[Senate Report 115-123]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 161
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 115-123
======================================================================
THOMASINA E. JORDAN INDIAN TRIBES OF VIRGINIA FEDERAL RECOGNITION ACT
OF 2017
_______
June 28, 2017.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hoeven, from the Committee on Indian Affairs,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 691]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the
bill (S. 691) to extend the Federal recognition to the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe, the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--
Eastern Division, the Upper Mattaponi Tribe, the Rappahannock
Tribe, Inc., the Monacan Indian Nation, and the Nansemond
Indian Tribe, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and
recommends that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 691 is to provide federal recognition to
six tribes in the Commonwealth of Virginia--the Chickahominy
Indian Tribe, the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division,
the Upper Mattaponi Tribe, the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc., the
Monacan Indian Nation, and the Nansemond Indian Tribe, and make
applicable to these groups and their members all laws that are
generally applicable to American Indians and federally
recognized Indian Tribes.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
Although there is a Federal regulatory process by which an
Indian group may obtain Federal recognition (described below),
the ability of a group to meet the regulatory requirements is
highly dependent upon the availability of documentary evidence
and records.
The six Virginia tribal groups proposed for recognition in
S. 691 maintain that the unique history of the Commonwealth of
Virginia--culminating with the destruction of the tribes'
records--prevents the tribes from satisfying the level of
documentary evidence required for Federal acknowledgment by the
Department of the Interior (``Department'').
Many of the courthouses that housed records and documents
related to these tribal groups burned during the Civil War,
making records up to the late 1800s difficult to find.\1\
Additionally, through the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, the
Commonwealth of Virginia required all segments of the
population to be registered at birth in one of two categories:
``White'' or ``Colored.''\2\ The Act mandated the ``Colored''
category be applied to all persons determined to be non-White,
regardless of race or ethnicity, including those of Indian
ancestry.\3\ Further compounding matters, officials from the
State's Bureau of Vital Statistics interpreted the law as
allowing them to retroactively change a person's birth
certificate to the ``Colored'' category if they believed there
was evidence that the person was not ``fully'' White.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Rountree, Helen C., Ph.D., A Brief History of the Six Indian
Tribes Requesting Federal Acknowledgment.
\2\Legislative Hearing on S. 724, Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa
Indians Restoration Act of 2007; S. 514, Muskogee Nation of Florida
Federal Recognition Act; S. 1058, Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians
of Michigan Referral Act; and H.R. 1294, Thomasina E. Jordan Indian
Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2007. Before the S. Comm.
on Indian Affairs. 110th Cong. 2 (2008) (Statement of Timothy M. Kaine,
Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia).
\3\Id.
\4\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the primary target of the Racial Integrity Act of
1924 was the African American community,\5\ some saw the
Virginia Indian community as a threat because, as long as a
person had not more than \1/16\ Indian blood quantum, the
Racial Integrity Act of 1924 allowed persons of White and
Virginia Indian ancestry to be classified as ``White''.\6\
Supporters of the law--including Dr. Walter Plecker, the
Registrar for Virginia's Bureau of Vital Statistics and known
eugenicist--saw this exception for Indians as an opportunity
for persons of mixed heritage to move from the ``Colored''
category to the ``White'' category.\7\ Officials from the
State's Bureau of Vital Statistics therefore actively sought to
denigrate persons of Virginia Indian descent and deny them the
right to identify as ``Indians'' or ``White'', instead forcing
them to be declared ``Colored''.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\To Extend Federal Recognition to the Chickahominy Tribe, The
Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division, the Upper Mattaponi Tribe,
The Rappahannock Tribe, Inc., the Monacan Tribe, and the Nansemond
Tribe Before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, 107th Congress 2,
74-76 and 111-116 (2002) (statement of Danielle Moretti-Langholtz,
Ph.D., American Indian Resource Center, coordinator).
\6\Section 5 of 1924 Racial Integrity Act.
\7\Legislative Hearing on S. 724; S. 514; S. 1058; and H.R. 1294
before the S. Comm. on Indian Affairs. 110th Cong. 2 (2008) (Statement
of Timothy M. Kaine, Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia).
\8\Moretti-Langholtz, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Racial Integrity Act of 1924 remained in effect until
1967, when the United States Supreme Court declared it
unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia.\9\ In 1997, Virginia
Governor George Allen signed into law a bill allowing Virginia
Indians to correct their birth records.\10\ However, the six
Virginia tribes proposed for recognition in S. 691 contend that
the existence of the law for several decades makes it unlikely
that adequate documentation exists to meet Department
regulations governing acknowledgment of Indian groups.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\388 U.S. 1 (1967).
\10\Legislative Hearing on S. 724; S. 514; S. 1058; and H.R. 1294
before the S. Comm. on Indian Affairs. 110th Cong. 2 (2008) (Statement
of Timothy M. Kaine, Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia).
\11\Such declarations were made prior to the Department's
publication of new regulations in July 2015 reforming the Federal
acknowledgement process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commonwealth of Virginia has strongly supported
extending Federal recognition to the six Virginia groups listed
in S. 691. In 1999, both chambers of the General Assembly urged
Congress to grant Federal recognition to the tribes. During the
109th Congress, former Governor George Allen, then-Senator,
introduced S. 480, which would have granted Federal recognition
to the six groups listed in S. 691. In the 111th Congress, the
Committee received a letter in support of an identical bill to
S. 691, signed by then-Governor Tim Kaine and six of the
previous State Governors.
BACKGROUND
History of federally recognizing Indian tribes
The act of federally recognizing an Indian tribe is highly
significant. It is an affirmation by the United States of the
existence of a formal government-to-government relationship
between the United States and the tribe. Once federally
recognized, a tribe and its members have access to Federal
benefits and programs, and the tribal government incurs a
formal responsibility to its members as the primary governing
body of the community.
Before Congress ended the practice of treaty-making with
Indian tribes in 1871, treaties were the usual manner of
recognizing a government-to-government relationship between the
United States and an Indian tribe. Since the conclusion of this
practice, the United States has recognized Indian tribes by
legislation, executive orders, and administrative decisions.
Additionally, Federal courts may clarify the status of an
Indian group.
In order to provide a uniform and consistent process by
which an Indian tribe may be federally recognized, the
Department of the Interior (Department) developed an
administrative process in 1978 to allow Indian groups to
petition for formal acknowledgment of a government-to-
government relationship with the United States. Standards and
procedures for this process were set forth in Part 83 of Title
25 of the Code of Federal Regulations (Part 83 or the Federal
acknowledgement process). These regulations, as amended in
1994, required a petitioner to satisfy seven mandatory
requirements, including:
(1) The petitioner ``has been identified as an
American Indian entity on a substantially continuous
basis since 1900'';
(2) A predominant portion of the petitioning ``group
comprises a distinct community and has existed as a
community from historical times until the present'';
(3) The petitioner has ``maintained political
influence or authority over its members as an
autonomous entity from historical times to the
present'';
(4) The group must ``provide a copy of its present
governing documents and membership criteria'';
(5) The petitioner's ``membership consists of
individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe
or from historical Indian tribes which combined and
functioned as a single autonomous political entity'';
(6) The ``membership of the petitioning group is
composed principally of persons who are not members of
any acknowledged North American Indian tribe'' and do
not maintain a bilateral political relationship with
the acknowledge tribe; and
(7) ``Neither the petitioner nor its members are the
subject of congressional legislation that has expressly
terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship''.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\See 59 Fed. Reg. 94-3934. (February 25, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department issued new Part 83 regulations on July 1,
2015.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\80 Fed. Reg. 37861 (July 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
History of changes made to the Department's Part 83 regulations
The Federal acknowledgement process has been criticized as
``broken'' for decades.\14\ Nonetheless, until the Department's
recent effort to reform Part 83 (discussed below), there have
been only a handful of changes made to the Federal
acknowledgement process since its inception.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\See 80 Fed. Reg. 37862.
\15\Examples of changes made to the process prior to recent reform
efforts include regulations clarifying the evidence needed to support a
recognition petition, 59 Fed. Reg. 94-3934 (February 25, 1994); a
notice regarding internal BIA processing of federal acknowledgment
petitions, 65 Fed. Reg. 7052-53 (February 11, 2000); and a notice
providing guidance and direction to streamline the process, 73 Fed.
Reg. 30146 (May 23, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complaints about the Department's Federal acknowledgement
process have centered primarily on the high cost of gathering
documentary evidence to meet the seven mandatory criteria, the
length of time it takes the Department to review a petition,
and the Department's inconsistent application of the listed
criteria.\16\ Of the 567 tribes that have been federally
recognized, only 18 have been acknowledged through the Part 83
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\See 80 Fed. Reg. 37861 (July 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 1970, Congress has passed legislation to federally
recognize or reaffirm 17 Indian tribes.\17\ To date, the
Department has issued 50 decisions under the Part 83 process,
including one decision issued after new Part 83 regulations
were published in July 2015.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\See Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona, Pub. L. 92-470 (1972); Modoc
Tribe of Oklahoma, Pub. L. 95-281 (1978); Pasqua Yaqui Tribe of
Arizona, Pub. L. 95-375 (1978); Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians of
Maine, Pub. L. 96-420 (1980); Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians of
Oregon, Pub. L. 97-391; Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas, Pub. L.
97-429 (1983); Mashantucket Pequot Tribe of Connecticut, Pub. L. 98-134
(1983); Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo of Texas, Pub. L. 100-89 (1987); Lac
Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Michigan, Pub.
L. 100-420 (1988); Coquille Tribe of Oregon, Pub. L. 101-42 (1989);
Aroostook Band of Micmac Indians of Maine, Pub. L. 102-171 (1991);
Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians of Michigan, Pub. L. 103-323 (1994);
Little River Band of Ottawa Indians of Michigan, Pub. L. 103-324
(1994); Little Traverse Band of Odawa Indians of Michigan, Pub. L. 103-
324 (1994); Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes of
Alaska, Pub. L. 103-454 (1994); Graton Rancheria of California, Pub. L.
106-568 (2000); and Loyal Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, Pub. L. 106-568
(2000).
\18\The Department of the Interior issued a final determination
recognizing the Pamunkey Indian Tribe. See 80 Fed. Reg. 39144 (July 8,
2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent developments
On June 21, 2013, the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs
(AS-IA) released a Discussion Draft proposing changes to Part
83. The related comment period closed on September 30, 2013. On
May 29, 2014, the AS-IA published a Proposed Rule in the
Federal Register. The Department received substantial input
from tribes, state and local governments, and the public,
during the associated comment period, which closed on September
30, 2014.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\See U.S. Department of the Interior, News Release, Department
of the Interior Announces Final Federal Recognition Process to
Acknowledge Indian Tribes (June 29, 2015) (stating that more than 2,800
commenters provided input on the Discussion Draft, and that there were
over 330 unique comments on the Proposed Rule). The Department also
received feedback from tribes during consultations and public meetings.
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, the Department published a Final Rule on July
1, 2015, which took effect on July 31, 2015.\20\ Assistant
Secretary Washburn also issued a policy statement indicating
that the Department will rely on the new Part 83 process as the
``sole administrative avenue'' for Federal acknowledgement for
tribes.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\80 Fed. Reg. 37861 (July 1, 2015).
\21\80 Fed. Reg. 37538-39. (July 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Department, the Final Rule preserves the
existing standard of proof and seven mandatory criteria to
``maintain[] the substantive rigor and integrity of the [Part
83] process.''\22\ In order to promote timeliness and
efficiency, the Final Rule provides for a two-phased review of
petitions that establishes certain threshold criteria and may
result in the earlier issuance of final decisions, as well as a
uniform evaluation period (1900 to present) to satisfy the
tribal identification, community and political authority
criteria.\23\ The Final Rule is intended to promote efficiency
by providing for limited reconsideration of final agency
determinations.\24\ The Department states that the Final Rule
promotes fairness and consistency by providing that prior
decisions finding evidence or methodology sufficient to satisfy
any particular criterion will also be sufficient for a
petitioner under the new Part 83 process.\25\ It also states
that the Final Rule promotes transparency by providing for
increased public access to petitions for Federal
acknowledgement and associated public materials and, in the
case of a negative proposed finding, providing petitioners the
opportunity for a hearing.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\80 Fed. Reg. 37861 (July 1, 2015).
\23\Id.
\24\Id.
\25\Id.
\26\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indian tribes that applied for federal acknowledgment prior
to publication of the Final Rule on July 1, 2015, are allowed
to choose to have the Department evaluate their application
under the previous application process or the new application
process.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the Final Rule was published, one Indian tribe has
been federally recognized.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\The Department of the Interior issued a final determination
recognizing the Pamunkey Indian Tribe on July 2, 2015. See 80 Fed. Reg.
39144 (July 8, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 691 was introduced by Senators Tim Kaine [D-VA] and Mark
Warner [D-VA] on March 8, 2017. The bill was read twice and
referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. On May 8, 2017,
the Committee held a business meeting to discuss the measure,
and ordered the bill to be reported favorably, without
amendment.
A companion bill, H.R. 984, was introduced by
Representative Robert J. Wittman [R-VA] on February 7, 2017,
with three original cosponsors, including Representatives
Gerald Connolly [D-VA], Robert Scott [D-VA], Taylor Scott [R-
VA], and Donald Beyer [D-VA]. Representative Donald McEachin
joined as a co-sponsor on March 21, 2017. On February 7, 2017,
H.R. 984 was referred to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular
and Alaska Native Affairs. On May 17, 2017 H.R. 984 passed the
House of Representative under the suspension of the rules, and
was passed by a voice vote.
Similar Federal recognition legislation has been introduced
each Congress since the 107th Congress for the Virginia Tribes.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 sets forth the short title of this bill as the
``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal
Recognition Act of 2017''.
Section 2. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978
Section 2 ensures the bill does not affect the Indian Child
Welfare Act of 1978.
Title I--Chickahominy Indian Tribe
Section 101 sets forth findings of the colonial history of
the Chickahominy Indian Tribe.
Section 102 would define ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of
Interior, ``Tribal Member'' as a person who is enrolled in the
tribe as of the date of this Act, and ``Tribe'' as the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe.
Section 103 would extend Federal recognition to the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe, establish that all applicable laws
to Federally-recognized tribes will extend to the Chickahominy
Indian Tribe, create a service area for the Chickahominy Indian
Tribe, and make the Chickahominy Indian Tribe and its members
eligible for Federal services and benefits provided to
Federally-recognized Indian tribes.
Section 104 would establish that the Department will accept
the last membership roll submitted by the tribe prior to the
enactment of this bill as the tribe's membership roll.
Section 105 would establish the governing body of the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe.
Section 106 would authorize, at the request of the tribe,
the Secretary of Interior to take land into trust for the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe to establish a reservation, define
the counties where the land may be taken into trust at, and
create a three-year deadline to take the land into trust.
Section 106 would prohibit gaming activities by the tribe.
Section 107 would establish that nothing in the bill
expands or reduces hunting, fishing, trapping, or water rights
enjoyed by members of the Chickahominy Indian Tribe.
Title II--Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division
Section 201 sets forth findings of the colonial history of
the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division.
Section 202 would define ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of
Interior, ``Tribal Member'' as a person who is enrolled in the
tribe as of the date of this Act, and ``Tribe'' as the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division.
Section 203 would extend Federal recognition to the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division, establish that all
applicable laws to Federally-recognized tribes will extend to
the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division, create a
service area for the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern
Division, and make the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern
Division and its members eligible for Federal services and
benefits provided to Federally-recognized Indian tribes.
Section 204 would establish that the Department will accept
the last membership roll submitted by the tribe prior to the
enactment of this bill as the tribe's membership roll.
Section 205 would establish the governing body of the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division.
Section 206 would authorize, at the request of the tribe,
the Secretary of Interior to take land into trust for the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division to establish a
reservation, define the counties where the land may be taken
into trust at, and create a three-year deadline to take the
land into trust.
Section 206 would prohibit gaming by the tribe.
Section 207 would establish that nothing in the bill
expands or reduces hunting, fishing, trapping, or water rights
enjoyed by members of the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern
Division.
Title III--Upper Mattaponi Tribe
Section 301 sets forth findings of the colonial history of
the Upper Mattaponi Tribe.
Section 302 would define ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of
Interior, ``Tribal Member'' as a person who is enrolled in the
tribe as of the date of this Act, and ``Tribe'' as the Upper
Mattaponi Tribe.
Section 303 would extend Federal recognition to the Upper
Mattaponi Tribe, establish that all applicable laws to
Federally-recognized tribes will extend to the Upper Mattaponi
Tribe, create a service area for the Upper Mattaponi Tribe, and
make the Upper Mattaponi Tribe and its members eligible for
Federal services and benefits provided to Federally-recognized
Indian tribes.
Section 304 would establish that the Department will accept
the last membership roll submitted by the tribe prior to the
enactment of this bill as the tribe's membership roll.
Section 305 would establish the governing body of the Upper
Mattaponi Tribe.
Section 306 would authorize, at the request of the tribe,
the Secretary of Interior to take land into trust for the Upper
Mattaponi Tribe to establish a reservation, define the counties
where the land may be taken into trust at, and create a three-
year deadline to take the land into trust.
Section 306 would prohibit gaming by the tribe.
Section 307 would establish that nothing in the bill
expands or reduces hunting, fishing, trapping, or water rights
enjoyed by members of the Upper Mattaponi Tribe.
Title IV--Rappahannock Tribe, Inc.
Section 401 sets forth findings of the colonial history of
the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc.
Section 402 would define ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of
Interior, ``Tribal Member'' as a person who is enrolled in the
tribe as of the date of this Act, and ``Tribe'' as the
Rappahannock Tribe, Inc.
Section 403 would extend Federal recognition to the
Rappahannock Tribe, Inc., establish that all applicable laws to
Federally-recognized tribes will extend to the Rappahannock
Tribe, Inc., create a service area for the Rappahannock Tribe,
Inc., and make the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc. and its members
eligible for Federal services and benefits provided to
Federally-recognized Indian tribes.
Section 404 would establish that the Department will accept
the last membership roll submitted by the tribe prior to the
enactment of this bill as the tribe's membership roll.
Section 405 would establish the governing body of the
Rappahannock Tribe, Inc.
Section 406 would authorize, at the request of the tribe,
the Secretary of Interior to take land into trust for the
Rappahannock Tribe, Inc. to establish a reservation, define the
counties where the land may be taken into trust at, and create
a three-year deadline to take the land into trust.
Section 406 would prohibit gaming by the tribe.
Section 407 would establish that nothing in the bill
expands or reduces hunting, fishing, trapping, or water rights
enjoyed by members of the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc.
Title V--Monacan Indian Nation
Section 501 sets forth findings of the colonial history of
the Monacan Indian Nation.
Section 502 would define ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of
Interior, ``Tribal Member'' as a person who is enrolled in the
tribe as of the date of this act, and ``Tribe'' as the Monacan
Indian Nation.
Section 503 would extend Federal recognition to the Monacan
Indian Nation, establish that all applicable laws to Federally-
recognized tribes will extend to the Monacan Indian Nation,
create a service area for the Monacan Indian Nation, and make
the Monacan Indian Nation and its members eligible for Federal
services and benefits provided to Federally-recognized Indian
tribes.
Section 504 would establish that the Department will accept
the last membership roll submitted by the tribe prior to the
enactment of this bill as the tribe's membership roll.
Section 505 would establish the governing body of the
Monacan Indian Nation.
Section 506 would authorize, at the request of the tribe,
the Secretary of Interior to take land into trust for the
Monacan Indian Nation to establish a reservation, define the
counties where the land may be taken into trust at, and create
a three-year deadline to take the land into trust.
Section 506 would prohibit gaming by the tribe.
Section 507 would establish that nothing in the bill
expands or reduces hunting, fishing, trapping, or water rights
enjoyed by members of the Monacan Indian Nation.
Title VI--Nansemond Indian Tribe
Section 601 sets forth findings of the colonial history of
the Nansemond Indian Tribe.
Section 602 would define ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of
Interior, ``Tribal Member'' as a person who is enrolled in the
tribe as of the date of this act, and ``Tribe'' as the
Nansemond Indian Tribe.
Section 603 would extend Federal recognition to the
Nansemond Indian Tribe, establish that all applicable laws to
Federally-recognized tribes will extend to the Nansemond Indian
Tribe, create a service area for the Nansemond Indian Tribe,
and make the Nansemond Indian Tribe and its members eligible
for Federal services and benefits provided to Federally-
recognized Indian tribes.
Section 604 would establish that the Department will accept
the last membership roll submitted by the tribe prior to the
enactment of this bill as the tribe's membership roll.
Section 605 would establish the governing body of the
Nansemond Indian Tribe.
Section 606 would authorize, at the request of the tribe,
the Secretary of Interior to take land into trust for the
Nansemond Indian Tribe to establish a reservation, define the
counties where the land may be taken into trust at, and create
a three-year deadline to take the land into trust.
Section 606 would prohibit gaming by the tribe.
Section 607 would establish that nothing in the bill
expands or reduces hunting, fishing, trapping, or water rights
enjoyed by members of the Nansemond Indian Tribe.
Title VII--eminent domain
Section 701 would limit the use of eminent domain to
acquire lands in fee or trust for a tribe recognized through
this Act.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following cost estimate, as provided by the
Congressional Budget Office, dated June 19, 2017.
Summary: S. 691 would provide federal recognition to six
Indian tribes in Virginia--the Chickahominy Indian Tribe, the
Eastern Division of the Chickahominy Indian Tribe, the Upper
Mattaponi Tribe, the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc., the Monacan
Indian Nation, and the Nansemond Indian Tribe. Federal
recognition would make the tribes eligible to receive benefits
from various federal programs.
CBO estimates that implementing this legislation would cost
$67 million over the 2018-2022 period, assuming appropriation
of the necessary amounts. Enacting S. 691 would not affect
direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting S. 691 would not increase net
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
S. 691 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
impacts as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary effect of S. 691 is shown in the following table. The
costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 450
(community and regional development) and 550 (health).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2017-2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Department of the Interior:
Estimated Authorization Level........ 0 6 6 6 6 7 31
Estimated Outlays.................... 0 5 6 6 6 7 30
Indian Health Service:
Estimated Authorization Level........ 0 7 7 7 8 8 37
Estimated Outlays.................... 0 7 7 7 8 8 37
Total Increases:
Estimated Authorization Level.... 0 13 13 13 14 15 68
Estimated Outlays................ 0 12 13 13 14 15 67
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S.
691will be enacted before the end of 2017, that the necessary
amounts will be provided each year, and that outlays will
follow historical patterns for similar assistance to other
tribes.
S. 691 would provide federal recognition to six Indian
tribes in Virginia. Such recognition would allow those tribes
and about 4,700 tribal members (including members of other
federally recognized tribes who live far from their own tribal
service area, but close to the service area of the tribes that
would be recognized under S. 691) to receive benefits from
various programs administered by the Department of the Interior
(DOI) and the Indian Health Service (IHS).
Department of the Interior
DOI, primarily through the Bureau of Indian Affairs,
provides funding to federally recognized tribes for various
purposes, including child welfare services, adult care,
community development, and other general assistance. In total,
CBO estimates that providing those services to the six tribes
that would be recognized under S. 691 would cost $30 million
over the 2018-2022 period, assuming appropriation of the
necessary amounts and accounting for anticipated inflation.
That estimate reflects per capita expenditures for services
provided to the newly recognized tribes that would be similar
to those for other federally recognized tribes located in the
eastern states. (In 2015, the most recent year for which
historical information on such spending is available, per
capita expenditures for eastern tribes averaged about $1,200.)
Indian Health Service
S. 691 also would make members of the tribes newly
recognized under S. 691 eligible to receive health benefits
from the IHS. Based on an analysis of information from the IHS,
CBO estimates that about 55 percent of tribal members--or about
2,600 people--would receive benefits each year. CBO expects
that the cost to serve those individuals would be similar to
the costs for current IHS beneficiaries--about $2,650 per
individual in 2017. Assuming appropriation of the necessary
funds and accounting for anticipated inflation, CBO estimates
that health benefits for those tribes would cost $37 million
over the 2018-2022 period.
Other Federal Agencies
In addition to assistance from DOI and IHS, certain Indian
tribes also receive support from other federal programs within
the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development,
Labor, and Agriculture. Because those six tribes specified in
the bill are recognized by Virginia, they are already eligible
to receive support from those federal departments. Thus, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 691 would not authorize
additional spending by those departments.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: None.
Increase in long term direct spending and deficits: CBO
estimates that enacting S. 691 would not increase net direct
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive
10-year periods beginning in 2028.
Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 691 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector impacts as defined in UMRA.
REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the
regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in
carrying out the bill. The Committee believes that S. 691 will
have a minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork requirements.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The Committee has received no communications from the
Executive Branch regarding S. 691.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW (CORDON RULE)
On January 31, 2017, the Committee on Indian Affairs
unanimously approved a motion to waive the Cordon rule. Thus,
in the opinion of the committee, it is necessary to dispense
with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate in order to expedite the business of the Senate.
[all]