in Indian Country, particularly
in your State, with some of the oil development that is going
on there. There is a lot going on, and we have to work together
better. And we are at this point in time. That is a challenge
and that is something we will continue to pursue.
Apart from that, I think one of the other things we need to
do and are doing and has been again facilitated by the Act is
to assist tribal law enforcement and tribal judicial systems to
be able to better handle the issues that occur on the
reservations. That is something we have done with the data base
access, we provide grants to tribal courts to better build what
they are doing.
The Violence Against Women Act, which really helped tribal
courts enhance their entire system, has been incredibly
successful. I want to just for a second talk about one of the
things that has happened as a result of the Violence Against
Women Act. It has been a very nice development that we didn't
foresee. Initially in introducing the act and getting it up and
running on the initial five reservations, we put together a
group that is called the Inter-Tribal Technical Assistance
Working Group. That is 40 different tribes that have come
together. We convened the group, but the group is the 40 tribal
leaders and representatives. They share information with each
other. Tulalip has been a leader in that group. They work
through the problems they see in the reservation in a tribally-
specific way. So we think that kind of enhanced communication
and sharing is crucial and ongoing.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hoeven. Senator Cantwell?
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Toulou, I would like to follow up on that. Obviously we
want to see continued progress made and coordination and
working together. Mr. Gobin brought up a very painful example,
not in detail, but I am assuming you are referring to what
happened in a case of someone having a domestic violence order
filed against them and yet still getting access to a firearm.
So this issue of coordination is very important. Part of
the issue is that under the coordination grants, the Tulalip
has been a recipient of that in the past. But this year, I
think they have gotten nothing. I'm trying to understand how
you think this coordination works. I would say, I had a chance
to travel with Senator Murkowski to Alaska and look at some
examples of tribal justice in her neck of the woods. I would
say the Tulalips are way ahead, just by the nature of being in
a very large urban area. The numbers Mr. Gobin responded with
proves how much he has issues to deal with.
So my question is, I would assume that you would want some
continuity in the development of this system working with
tribes as opposed to having a grant one year and the next year
being gone. I am trying to understand how we build on some of
the best examples right now of tribal justice. There is a lot
to learn here in the coordination, a lot to get through, I
should say.
Mr. Toulou. We recognize the funding issues. Particularly
with the tribes who were the initial leaders in the Tribal Law
and Order Act, they put a lot of their own resources into those
programs. Grants aren't always the best way to fund ongoing, in
fact, they are not the best way to fund ongoing needs to
tribes. But they are the means we have. We have done our best
to spread them around.
One of the things we have been talking to tribes about
generally as we plan our grant-making programs, and we talk to
tribes as we set up our grants, was the issue of direct funding
for the tribes who were implementing the Violence Against Women
Act. Unfortunately, we don't have a consensus with tribes right
now, how they would like to see that happen. We will continue
to explore opportunities with Tulalip and Pascua Yaqui,
Umatilla, Fort Peck and Sisseton-Wahpeton, to figure out better
ways of providing them funds. We go forward with the limited
grant funds we do have.
Senator Cantwell. Mr. Gobin, did you want to comment on
that? And did you say there was something, some State
regulation that prohibited you from sharing that data?
Mr. Gobin. It is not a State regulation, it is an economic
fact that double taxation in any economic region means you are
going to have no development. If the State will not forgo
taxing on tribal lands, then the tribe cannot economically
impose its taxes. So the State collects it, yet no services
come back onto the reservation.
Senator Cantwell. So how do you build the continuity in the
system? Is there some point you wanted to make about that? You
were able to use some of the grants so far to improve the
system? But now there will be a gap?
Mr. Gobin. It is inconsistent funding. We have applied for
grants. Sometimes we have received grants. Sometimes not.
Sometimes the grants are diminishing three-year grants that
start out at a certain level and expire after three years. Then
the tribe is supposed to pick up and carry on with that
program.
We had some of those early on, I think it was a juvenile
justice grant. It helped grow our police department. But after
three years, the tribe incurred the expense to carry that on.
Without the collection of taxes to fund that governmental
service, they come directly out of our economic development
dollars that come in.
Senator Cantwell. Mr. Roberts, what is the vision of the
agency about how we move forward here?
Mr. Roberts. Moving forward with implementation of TLOA?
Senator Cantwell. Yes. Well, let me just say, I feel like
we are a vast representation on the membership that is here
right now on what the needs are for Indian Country and
coordination. I think we represent all sorts of different
areas. I would assume that what we would want to do is get best
practices established and then try to continue to push them out
as far as we can push them out.
So what I am saying is, put a little money on the table. I
am not even sure what lessons we have learned correctly and how
much more we need to build capacity and scale. But every one of
us can tell you of a tragic story that has happened in Indian
Country, in our State that basically has broken our hearts and
devastated us. We want to make sure we are taking steps forward
for best practices and then scaling it and having an
understanding of what it is going to take to scale it. That is
what we want to know.
Mr. Roberts. A couple of things that the Department has
done along those lines is, we had a pilot project that we
implemented on I believe it was four reservations addressing
violent crime in Indian Country. One of the was Chairman
Barrasso's home State tribes at the Wind River Reservation. We
implemented that pilot program in a number of other locations
as well. What we have seen is, as part of that program, where
we provide resources and assistance to a tribe to combat
violent crime that they are very successful in lowering those
crime rates.
There was a period I believe of over three to four years of
this pilot program. What we saw in the initial years was that
crime rates went up. The reason crime rates went up is because
people had more confidence that action was going to be taken.
So before the pilot program, folks may not have gone to law
enforcement because they didn't see results. In these pilot
programs, when they were being implemented, they saw results
that were happening. Crime rates went up, but then they went
significantly down because of the increased presence.
The other thing we are doing is implementing the recidivism
project that I talked about in my opening statement. That is at
three reservations. We are trying to build data there to see,
okay, if we focus on recidivism and we know from talking with
law enforcement that the majority of offenders in Indian
Country, they are not violent criminals. They are committing
crimes because they have a drug abuse or alcohol related issue.
So we focus on recidivism and a pilot project to build data
that the Committee can use to see how we scale that out, how we
develop best practices.
We have been at that for a couple of years. The results
over a couple of years, I think folks will tell you, a couple
of years isn't long enough to track recidivism right now, but
over the couple of years, we have seen a decrease in the double
digits, over 40 percent, in recidivism. So at the Red Lake
Reservation, and the chairman of Red Lake, hopefully he can
help educate the Committee, but at Red Lake, for example, they
had 31 juveniles in that pilot project for recidivism. They
have since aged out, but not a one of them has gotten back into
the system under that pilot project.
So I think there are some real successes, and that is sort
of what we are trying to build on.
Senator Cantwell. My time is expired, Mr. Chairman, thank
you.
The Chairman. Thank you. Senator Murkowski?
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Roberts, thank you for your testimony. I thank all of
you.
This week, Secretary Washburn is in the State. He is at the
BIA providers conference up there. He has indicated that DOI is
prepared to consider land-into-trust applications from the
State as soon as this litigation that I mentioned earlier is
resolved. The Department has represented to us that there will
be public safety advantages to our villages if we see land
taken into trust.
We have jurisdictional issues to resolve out there, but
what I am curious to know more about is the resources that
might follow. Our villages rely 100 percent on the Federal
Government to fund their governments.
So are you prepared to fund, is the Department prepared to
fund public safety improvements in Alaska if we were to see an
increase in our trust lands?
Mr. Roberts. Senator, thank you for the question. One of
the things that we do look at when we are considering fee-to-
trust application is our ability to deliver services to that
land. That fits into the nexus.
Senator Murkowski. Right.
Mr. Roberts. So if we take land into trust, then we would
obviously be prepared to take on that responsibility. I think
what Secretary Washburn has mentioned though, and I think it is
an important point for everyone to bear in mind is that if we
take land into trust in Alaska, the State will still have
jurisdiction, but it brings another partner to the table for
those crimes that would happen on that trust land. Right now,
tribes are limited in their ability.
But if the land is in trust, then it would be like other
trust land and Public Law 280 States, where tribes would have
authority to prosecute members as well as the State.
Senator Murkowski. Let me ask specifically then because we
have BIA police here behind you this afternoon. Would you
anticipate that we would see heightened BIA police presence
within the state if we move to land-into-trust in the State?
Mr. Roberts. I think we would address it the same as we
address other Public Law 280 States in that support. So I think
there would be increased services available. I can provide more
information on that.
Senator Murkowski. I think it would be helpful to have more
information and more understanding. As you may know, I have
been trying to get funding for P.L. 280 States for our tribal
courts. So through the appropriations process this year, we
have for the first time ever a small amount. It gets our foot
in the door.
But as a P.L. 280 State, it has been one of those issues
where we are looking at it and we are saying, we would like to
be able to do more, but the funding has not come to us. So if
there is going to be representation that if you put forth your
application for land into trust that resources will then
follow, I think you are going to see perhaps more interest. But
it is not going to be real if there isn't something concrete
behind that. I think we need to know that going into it.
And again, these discussions are very much underway in
Alaska right now.
Mr. Roberts. And like I said, it would be commensurate with
how we deal with law enforcement in other P.L. 280 States. For
example, California is a P.L. 280 State. I mentioned in my
testimony about BIA working with Cabazon to get better access
to that California data base, to work more collaboratively.
Will there be officers on the ground? I don't know off the
top of my head, but that is something that we can certainly
follow up with your office, Senator. The other thing I wanted
to quickly mention is that Tricia Tingle from Director Cruzan's
office is in Alaska this week providing tribal court training
in Alaska. I know there are a number of assessments there. So
thank you for your support on that work.
Senator Murkowski. We will keep pushing on that.
Let me ask you, Mr. Toulou, from DOJ's perspective what
resources could be brought to bear if Alaska were to move, if
some of our tribes were to move toward land-into-trust?
Mr. Toulou. I think it's some of the existing resources
that tribes are accessing now. It would be a better
justification for them when they are putting their grants in.
That would be the COPS program, we currently provide COPS
funding which provides for officers. We also provide funding
regarding detention facilities and their construction in
Alaska. We provide money for tribal courts, for re-entry. So
all those programs, Office of Victims of Crime has victim
services money that would be available, we have police officers
working in the villages. That would certainly be something we
would want to factor in. And the Office of Violence Against
Women has resources.
So all those resources would be available. But I think it
becomes a more urgent need if you have the jurisdiction of the
land that you have the officers in.
Senator Murkowski. I would be remiss if I did not take the
opportunity to remind you that the Attorney General has been
invited on numerous occasions to come visit the State of
Alaska. I don't know whether she has publicly made promises,
but I know there are great hopes that she would have an
opportunity to visit some of our Alaska Native villages some
time in this next year. So if you could convey that outstanding
invitation to her, it would be appreciated.
Mr. Toulou. I will do so. I had the opportunity to visit
Alaska last year and I will convey that. It is a great place.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Murkowski, thank you very much.
Senator Heitkamp?
Senator Heitkamp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to focus most of my comments on substance abuse and
the work that SAMHSA is doing, which I think is great, a little
late, but we are glad you have been included on this panel.
Mr. Toulou, how many law enforcement officers should we
have on Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation?
Mr. Toulou. Ma'am, I could not tell you a number, but I can
certainly look into it.
Senator Heitkamp. I don't think anyone has those numbers.
So you can look into it, but you aren't going to find those
numbers. I think you know my point. My point is that we have
large land tribes. We have isolated rural tribes. And we have
no law enforcement presence. We have no cop on the beat. And
when you have no cop on the beat, and you have heard Mr.
Roberts talk about increased presence and what that does,
increased attention to recidivism and re-entry from Federal
prisons, which I know you guys are working on and I applaud
that.
But we don't know how many cops we need in Indian Country
and where we are going to get them. And when you say, let's do
memoranda of understanding in this collaboration, I am pretty
sure I am the only person in this room, at least this half of
the room, who has ever tried to negotiate an MOU. I spent six
years and got nothing done. And I am not used to spending that
amount of time and getting nothing done.
But it was a pilot project, and it relies on trust, which
we don't have between State and local authorities and Federal
authorities. We have Federal authorities who have jurisdiction
but don't have a presence. So we don't have a cop on the beat.
This is an issue I raised with the FBI director, invited the
FBI director to come out. I think we cannot begin to solve all
these other problems until we get a true law enforcement
presence. This is an age-old problem.
I want to focus on substance abuse because as Mr. Roberts
has said, and I think anyone who does this work, we know that
we have a crisis in this country of substance abuse. But it is
amplified in Indian Country. I want to tell you, I am very much
looking forward to your 2016 report. I think that will be very
enlightening.
But during your testimony, you said there are 70 programs,
and you are going to educate on where those 70 programs are.
Did you ever think, boy, that is a lot of programs and maybe we
ought to streamline this and adopt the kinds of programs that
are best practices that we actually have seen things work?
Ms. Beadle. Those programs include a whole range of things.
Some of those are Federal programs. Others are programs that
are exemplary, that are important for tribal communities. These
are not all funded programs from the Federal Government. We
were asked through TLOA to identify the various resources that
would be helpful to tribes.
So these educational programs include substance abuse.
Senator Heitkamp. But just exercising your personal
judgment, do you think giving somebody a list of 70 programs,
and some are this and some are that, that that is really----
Ms. Beadle. It doesn't end there. I appreciate and respect
your question. What we do a lot is, in addition to letting
tribes know what is out there, we do a significant amount of
technical assistance. We literally can do onsite technical
assistance with tribes to help them understand how to bring
those programs together that might be useful to their
communities.
Senator Heitkamp. I have a little experience in tobacco
control from my time as attorney general. I would tell you, CDC
put together best practices on tobacco control. Didn't mean one
size fit all. But it was a foundation and a framework piece.
Then if you look at almost any good public health program,
domestic violence programs started with the Duluth Initiative
and we were able to build on that and actually come up with a
plan that really led to better outcomes.
But with my small time remaining, I want to talk about
trauma-informed and trauma-based therapies. The things we have
been doing in the past to deal with addiction and to deal with
some of the issues, I think the more we are learning about the
effects of trauma, adverse childhood experiences on children,
the more we know that we could approach this differently. What
is SAMHSA doing to bring trauma-informed and trauma-based
initiatives to the discussion?
Ms. Beadle. One of SAMHSA's primary strategic initiatives
is actually trauma. We have done a significant amount of work
across the Country, including the tribal communities. We have
issued guidance on trauma-informed care, established trauma-
informed care. We have also worked with multiple sectors on
implementing these guidelines. We specifically now are looking
at trauma from a community perspective, from an historical
trauma perspective and supporting a number of tribal programs
that include those types of efforts to support historical
trauma within Indian communities.
Just about every single SAMHSA program that is in a tribal
community includes those trauma concepts.
Senator Heitkamp. And I applaud the Office of Juvenile
Justice that has been a leader in this area as well, and
something this Committee has tried to educate ourselves on. We
had a trauma panel about a year and a half ago. This could be a
path forward for a different program that could lead to better
and best practices. So I just want to raise that issue.
Ms. Beadle. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. Senator Murkowski, any additional
questions?
Senator Murkowski. Just very briefly on the issue of
substance abuse. I don't think Alaska is unique in that we are
seeing unprecedented amounts of heroin coming into our State,
getting out to our small villages. We are also seeing levels of
spice, particularly in our urban areas, in Anchorage. It is
having a horrible impact on not only our homeless population
there, but many of our Native residents as well.
What specific initiatives are focusing on what we are
seeing with this heroin epidemic in Indian Country, up in
Alaska? I know that we had, not too many years ago, it was all
eyes were on meth. And by gosh, we had an effort to get on the
reservations and wipe it out. In fact, just within the past
couple of months we saw a grant program, a grant being awarded
to Alaska on the issue of meth. I am like, wait a minute, that
was last year's drug that has hit us.
What are we doing? Heroin, spice, and meth really hasn't
gone away either.
Ms. Beadle. I am going to quote the Indian Health Service
Deputy Director who says, there is always a drug of the month.
So the issue is not necessarily about do we have one single
program for meth, one single program for spice. The issue is
whether we have sufficient programming in Indian Country to
address any drug or issue.
So SAMHSA does have a range of programs that support any
drug that a tribe is having an issue with. We have programs
that focus on youth and drug use, alcohol use. We have programs
that focus on court systems and providing treatment for
individuals who do enter the criminal justice system.
So there are a range of programs. I think the question is,
how are we coming together across the various Federal
departments to address that issue. And in response to the
concerns in Alaska, we are having a very deliberate Federal
dialogue around spice, how can we be more proactive around
that. We are looking at that as we speak.
Senator Murkowski. From Justice's perspective, one of the
things we are seeing in Alaska is we can't go out, we can't
prosecute because the definition of what spice is is just one
formula off of what we have been able to file charges on. So
how we stay ahead of that, ahead of the bad guys that are going
to try to trip us up at every turn, what we are doing within
the Department of Justice?
Mr. Toulou. It is a challenge. These drugs change, as you
pointed out, and there is always a flavor of the month. Prior
to this hearing, we reached out to the FBI to see what the
issues were in Alaska. Spice was, not surprisingly, one of the
issues that they raised. They told us that they are working
with DEA, State and locals and tribal officials, along with the
State AG's office and the U.S. Attorney's office to try to come
up with a mechanism for targeting. They have had law
enforcement actions against some of the places that are selling
spice. They will continue to work with their partners to try to
come up with strategies to hit the new and emerging markets.
Senator Murkowski. I think we are somewhat unique in that,
because so many of our communities are isolated, 80 percent of
the communities in the State are not connected by road. So how
do these drugs get in? They come in by airplane. And they come
in through the U.S. Postal Service. They come in through the
mail. So to me, this ought to be the easy one to address. It is
not like down in North Dakota where you have a reservation that
you know the road coming in or the road going out, or you can
fly in. But it is tougher, it is more porous.
Here we have one way in. The fact that we have not been
able to see the reduction in the import of whether it is spice
or heroin or meth, it continues to confound and disturb me that
we are not doing better. It does really require a very
collaborative effort. We don't have the resources on the ground
that we need. And utilizing everybody is an effort that we
simply must continue to pursue.
So not only within the folks at SAMHSA, but those of you
over at DOJ, this is something that is a huge priority for us.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the extra time.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. Senator
Heitkamp?
Senator Heitkamp. I just want to ask the vice chairman, and
thank him for the work that his tribe has done. I think we are
looking for models all across the Country that can be adopted
in Indian Country to better protect Indian people.
As part of your system, do you have drug courts?
Mr. Gobin. We absolutely do.
Senator Heitkamp. Do you have difficulty basically getting
wraparound services? Because the theory behind drug courts is
treatment and the opportunity for treatment is critical.
Mr. Gobin. That is kind of a long answered question. But I
did want to comment that sitting here is not unlike sitting in
a tribal council chamber as leadership trying to deal with all
of these issues. I find it a very similar discussion.
We contribute millions of dollars toward drug prevention.
It comes in many ways. It comes through supporting our
education programs, early childhood development programs, our
treatment programs, our court programs, alternative sentencing
programs, trying to find creative ways to deal with the ever-
changing issues around drugs and addiction and what it is doing
to our society. It is our society as a whole. In Indian
Country, it seems more magnified. I often think it is because I
know the victims, we know them. They are family members, they
are friends. They are people that you grew up with, they could
be your aunts, your uncles, your brothers, your grandparents.
And you see this, and you take an active interest in trying to
deal with it.
But it all takes money. It takes dollars to do this.
Fortunately, my tribe is in a position, we have grown
economically, we are able to contribute those dollars toward
the membership. But funding that comes through the Federal
Government needs to have specific set asides that tribes can
access. Oftentimes it comes down through States and tribes see
little to none of those dollars. It all depends on the
relationship that you have with the State.
You have issues that deal with how you go to deal with
violators, the VAWA Act. It gives us provisions to deal with
domestic violence of a non-Indian on a reservation against a
Native American woman. If that violence also included children,
the tribes have no ability to charge that person. It would have
to go to Federal court.
If that violator also included children, and had drugs
involved in it, the tribes have no ability to charge that
person for the drug violation. So unless the Federal prosecutor
picks that up, they go uncharged and they get away with that.
So some of those things need to be addressed. Six of our
cases dealt with minor children. Only one has seen justice
because of that. Those types of things are what I think need to
be addressed within the Act. How do we do this? How do we put
the faith in the tribal court systems that are fully trained
and in our case, our police department is Washington State
police officer certification, certified, been through
academies, been through training. Our chief of police has been
through the FBI academy, a tribal member.
So we have built a very strong police force. Yet do not
have full exercising of our judicial sovereignty that we should
have within the lands of our reservation.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Vice Chairman. Continue your good work, and we hope that the
lessons that you are learning and the loopholes that you are
exposing here continue to inform our decisions as we move
forward. Good luck to you and your tribe.
Mr. Gobin. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Heitkamp.
Mr. Roberts, your written testimony highlights the
flexibility in training programs, the BIA in providing tribal
law enforcement officers. Training is intended to lead to a
larger pool of applicants. I am wanting to get a little follow-
up on that on how the agency determines the effectiveness of
this training once these officers are now placed in the field.
Mr. Roberts. Thank you, Chairman, for the question. I do
know that with regard to that enhanced training that there has
been a larger pool. I don't know if we have the data in terms
of how that correlates to on the ground filling of vacancies.
But I do know, talking with Director Cruzan, that that
flexibility has been critical.
The Chairman. The Tribal Law and Order Act required BIA to
develop and provide dispatch emergency 9-1-1 services in Indian
communities. I am just wondering, because you talked a little
bit about it in the written testimony, that you had been able
to procure equipment and integrate some of the communications
systems, I think at 17 different agency locations. Can you just
elaborate a little bit on what capabilities are now available
in these communities and how things are going?
Mr. Roberts. I believe, Senator, that the Director is
saying that at Sycuan, that is one of our primary areas where
we have implemented those capabilities. I can certainly provide
additional information for you on that.
The Chairman. During that field hearing in Wyoming that we
talked about a little earlier, the lack of law enforcement
within Indian Country was discussed. I just want to know about
improvements that the Department has made to ensure that law
enforcement is fully staffed.
Mr. Roberts. Full staffing is, I think, unfortunately given
the difficult budget times, is more of an ideal than a reality
in Indian Country. I think we all know that.
But we are trying, and I think that is why I wanted to
highlight the collaboration between tribal, State and Federal
law enforcement officers as part of TLOA, because that
collaboration can help fill some of those gaps, in our
preparations for this hearing, Mr. Chairman, we talked a lot
about the SLEC positions. Director Cruzan said, before TLOA,
that was a huge issue for tribes in getting those memorandums
of agreement working with the SLEC, with BIA. HE said, because
of TLOA, we don't hear about that any more. It is working well.
So that is one of the areas where I think we are trying to do
more with limited resources, finite resources.
The Chairman. Ms. Beadle, I want to talk a little bit about
the fact that the Tribal Law and Order Act provides that
alcohol and substance abuse issues in Indian communities be
coordinated under your agency. According to Rick Brennan, my
friend who I have worked with many, many years as I practiced
medicine in Wyoming, he is a council member of the Northern
Arapahoe Tribe in Wyoming, you have been helpful, he says, in
responding to and implementing the tribe's substance abuse
action plan. As I am sure you know, alcohol is a significant
contributor to too many premature deaths on the Wind River
Reservation in Wyoming where the Northern Arapahoe and Eastern
Shoshone Tribes both reside.
What more do you think can be done by your agency, by the
Department of Health and Human Services, to reverse the trend
that we are seeing nationally and help specifically the tribes
on the Wind River Reservation? Do you have sufficient authority
and resources to fully implement the Tribal Law and Order Act?
Ms. Beadle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When Senator Hoeven
asked me about the challenges, I was talking about what tribes
are always saying to us. Those were the tribal communities'
points.
This is a point that I think SAMHSA, as the lead agency in
this country, is concerned about. That is, we haven't talked
about mental health at all today. The big issue is that most
people who have substance use problems and have alcohol
problems, mental health is an issue. We are really working on
elevating that issue for tribal communities. I can tell you
that while we have national numbers, alcohol clearly is still a
problem. Substance abuse is still a problem, but we do know
that over time, those issues are slightly better.
It doesn't mean that in particular tribal communities it
still isn't really, really bad. But overall as a Nation, we are
actually a little bit better on those two issues.
Mental health, however, is not happening in the same way in
tribal communities. So what we have been trying to do is to
elevate not only the concerns around substance use and alcohol,
but we have been trying to talk with tribal leaders, tribal
communities about mental health. I do believe that if there is
a great focus in tribal communities around mental health, we
will start seeing differences in terms of what is happening in
those communities.
The Chairman. I am always curious on how we measure and
determine the effectiveness of any of these activities, in
terms of mental health, in terms of alcohol and substance
abuse. How do you work in terms of performance measurements, in
trying to determine the effectiveness of some of these
programs?
Ms. Beadle. Thank you for that. In our programs, all of our
funded tribal grantees do their local evaluation. We also have
a national evaluation that we have the grantees participate in.
Those evaluations are showing us very important things. That is
where we get some of our more qualitative information from.
The Chairman. Thanks. Mr. Toulou, if I could talk about the
written testimony of Vice Chairman Gobin, he stated that
despite the additional of tribal liaison and U.S. Attorney's
office, we are still seeing people declining to prosecute major
crimes still occurring. This kind of declining to prosecute,
which occurs for a variety of reasons, may still leave the
victim without recourse of justice.
So the Tribal Law and Order Act authorized several tools to
improve the potential for prosecutors and prosecutions of
crimes in Indian communities. Can you explain what else may
need to be done, that we ought to be looking at to improve the
chances of prosecuting these crimes in Indian Country?
Mr. Toulou. I think it is a preliminary matter. Part of the
reason we see, so you look at these statistics, and they don't
always tell the whole story, is that many U.S. Attorneys'
offices are charging more cases than they ever had before. They
are talking to their tribal partners and they are making
determinations on where those cases should be. We see in some
districts those cases are now going to tribal courts. In other
cases, we are looking at cases we probably wouldn't have looked
at before, but we want to give them a fair shot. Those cases
may not be as strong as ones we have had in the past.
So just because the declination numbers remain high doesn't
necessarily mean we aren't getting the cases we need to get.
That said, I think one of the important things that the
Tribal Law and Order Act has done is improved our communication
with tribes on the local level. As a former AUSA in Montana,
there is nothing like being on the ground and talking with the
people who are experiencing the crime and seeing the crime
scene to help you understand what is happening. Unfortunately,
you can't always be out there.
So working with tribal SAUSAs, special assistant U.S.
Attorneys are prosecutors, not only allows us to have those
individuals in to prosecute in tribal court, but it has
developed this relationship. We have seen many cases,
particularly in the domestic violence arena, where the Federal
Government is picking up cases they may not have seen before
because of that close relationship.
So I think there are a lot of things that might help. But
just continuing to build on that communication is critical.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gobin, your written testimony noted the
increased funding for crime victim services would help build
capacity to operate justice systems more effectively. You
specifically noted that your tribe was encouraged by the
introduction of the SURVIVE Act in this Committee. Can you
describe in a little more detail how the SURVIVE Act would help
your justice system?
Mr. Gobin. I apologize, I am not fully aware of that. But
we can send in additional testimony in regard to that question.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. I do appreciate and t
hank all of you for being here today. The hearing record will
be open for two additional weeks. Some other members may want
to supply you with some written questions. I hope you would get
the answers back to us quickly, if you could. Thank you all for
being here today. Thank you for your testimony.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:48, the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Joint Prepared Statement of M. Brent Leonhard, Attorney, Office of
Legal Counsel, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
and Bill Boyum, Chief Justice, Cherokee Supreme Court
Thank you for the invitation to provide written testimony to the
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. We thank Chairman Barrasso and
Vice-Chairman Tester for your leadership on Indian country issues and
desire to improve public safety in Indian country. This brief written
testimony specifically addresses the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) TLOA Pilot
Program and the need to make the program permanent based on the
experiences of both the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation (CTUIR) and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians tribal
court (EBCI).
The CTUIR implemented felony sentencing under TLOA in March of
2011. EB Cherokee implemented in October of 2012. We were likely the
first tribes in the nation to do so. It has been a real success for
both.
Many people at the CTUIR have been charged and convicted of
felonies since adoption of TLOA. It has proven to be both a vehicle for
ensuring defendants are held accountable for serious crimes when the
federal government declines to prosecute cases, as well as an
appropriate vehicle for holding people accountable by the local
community when both the tribal nation and the U.S. Attorney's Office
conclude that a particular case can be best dealt with in tribal court
rather than federal court.
A key aspect of TLOA's felony sentencing authority was the
associated BOP TLOA Pilot Program. Section 234(c) of TLOA required the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons to establish a four-year pilot
program to accept certain qualifying tribal convicts free of charge.
That program was implemented on November 29, 2010 and ended on November
24, 2014. It was critical for the CTUIR. We house prisoners in the
local county jail through a contract agreement with Umatilla county.
Currently, the CTUIR has 5 jail beds available to house criminal
defendants both pre and post-conviction. Once those are full there is
no other place to house tribal convicts.
To qualify for being housed in the BOP Pilot Program a tribal
convict must have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of two or
more years and have two or more years left to serve at the time of
transfer to the BOP. The underlying offense must also be a violent
crime substantially similar to a crime listed in the Major Crimes Act.
The BOP has established a process whereby tribes can submit all of the
necessary information for the BOP to determine if a convict qualifies,
and where best to house the convict in the federal system to ensure
both the convict's safety and the safety of other inmates. Attempts are
made to house the convict in a facility close to the tribe's community.
During the duration of the BOP Pilot Program 6 people were placed
in federal prison: three from the CTUIR, two from the Eastern Band of
the Cherokee Indians, and one from Tulalip. While the BOP in their
March 7, 2014 report on the TLOA program indicated they were uncertain
why so few tribal offenders had been referred under the pilot program,
it is assuredly because only a handful of tribes have been able to
implement TLOA felony sentencing authority in that amount of time.
After all, it wasn't until 4 months after the BOP started the program
that the first tribe was able to implement felony sentencing. To date
there are 10 tribes that have implemented felony sentencing authority.
Unfortunately, the Pilot Program did not last long enough for more
offenders to be housed in federal prison.
At the CTUIR the BOP Pilot Program has proved essential to
exercising felony sentencing authority. The three defendants housed
under the BOP Pilot Program would have taken up 60 percent of the CTUIR
detention budget. This amounts to a cost of $85,200 per year under the
CTUIR current agreement with Umatilla county. That would leave only 2
beds available for all the other tribal defendants--pre and post-
conviction. In addition, those 3 convicts would not have had the
various services available under the federal prison system that can be
critical in reducing recidivism.
Without the BOP Pilot Program, the CTUIR is left having to focus
heavily on the impact imprisonment will have on the tribe's overall
detention resources rather than focusing on what the appropriate
sentence would be for the underlying conviction. While all systems have
detention resource concerns to consider, tribal nations like the CTUIR
have much more serious resource constraints. In absence of additional
funding from the federal government for detention purposes, the BOP
Pilot Program was the only viable option available for multiple serious
felony convicts and had the added bonus of providing important
programing that could help the defendants deal with underlying issues.
The first person transferred under the program was sentenced in
CTUIR court on November 20, 2012 and transferred to the BOP in January
of 2013. He was convicted of felony assault that resulted in serious
physical injury as well as felony conspiracy to commit an assault that
resulted in serious physical injury. In that incident the defendant
knocked the victim unconscious and fractured the victim's skull. He
also agreed with another person to cause serious injury to a second
victim who ended up getting a broken nose. He was sentenced to 1,095
days in jail with 275 days suspended, and 820 days to serve. The CTUIR
and U.S. Attorney's Office worked together and determined that the
tribal court was best suited to handle the matter rather than federal
court. He was represented in tribal court by his federal defense
attorney.
The second convict transferred to the BOP from the CTUIR was
convicted after trial of one count of felony domestic violence, two
counts of domestic violence menacing, three counts of domestic violence
misdemeanor assault, and three counts of endangering the welfare of a
minor. These offenses arose from the same event. He was also convicted
of one count of Harassment and one count of Criminal mischief for a
separate incident. The U.S. Attorney's Office declined to prosecute his
case and it was left to the CTUIR to ensure he was held accountable for
his serious criminal conduct. The underlying facts of the felony
assault conviction involved using a firearm to strike his significant
other in front of their minor child. He was sentenced to 26 months in
jail and referred to the BOP Pilot Program.
In the third case the defendant was convicted of felony assault by
plea for stabbing his cousin 22 times. The U.S. Attorney's Office
declined to prosecute the case. He was sentenced to 910 days in jail
with 788 suspended, or 122 days in jail with credit for time served.
The defendant later violated his conditions of probation and had 786
days in jail imposed. At that point he was transferred to the BOP Pilot
Program in September of 2014. The defendant requested to be transferred
to the BOP. He did not want to serve the full sentence in county jail.
Since the BOP Pilot Program has ended the CTUIR has not sentenced a
defendant to more than one year in jail. This, despite there being
several sentences with more than 24 months suspended. It is the belief
of the Prosecutor's Office that this is due in fair part to the
limitations on available jail space and the absence of the BOP Pilot
Program.
The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians has also found the BOP Pilot
Program to be essential. At the time of sentencing under the BOP Pilot
Program, they were housing inmates in a county jail for $40 per inmate
per night, not including medical care. The county jail did not provide
work release, drug treatment, educational training or any kind of
meaningful rehabilitation program. In fact, the second defendant at
EBCI, like the third at CTUIR, requested that he be allowed to serve
his time with the BOP to allow him to take advantage of their drug
treatment program. While EBCI now has a detention facility on their
reservation, they have not been open long enough to compile sufficient
statistical data to determine their inmate costs but it is estimated to
run in the $75 per night range. Their new facility is designed to hold
inmates through the adjudicative process and to house them for a short
to medium term of incarceration. It was not designed to house inmates
for multiple years, although it provides more services and training
than their local county jail.
Federal prosecution at EBCI was contemplated for both defendants
housed in the BOP Program but it was determined by their tribal
prosecutor/SAUSA that they should both be prosecuted in the EBCI court
system. The first defendant was sentenced to a 4 year term of
imprisonment on November 16, 2012 and was subsequently accepted by the
program. He is currently serving the 4 year term and is scheduled to be
released sometime in late 2016. He entered a guilty plea in which,
among other charges, he pleaded guilty to Assault on a Female and
Failure to Obey a Lawful Court Order. He violated the terms of a
domestic violence protective order. He assaulted the victim by punching
her and pulling her hair out which led to the assault charge and
conviction. He later made direct contact with the protected party at
the courthouse resulting in a protection order violation. The cost of
housing this inmate would be approximately $58,400 in county custody or
more if housed in tribal custody.
The second defendant at EBCI was sentenced to a 3 year term of
imprisonment on May 6, 2013 and was subsequently accepted into the BOP
Program. He has just been released from their custody and is serving
the remaining period of his active sentence under electronic home
confinement through the EBCI tribal court probation department. The
defendant entered a plea in which, among other charges, he pled guilty
to Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Assault Inflicting Serious Bodily
Injury. The judgment was consolidated into a 3 year term of
imprisonment. Defendant stabbed the victim with a knife in the back of
the head causing 3 wounds. Defendant also cut the victim on the left
cheek. The blade was broken off at the handle and the victim had to be
transported to the nearest trauma center in Asheville, North Carolina.
The total cost of the 3 years of incarceration would have been $43,800
in a county facility or more if housed in a tribal facility.
Currently, the EBCI have one additional inmate who would have been
eligible for the Pilot Program as he received a sentence of more than 2
years for a domestic violence conviction. He is serving a 3 year active
sentence. This defendant has requested that he be allowed to serve his
sentence in a federal facility instead of the tribe's detention
facility. Additional, they have an inmate servicing a 7 year sentence
for numerous property crimes.
In conclusion we want to extend our gratitude and appreciation to
Chairman Barrasso, Vice Chairman Tester, and all members of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs who are looking at the impact TLOA has had
over the past 5 years. TLOA has many significant provisions and seeks
not only increased resources to combat crime in Indian Country, but
most notably, systemic changes that are necessary to help fix a clearly
broken system. Unfortunately, one critical piece of TLOA has ended and
needs to be reinstated and made permanent. The BOP itself has
recommended in its May 7, 2014 report to make the BOP TLOA Pilot
Program permanent so that it remains available as a resource for
tribes. We urge you to pass legislation that will accomplish this
uncontroversial bi-partisan program. Thank you for your efforts in this
matter.
______
Prepared Statement of Ryan P. Jackson, Chairman, Hoopa Valley Tribal
Council
Thank you for the opportunity to present written testimony on
behalf of the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe concerning implementation of
TLOA. I ask that the Committee consider our testimony carefully in
determining whether to take remedial action regarding TLOA.
1. Introduction and Interest of the Hoopa Valley Tribe
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation is the largest land based
Indian reservation in California, \1\ comprising approximately 100,000
acres in Humboldt County. Approximately 4,000 people live on the
Reservation of whom about 51 percent are enrolled members of the Tribe.
Most of the population lives in the valley of the Trinity River but
some people live in the hills outside the valley. The Hoopa Valley
Reservation is located in the heart of the Tribe's aboriginal lands,
lands the Tribe has occupied since time immemorial. The federal
government established the Hoopa Valley Reservation in 1864.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Klamath River runs through the northern part of our
Reservation, and the Trinity River, the largest tributary of the
Klamath, bisects our Reservation running south to north. The Hoopa
Valley Tribe has critically important enforcement responsibilities for
fishing and water rights in the Klamath Basin,, as recognized by the
United States in the Memorandum from Solicitor of the Department of the
Interior to the Secretary of the Interior (Oct. 4, 1993); and the
Memorandum from Regional Solicitor, Pacific Southwest Region to the
Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region (July 22,
1995) (collectively, ``Solicitors' Opinions''); and by federal courts
in, for example, Parravano v. Babbitt, 70 F.3d 539 (9th Cir. 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoopa Valley is an isolated location about 50 miles from the
nearest coastal cities of Eureka, California and Arcata, California and
separated from them by two mountain passes which are often impassable
because of snow or other weather conditions.
2. Hoopa Has Shouldered the Burden of Providing Policing Within the
Hoopa Valley Reservation
Congress required California to assume criminal jurisdiction of the
Hoopa Valley Reservation in 1953. However, the State of California and
Humboldt County lack the resources, or the will, or both to provide
adequate law enforcement services. As a result, for many years the
Tribe has undertaken that responsibility at tribal expense. The unique
culture and history of the Tribe, the geographic remoteness of the
Reservation, and the structure of tribal and federal Indian laws mean
that having tribal police officers authorized to enforce state, federal
and tribal laws will enhance law enforcement services and public
safety.
In 1995, the Tribe and Humboldt County negotiated a joint powers
agreement under which both entities would acquire data, plan public
outreach, and the Sheriff would deputize Hoopa tribal police officers
to enforce state criminal laws upon completing a training course for
deputy sheriffs as prescribed by the Commission on Peace Officers
Standards and Training. However, in January 1996, the California
Department of Justice determined that Indian tribal police were not
within the definitions of the California Penal Code as being authorized
to obtain criminal offender record information or otherwise recognized
as peace officers under state law. Accordingly, the Hoopa Valley Tribe
and Humboldt County Sheriff Dennis Lewis approached the state
legislature for relief. Senator Mike Thompson introduced S.B. 1797 to
provide county sheriffs and chiefs of police with clear authority to
deputize tribal police officers as peace officers. Governor Wilson
signed that bill into law in late 1996 and the sheriff's authority to
deputize tribal police officers is now codified in California Penal
Code 830.6 (b).
Having tribal police officers deputized as county sheriffs
minimizes the difficulty of enforcing state criminal laws against non-
tribal members on the Reservation though it exposes the officers to
liability while acting under state law. However, that procedure works
only with the cooperation of the duly elected Sheriff of Humboldt
County. Shortly after his election in 2010, the new Sheriff for
Humboldt County, Michael Downey, terminated the Deputization Agreement
that has existed between the Tribe and Humboldt County since 1995.
After a dangerous four-month hiatus in law enforcement services, the
Sheriff realized his mistake and reinstated the agreement in April
2011. However, the Sheriff again terminated the agreement on September
23, 2015 and thus, through the present day, our qualified tribal police
officers are unable to exercise arrest powers in most circumstances or
to enforce state criminal laws.
The enactment of TLOA in 2010 appeared to provide a solution to
problems caused by the political whims of elected county sheriffs who
may decline to deputize qualified tribal police officers. Section 221
of TLOA authorizes the United States to reassume concurrent criminal
jurisdiction upon the request of the Tribe. With full criminal
jurisdiction tribal police officers to whom Special Law Enforcement
Commissions have been issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of
Justice Services are authorized to enforce the full panoply of
applicable federal law. Further, California Penal Code 830.8
authorizes such federal law enforcement officers, when engaged in the
enforcement of federal criminal laws, to exercise arrest powers under
state law also. Unfortunately, the potential solution offered by TLOA
has proven to be unavailable.
3. Tribal Requests for the United States to Accept Concurrent
Jurisdiction Are Being Ignored
In 2011, after our Deputization Agreement with Humboldt County had
been terminated, the Hoopa Valley Tribe requested that the United
States reassume concurrent criminal jurisdiction on the Reservation
pursuant to 221 of TLOA. That request has lain dormant for nearly
five years, receiving neither approval, nor rejection.
On December 6, 2011 the Justice Department adopted regulations
concerning assumption of concurrent federal criminal jurisdiction in
certain areas of Indian Country, found at 28 CFR 50.25. The
regulation prescribes the requirements for tribal requests and the
procedure for handling them. Upon receipt of a tribal request the
Office of Tribal Justice must promptly publish a notice in the Federal
Register seeking comments from the general public. Requests received by
February 28 of each calendar year will be ``prioritized for decision by
July 31,'' of the same calendar year. After receiving written
recommendations from the Office of Tribal Justice, the Executive Office
of the United States Attorneys, and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the Deputy Attorney General of the United States will
consent to the request, deny it, or request further information. The
Deputy Attorney General will also explain the basis of the decision and
appropriate technical assistance will be offered for renewed request.
The Justice Department has approved a total of one application
under 221 of TLOA, the application of the White Earth Reservation in
Minnesota, approved March 15, 2013. Four other applications have
awaited consideration for three or more years including the Elk Valley
Rancheria of California (noticed June 4, 2012), the Table Mountain
Rancheria of California (noticed October 22, 2012), our application
(noticed for the second time on October 22, 2012), and the Mille Lacs
Band of Ojibwe of Minnesota (noticed March 19, 2013). To the best of
our knowledge, all comments concerning our request have been fully
addressed but no action has been forthcoming.
4. TLOA's Promise of Better Public Safety Is Not Being Realized
The assumption of concurrent federal criminal jurisdiction will
allow most criminal prosecutions to occur in California state court,
rather than federal court. While federal criminal law is not
comprehensive, the Indian Country Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C 1152, allows
the Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. 13, to apply to Indian
Country. The Assimilative Crimes Act fills any void in federal criminal
law by using state criminal law. But without federal reassumption of
concurrent criminal jurisdiction at Hoopa, the Assimilative Crimes Act
does not apply.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in Los Coyotes Band
v. Jewell, 729 F.3d 1025 (9th Cir. 2013) that despite pressing need,
the lack of existing BIA law enforcement programs in Public Law 280
states such as California denies the tribes the opportunity to use the
Indian Self Determination Act to carry out those services. The court
said:
It is hard to dispute that Indian Country may be one of the
most dangerous places in the United States. Statistics tell
only part of the story, and they are saddening: American
Indians are victims of violent crime at a rate twice the
national average. The Department of Justice estimates that
American Indians experience rates of violent crime higher than
most racial and ethnic groups.
Violence against women is particularly prevalent; in some
American Indian communities women are murdered at a rate 10
times the national average. 30-4 percent of American Indian
women will be raped during their lifetime, compared to less
than 1 in 5 women nationwide.
Los Coyotes Band at 1028-29.
In our view, TLOA has failed because the Department of Justice has
not carried it out. Deputy Attorney General Sally Quillian Yates should
act promptly to approve the Hoopa Valley Tribe's request. We thank the
Committee for holding an Oversight Hearing concerning implementation of
TLOA.
______
Prepared Statement of Carol Wild Scott, Legislative Director, Veterans
and Military Law Section, Federal Bar Association
Veterans Treatment Courts: Proposed Implementation Within the Purview
of the TLOA
At the heart of the burgeoning Veterans Treatment Court movement
nationwide is the recognition that the returning Warrior frequently
finds himself or herself unable to either understand or control the
internal psychological and physiological changes resulting from the
wounds of war--seen and unseen. Beyond that the ``Warrior Mentality''
prevents acknowledgement of the need for assistance. These forces all
too frequently result in behaviors that bring the veteran into conflict
with the rules and expectations of society, thus becoming defendants in
the criminal justice system. The views expressed within this proposal
are those of the Veterans & Military Law Section of the Federal Bar
Association and not necessarily those of the FBA membership at large
There is a place within the criminal justice system in Indian
country for Veterans Treatment Courts, particularly with the
implementation of the Tribal Law and Order Act. More than 190,000
American Indian/Alaska Native and Hawaiian Natives are currently in
uniform. Among the American Armed Forces in general, over (9) years,
2.1 million American troops have served more than 3 million tours of
duty. Of those returning from deployment an estimated 37-50 percent are
diagnosed with PTSD or other serious mental issues and Traumatic Brain
Injury (TBI), which frequently have overlapping symptoms. All these
injuries have significant behavioral and psychological consequences
which affect nearly 70 percent of those deployed, including Indian
military members. These consequences then all too frequently include
criminal offenses involving polysubstance abuse (self-medication),
domestic violence and assault (the result of anger management issues)
and petty theft, which correlate with polysubstance abuse. High rates
of unemployment and unemployability also result from PTSD, TBI and
other catastrophic physical trauma.
Veterans Treatment Courts, integrated into the implementation of
the Tribal Law and Order Act, which provides for alternatives to
incarceration, would provide the best restorative and rehabilitative
resource for veterans as well as their families in Indian country who
are caught up in the criminal justice system. Veterans Treatment Courts
(or a docket within the tribal court designated as such) would benefit
the tribal communities by minimizing the expenditure of tribal
resources for incarceration and economic assistance to the families of
incarcerated veterans. This would be accomplished through a cooperative
structure within the tribal community involving the tribal courts,
prosecution and defense bars, DOJ, and the Department of Veterans
Affairs (through the medical centers and the Criminal Justice Outreach
Coordinators now assigned to each VAMC). A formal agreement, usually an
MOU, would memorialize the structure and provide the operating
procedure. Also involved would be Tribal Veterans Service Officers
(TVSOs), tribal social services and the veterans community (which
provide mentoring to each justice-involved veteran).
Structure:
Traditionally, Veterans Treatment Courts are a cooperative effort
between criminal trial courts on the state and local level,
prosecutors, defense counsel and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
These entities are all signatories of an MOU that establishes the
parameters of the Veterans Treatment Court Program for that
jurisdiction. In Indian country the participation of the Department of
Veterans Affairs would have the added advantage of the MOUs between VA
and IHS and those between VA and independent tribal health care systems
would enter into an operational MOU for Veterans Treatment Courts
pursuant to those agreements. The provisions of the TLOA would allow
participation by DOJ, which on a case by case basis would cede
jurisdiction to tribal courts where necessary and appropriate,
dismissing charges without prejudice pending completion of the program
by the veteran. Upon successful completion of the treatment program,
charges would, ideally, be dismissed with prejudice. Provisions within
the TLOA that provide for grants funding defense counsel,
administrative costs, judicial training and other costs of
implementation should be amended to include those associated with the
establishment of Veterans Treatment Courts.
Process:
1) Upon intake or at first appearance, the veteran would be offered
the opportunity to participate in the Treatment Court Program provided
he or she has an honorable or general discharge under honorable
conditions. While VA treatment may not be available for those with
other than honorable discharges, this prohibition would not affect
treatment through IHS.
2) If the veteran accepts the offer, he or she would be assessed
for medical, psychological and economic needs by VA and where
appropriate, IHS.
3) If admission to the Treatment Court Program is appropriate, the
veteran would then enter into the standard contract for that Veterans
Treatment Court Program, individually modified to meet the assessed
needs and setting out the ``Rules of the Road.'' Non-compliance with
the terms of the contract could mean expulsion and re-entry into the
criminal justice system. During the course of the contract the veteran
would appear before the tribal judge at given intervals for progress
assessment. In most VTCs, each participant must be present weekly for
this purpose.
4) Treatment begins; if substance abuse is an issue, then treatment
may include in-patient treatment at a VA Medical Center, PTSD program
or Substance Abuse facility, including family counseling where
appropriate. This would also include programs designed for families
both in the tribal community and through VA. In Indian country,
traditional healing should be an integral part of the Treatment Court
Program, providing strong tribal peer support through warrior
societies, sweats and the assignment of individual ``quests.''
Treatment would of necessity include programs designed for families.
5) At the initiation of the program a peer mentor would be paired
with the veteran. Mentoring is a crucial aspect of the Veterans
Treatment Court program. The mentors, all volunteers, are usually
combat veterans with similar experiential histories and from all walks
of life. Within the tribal community, elders with combat experience are
very desirable. The crucial aspects are commitment to the mentee; being
available 24/7 to assist the veteran to cope with various aspects of
integration (or reintegration) into community and family; insuring that
appointments are kept; assisting with search for employment and
providing a highly personal relationship and emotional support.
Training and orientation is important for the mentors, and is best
accomplished by the VA or a mentor court such as the Tulsa, OK,
Veterans Treatment Court.
6) Assessment of benefit needs and eligibility would be provided
through either Tribal Veterans Service Officers trained as advocates
and certified by VA or non-Indian VSO's where TVSOs's are unavailable.
Claims should be filed for compensation and pension benefits for which
the veteran is eligible. Additionally, application to other VA programs
geared to economic and educational benefits as well as vocational
rehabilitation, independent living and where appropriate,
entrepreneurial opportunities would be considered. Traditional Tribal
Veterans Centers, if established would provide the focal point for all
services provided through the Veterans Court.
7) In the interim, criminal charges would remain pending, monitored
by all parties and overseen by the tribal court. Transgressions would
be promptly addressed and adjustments made as needed. If the veteran
successfully completes the Treatment Court Program, the charges would
be dropped. The mentoring relationship would be encouraged to continue
and to be available to the veteran for an indefinite period of time to
provide a greater degree of stability for the veteran and the family.
Ongoing treatment would also remain available. Within the tribal
community, consistent with traditional healing practices, involvement
of tribal elders would be a distinct asset.
8) In the instance of federal charges of a nature outside of the
tribal court jurisdiction, there should be, under the cooperative
provisions of the TLOA, and any MOU among the parties, the opportunity
of ceded jurisdiction, with dismissal of federal charges without
prejudice pending completion of the Veterans Treatment Court Program.
This application would only be available on a case by case basis.
Benefits to the Tribal Community:
1) Expense of incarceration is avoided. Treatment modalities are
under VA/IHS MOU. The veteran is put on track for compensation or
pension benefits from VA and any other available benefits, such as
Social Security. Assessment, treatment and benefits are all VA budget
items. Those budget items which would be tribal could, with minor
adjustments, fall within the ranges contemplated by the grants
provisions of the TLOA.
2) The veteran and family become assets to the community, both
sociologically and economically, as compensation is tax free, and the
rehabilitated veteran may provide mentoring for others in like
circumstances.
3) There are a wide range of economic and educational programs and
benefits available to these families in terms of educational programs
for dependents of 100 percent disabled veterans, educational and
vocational training benefits as well as independent living programs.
Additionally, small business, employment and other entrepreneurial
opportunities are available from VA, SBA, Department of Labor, etc. The
most substantial benefit is the successful re-integration of a warrior
into the tribal community as an integral part of the tribal community.
Conclusion:
Veterans Treatment Courts can provide resources for reclaiming the
lives of veterans who have lost an integral part of their stability and
future on the field of battle. Over 27 percent of the entire population
of American Indian/Alaska Native and Hawaiian Natives are either
members or veterans of the US Armed Forces. Veterans Treatment Courts
are provided for every generation of veteran. Had they been available
after Vietnam, there would be far fewer veterans incarcerated in state
and federal prisons.
The economic contributions to the community cannot be
underestimated. Communities which have instituted Veterans Treatment
Courts have experienced an extremely low recidivism rate and have had
the advantage of families leaving the social services safety net and
becoming more financially independent either through increased
employment rates or through the influx of VA and Social Security
Disability benefits.
The ultimate costs to the tribe are predominantly administrative,
and are far outweighed by the cost of maintaining inmates with the
collateral expense of dealing with broken homes and needy families. It
is essential to understand that in nearly all instances veterans
appearing before these courts served their country well and are
carrying on their shoulders the weight of multiple deployments in a
counter-insurgency environment (that is far more dangerous than any in
our history) with short periods of respite and with little opportunity
for R&R. This is one way for the tribal community to bring its Warriors
home, with the opportunity for the individual restoration of honor.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Al Franken to
Mirtha Beadle
Opioids present both a law enforcement challenge and public health
crisis in Minnesota. Indian reservations in my state have been on the
frontline of this crisis. In fact, 28 percent of babies born addicted
to opioids in Minnesota are Indian.
I've met with tribal leaders, and what's clear from these meetings
is that we need a multi-pronged approach to the opioid crisis in Indian
Country. We need more research, less over-prescription, and better
treatment.
Question. How can SAMHSA help address the opioid crisis, in
particular the need for more research that is focused on reducing
opioid use in the Native American Population?
Answer. SAMHSA shares your concerns regarding the impact of opioids
on American Indian and Alaska Native communities and has been working
on a number of activities over the past two years. SAMHSA believes that
a coordinated, multisystem approach best serves the needs of all
American Indian and Alaskan Native peoples including pregnant women on
opioid pain medicine, misusing prescription opioids or who have opioid
use disorders and, because of these factors, may be at risk for giving
birth to an opioid exposed infant.
Collaborative planning and implementation of services that reflect
best practices for treating opioid use disorders during pregnancy
require thoughtful planning because so many different professionals are
charged with meeting the needs of the mother and child along the
continuum from pregnancy, birth, and during the post-partum period.
Advance planning for the treatment of pregnant women with opioid use
disorders that addresses safe care for mothers and their newborns can
help prevent unexpected crises at the time of delivery. Any response to
the many barriers facing the families of pregnant women with opioid use
disorders must be grounded in solutions within the community that
reflect best practices (e.g., evidence-based practices) as well as
values, resources, and policies that address the needs of the
community.
In September 2014, SAMHSA's National Center on Substance Abuse and
Child Welfare (NCSACW) began work with six states, including Minnesota,
to provide technical assistance (TA) to advance the capacity of tribes,
state and local jurisdictions to improve the safety, health, permanency
and well-being of infants exposed to maternal alcohol and other drug
use, particularly opioids, during pregnancy, and the recovery of
pregnant and parenting women and their families. The TA is
strengthening the collaboration and linkages across child welfare,
substance use and mental health treatment, medical communities, early
intervention and early care and education systems, family courts and
other key stakeholders to improve outcomes for pregnant and parenting
women, their infants and their families.
Each state organizes an extensive Stakeholder Coordinating
Committee that receives ongoing facilitation and support to assist the
state in meeting its identified goals and objectives within this
initiative. Minnesota has formed three primary workgroups that are
associated with each of the following three primary objectives:
1. Screening and Assessment--Pregnant women, substance exposed
infants and their families are identified in a consistent,
uniform, and timely manner across all systems.
2. Joint Accountability and Shared Outcomes--Partners have
developed a collaborative practice approach to serving
substance exposed infants and their families that intersect
each of their systems.
3. Services for pregnant women, substance exposed infants and
their family--Partners have agreed upon evidence-based
practices and programs that meet the needs of the target
populations and have processes in place for monitoring use and
effectiveness of these programs.
Minnesota Partners
The partners involved in the Minnesota initiative include:
Minnesota Department of Human Services (Alcohol and Drug
Abuse Division--American Indian Section, Legislative
Communications, and State Methadone Authority)
Minnesota Department of Human Services (ICWA Consultant)
Minnesota Department of Health
Tribes and Tribal Organizations (American Indian Mental
Health Advisory Council, Boise Forte Band of Chippewa, Fond du
Lac Band of Chippewa, Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, Mille Lacs
Band of Ojibwe, Red Lake Nation, White Earth Nation)
The intent of the partners is to increase the number of women that
are screened during pregnancy, linked to treatment and supportive
services, and have substance-free, healthy births. The partners also
seek to decrease the number of pregnant women that use substances,
including tobacco, during pregnancy; the number of infants that suffer
from NAS/withdrawal symptoms; and, the stigma associated with needing
and seeking help. The partners are working to develop a State/Tribe
Oversight Committee that will commit to mobilizing resources and policy
to support sustainability of the initiative.
Resources
SAMHSA will be releasing a new publication entitled ``A
Collaborative Approach to the Treatment of Pregnant Women with Opioid
Use Disorders.'' The publication includes a guide for collaborative
planning with system-specific guides to assess practices and policies
used across systems in working with pregnant women with opioid use
disorders, including a cross system guide as well as guides for the
mother's medical providers, the infant's medical providers, substance
use treatment and medication-assisted treatment providers, child
welfare providers, and dependency and family drug court professionals.
Another SAMHSA resource is the Residential Treatment for Pregnant
and Postpartum Women (PPW) Program that expands the availability of
comprehensive, residential substance abuse treatment, prevention, and
recovery support services for PPW and their minor children, including
services for non-residential family members of both the women and
children. The PPW program supports evidence-based treatment models
including trauma-specific services which will:
Decrease the use and/or abuse of prescription drugs,
alcohol, tobacco, illicit and other harmful drugs (e.g.,
inhalants) among pregnant and postpartum women;
Increase safe and healthy pregnancies;
Improve birth outcomes;
Reduce perinatal and environmentally related effects of
maternal and/or paternal drug abuse on infants and children;
and
Improve physical health of the women and children.
While PPW grantees may not specifically address Neonatal Abstinence
Syndrome (NAS), the withdrawal symptom some babies experience after
being exposed to maternal opioid use prior to birth, SAMHSA is aware
that many of the women in the PPW program have disorders related to the
use of opioids and that PPW grantees serve infants who experience NAS.
The Wayside Whole Family Treatment Project, near Minneapolis,
receives PPW Program funding to provide evidence-based residential
family treatment services to assist women, their children, and their
families recover from addiction, reunify, and build stable lives. The
project prioritizes women who are pregnant, intravenous drug users with
minor children, and women involved with child protection. There are
other PPW grantees across the nation and the Volunteers of America,
Dakotas (VOAD) in South Dakota is specifically working with the
American Indian community. This PPW project serves women and their
families who reside throughout the state and in Southwest Minnesota and
Northwest Iowa. An estimated 95 percent of women are diagnosed with co-
occurring disorders, including mental health disorders primarily
consisting of depression, anxiety, bi-polar disorder, borderline
personality disorder, and anti-social personality disorder.
Research
SAMHSA's Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality
(CBHSQ) currently conducts research on the epidemiology of and factors
contributing to opioid use and misuse among American Indians and Alaska
Natives. CBHSQ collects data through the National Survey on Drug Use
and Health (NSDUH) on substance use and mental health, including opioid
use and misuse, as well as associated demographic and risk and
protective factors. Data are also collected through the Treatment
Episode Dataset (TEDS) on treatment admissions and discharges, as well
as associated demographic factors. CBHSQ frequently reports on analyses
by demographic characteristics, including for the American Indian and
Alaska Native population. CBHSQ is developing a Public Health Research
and Surveillance Agenda for the American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/
AN) population that will include a description of what is known and
questions that remain regarding the behavioral health epidemiology of
the AI/AN population. Recent CBHSQ publications include:
2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables
(2015)
The NSDUH Report: Need for and Receipt of Substance Use
Treatment among American Indians or Alaska Natives (November
2014)
The TEDS Report: American Indian and Alaska Native Substance
Abuse Treatment Admissions Are More Likely Than Other
Admissions to Report Alcohol Abuse (November 2014)
Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS): 2002-2013. National
Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment Services (2015)
Data Spotlight: Almost Half of American Indian and Alaska
Native Adult Substance Abuse Treatment Admissions Are Referred
through the Criminal Justice System (November 2012)
The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), within the National
Institutes of Health, also funds research on opioid misuse. Since 1975,
NIDA has funded the Monitoring The Future (MTF) survey, which measures
drug, alcohol, and cigarette use and related attitudes among adolescent
students nationwide. Survey participants report their drug use
behaviors (including prescription opioid misuse) across three time
periods: lifetime, past year, and past month. Overall, 44,892 students
from 382 public and private schools participated in this year's MTF
survey. NIDA has also funded research comparing MTF survey results with
survey data specific to the AI/AN population.
______
Written Question Submitted by Hon. Al Franken to Tracy Toulou *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Response to the following question was not available at the time
this hearing went to print.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tragically, Native American women are sexually assaulted at four
times the national rate. For years, jurisdictional problems have often
allowed non-Indians to commit crimes of sexual violence on reservations
with impunity. The 2013 VAWA reauthorization restored tribes' criminal
jurisdiction over non-Indians who commit acts of domestic or dating
violence and increased the amount of VAWA funding for tribal programs.
That provision took effect earlier this year. In addition, the Tribal
Law and Order Act authorized new guidelines for handling sexual assault
and domestic violence crimes.
Question. What effect have these two bills had so far in addressing
sexual assault and domestic violence?
[all]