[Senate Hearing 108-60]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-60
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST FOR INDIAN PROGRAMS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
__________
FEBRUARY 26, 2003
MARCH 5, 2003
WASHINGTON, DC
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Vice Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, KENT CONRAD, North Dakota
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico HARRY REID, Nevada
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
GORDON SMITH, Oregon MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
Paul Moorehead, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel
Patricia M. Zell, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
February 26, 2003
Statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 1
Cheek, John, executive director, National Indian Education
Association, Alexandria, VA................................ 27
Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota............ 19
Culbertson, Kay, president, Denver Indian Health and Family
Services, Denver, CO....................................... 23
Davis-Wheeler, Julia, chair, National Indian Health Board,
Denver, CO................................................. 21
Edwards, Gary, CEO, National Native American Law Enforcement
Association, Washington, DC................................ 8
Hall, Tex, president, National Congress of American Indians,
Washington, DC............................................. 2
McNeil, Ron, chairman, President's Board of Advisors on
Tribal Colleges and Universities, Sitting Bull College,
Fort Yates, ND............................................. 29
Sossamon, Russell, chairman, National American Indian Housing
Council, Washington, DC.................................... 5
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Cheek, John.................................................. 131
Culbertson, Kay.............................................. 121
Davis-Wheeler, Julia......................................... 35
Edwards, Gary................................................ 64
Hall, Tex.................................................... 41
Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 35
McNeil, Ron (with attachments)............................... 74
Sossamon, Russell............................................ 58
Additional material submitted for the record:
DeWeaver, Norman C., national representative, Indian and
Native American Employment and Training Colaition, letter.. 146
March 5, 2003
Statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 149
Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota........ 163
Erwin, Donna, acting special trustee, Department of the
Interior, Washington, DC................................... 153
Grim, Charles W., M.D., interim director, Indian Health
Service, Rockville, MD..................................... 156
Hartz, Gary, acting director, Office of Public Health........ 156
Jones, Lonna B., acting director, Elementary Secondary, and
Vocational Analysis Division, Budget Service, Office of
Deputy Secretary, Department of Education, Washington, DC.. 161
Kincannon, Louis, director, Bureau of the Census, Suitland,
MD......................................................... 150
Lincoln, Michael E., deputy director, Indian health Service,
Rockville, MD.............................................. 156
Martin, Aurene, acting assistant secretary, Indian Affairs,
Department of the Interior, Washington, DC................. 153
Martin, Cathie L., group leader, Office of Indian Elementary
and Secondary Education, Department of Education,
Washington, DC............................................. 161
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator from Alaska............... 160
Russell, William, deputy assistant secretary, Public and
Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Washington, DC................................ 159
Vanderwagen, Craig, M.D. acting chief medical officer........ 156
Vasques, Victoria, director, Office of Indian Education,
Department of Education, Washington, DC.................... 161
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Carlson, Ervin, president, Inter-Tribal Bison Cooperative
(with attachment).......................................... 580
Daniels, Deborah J., Assistant Attorney General, Office of
Justice Programs (with attachment)......................... 175
Grim, Charles W. (with attachments).......................... 511
Kincannon, Louis (with attachments).......................... 180
Martin, Aurene............................................... 500
Russell, William (with attachments).......................... 538
Vasques, Victoria (with attachments)......................... 558
Note: Other material submitted for the record will be retained in
committee files.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in
room 485, Senate Russell Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse
Campbell, (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell, Inouye, and Conrad.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. The Committee on Indian Affairs will be in
order.
This morning we have a business meeting with three pending
bills. Unfortunately, Senator Inouye is going to be late;
probably that murderous weather that is already accumulating
out there, but he will be along. So what we are going to do is
reverse the order and go ahead with the hearing part on our
fiscal year 2004 budget request and then come back when
Senators show up to second the motion for the business part of
our meeting.
This will be the first of our two oversight hearings on the
President's fiscal year 2004 budget request for Indian
programs. As we all know, our Nation is now on the verge of a
major conflict. All of us hope that is not going to happen, but
unfortunately it appears very close. This effort has cost, and
will cost, billions of dollars.
We are also engaged in a coast-to-coast effort to protect
our homeland with the building up of the national defense
program. The President's fiscal year 2004 budget reflects those
realities and, at the same time, provides for a modest increase
in a number of Indian accounts.
The Department of the Interior's budget is pegged at $10.7
billion with more than one-quarter of the entire Department's
budget dedicated to Indian accounts, including $2.314 billion
for the BIA, and $275 million for the Special Trustee. The
Indian Health Service account would receive $2.89 billion, an
increase of $68 million over fiscal year 2003.
I won't recite the litany of all of the accounts, but all
of the dollar figures, as we will hear today, are for the major
Indian programs. Next week we will hear from the Federal
departments and the agencies on the budget request.
I will be paying particular attention to the Homeland
Security budget, and the committee will be most interested in
seeing the degree to which it involves Indian tribal
governments, law enforcement, and medical personnel in our
security efforts.
When Senator Inouye gets here, we will take a break so he
can make his statement.
With that, I would like to welcome our guests in their
order of appearance. We have Tex Hall, president of the
National Congress of American Indians, Russell Sossamon, the
chairman of the National American Indian Housing Council, and
Gary Edwards, the CEO of the National Native American Law
Enforcement Association.
Welcome we will go ahead and proceed with your testimony.
As in other committee hearings, if you want to insert your
written testimony, all of that will be included in the record
and you are welcome to abbreviate your testimony.
STATEMENT OF TEX HALL, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN
INDIANS, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Chairman Campbell, and members of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs. My comments today will be brief as
our written testimony provides the details of our concerns
about the President's budget request for fiscal year 2004. I
invite you to consider our written testimony carefully.
[Prepared testimony of Mr. Hall appears in appendix.]
Mr. Hall. I thank you for this opportunity to speak before
you and to continue to foster a good government-to-government
relationship between the United States and the Indian Tribal
Nations. For the past several years I have served on the BIA
Budget Advisory Council representing the needs of my region of
the Aberdeen area of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, as well as
the agenda of the National Congress of American Indians.
During many of these sessions, representatives of OMB, the
Office of Management and Budget, have been present at these
meetings. This has always been a painful experience because our
national needs are so great. Yet, we are repeatedly told that
we will have to do much with less. Once again, we are faced
with tremendous shortfalls for the most vital programs that
serve our people. This is especially true in health care,
housing, education, and public safety. Further, in my BIA
region in Aberdeen, the President's budget for fiscal year 2004
allocates zero for our water development needs.
Let me talk about health care first. Last weekend we sat
down with the acting director, Charles Grimm, of the Indian
Health Service. He told us that under the ``PART'' methodology,
which is the Program Assessment Rating Tool that OMB uses for
efficiency rating, the Indian Health Service and IHS Sanitation
Services scored the highest of any programs of the Department
of Health and Human Services. Yet, despite this high praise,
the fiscal year 2004 IHS budget request does not even keep pace
with medical inflation.
At the same time, the IHS budget at $3.6 billion is barely
one-third of the estimated annual need of $10 billion. So if
the PART methodology that OMB uses is really intended to award
the most effective and efficient programs, then where is the
increased budget for IHS? In further talking with Charles
Grimm, we learned that the VA, the Veterans Administration's
health programs, were exempted from the PART methodology, which
is good. But if the PART program is such an effective tool for
evaluating our Federal Governments, then why is it not
universally applied to all agencies?
Our health status, Mr. Chairman, as you know, are well
known, but deserve mentioning again. The diabetes rate on our
reservation is more than ten times the national average. It is
at epidemic levels, as we know, and many of our children are
now being diagnosed with juvenile diabetes. And yet the
requested fiscal year 2004 IHS budget again does not keep pace
with inflation.
Our life expectancy in the Northern and Great Plains of
this country for men is still 12 years less than the national
average. And yet again the requested fiscal year 2004 IHS
budget does not keep pace with medical inflation.
Funding is not available to our people to receive simple
tests for cancer screening. I, for one, can attest that my
mother died prematurely because she did not receive a simple
mammogram. And yet the 2004 IHS budget again does not keep pace
with medical inflation and will deny many other women a chance
for a mammogram or cancer screening tests that they so most
importantly need.
These abysmal statistics do not, in many ways, permit our
tribal nations to achieve the health status we need to truly
achieve our economic development goals for healthy tribal
people. Without good health, our tribal members cannot work as
hard or as long. This makes it more difficult for our
reservations to attract good paying job in strong businesses as
this affects our work force. It makes it harder for our people
to contribute as taxpayers to our country. It makes it harder
for our people to avoid the need to be on welfare assistance.
It also makes it harder for our people to complete their
education.
The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized the
health care trust obligations of the United States. So, Mr.
Chairman, we ask Congress to adopt the same position and
appropriate the funds that will fulfill this Trust with the
obligation of the United States for the health care of its
indigenous people.
Housing is another severely under-funded trust function. In
the Great Plains, as elsewhere in this Nation, our members wait
as long as 20 years on a housing waiting list. And while we are
taking steps to improve our housing capacity on each of our
reservations through our own means, the budget in this area
does not significantly reduce the waiting time our members to
have houses and rental units.
The President's elimination of the Rural Housing and
Economic Development Program in fiscal year 2004 budget
compounds this problem even more. Housing funding is another
reason, as we mentioned in our written testimony, that Indian
programs should be exempt from OMB's PART methodology.
Shortly after his election, President Bush announced a bold
new education plan: Leave no child behind. We applaud these
efforts, but the President must put real resources behind that
goal. Nowhere is this more true than an Indian education.
Tribes do not have a local property tax base. We are like the
military. Reservations are largely dependent on the Federal
Government for education funding. Our schools are still falling
apart faster than the Government is appropriating funds to fix
them. This has to stop.
Another area under funded is public safety, including
funding under the recently enacted Homeland Security
legislation. Tribes should be able to directly receive grants
from the Federal Government and from Homeland Security for the
purpose of protecting our tribal homelands just as States do.
The one area of growth in the BIA budget has been trust
reform. Yet the Department itself has communicated that it has
had to scramble to find funds for this purpose. Throughout
Indian country, I continue to hear worries that the money to
fix the Trust Fund's management mess is being taken from other
core Trust Service functions of the Department of the Interior
and other agencies.
Additionally, tribes continue to communicate to me that
there is a genuine lack of consultation on trust reform issues
that are critical for the beneficiaries, the Indian tribal
governments, and the individual Indian beneficiaries.
Congress should ensure that other BIA services are in no
way impacted by the need to comply with trust reform orders
from the Court. I also call for Congress to comply with the
American Indian Trust Funds Management Reform Act of 1994 and
adequately consult with tribes in foregoing a trust reform
solution.
On a regional note, it is critical that we get all possible
assistance in the Great Plains States for the Rural Water
Distribution projects that have been promised to us for more
than 50 years. The fiscal year 2004 budget proposed by the
President eliminates all construction funds for programs like
the Mni Wiconi and the Dakota Water Resources Act which
authorizes the completion of our Rural Water Distribution
Systems on those reservations in the Great Plains.
Under the President's plan, similar projects in South
Dakota, Montana, North Dakota, and other States that are
greatly affected by our tribal nation's budget have been zeroed
out.
We have been waiting patiently for the United States to
fulfill its responsibilities and promises to us for good, clean
drinking water to our tribal homes. We have been waiting for
this since the hydroelectric dams authorized in the 1944 Pick-
Sloan Act were built along the rivers in the early 1950's
flooding our tribal homelands. This has not yet happened and
yet the President's budget says that the effectiveness of these
programs is not demonstrated under the PART analysis I
described earlier.
I do not understand how a project is not deemed effective
that delivers good water to households where water has been
hauled in by hand for the past 50 years. So this is of great
importance to us on trying to put those dollars back in.
Finally, I want to close with a few thoughts of what has
been a main theme of both my presidency of NCAI as well as my
chairmanship of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Tribes on the
Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota. That is economic
development. We must have adequate funding for as many of our
economic development initiatives as possible in the 2004
budget.
Senator Campbell, you have supported and reintroduced a
number of our initiatives in the 108th Congress. Some of our
ideas do not cost any money, if they cost anything at all. It
will be more than made up for in the increased economic
activity these initiatives will bring to Indian reservations.
Examples of such initiatives are reenacting the Indian
Investment Act, providing for energy development incentives on
reservations, supporting economic development technical
assistance centers, and raising the ceiling on loans under the
Indian Finance Act.
Still another idea that should be given consideration by
this committee is the extension of the 5 percent set-aside rule
by the Department of Defense for Native American contractors to
all U.S. Departments; not just the Department of Defense.
Tribes are now banding together to take advantage of Government
and private contracting opportunities. My tribe is part of this
new consortium, but any help this committee can provide is very
welcome indeed.
We hope that as this committee considers economic
development issues, the appropriate budget dollars that were
put in place to make these incentives and ideas, will be a
reality for this session of Congress. Throughout this process,
we hope that we are consulted on a government-to-government
basis as these ideas are developed further.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for all of your
support on these very important issues. I want to thank you for
the opportunity to provide testimony today on the needs of
Indian Tribal Nations in this great country of ours.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. Just for your information, Tex,
one of the big thrusts of the committee this year is going to
be to try to get a number of bills passed that will be designed
to improve the economic situation and improve the opportunity
for jobs on reservations. That is one of the things that we are
really interested in trying to get through this year.
Sometimes, as you know, you have to do these bills two or
three times in a row before we get them passed. It has been a
personal interest of mine for a good number of years, as you
know.
Mr. Hall. Absolutely.
The Chairman. Thank you for bringing up a number of
important points in your testimony. Some of those I will ask
specifically next week of the Administration when they appear
before the committee.
Mr. Hall. Thank you.
The Chairman. We will now go to Mr. Sossamon. Please
proceed.
STATEMENT OF RUSSELL SOSSAMON, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL AMERICAN
INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Sossamon. Thank you, Chairman Campbell, and the members
of the committee.
My name is Russell Sossamon and I am the chairman of the
National American Indian Housing Council, an organization that
represents the interests of over 400 tribes and their tribally-
designated housing entities. I am also the executive director
of the Housing Authority of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today on
the President's fiscal year 2004 budget for Indian housing and
related community and infrastructure programs. I have submitted
a written statement which I asked to be included in the hearing
record which will provide clarification on the issues I bring
before you today.
The Chairman. It will be included in the record.
[Prepared testimony of Russell Sossamon appears in
appendix.]
Mr. Sossamon. In the brief time allotted to me today, I
would like to focus on seven areas of the budget with two
additional items that we feel require Congress' urgent
attention and support.
We were disappointed with this budget. It again did not
include an increase for tribal housing. I understand there is a
return to budget deficits and a need for homeland security. But
that does not make our members in inadequate housing feel any
more safe or secure in their situation. This would be the
fourth straight year of flat-line funding for the Indian
Housing Block Grant, despite inflation, the increased cost of
construction, and the growing native population.
A letter signed by many of our members was sent earlier
this week to the members of this committee, the President,
other members of Congress, and the Administration with the
information I would like to share with you today. I thank this
committee for all the work that it has done into passing and
improving the NAHASDA during the past three Congresses. But
that effort will not fully be realized without adequate funding
for the programs.
We request that you support an increase for the NAHASDA
block grant on the track to a total of $1 billion by fiscal
year 2007, and appropriating at least $700 million for fiscal
year 2004. The President's request is $646.6 million. If
inflation were applied to the past 4 years of stagnant funding,
this year's budget amount would be $700 million.
We are requesting at least that much to cover the current
unmet need of 200,000 housing units, and increases in the
Indian Community Development Block Grant from 1.5 percent to 3
percent of the total CDBG allocation to an increase in the
amount of $150 million, since this program has been so
successful in aiding the development of tribal economies. The
President has requested $72.5 million.
The next item is the Rural Housing and Economic Development
Program. It is a very important tool for building the capacity
of the tribes and should be funded again in fiscal year 2004,
although it was zeroed out by the President's budget. Tribes
generally receive about one-half of these grants for capacity
building and job creation.
The BIA Housing Improvement Program has also been funded at
the same level for many years. This program assists tribes in
rehabilitation of homes and fills in the gaps of many under-
funded tribes. We would like to see this increased to at least
$35 million for 2004.
Mounting water and sewer infrastructure costs must be
considered by the tribes when planning for housing development.
We oppose current Interior report language that precludes
tribes from using sanitation facility construction funds in
conjunction with HUD funded homes. It is causing complicated
accounting and engineering issues for the tribes back homes.
Since HUD no longer fully subsides infrastructure development,
we feel the tribe and not the Indian Health Service should
decide where the funds are going since it is all for the same
recipient.
We are requesting that this committee investigate the
situation of infrastructure funding for tribes and make a
recommendation as to the best policy. Tribes seem to be caught
in an Agency turf battle. Please refer to my written testimony
for more information on this matter.
We applaud the $20 million increase to sanitation
facilities construction in this budget, but feel the need is
much larger, and an increase of up to $180 million would be
more appropriate.
We are told that the Administration will be using
performance-based budgeting, and that 45 percent of all Indian
housing funds under the IHBG remain unspent, implying that a
cut to IHBG could be in the future. We have never seen any data
to back this up, but we are willing to make the efforts to
reach out to HUD and understand their interpretation of the
data and make the improvements where warranted.
The allocation does not take into account the following
issues: The figure is both obligated and unobligated funds.
Tribes must spend their funds within 72 hours of drawdown.
Tribes have 2 years to obligate these funds. HUD often takes
several months to make the funds available after appropriation,
meaning most of this funding is likely from the past two years
and within the regulatory authority of obligation. HUD collects
data and Indian housing plans in annual performance reports but
seems never to have compiled that data to assist in documenting
the progress or difficulties of the tribes. We hope this
committee will join us in working with HUD in demanding a full
and complete accounting on these funds.
Technical assistance funds were cut in this budget. NAIHC
has been receiving over $4 million a year to conduct technical
assistance and training for the past several years to assist
tribes in implementing Federal housing programs. The portion of
this funding normally taken as set-asides out of IHBG has been
cut out of this year's budget.
Why threaten to cut funding based on capacity and then cut
technical assistance which is used to improve capacity? NAIHC
did over 150 on-site visits to tribes last year, and served
over 1,300 students who attend our training courses. We are
requesting full funding for technical assistance and training
for NAIHC in fiscal year 2004, which ideally would all be out
of a CDBG set-aside rather than out of the Indian Housing Block
Grant set-aside.
Mr. Chairman, we believe that in the scheme of things these
are modest requests and we hope that the Subcommittee and
Congress will address these. We recognize that funds are scarce
and tough decisions lie ahead. However, the needs of Indian
country are great, and without an expended level of support of
Congress and the Administration, the problems will only grow
worse.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to present
the views of NAIHC. I will be happy to respond to any
questions.
The Chairman. Thank you.
My intention now that Senator Inouye here is to give him
time for his opening statement.
Senator Inouye. I would like that be inserted in the
record.
[Prepared statement of Senator Inouye appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. We will go to Mr. Edwards. Then we will go
back to our Business Meeting. We will then hear from our second
panel on the fiscal year 2004 budget.
Mr. Edwards, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF GARY EDWARDS, CEO, THE NATIONAL NATIVE AMERICAN
LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Edwards. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members
of the committee. My name is Gary L. Edwards. I am the chief
executive officer of the National Native American Law
Enforcement Association. I am also the vice chairman of the
Native American National Advisory Committee for Boys and Girls
Clubs of America. I am also an Advisory Board Member for the
Helen Keller Worldwide Child Sight Program.
Today my testimony will focus on three categories of Indian
programs. The program categories are Native American Youth
Programs, Native American Law Enforcement Training Programs,
and Indian country Homeland Security Training Programs.
The Boys and Girls Clubs of America will be the group that
I address first. Currently, we have 140 Boys And Girl Clubs
that are open in Indian country today. We serve over 60,000
Native American Youth across Indian country.
In January of this year we had the 2003 Summit for Clubs
serving Native American youth. Our focus was expanding the
circle, and continuing the legacy of our children. It infused
our attendees with the hope that by the year 2005 we will be
able to open 200 clubs in Indian country to serve our youth. It
also embedded within our hearts the need to sustain the clubs
that we opened, and that we hope to open in the future. Senior
members of the Boys and Girls Clubs of American, like Robby
Callaway, are committed to sustaining these clubs.
Another way that we are looking to sustain the clubs is
through partnerships--partnerships through organizations such
as the U.S. Secret Service, the Department of Justice, Office
of Community-Oriented Policing, the Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Office of Law Enforcement Services, and the Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives Division through their Great Program.
A highlight of these partnerships that I would like to
bring forward to you is the Great Program. Currently, the
National Native American Law Enforcement Association has
entered into partnerships with the groups that I just mentioned
to develop six pilot programs in Indian country Boys and Girls
Clubs. These are clubs in areas where we have high rates of
violence among all age groups and income categories of people
that live in the areas. We also have a growing gang problem
within these areas.
What we have done with the Great Program on the six pilot
sites is that we have brought law enforcement officers into the
programs to work hand-in-hand with the children. This has
created a dynamic where the children no longer look at the law
enforcement officers in an adversarial role, but they look at
them as partners. They look at them as avenues to solve some of
the problems they face on a daily basis, and they look at them
as role models.
This Great Program serves not only the community and the
Boys and Girls Clubs by sustainability, but it also serves our
Nation in putting people in closer contact through community
and police working together. This program, the Boys and Girls
Clubs of America, if we are going to be able to reach our goal
of 200 clubs by the year 2005, we will need additional funding,
and we will also need to have programs such as the Great
Program to be expanded to more than just the six clubs in the
pilot program. We want to sustain those and take it to all the
clubs in Indian country.
Another exciting program that is coming for our youth this
year to Indian Country is the Helen Keller Worldwide Child
Sight Program. The Child Sight Program has committed to giving
32,000 free eye examinations and free designer eyeglasses to
children in need. The Child Sight Program has committed 60
percent of these eye exams and eye glasses for Indian country
youth.
Our first pilot program in Indian country will be held in
April of this year at the Pueblo of Laguna in New Mexico. If
additional funding becomes available, we will be able to expand
this program, not only in Indian country, but throughout the
United States. We hope to establish a deliverable through the
Boys and Girls Clubs of America. The great thing about the
Child Sight Program is that it is not a one-stop visit. The
idea is to provide a vision health care program within the
communities. When they come to the communities, they will be
sustainable.
With the support of Congress and the White House,
additional partnerships such as the ones just mentioned, will
help us to serve America's youth and to develop our communities
and prepare them as we look into the future and the needs with
regard to homeland security.
The next program I would like to discuss briefly is the
National Native American Law Enforcement Association's training
program. For the last ten years, the National Native American
Law Enforcement Association, NALEA, has been bringing Federal
law enforcement training to Indian country law enforcement
officers throughout the United States. We have done this on a
partnership basis by bringing together Federal law enforcement
agencies that actually provide the training, as well as state,
local, and community programs that also support training and
also help us bring the people to the conference.
We would like to thank you, Senator Campbell, for being a
keynote speaker at last year's conference on the Indian country
homeland security summit. This year, NALEA is looking to
develop an unique program for Indian country law enforcement.
The program is going to be a program that will be a center for
academic excellence in Indian country law enforcement training.
This is something that we feel is greatly needed. We are
partnering, and attempting to partner, with many colleges and
universities across the country as well as all Federal, State,
and local law enforcement agencies and many tribal agencies.
Some of the colleges that we are working to partner with is
the Central University of Oklahoma, Western Oregon University,
Fort Lewis College of Colorado, and also the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, which is now part of the newly
formed Department of Homeland Security.
The concept that we are going to utilize in this law
enforcement training is an uniquely Native American concept
that I don't think has been tried in Indian country before. We
are entitling the new program, ``Wearers of the Shirt.'' The
idea of this particular program is that we will go back to the
different tribal leaders and elders from across the country. We
will get their perspectives of how tribal order was achieved
prior to the European intervention on this continent.
From those ideas and methods and theories, we will work
with educators across the country to develop a program that is
uniquely for Indian country law enforcement officers, and that
will be applied to the modern technologies of today. Some of
the problems that our Indian country law enforcement officers
are having is a very high dropout rate before graduation at our
national police academies. We want to also take a strong look
at that and see what we can do to remedy that particular
problem.
As we look at going into the future, in Indian country we
need to work very hard to bring our Indian country law
enforcement and first responders to parity with communities of
reservations and trust lands.
Another very exciting opportunity that we are looking at in
this particular unique law enforcement training is E-Learning.
As I mentioned before, one of our partners is the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, FLETC. They are currently
developing a distributive learning program. That program has in
it over 2,100 particular courses that deal with all types of
administration, law enforcement, first responder techniques,
and current state-of-the art training that is of importance to
events that are happening today.
FLETC has agreed to work with NALEA to create programs that
are uniquely designed for Indian country law enforcement
officers. Also, as a result of this distributive learning
program, we look to go satellite and utilize dishes to connect
remote areas of Indian country.
This not only will help the ability of our law enforcement
officers to take a wide variety of training which could lead to
certifications and college degrees, but it could also connect
them on-line in-time with programs and classes that are
currently going on in different parts of the country.
To give one example, we have major problems with regard to
communications and officers--as I am sure you are aware, having
been a former police officer in Indian country--with maybe one
officer in a remote area that doesn't even have cell phone
connection to his office. Through this remote satellite
connection, he could actually be on-line with the computer. For
example, he could be on one side of a large dam, like on the
Covell Reservation, and be talking at the same time with an
officer on the other side of the reservation via his lap top
computer.
We hope to coordinate these particular dynamics that we
bring to Indian country--again through the Boys and Girls Clubs
of America--by providing additional computers and training
labs. This will also provide training for our children. As we
look to the community, we can bring tribal leaders and elders
to the community to also take courses of interest in that
particular program.
Next, I would like to briefly discuss homeland security in
Indian country. Mr. Chairman and Senator Inouye, I believe our
Nation, as well as tribal lands, have a three-part approach to
homeland security. We must realize the reality of today, define
our vision of homeland security for tomorrow, and act to make
that vision a reality of the future.
When we look at the realities of today, and in particular
in Indian country, we must realize that we have certain
vulnerabilities on tribal land that affect the security not
only of our tribal lands, but of the Nation as a whole.
Specifically, some of the primary vulnerabilities that we have
on Indian lands is the border and port security of tribal
lands, the critical infrastructure located on tribal lands,
such as dams, water impoundments, reservoirs, electrical
generation plants, and waste systems.
There is also the existence of nonintegrated law
enforcement and the minimum emergency response for the medical
capacity planning and implementation, in case we did have a
terrorist attack.
Unfortunately, these vulnerabilities exist because tribal
communities lack the resources to address these
vulnerabilities. The lack of the resources is a direct result
of inadequate funding. Inadequate funding has created the lack
of law enforcement and first responder personnel, giving rise
to insufficient training of existing human capital and greatly
reducing technical assistance and resources. As such,
inadequate funding is a major road block to the elimination of
vulnerabilities in tribal lands.
Further complicating the matter is the jurisdictional
issues that our tribal officers and courts have to face in
Indian Country. These vulnerabilities need to be addressed as
indicated by AUSA Tom Heffelfinger who is with the Attorney
General's Subcommittee on Indian Programs. He suggests that
certain laws, rules, and regulations governing jurisdictions in
Indian country must be changed.
Next, as we look to define our vision of homeland security
in Indian country for tomorrow, we must look to the President
and the Department of Homeland Security for their basic
guidance. The President has identified three strategic areas of
terrorism and to minimize the damage and recovery from attacks
that do occur.
Accomplishing these missions at an affordable cost will
take time and require all levels of government, tribal, state,
local, and private industry to cooperate as they never have
before. There are some concepts that should drive our vision of
the future. Homeland security must be a locally-organized,
grassroots-developed efforts that requires people providing the
security to know three things.
They need to know what they are protecting. They need to
know who they are protecting it against. And they need to be
thoroughly familiar with their local territory.
Equipment and services that will improve the daily health
and safety issues in tribal lands should be funded as a
priority over the single use items and services. Duplicative
services should not be funded, but complementary services
should be. Every proposal for funding should include the
criteria that will be used to determine whether or not the
program is effective or not effective. Programs that have
failed and have not been completed should no longer be funded.
Funding programs should be directly to the priority
programs. We should encourage adjacent jurisdictions to
partners to define our partners in tribal, law enforcement, and
tribal governments, to gain Memorandums of Understandings and
Mutual Agreements to support each other with our assets. We
should encourage homeland security planners to think outside
the box, to prepare America for the next terrorist attack, not
for the last one.
We should teach chemical, biological, radiological
operations, and decontamination procedures at the local level.
We need to be prepared to respond to denial of service attacks
as well as chemical, biological, and radiological attacks of
weapons of mass destructions.
We must act to make our vision a reality of the future. The
50 million acres of tribal lands are replete with military,
energy, water, and other facilities that significantly affect
the American economy and American living outside the
reservations. Potential targets that lie with Indian lands
include the dams, oil fields, oil and gas pipeline, coal slurry
lines, communications towers, casinos, other tourist
attractions, power generating stations and transmitters,
radios, ports, and international borders.
These critical infrastructures on tribal land, if
compromised by terrorists, will produce a devastating impact
that will reach far beyond the reservations and Trust lands,
tearing into the very heart of America. We must act to prevent
this from happening.
Some conclusions that we have drawn from the NALEA tribal
lands homeland security summit and other research, have
produced the following recommendations for the Department of
Homeland Security.
First, establish a coordination unit within the Department
to provide a single point of contact for the Indian nations. We
envision this unit being the conduit for providing the Indian
share of homeland security funding directly to the Nations
involved, thereby recognizing Indian rights of sovereignty and
self determination.
Next, deliver a comprehensive list of targets within the
Indian nations as well as the rest of the country. Also,
apportion homeland security funds based on the cost of reducing
specific priority vulnerabilities, not on population or other
non-related criteria.
Next, develop a homeland security emergency communication
system and frequency that all levels of government--Federal,
tribal, State, and local--have access to, and with which to
provide two-way communication of terrorist alerts,
notifications, and national and man-made disasters and relevant
operational intelligence.
Next, encourage State and local jurisdictions to enter into
mutual support agreements with Indian nations, to share
complementary resources in times of crisis. And finally,
encourage state and local governments to establish cross-
deputization agreements that provide certified Indian police
officers equivalent status as all other police departments.
We have three suggestions for the Department of Justice.
Develop legislative language that clarifies the right of Indian
nations to arrest, detain, and prosecute non-Indian Americans
committing crimes on reservations and trust areas.
Next, support uniform national standards for law
enforcement officer training and certification, and actively
encourage states to enter into cross-deputization agreements to
facilitate the mutual sharing and support of peace officers,
particularly in times of crisis.
Mr. Chairman, you have said it best. Native people are
Americans and want to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the rest
of their countrymen in defending American lives and homelands
from threats now before us. NALEA will take its place providing
training and technical assistance in inventive ways for Native
American law enforcement to lead by service to our communities
and to the United States of America.
I would thank you very much for letting me speak here
today. I would be happy to answer any questions that you might
have for me. I would ask that my written testimony be entered
into the record.
The Chairman. Your complete testimony will be included in
the record.
[Prepared statement of Gary Edwards appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Where did I say those profound comments? Was
that out in Reno?
Mr. Edwards. No, sir; they were in a speech that you gave
to Indian Country Today. But you did say some great remarks out
of Reno, as well.
The Chairman. Frankly, most of the profound comments in
this committee come from my colleague, Senator Inouye.
Let me ask you a few questions before we go back to our
Business Meeting.
Since you spoke last, Mr. Edwards, let me tell you that I
am a big supporter, as most of us are I think in this
committee, of some of the programs you mentioned, like the
G.R.E.A.T. Program, and the Boys and Girls Clubs. I think we
recognize very well that you have a choice in this business.
You put some resources ahead of the curve by helping young
people.
A fundamental question is: Are we going to build more cells
and more prisons and all that later on which is much more
expensive to say nothing of the trauma that families and
communities are driven through because we don't have the
foresight to recognize that we need to help the youngsters more
often?
You mentioned several programs that you are working with
now in different parts of the country. One you mentioned was
with Fort Lewis College. I didn't know they had anything at
Fort Lewis College in Colorado that had anything to do with law
enforcement. What are you doing there?
Mr. Edwards. Well, they have Southwestern Studies Programs,
as I am sure you are aware.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Edwards. We have made an initial contact with them to
help us to study and analyze problems in Indian country law
enforcement.
Just to give you a brief example. When we look at this
tremendously high dropout rate, in particular with one of the
national training facilities for Indian country law
enforcement, it is approaching 50 percent. Well, whenever we in
Federal law enforcement have problems that we think is well out
of line with what it should be and what the rest of the country
is, then we do a study. From that, then we make adjustments.
What I don't think has ever really been done is that we
have gone back and we have looked at our particular tribal
communities and we have looked at seen exactly what our needs
are for the recruits' applications, courses, and to deal with
community specialized issues, problems, and traditions.
We thought that we could use two of the schools that have
one of the highest populations of Native Americans in them,
such as Fort Lewis and also at East Central University--they
both have close to 1,000 Native American students enrolled in
each one independently. We feel that if we can give them the
information that we gather, that they can better help us, based
upon their experience, to develop a meaningful program for
Indian country, and where we can cut this dropout rate and
improve our basic policing.
It is imperative that we bring our policing levels up to a
parity with the rest of the United States communities before we
can really start truly addressing critical infrastructure on
Indian land for homeland security.
The Chairman. Fort Lewis college is the only public college
in the country that I know of that gives free tuition to Indian
students, too, as you probably know. So I commend you on that
and hope there is some progress made in that area.
You mention a number of things on Indian reservations
including strategic assets, natural resources, borders, and so
on. We know we have to do a lot more to make sure that the
Homeland Defense Agency is working well with the Indian
reservation communities.
It is a huge job. We have to start somewhere. Where would
you start as a strategic plan to start improving the security
of the Nation that is bounded by reservation lands?
Mr. Edwards. Well, sir, I think that we have already made
the first step. When you brought people together to discuss the
problems that we are going to be facing in homeland security
back about a year ago, we followed that up with the Tribal
Lands Homeland Security Summit in Reno, Nevada where we
developed an eight-step training program that the people of the
conference could train the trainers.
We are not looking for a wish list from them. Each
community is individual and different. So we developed a
program that we could take back to each individual community
that we could define what terrorism is to the local people. We
can then look to see what assets that we have in our particular
communities that might be of interest to a terrorist attack.
Once we have defined these potential vulnerabilities in our
areas, then we have to look at how we can protect them. Once we
look at how we protect them, then we go back and we start
looking at partners that we can call upon to help us protect
them.
The Chairman. When you had your conference in Reno, though,
we didn't have a Homeland Security Department set up yet. It
was still bits and pieces.
Mr. Edwards. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. At your Reno convention, was there
interaction between the Federal Government dealing with the
interaction between homeland security agencies and tribal
governments?
Mr. Edwards. Yes, sir; within the program that I was
describing, we had different sections on each days where we
actually had discussions between Federal law enforcement
programs. We had a representative there from the Office of
Homeland Security at that time that was part of that. We also
had people from Secret Service, FBI, FEMA, ATF, and the Border
Patrol. All of these people talked and interacted with tribal
leaders as they tried to develop stages and plans for preparing
their communities for homeland security.
At the end of that particular meeting, we decided that we
would do a publication, which we are nearing completion now,
that will be widely distributed. I think that will give a lot
of enlightenment as to the current situation in homeland
security on tribal lands.
As I mentioned, I think the next and most important step
that we must do is within the Department of Homeland Security,
to develop a special office just for Native American programs
and nations. I feel that this should be, at a minimum, at the
Assistant Secretary's level so that they can interface and deal
with the particular divisions and offices and agencies within
the Department of Homeland Security. I think it is critical to
start there.
Then from there it is a step-by-step program of actually
going out, assessing each community, seeing what
infrastructures we have there, and to bring up the important
fact that our first responders and law enforcement officers
traditionally lag behind the rest of the American communities
in their ability to deal with just the police work challenges
on a day-to-day basis.
These priorities have to be brought up to parity with the
rest of the American communities before that we can really
effectively protect much of this infrastructure. We have some
tribes that have some resources, and they are doing the best
that they can with them. We have other tribes that are not
addressing this at all. We have to bring this awareness to the
people.
We have to have the people to help us identify problems we
have. We have to be able to relate that to homeland security.
Homeland Security, through the guidance of the White House and
Congress, needs to direct funds to these specific areas of high
vulnerability so that we can secure our homeland, and that
Indian country can fit seamlessly into the fabric of the
National Homeland Security strategy.
The Chairman. Thank you. Homeland security, obviously, is
going to have to deal with hospitals and health, too, in the
case of internal attacks.
Let me go to Mr. Sossamon. Let me start by saying that you
mentioned in your testimony the average infant mortality rate
for American Indians and Native Alaskans is 25 percent higher
than the national average of American infants.
A study in the Aberdeen area indicated that education and
outreach programs focused on both of those. Sudden infant death
syndrome and fetal alcohol syndrome can significantly decrease
infant mortality. I don't know very much about sudden infant
death syndrome, but I know quite a bit about fetal alcohol
syndrome.
Reducing infant mortality is only part of the real problem
with FAS. Some of the youngsters that are born, even if they
are born and have relatively good health, because of the high
degree of alcohol in their mothers' system, those youngsters
are born incapable of functioning to the level they would had
that alcohol not been in their system. Some of them, in fact,
are to the point where they literally have to be
institutionalized for life. They almost cannot function by
themselves.
Would you like to address that a little bit? I don't quite
understand. You reduce the infant mortality--which I am very
supportive of, by the way--but it doesn't get to the long-range
problem of what happens to those youngsters then throughout
their life.
Mr. Sossamon. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I believe that
testimony was submitted by Mr. Hall.
The Chairman. Oh, was it? Excuse me. I got all my notes
mixed up here. Did you do that?
Mr. Hall. Yes; I talked about the need for health care, Mr.
Chairman.
I think that you hit the nail on the head. The real issue
is the alcohol abuse itself. So clearly there has to be funding
to prevent alcohol abuse. Then for treatment there is
intervention, and then finally for those people who are
affected by SIDS or FAS, there needs to be funding, in some
cases, unfortunately for long-term care. Sometimes permanent
institutionalization is needed for these individuals.
But clearly an intervention would have the resources to
make a broadbased effect to really protect against alcohol
abuse, especially during the pregnancy years. That education
effort really has to be a broadbased educational effort. I
think the tribal colleges and alcohol and drug programs in a
coordinated effort can really address that issue. But we really
have to have a targeted focused approach.
The Chairman. Targeted toward mothers?
Mr. Hall. Exactly.
The Chairman. Since you have the microphone there, you did
talk about the budget requests for contract support costs. That
level of funding--$135.3 million--is the White House's
proposal. Each year the tribes are assuming more responsibility
for more programs under the Self Governance Act. Do you, as
NCAI, have an estimate of how many more BIA programs that
tribes will take over this year?
Mr. Hall. I think we have an estimate that's pretty close.
Actually, I think we're funded at about 70 percent. So there is
probably close to 30 percent more additional that will be
coming into the system.
The Chairman. I see.
Let me now ask Senator Inouye if he has some questions.
Senator Inouye. I just want to make a few general
statements. On homeland security, if the provisions of the
present law are permitted to stand, then the application of
U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Nevada v. Hicks may be further
expanded because the present act says, ``Tribal governments are
local governments.''
Therefore, we are working on a measure which we hope to
introduce sometime this week or early next week, that will
recognize the inherent authority of tribal governments to
exercise jurisdiction--criminal, civil, and regulatory--over
any person who violates homeland security laws. In other words,
to reorganize your sovereign authority to do this. Otherwise,
you may have to do whatever the county or the State tells you
to do.
The funding that you will under the current act receive
would be whatever is left over. It would be up to the State or
the local government to decide whether you get a nickel or five
dollars. Therefore, I hope that the bill we are working on will
be well received by the Members of the Congress and passed. We
will have to, someday soon, enact a measure that will overturn
Nevada v. Hicks because that is a basic matter before us
because it concerns sovereignty. As long as Nevada v. Hicks is
the law of the land, you, and this Committee, will have a lot
of problems.
I just want to ask President Hall a question. It has been
suggested by authorities in the Department of the Interior that
funds that are set aside for Indian programs be used to pay for
trust reform out of other Indian programs. Do you favor that?
Mr. Hall. Absolutely not, Senator. We feel that those are
trust core functions, like home improvement. Russell Sossamon
will further attest to that. It is completely underfunded. Road
maintenance is one-fourth of the funding. TPA is underfunded.
Contract support costs are underfunded. The list goes on.
Those core functions are underfunded. If we were to
transfer those precious few dollars to trust reform for that
initiative, would really be an under-service and further
deplete and jeopardize those departments from carrying out that
Trust responsibility.
We strongly oppose that initiative.
Senator Inouye. President Hall, as you know, the chairman
and I have many things in common. One thing that we believe in
is that Indian country paid their dues a long time ago. They
gave their sons and daughters and shed their blood for our
Nation. They gave their lands. They gave their resources. It is
about time the U.S. Government met its obligations.
Anything that will underfund these basic things, I can
assure you, we are not in favor of. We will not stand for any
attempt to pay for trust reform. I don't suppose you had
anything to do with making trust management the way it is.
Mr. Hall. Absolutely not, Senator.
I just want to add that one of the reasons I wore the war
bonnet today was that because of what you just stated. The
eagle feather represents the highest honors politically and
militarily for our people in the Northern Plains.
It saddens me to see that water appropriation dollars are
zeroed it. It saddens me to see that trust core functions may
be depleted for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to carry out its
trust responsibility. It saddens me to see that our colleges,
like the United Tribes College in Southwestern polytechnicals
are zeroed out.
It saddens me to see that these are 3 years of IHS medical
bills for individuals. One of our tribal members, a young
mother in her thirties, is afflicted with diabetes and she
needs a transplant. But she is on this list. She won't be able
to get a transplant because IHS doesn't have the resources in
contract health to pay for her unpaid medical bills back 3
years. The health care vendor has gone after her personally.
She will be subject to State court because she now resides off
the reservation to be close to a regional health care facility.
There are many people in her shoes. We just have to have
the dollars. For some of our people, it really is a matter of
life and death. We really appeal to the committee to increase
these dollars in all of the budgets for BIA, for IHS, for
education college, and for all of those programs that so most
deservedly need those dollars. Our people were promised those
things for the last 150 years now.
I thank you for that comment, Senator Inouye.
Senator Inouye. When I saw your eagle feathers I assumed
that you were not here to beg for anything.
Mr. Hall. No; I wasn't. That Trust responsibility disturbs
me and the PART methodology, which is the Program Assessment
Rating Tool, that OMB is using. In a meeting yesterday with OMB
officials, I felt that that was being insinuated that I was
here to beg for those dollars.
I showed a picture of our tribal council in the 1953
Garrison Dam legislation where the chairman was crying. It is
one of the pictures that our sociologists use for socioeconomic
trauma on forced removal of our people as many of our
reservations were forced to moved, giving up 156,000 acres of
land and basically our economic engine.
This did lead to the Equitable Compensation Act which
Senator Conrad sponsored. One of the things it said was ``Free
quality drinking water because we are going to dam up your
river and it's going to create Lake Sacajawea.''
When that legislation was signed in 1953 that
responsibility was promised to those who today are in their
seventies and eighties. Today they are the ones still having to
haul water. They told me to demand that the Federal Government,
the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Congress, and the
Administration live up to that Trust responsibility of
replacing these kinds of dollars. They told me, ``That is our
right since we did live up to our end of the bargain.''
I was disappointed in some of the discussions. Maybe there
were some young CPAs that didn't really understand the history
of what our people had to give up. So thank you for that
question.
Senator Inouye. I just want to note something here. Senator
Conrad is the ranking member on the Budget Committee. The
chairman and I are members of the Appropriations Committee. I
will become a new member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee.
Mr. Hall. Very good.
Mr. Sossamon. He and I will be members of the new
Subcommittee on Homeland Security.
Mr. Hall. That's excellent.
Senator Inouye. We are going to do our level best to make
certain you get your money.
[Applause.]
The Chairman. I can only second that and add my voice to
Senator Inouye's. We both are on some committees that I think
are crucial to Indian country. We work together very well, Tex.
Mr. Hall. Absolutely.
Senator Conrad. We will do our very best.
One thing I want to ask you. The land you said you lost.
That is really the land that is now under water in the Garrison
Dam; is that correct?
Mr. Hall. 156,000 acres under water.
The Chairman. One other thing. It would be an interesting
debate at some other forum. But what kind of transplant is the
lady waiting for that you mentioned?
Mr. Hall. Kidney.
The Chairman. Sometime, perhaps not today, I would like to
talk with you, not necessarily in this format, about the belief
of Indian people as opposed to modern medicine. I bet there are
some interesting debates going on about whether transplants of
organs are within the keeping of what the traditional beliefs
are of Indian people. It is not for this hearing. It has
interested me as scientific knowledge moves ahead more and more
in medical science, how we interact that with the traditional
beliefs about healing. We will deal with that some other time.
Mr. Hall. There is, Senator. I would be happy to discuss
that.
The Chairman. Senator Conrad, do you have an opening
statement, comments, or questions? You have always been such a
great champion for Indian people. I certainly want to give you
an opportunity.
STATEMENT OF HON. KENT CONRAD, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Conrad. I thank the chairman. I thank the vice
chairman as well.
First of all, I want to send a message to OMB that the
comments yesterday that were made that have been passed on to
me are totally inappropriate. Frankly, I am angered by it. To
suggest that the settlement of the outstanding claims around
the Garrison project are a Federal handout is insulting. And
it's wrong.
The Federal Government took land to build a reservoir to
protect downstream areas and downstream States from flooding.
We understood the necessity for doing that, and we supported
it. Now the question is: Does the Federal Government keep its
word with respect to the promises that were made. That is what
the settlement was about.
Promises were made that were never kept. This isn't just my
opinion. This is the conclusion of a commission from the Reagan
administration, appointed by President Reagan, that came back
and reported that the promises were not kept.
The Federal Government owed hundreds of millions of dollars
to the Indian people at two reservations in North Dakota, Three
Affiliated Tribes that Chairman Hall leads, and the Standing
Rock Sioux Reservation. We achieved a settlement based on money
that is owed, due and owing, to these people.
For the people to OMB to suggest that this is some kind of
welfare, that we are here begging for something, they have it
all wrong. This is money we owe based on a conclusion of a
commission, the Joint Tribal Advisory Commission, from the
Reagan era. It was headed by very distinguished Americans on a
bipartisan basis who came back with the conclusion that this
money was clearly owed.
I apologize for taking this time of the committee, but the
OMB needs to straighten out their attitude. They ought not be
insulting people who come here. That's not appropriate.
I want to especially extend my greetings to Tex Hall, who
is president of the National Congress of American Indians and
as I indicated, chairman of Three Affiliated Tribes, we are
proud of the job that you are doing. I think you have just done
splendid work. We appreciate it.
I also want to recognize Ron McNeil, the president of
Sitting Bull College, and chairman of the President's Board of
Advisers on Tribal Colleges. He has been a leading advocate.
Ron is here for increased funding for tribal colleges.
Let me just say briefly, if I could, Mr. Chairman, there
are a number of parts of this budget that give me deep concern.
First, the United Tribes Technical College. It has been funded
in every budget of every President since 1981. This President
pulls the plug. No warning. No rationale. No justification.
That cannot be the conclusion as we move through the work of
this committee and the institutions of Congress.
United Tribes is a unique institution. It is the only
intra-tribally controlled vocational institution in the United
States. It provides valuable educational opportunities to
students from 40 tribes across the Nation. The president has
told me that they are going to have to shut down if this
funding is pulled as the President has proposed. That just
cannot be the result. It is not fair. It makes no sense. Tribal
colleges have a 10-percent cut.
I have seen first hand the profound difference the tribal
colleges are making in my State. I will never forget the look
on the faces on graduates as I have attended the graduation of
these schools. There is the sense of accomplishment, and the
opening of the doors of opportunity for people who have had
them shut in their face for generations.
This is going exactly in the wrong direction. Let me just
say that we are providing $9,000 per full-time student for
other public institutions, and $3,900 for tribal colleges. That
disparity cannot be justified. The President's proposal to cut
the funding is without merit.
On Indian water projects I was frankly shocked by the
elimination for projects in North Dakota. This is what people
are expected to drink. This is water from western North Dakota.
The Chairman. Has that been analyzed, Senator? What's in
that?
Senator Conrad. About 20 million carcinogens are in here.
These are coal seams and the water is on top of the coal seams
and they soak up things that are in those coal seams, known
carcinogens.
They cut the funding to get decent quality water to these
people? That is inexplicable. That is outrageous. I must say I
don't know what these people are thinking of.
On housing, we have families who get their running water
from a garden hose run through a hole in the wall. We have
homes in North Dakota insulated with duct tape, cardboard, and
hay bales. This is reality.
To see these conditions it is difficult to believe you are
in the United States and not in a Third World country. I have
just come from Cuba where the average income is $13 a month.
You talk about a failed economic system. That's it. But we've
got a failed system here, too. You go to the Indian
reservations of my State. It's desperate.
The National American Housing and Self Determination Act
has been a good step forward but this budget provides only
level funding when the need is over $1 billion. Now, this is
our responsibility. We can't duck this and say, ``No, it's the
State's responsibility.'' No, no. This is the Federal
Government's responsibility. We can't duck it and we can't
suggest it's not there. There is not a person with eyes in
their head that could come to my State and say that this isn't
a travesty.
Finally, on health care, on contract care a patient must
now fall within the Priority 1 category which means the patient
has to have a life-threatening illness or injury to receive
care from a contract carrier. That's wrong. It's immoral.
If people want to start talking in moral terms, let's start
talking in moral terms. This is immoral. It's wrong. We have to
change it.
Mr. Chairman, I have much more but I wanted to at least
make those remarks. I thank you very much for your patience.
The Chairman. Thank you for that very strong statement. We
will be looking forward to working with you, particularly on
those issues such as the United Tribes College. I agree that if
there is going to be a future for Indian people, a good portion
of it has to come through education. I can't see how we can get
them to that venue if we are going to cut off the bridge that
they have to travel across. Thank you very much.
I would like to thank this panel for being here today.
We will take a short recess.
[Recess taken.]
The Chairman. The committee will be in order.
We will now proceed with our second panel.
Julia Davis-Wheeler, Kay Culbertson, John Cheek, and Ron
McNeil, would you please come forward?
All of your written testimony will be included in the
record. I will tell you that we are running a little close on
time. So if you can be direct with your spoken statements, the
chair would appreciate it.
Why don't we start as I listed them. Ms. Davis-Wheeler.
STATEMENT OF JULIA DAVIS-WHEELER, CHAIR, NATIONAL INDIAN HEALTH
BOARD, DENVER, CO
Ms. Davis-Wheeler. Thank you, Senator Campbell and Vice
Chairman Inouye. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on
the President's fiscal year 2004 Indian Health Service budget
request.
I am here today on behalf of the National Indian Health
Board. The Board of Directors send their regards and their
congratulations for doing this hearing. As you know, I am on
the tribal council for the Nez Perce Tribe. I serve as
Secretary, but I also serve as chair of the Northwest Portland
Area Indian Health Board. My compliments and support go to Tex
Hall, Mr. Sossamon, and Gary Edmonds on their testimony
previous to ours.
You have our written testimony, but I want to be very
specific about our budget concerns. You may be aware that the
Administration and the Department needs to tweak the actual
fiscal year 2004 request a bit to reflect the enacted fiscal
year 2003 budget that was not available when the President
submitted this fiscal year 2004 budget which he did last
Thursday.
So we don't really have exact numbers to work with at this
time. It is my hope that the Administrative can revise the 2004
budget now that they have the President's 2004 budget.
The Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board always does
an analysis on the President's budget, and we are going to do
that the second week in March. We will analyze his budget and
send you a copy of the analysis.
First of all, I would like to talk about the goal of the
Administration to reduce health disparities. The best way to do
this is to adequately fund the Indian Health Service. A minimum
of $325 million increase is needed to maintain the current
program funded by the IHS budget.
The Administration is requesting an increase that will
create a $250 million shortfall in funding. The fiscal year
2003 budget signed by the President contains a 3.3-percent
increase, or $90 million. This was about $220 million less than
needed to maintain our health programs. So you can see in just
two short years we are facing nearly one-half million dollars
in funding shortfall for Indian Health Service funded programs.
It is also a strong principle of this Administration to
hold governments to their treaty obligations. Most tribes will
have to fill in the funding shortfall with their own funds to
maintain the Federal obligation for health care services to
Indian people. Unfortunately, some tribes cannot do this, and
services will cut.
Every tribe will now have to spend money on health that
they had hoped to spend on other priorities, such as economic
development, education, or training for our people. States are
cutting back on their Medicaid programs, and the first cuts
will affect our dental programs and our pharmacy programs which
are high-cost services that are going to be cut by the State
programs. This has already happened in Idaho. It will also be
the case in Oregon on March 1.
These State Medicaid cuts are very significant and they
call into question the wisdom of depending on States to honor
the Federal obligation to Indian tribes. It isn't working in my
State.
I would like to give you an example on how the President's
request falls shorts of reasonableness even in this time of war
and poor economic performance. The contract health service line
item is $475 million this year. Medical inflation is about 12
percent. This means we need $50 million added to the budget to
buy specialty and hospital services. The President is
requesting a $25 million increase just one-half of what we need
to stay even.
The $1.2 billion hospitals and clinics line item does not
even sufficiently fund the pay-out cost increases and the
increases needed for paying staff and new facilities. There is
no money for the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund unless
that money is taken from other parts of the program that need
inflationary increases.
There is no increase for contract support costs at all.
This means mature contractors will get no increase to keep in
pace with inflation, and anyone wishing to expand or enter into
new contracts, like the Navajo Nation, will have to forget
their plans and get in line and hope for funding in the future.
Self governance is a successful example of contracting that
we think deserves continued support. Facilities funding remains
inadequate, but we welcome the $20 million increase for
sanitation facilities, which has been a long time coming. Last
year the urban programs only received a 1.2 percent increase,
far less than the 10 percent required to keep pace with medical
inflation.
My 5 minutes are over, but I very much would like to answer
any questions you have. I look forward to coming back to
testify on the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. At this
time, I would like to thank your staff, namely Patricia Zell,
for working with our technical people on getting that Indian
Health Care Improvement Act. I want you to know that we are
pursuing to get that bill completed by the end of March and
introduced into the 108th.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Your written statement will be placed in the
record.
[Prepared statement of Julia Davis-Wheeler appears in
appendix.]
The Chairman. Ms. Culbertson, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF KAY CULBERTSON, PRESIDENT, DENVER INDIAN HEALTH
AND FAMILY SERVICES, DENVER, CO
Ms. Culbertson. Good morning, Honorable Chairman Campbell,
Vice Chairman Inouye, and committee members. My name is Kay
Culbertson. I am the president of the National Council of Urban
Indian Health, and more importantly I am a member of the Fort
Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes from Poplar, MT. Right now I
am also serving as the executive director of Denver Indian
Health and Family Services.
On behalf of NCUIH, I would like to express our
appreciation for the opportunity to address the committee on
the fiscal year 2004 President's budget request and its impact
on the off-reservation Indian population.
Before I begin, Chairman Campbell, I want to make special
mention of your article in Indian Country Today entitled,
``Charting a New Course for Indian Health Care.'' This article
addressed the full spectrum of Indian health both on and off
reservations. NCUIH is thankful to you for your acknowledgment
and support of urban Indian health needs.
NCUIH is a membership organization representing urban
Indian health programs. Our programs provide a range of health
care services and referrals in 41 cities throughout the Nation.
Our programs are often the main source of health care and
health information for urban Indian people.
The urban Indian health programs have achieved
extraordinary results despite the great challenges that we
face, mainly the lack of funding. As you know, the 2000 Census
reports that 66 percent of the American Indians live in urban
areas. We realize that not all of that 66 percent lives in the
41 cities that we serve, but there are 66 percent of the Indian
people who are going without services throughout this country.
As opportunities for employment, education, and housing
become more strained on reservations, we anticipate that these
percentages will continue to increase over the next ten years.
It should be added that the American Indian population is
widely considered the most under-counted group in the Census
overall. Although the total number of Indians may actually be
low, our experience is that the percentage of Indians living on
reservations compared to those who reside off reservations is
accurate.
The fiscal year 2004 President's budget request for the
Indian Health Services is $3.6 billion, a net increase of $130
million. However, if the budget request keeps spending, the
urban Indian health programs are flat.
Of course, NCUIH supports any increase to the IHS budget,
but that same increase should be reflected in the budget line
item specifically for urban Indian health programs. Much like
the on-reservation programs, urban Indian health programs have
experienced a continual increase in the need for our services.
In fact, the increase of the Indian population residing in
urban areas is likely greater than the increase than it is on
the reservations.
The Indian Health Service budget funds, and the urban
Indian health programs, are only a small percentage of the
total number of Indians eligible for those services in most
cities.
In fiscal year 2003, urban Indian health programs received
1.12 percent of the total Indian Health Service budget.
Although urban Indians constitute well over one-half of the
total Indian population, in 1979 at a time when urban Indians
made a much smaller percentage of the overall Indian
population, the urban Indian programs received 1.48 percent of
the Indian Health Services budget.
These figures indicate a dramatic decline of the level of
funding for urban Indian health programs and off-reservation
tribal members. As a result of this less funding, urban Indian
health programs can only service 95,767 people of the 605,000
urban Indians that are currently eligible to receive services
in our area.
In providing these services we have encountered barriers
that the tribes do not face. Unlike tribal facilities, urban
Indian health programs are not extended by the Federal Tort
Claims Act for medical malpractice insurance. We are facing a
malpractice crisis, much the same as the surgeons that are in
Florida where they have walked out because malpractice
insurance is so high. We face those same costs in the urban
Indian health care programs because of our lack of the Federal
Tort Claims Act leverage.
We have been quoted rates for malpractice insurance that
range from $5,500 to over $10,000 for one general practitioner.
This is one person. The malpractice insurance costs, especially
for obstetrics and psychiatry, are cost prohibitive to most of
the urban Indian health programs.
One of the clinics in our membership has malpractice costs
in excess of $50,000. That is more than we pay probably a
nurse-practitioner in my clinic at this time.
Recruitment and retention continue to be difficult for
urban Indian health programs. Although our professional staff
are eligible for the loan repayment and the scholarship
payback, we continue to compete with tribes and the private
sector in the cities where we live.
As nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations, our salaries and
benefits differ greatly from the Indian Health Service and the
tribes and the private sector. I can give you an example. I had
a job open for probably six months because I couldn't bring on
a diabetes educator. The diabetes educators in the general
market in the Denver area get around $65,000-$70,000. Indian
Health Services will pay between $50,000-$65,000. I could only
offer $45,000. So it was very difficult finding a qualified
person that could come in and do the work that we needed with
our diabetics.
So I can honestly say to you that the staff who are working
in these urban Indian health care programs have a true sense of
commitment to bettering the health of Indian people across the
country regardless of where they live.
We also need money in order to enhance program data
collection and funding from third-party collections. It is
imperative that urban Indian programs utilize an accurate data
system much like the Resource Patient Management System for
Indian Health Service, RPMS, as it is formally know. Although
RPMS software is provided at a minimal cost, the cost
associated with the use of it can exceed over $500 a month.
Now this may seem like a small amount, but that can be the
difference between buying medications for a diabetic, or buying
medications for someone with hypertension. So it is a strain on
us. Then you incur additional costs through trainings and
updates and additional hardware.
Many of the urban programs have also gone to other
commercial software packages to other commercial software
packages to do their data collection. Those are expensive; we
have heard between $25,000-$75,000 for those sources. We need
to have something that meets the needs of the urban Indian
health programs and can collect all of the data from all of the
other funding sources that we have. Some programs have as many
as 25 different funding revenues to their programs.
One of the greatest needs that we have are dental services
for Indian health programs. I know that we have talked about
this before. Currently we see people in Denver who are in need
of extensive dental work. We brought a small package plan so
that we could promote dental prevention and hygiene. We have
not had one person that has just only need of cleanings. We
have had people that come in that need root canals. Children as
young as 5 years old need root canals. They are young--30 years
old--and they have dentures. Dental care for urban Indians is
just nonexistent. Many of the private doctors do not take
Medicaid so our patients are pretty much stuck out there
without dental work.
We must also address the medical inflation rate.
Considering these factors, we are actually getting a decrease
in the amount of funding. Urban programs already experience
severe limitations as a result of inadequate funding.
I want to give you an example of a patient of mine that
came in to our clinic. He is 40 years old. He is a member of
the Sisseton-Wahpeton Tribe with diabetes and hypertension. He
presented to our clinic for routine management of his diabetes
and hypertension. We saw him. We were able to provide him with
medications and exams.
While we were trying to control his diabetes with
medications and diet, his hypertension went out of control and
his lab work suggested the beginning stages of renal failure.
Attempts were made to improve the patient's renal function
through diet and medication modification. Despite these
attempts, the patient's renal function continued to decline and
he was in need of a renal consult.
This was a difficult situation. The patient was fully
employed but he did not have health insurance and yet he could
not pay for a specialist to look at his kidneys. Assessing the
State-funded programs became very difficult. The patient needed
to work, and continued to work to support his family, but his
income was too high to qualify for any assistance.
He moved to Denver because of the influences that
surrounded him at home were having a negative effect on his
health and well being. He came to Denver looking for work and
for opportunity. He felt that returning to the reservation to
access care at the IHS facility was not an option for him. Thus
begins the search for services.
We were able to contact a nephrology clinic at the
University of Colorado Health Sciences Center. This facility
will see uninsured patients with the understanding that they
will be required to pay a $300 deposit, which he did not have
and which we did end up paying, and then be billed later for
services.
We tried to work with the contract health care back at his
home reservation without success. We were unable to get calls
returned. We were unable to provide services for him.
Ultimately the patient couldn't afford it. He moved back to the
reservation and now he has qualified for contract health care
which we have heard is already in severe shortages. Then he has
to look for a job. If not, he will go to the tribe and look to
them for further assistance.
There have been multiple instances of this where we have
had to send people to the emergency room because of cardiology
referrals. We just can't access them in a timely manner. Many
of our patients who benefit from stress tests are unable to pay
for and access such services. That is critical when you are
looking at diabetes prevention and hypertension as far as the
complications that go along with it, and being able to set up
an exercise program or a diet program for them.
To access the urban Indian health planning disparity in an
amount that urban Indian programs could effectively put to use,
NCUIH recommends a $6-million increase to President Bush's
fiscal year 2004 budget for urban Indian health programs. This
would lift our funding from $29,947,000 to $3,947,000.
While we realize this will not address the total need, we
believe that it will be a beginning for us to start closing the
gap of health disparities for people living off-reservation.
The proposed increase would have a huge impact on the provision
of health care. A $6 million increase for urban Indian health
would find much needed resources to allow for the recruitment
and retention of personnel essential to the provision of health
care in urban settings, and would enhance the integration of
clinical expertise for medical and behavioral health. Substance
abuse is very big issue for us.
Ms. Culbertson. Am I almost out of time?
The Chairman. Unfortunately, we are going to need to move
along, please.
Ms. Culbertson. Okay. Needless to say, the Indian Health
Service really has not provided us with the money that we need
to provide services to urban Indian health programs. We would
like to thank you for letting us testify today. We look forward
to seeing you hopefully at our conference in March.
I would ask that my written testimony be inserted in the
record.
[Prepared statement of Kay Culbertson appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you.
John, why don't you proceed.
STATEMENT OF JOHN CHEEK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INDIAN
EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, ALEXANDRIA, VA
Mr. Cheek. Good morning, Chairman Campbell and Vice
Chairman Inouye. My name is John Cheek. I am executive director
with the National Indian Education Association. We are a
membership organization of almost 4,000 members. I bring
greetings from our President, Robin Butterfield, who could not
be here today.
Today's hearing focuses on the fiscal year 2004 funding for
Indian programs. This is a period of tremendous challenge in
all schools, but especially in Indian schools across the
country. The requirements of the ``No Child Left Behind Act''
mandate much more from students and schools than they have ever
had to produce before. Since Indian students as a group tend to
score lower than other groups, the challenges they face are
going to be much harder to achieve.
The ``No Child Left Behind Act'' assumes all students leave
the starting line at the same location and reach the finish at
the same time. This is simply unrealistic when you factor in
economic status, access to resources, family income, etc. The
``No Child Left Behind Act'' requires all students to reach
proficiency levels, and sanction schools when students do not
make substantial progress. Indian schools and administrators
are under the gun to produce results or risk losing their
students, their schools, and their jobs.
How does a school change to create such substantial
increases in achievement? We hear that students are being
subjected to more homework. Will that increase achievement?
Schools that do not have a new idea are going to try more the
same. We do not think that is a successful approach.
Resources are needed if the ``No Child Life Behind Act'' is
to be fulfilled. Resources for curriculum development,
resources for innovation, resources for new and better use of
technology, and resources for staff development are also
needed. The Department of Education budget has some increases
but not nearly enough. The BIA school system gets a little more
than pay cost adjustments, but yet has the same challenges and
responsibilities as the State system.
There was a promise of substantial new resources for
schools in the act. For example, title I, the largest title in
``No Child Left Behind'' was authorized at a level of $18.5
billion in fiscal year 2004. But the request falls short by $6
billion. Across the board there is funding to maintain the
status quo. Pay increases are generally provided for, but this
is law is requiring much more than the status quo. This law
mandates substantial increases in achievement.
NIEA's concern, of course, is focused on funding for Indian
education. Most program for American Indians are located in the
Departments of Interior and Education. Within the Education
Department funding is being requested at the same level as
2003. The request of $122 million provides educational services
for over 460,000 K-12 Indian students and 1,200 public schools
in 43 States.
NIEA is requesting a nominal increase to $129 million to
include additional funding for the American Indian
Administrator's Corps, the National Advisory Council on Indian
Education, and the travel departments of education and Indian
fellowships. With the exception of travel education
departments, all of these programs have a successful track
record of meeting the educational needs of Indian country.
One innovation provided for in the ``No Child Left Behind
Act'' is the authorization for tribes to assume more control
over their educational programs. Through the development of
tribal educational departments, which would operate in a manner
similar to State departments of education, the authority is
there but the funding is not.
We believe that a tribally-controlled educational system
would be more likely to motivate students and achieve the
success required if they are allowed to do so. Funding for
travel education departments is a step toward true self
determination.
Another program is the American Indian Administrator's
Corps authorization. It is the companion program alongside the
American Indian Teacher Corps. Today, the Teacher Corps program
is on its way to adding 1,000 new Indian teachers to the
teaching force in Indian schools across the country. While
teachers are greatly needed, they equal only part of the
equation. Without inspired and effective school leaders at
these schools, we will likely continue to see high turnover
rates of Indian teachers that plague Indian schools today.
NIEA strongly recommends that funding be restored to the
Administrator's Corps, and to support the Indian teachers
exiting the program in the next few years. In 2002, the program
was funded at over $3 million, but in 2003 the program was
recommended for only $360,000. No funding is requested in 2004.
NIEA is recommending at least $1 million be refocused on this
program.
Education funding for the Department of the Interior's
Bureau of Indian Affairs is more costly since it covers the
full spectrum to assist over 50,000 students, numerous tribal
college students, teachers, and ancillary personnel. The total
direct education allocation for BIA for K-12, tribal colleges,
higher education scholarships, and construction is over $930
million for fiscal year 2004.
While this may seem like an enormous amount, you must
consider that the funding covers the students, the class room,
and everything else associated with it, such as transportation,
construction, and personnel.
I want to mention one very positive thing that is
happening, however. The bipartisan initiative begun by this
committee a few years ago to replace and repair the facilities
of the Bureau of Indian Affairs continues with no reduction in
funding levels. Both the Administration and the Congress are
staying the course. The facilities, and the schools funded by
the BIA are greatly improving.
In closing I did want to make a couple of requests of the
committee. This year there is a pretty heavy education agenda
for the Congress. We have three major education
reauthorizations occurring this year: The Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act, the Higher Education Act, and the
Head Start reauthorization.
NIEA is requesting that an oversight hearing be held on
each one of these authorizations, the sooner the better, so we
can make sure Indian county's concerns are included in these
reauthorization bills as they move forward.
In closing, I would just thank the committee for inviting
NIEA to present testimony on the fiscal year 2004 funding
request. I would be happy to answer any questions the committee
may have. Thank you.
I would ask that my statement be included in the record.
[Prepared statement of John Cheek appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. I am told by staff that we are going to do
oversight hearings on all the things you suggested.
Mr. McNeil.
STATEMENT OF RON McNEIL, CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT'S BOARD OF
ADVISORS ON TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, SITTING BULL
COLLEGE, FORT YATES, ND
Mr. McNeil. Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman Inouye, and
distinguished members of this committee, on behalf of the
Nation's 34 Tribal Colleges and Universities, which comprise
the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, I thank you
for extending to us the opportunity to testify today on the
President's fiscal year 2004 budget. I am honored to be here.
My name is Ron McNeil. I am Hunkpapa Lakota from the land
known as the Standing Rock Reservation. For the record, I am
here in my capacity only as the President of Sitting Bull
College and as a representative of the American Indian Higher
Education Consortium.
For 9 of the past 11 years, I have served as president of
my tribe's college, Sitting Bull College. Sitting Bull College
is my alma mater. I attended school there in 1982 and 1983 and
went on from there to achieve my juris doctorate degree and
then returned home in 1988 to be employed with the College.
I say that because if it wasn't for my beginnings at
Sitting Bull College, I don't think I would be here to testify
today. Sitting Bull College is one of the first and oldest
tribal institutions of higher education. My tribal leaders
founded the college in 1973 for a simple reason: The near
complete failure of the higher education system in the United
States to meet the needs or even include American Indians.
For the past 30 years the idea of tribal institutions of
higher education has spread throughout Indian country. Today
despite decades of severe funding inequities and Federal budget
cuts, 34 tribal colleges and universities in 12 States are
educating upwards to 30,000 Indian students from 250 federally
recognized tribes.
I must emphasize that point because I know that at some
point in time, Senator Dorgan of this committee was asked by
another Senator why should he support tribal colleges when
there was no tribal college in his State. The idea is that 250
recognized tribes are not all in the 12 States that we serve.
Many of those students come from States that do not have tribal
colleges.
I am going to skip a lot of the history about tribal
colleges and move on very quickly to say that most of our
institutions are located on Federal Trust land. States,
therefore, have no obligation to fund tribal colleges. Most
States do not even provide funding for non-Indian State
resident students who attend tribal colleges and account for
approximately 20 percent of our enrollments. In other words,
funding for tribal colleges and Indian students are helping
support the education for non-Indian students at our colleges.
Despite trust responsibilities and treaty obligations
resulting from exchange of millions of acres of land, the
Federal Government has, over the years, not considered funding
American Indian higher education a priority. For the past 21
years since the initial funding of the Tribal College Act, our
institutions have been chronically underfunded.
Our fiscal year 2003 estimated funding level for title I of
the Tribal College Act is about $3,900 per Indian student,
which is still less than the two-thirds of the authorized level
of $6,000 per Indian student. I emphasize that point as well
because in 1988 all we received for our Indian students was
$1,800 per student. I would like to see a State-supported
institution keep its doors open on $1,800 per student.
But our situation could be even worse this next year. If
enacted, the President's fiscal year 2004 budget request for
basic operations of the tribal college would result in a $4
million cut from the 2003 level recently approved by Congress.
This marks the second year in a row that the Administration has
recommended a cut in our funding and has zeroed out funding for
United Tribes Technical College and Crownpoint Institute of
Technology.
Simply put, this is unconscionable and shortsighted.
We respectfully urge the members of this committee to lead
the Senate in rejecting this number and appropriating a more
reasonable level of funding. For 2004 we respectfully request
$49.2 million for titles I and II of the Tribal College Act.
This increase would bring funding for basic operations at
existing eligible tribal colleges to $4,500 per Indian student
count which still represents just three-fourths of the
authorized amount of $6,000 per student, and also to restore
funding to United Tribes Technical College and Crownpoint
Institute of Technology.
Last month the President announced that he was increasing
title III programs by 5 percent. However, the President's
fiscal year 2004 budget recommendation of $19 million for
tribal colleges under Title III would actually decrease funding
from the 2003 level by $4 million.
We request that funding for the tribal college title III
program be funded at $27 million, an increase of $4 million
over fiscal year 2003, and $8 million over the President's
request.
One hundred and forty years ago, Congress enacted
legislation establishing the Nation's first land grant
institutions. Nine years ago, Congress established tribal
college and universities as land grant institutions. We call
them the 1994's. Congress created four very modest programs
specifically for the 1994 land grant institutions. We urge your
careful attention to them. Funding details are provided in my
written remarks.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, for fiscal year 2001, a bipartisan
group from the Administration and Congress came together to
launch a modest, but direly needed facilities initiative for
our colleges.
With help from many members of this committee, several
small competitive grant programs were established to help the
infrastructure problems that plague our institutions. Programs
of $3-$4 million were established in the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, the Department of Defense, and the
Department of Agriculture's Rural Community Advancement
Program, called RCAP.
These programs, together with the Department of Education's
Title III program, have helped tribal colleges address the
critical need for new enhanced facilities on our campuses.
Unfortunately, annual appropriations for these programs has not
grown in the past 3 years. In its fiscal year 2004 budget
request, the Administration would eliminate entirely tribal
college facilities under the USDA's RCAP program.
We urge the committee to join with other members of the
Senate to preserve the RCAP program and to strengthen the other
programs which have enabled our schools to build classrooms,
computer and science laboratories, child care centers, and even
a veterinarian clinic.
Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for this opportunity to present
our recommendations to help bring equality in education and
economic opportunities in Indian Country to the tribal colleges
and universities. Thank you.
I ask that my testimony be included in the record.
[Prepared statement of Mr. McNeil appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. I have been on this committee now for many,
many years. I have had the privilege of serving as chairman and
Ranking Member during most of those years. It is always sad to
listen to testimony such as this because I know it is true.
For example, as you indicated, the per capita amount that
the Federal Government provides tribal colleges would be $1,800
per student?
Mr. McNeil. In 1988; yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. For Howard University, for African-
Americans, it is nearly $20,000. I have been working on a
Native American university proposal. It has been a slow
process. I hope that sometime in the next 12 months I will be
able to conduct consultation hearings in about four regions to
get the views of tribal educators to tell me, and to tell the
committee what they hope to have as a Native American
university. There are many concepts and ideas.
But as you have pointed out, the way we have responded to
the needs of education in tribal colleges is obscene. I can
assure you that we will keep on doing what you think should be
done.
The other thing that I should note is that history
indicates that whenever this Nation is faced with some crisis,
such as war, that becomes the priority. And as such, other
programs begin to get hurt. I can assure you that this
committee will do its utmost to make certain that your
priorities do not get diminished or disappear because they are
very important.
I have just one question. You qualify as a land grant
college. There is an obligation and Trust responsibility on the
part of the Federal Government for the education of Indian
children. Why is it that many States refuse to provide
assistance when you provide education to non-Indian students in
tribal colleges? About 20 percent of the student body is non-
Indian; isn't that correct?
Mr. McNeil. Twenty percent are non-Indians, yes.
Senator Inouye. Can you tell me why the States are
reluctant to provide assistance. They do it for other colleges.
Mr. McNeil. I can answer that in terms of North and South
Dakota. That is where Sitting Bull College and Standing Rock
Reservation is located. In North Dakota we have approached the
State legislative body a number of times. The last time that we
approached them, their response to us was that since the North
Dakota tribes have casinos and many non-Indians go to those
casinos, that is how they are making their contribution to
Indian education. They go to our casinos and spend their money.
That was, in fact, one of the comments that we heard back
from the Senators of South Dakota.
Senator Inouye. Which Senators told you that?
Mr. McNeil. North Dakota.
South Dakota did appropriate $50,000 for the tribal
colleges for the non-Indian students attending there. However,
the Governor at that time said that he thought that it was
unconstitutional to give money to a special group within the
State, and therefore, refused to release the $50,000. Our
comment back was every group that comes to the State
legislative body, whether it be farmers, ranchers, handicapped
personnel, veterans--anybody is a special group that goes
there. So they should have released the money.
Senator Inouye. Well, we've got problems. [Laughter]
Homeland security is one of the top priority matters. Has
the Indian Health Service consulted with tribally-controlled
hospitals and clinics on matters relating to homeland security
and emergency response preparedness?
Ms. Davis-Wheeler. We, as tribes, Senator Inouye, have
individually looked at homeland security. We have a very
progressive tribe in Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Warm
Springs, that have Commission Corps public health service that
have pushed their way into county meetings and State meetings
regarding homeland security. That has pretty much been an
initiative that that tribe has done.
So each tribe is basically doing our own thing. The
National Indian Health Board, on the other hand, has been
following that homeland security legislation and the whole
workings on that very closely. We do have some information that
we have been sending our tribes.
But as for Indian Health Services, truthfully, they are
just looking at their budget and how less money they have
besides looking at homeland security. They are dealing with
their own. That is my perception.
Senator Inouye. So they haven't done anything?
Ms. Davis-Wheeler. Not that I know of.
Senator Inouye. What about urban Indian clinics?
Ms. Davis-Wheeler. Yes; not a coordinated effort.
Ms. Culbertson. And the same goes for the urban Indian
health programs. I know that one of the programs in Kansas had
been working with homeland security and was called upon by the
State. Unfortunately, when she went to the meeting, they said,
``No, we are supposed to be working with the tribes; so you
need to leave.''
So as far as the urbans go, we are just working within the
counties and States that we are in, and are hoping that we will
able to dovetail with some of their things. But officially, no,
Indian Health Services has not looked at homeland security for
urban Indian health programs.
Senator Inouye. I have so many questions but every time I
ask one it makes me sad. [Laughter.]
I have discussed this matter with the chairman before he
left, and I can assure you that this committee, whether it be
on education, health, or any other program, we will seek the
highest funding possible. If there are going to be any cuts, it
will not come from this Committee. If we should decide to put
in a lower figure, then you can be assured that when the
appropriating committees get into action, they will go below
that.
So, frankly, we are going to increase the Indian program
budget to the extent possible. Otherwise, your priority will be
low. We don't want to see that happen.
Ms. Davis-Wheeler. Senator Inouye, if I may, I would like
to thank you. As a tribal leader I have been familiar with many
of our tribes across the United States. All of us have a
constitution and bylaws that we go by that we rule our people
with. I really hope that we can see a better budget in fiscal
year 2004.
Because it is in our constitution and bylaws to take care
of our people through health, education, and welfare, I want to
thank you from the bottom of my heart that you will make sure
that doesn't happen.
Senator Inouye. The other matter that I think is very
important--and this is something that we have to work with
you--is the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. We have been
working on this for too long. It is about time it became law.
If it should become law, then your problems with malpractice
may be addressed. So let's get down to work on this one.
I think we are getting close to the point of introducing
the measure. If we are, we should do it as soon as we can so we
will have at least 1 year. The bill will have to go to several
other committees. The sooner we get it done, the better.
I will instruct the staff to get into action now and see
what we can do.
Ms. Culbertson. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Inouye. The Department of Education, because of
priority fundings, has suggested a decrease in impact aid of
about $300 million--$289 million. How would that affect schools
or any other programs in Indian country?
Mr. Cheek. I think in terms of the cut, that is a
substantial cut given what that program has received in 2003
and 2002. It is almost a $300 million cut. I believe that cut
is occurring under the B category of students that are funded
under the Impact Aid Program. To the best of my knowledge, a
lot of the students that are going to be impacted, are those
students that have parents that live or work in military
installations.
I think, given the fact that we have a pending war on the
horizon, I think the Administration took an unwise move, to
move money out of that category in light of the military build
up and all of the resources that are heading in that direction.
In terms of the impact on Indian students, I think it is
probably a minimal effect since most of the dollars that go for
Indian students come out of category A. Actually, American
Indian students generate the majority of funds under Impact A.
But typically what I have seen over the past several years,
the Administration will ask for a lower amount and then I think
that outside voices will bring the funding back into it. So
this may be the same thing that they are trying this year. But
I think the fact that it is affecting military people is
unconscionable.
Senator Inouye. Personally I would hate to get involved in
any process that would reduce the funding for Indian programs.
But the reality of political life would suggest to me that will
happen in the budget and appropriating process.
That being the case, could you provide the chairman, and
provide me with a list of those things that all of you would
consider absolute musts?
Mr. Cheek. Yes; we will be happy to provide that, Senator.
Senator Inouye. Otherwise, there is a tendency in the
Congress to have across-the-board cuts--a 10-percent cut across
the board. When you do that, you would be cutting absolutely
essential measures and cutting some that are not that
essential. So if you can provide the leaders of this committee
a list of those programs that you consider musts, we would be
most appreciative. Then we can secure some guidance from you.
With that, I will have to adjourn this hearing because of
the time element here. But may we submit questions to you for
your response?
Ms. Davis-Wheeler. Yes.
Ms. Culbertson. Yes.
Mr. Cheek. Yes.
Mr. McNeil. Yes.
Senator Inouye. The subject matter that we are involved in
now is so essential that we would like to get responses in
detail.
With that, I thank all of you for your attention. Thank you
all for your testimony. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the committee proceeded to
further business.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of Hon. Daniel K. Inouye, U.S. Senator From Hawaii,
Vice Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join you in this hearing today as we
receive testimony from the tribal organizations that represent the
interests and concerns of Indian country.
I am certain that, as they have in the past, these organizations
have studied the Presidents Budget Request for Indian programs for
fiscal year 2004 carefully and that they will provide this committee
with information on the impacts of the President's Request that can be
anticipated in Indian country.
______
Prepared Statement of Julia Davis-Wheeler, Chairperson, National Indian
Health Board
Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman Inouye, and distinguished members
of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. I am Julia Davis-Wheeler,
chairperson of the National Indian Health Board. I am an elected
official of the Nez Perce Tribe, serving as Secretary, and also chair
the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board. On behalf of the
National Indian Health Board, it is an honor and pleasure to offer my
testimony this morning on the President's Fiscal Year 2004 Budget for
Indian Programs.
The NIHB serves nearly all Federally Recognized American Indian and
Alaska Native (AI/AN) Tribal governments in advocating for the
improvement of health care delivery to American Indians and Alaska
Natives. We strive to advance the level of health care and the adequacy
of funding for health services that are operated by the Indian Health
Service, programs operated directly by Tribal Governments, and other
programs. Our Board Members represent each of the 12 areas of IHS and
are elected at-large by the respective Tribal Governmental Officials
within their regional area.
As we enter the 108th Congressional session, we Gall upon Congress
and the Administration to address the funding disparities that continue
to hamper Indian country's efforts to improve the health status of
American Indians and Alaska Natives. No other segment of the population
is more negatively impacted by health disparities than the AI/AN
population and Tribal members suffer from disproportionately higher
rates of chronic disease and other illnesses.
Indian country has continuously advocated for equitable health care
funding. Health care spending for AI/AN's lags far behind spending for
other segments of society. For example, per capita expenditures for AI/
AN beneficiaries receiving services in the IHS are approximately one-
half of the per capita expenditures for Medicaid beneficiaries and one-
third of the per capita expenditures for VA beneficiaries. Sadly, the
Federal Government spends nearly twice as much money for a Federal
prisoner's health care that it does for an American Indian or Alaska
Native. The failure of the federal government to provide equitable
health funding for American Indians and Alaska Natives reflects a
tragic failure by the United States to carry out its solemn Trust
responsibility to American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal governments.
Further exacerbating the current funding situation are the
challenges our Nation faces relating to the war on terrorism, a
sluggish economy and probable military action in Iraq, which has
further shifted fiscal priorities away from American Indian/Alaska
Native health-related initiatives. While we certainly realize the
significance of these challenges, we must also ensure that the health
needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives are protected during this
time.
At this point in my testimony, I would like to illustrate the
challenges we face as tribal leaders as we desperately fight to improve
the status of our people.
According to the Indian Health Service, American Indians and Alaska
Natives have a life expectancy 6 years less than the rest of the U.S
population. Rates of cardiovascular disease among American Indians and
Alaska Natives are twice the amount for the general public, and
continue to increase, while rates for the general public are actually
decreasing. American Indians die from tuberculosis at a rate 500
percent higher than other Americans, and from diabetes at a rate 390
percent higher.
Public health indicators, such as morbidity and mortality data,
continue to reflect wide disparities in a number of major health and
health-related conditions, such as Diabetes Mellitus, Tuberculosis,
alcoholism, homicide, suicide and accidents. These disparities are
largely attributable to a serious lack of appropriated funding
sufficient to advance the level and quality of adequate health services
for American Indians and Alaska Natives. Recent infant mortality data
indicates that the infant mortality rate for American Indians and
Alaska Natives is 25 percent greater than all other races in the United
States. Recent studies reveal that almost 20 percent fewer American
Indian and Alaska Native women receive pre-natal care than all other
races and they engage in significantly higher rates of negative
personal health behavior, such as smoking and alcohol and illegal
substance consumption during pregnancy.
The greatest travesty in looking at the deplorable health of
American Indians comes in recognizing that the vast majority of
illnesses and deaths from disease could be preventable if funding was
available to provide even a basic level of care. It is unfortunate that
despite two centuries of treaties and promises, American Indians are
forced to endure health conditions and a level of health care funding
that would be unacceptable to most other U.S. citizens
Cancer is the third leading cause of death for American Indians of
all ages, and is the second leading cause of death among American
Indians over age 45. According to the IHS, American Indians and Alaska
Natives have the poorest survival rates from cancer of any other racial
group. Also, our women have disproportionately high incidences and
mortality rates for cervical cancer, and it occurs at a younger age
than it does in other racial groups.
Oral health is also a great problem. Nearly 80 percent of Indian
children aged 2-4 years have a history of dental decay, compared to
less than 20 percent of the remaining U.S. population. Further, 68
percent of our adults and 56 percent of our elders have untreated
dental decay and gum disease.
Trust Obligations of the Federal Government
The federal responsibility to provide health services to American
Indians and Alaska Natives reflects the unique government-to-government
relationship that exists between the Tribes and the United States. The
importance of this relationship is reflected in the provisions of
Article I, Sec. 8, clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which
gives the Federal Government specific authorities in its dealings with
Indian Tribes.
Article VI, Sec. (2) of the United States Constitution refers to
all treaties entered into under the Authority of the United States as
the ``Supreme Law of the Land''. Treaties between the Federal
Government and our ancestors--negotiated by the United States
Government in return for the cession of over 400 million acres of
Indian lands established a Trust obligation under which the Federal
Government must provide American Indians with health care services and
adequate funding for those services. Additional Treaties, Statutes,
U.S. Supreme Court decisions and Executive Orders have consistently
reaffirmed this Trust responsibility.
The Snyder Act of 1921 has been the foundation for many federal
programs for Tribes that have been instituted since its enactment,
including programs targeting Indian health. It gives broad authority to
Congress to appropriate funds to preserve and improve the health of
American Indians and Alaska Natives.
Since 1964, three public laws have dramatically changed the
delivery of health care to the tribes. First, the Transfer Act of 1954
removed responsibilities for health care of American Indians and Alaska
Native from the Federal Department of the Interior to the, then,
Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Essentially, one major
Indian program was excised from a Department that had been responsible
for a number of key programs for the tribes. The subsequent transfer of
Indian health to a Department with equal standing in the Federal system
elevated the health and welfare of American Indians and Alaska Natives
to a status in which they became a primary focus of Department efforts.
Second, the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act
of 1975 changed forever the nature of relationships between Tribal
organizations and the Federal Government and revolutionized the manner
in which health services were delivered in Indian country. The Act
provided guidance and direction to IHS to enable it to work with Tribes
to develop Tribal based health systems in which Tribal organizations
were given tools with which to operate their own health programs.
With approximately half of all service funding through IHS now
going to programs that are operated directly by Tribes, health care
systems offering locally accessible, coordinated services that are
capable of being more responsive to the needs of individual Tribal
members are now widely available and expanding. In the 1998 NIHB study
``Tribal Perspectives on Indian Self Determination and Self Governance
in Health Care Management'', 94 percent of the Tribal leaders and
health system directors surveyed reported plans to enter into Self
Determination or Self Governance agreements with the IHS. Tribally
operated systems, reported significantly greater gains in the
availability of clinical services, community-based programs, auxiliary
programs and disease prevention services. In most cases, Tribes
contracting or compacting with IHS reported improved and increasingly
collaborative relationships With the agency, with both IHS Area Offices
and Tribal organizations working together to facilitate the transfer of
program management.
Finally, with its comprehensive, far-reaching provisions, the
Indian Health Care Improvement Act of 1976 created opportunities for
enhancement of services to Tribes through innovative interventions that
are responsive to the health needs of the Tribes and their members.
Areas in various Tribes and the IHS have intervened to achieve positive
changes under the Act include: Virtually every component of service
delivery; health profession training, recruitment and retention;
targeted disease prevention and treatment; funding of health systems;
and, mechanisms for integrating Tribal systems with federal programs,
such as Medicaid and Medicare. Additionally, through periodic
Reauthorizations, authority is given by Congress for IHS and Tribes to
develop new strategies to improve components of programs in response to
administrative, technical and professional trends and advances.
Yet, despite these acts to achieve critically needed improvements
in health systems serving Tribes, easily preventable health problems
continue to plague the 1.6 million Americans being served by the Indian
Health Service and Tribal health providers.
The President's FY 2004 IHS Budget Request
As you know the FY 2003 Budget was just signed by the President
last Thursday, February 20, 2003. I understand that some of the numbers
we are using for FY 2004 will be modified based on the enacted budget
of last week. The IHS FY 2004 budget request is $2.89 billion, an
increase of $40 million over the FY 2003 enacted amount for the Indian
Health Service. Even if the $50 million dollar increase for diabetes
funding is included the budget request is still over $200 million short
of what is needed to maintain current services. It is estimated that a
$325 million increase is required provide the same level of health care
services provided in FY 2003. This amount would be Sufficient to cover
pay act costs, population growth.
The President's budget includes $114 million for sanitation
construction, an increase of $20 million over the FY 2003 Budget
Request. This 20 percent increase represents the largest increase
provided for sanitation construction in over a decade. This provision
and significant increase is applauded and demonstrates the
Administration's commitment to providing safe water and waste disposal
to an estimated 22,000 homes, an increase of 2,600 over the number of
homes served in 2003. Proper sanitation facilities play a considerable
role in the reduction of infant mortality and deaths from
gastrointestinal disease in Indian country.
The President's budget request also reflects the $50-million
increase in the Special Diabetes Program for Indians funding approved
during the 107th Congress. We are grateful to the Administration and
Congress for recognizing the success and effectiveness of the Special
Diabetes Program for Indians as a tool to reduce the incidence and
harmful effects of Diabetes in Indian country.
As a result of the Special Diabetes Program, today there are over
300 diabetes prevention and treatment programs serving American Indians
and Alaska Natives. The funding allows Tribal governments to develop
and improve wellness centers, purchase newer medications which are
effective in preventing Type II diabetes, establish education programs,
and other activities. It is not only an effective tool in preventing
and treating diabetes, it also provides opportunities to reduce the
incidence of diabetes related blindness, amputations, and end stage
renal disease. We ask that the increase in funding for the Special
Diabetes Program does not come at the expense of other vitally
important IHS programs.
Health Facility Construction: The budget includes a total of $72
million for construction of new health facilities allowing IHS to
replace its priority health care facility needs with modern health
facilities and to significantly expand capacity at its most overcrowded
sites. The request will complete outpatient facilities at Pinon (Navajo
Reservation, Arizona) and Metlakatla (Annette Island, Alaska); continue
construction of the Red Mesa Outpatient Facility (Navajo Reservation,
Arizona) and begin construction of a new outpatient facility to replace
the Sisseton hospital (Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe, South Dakota).
When the Sisseton hospital is closed, IHS will purchase inpatient and
emergency care from non-IHS facilities such as the nearby Coteau Des
Prairies hospital.
Pay Costs: The budget includes an additional $35 million to cover
increased pay costs for IHS's 15,021 FTE's and to allow tribally run
health programs to provide comparable pay raises to their own staffs.
Approximately 1 year ago, tribal leaders' came together to develop
a ``Needs-Based Budget'' for Indian Health Service funding. The needs-
based budget was developed through a careful and deliberate process to
ensure that it was reflective of the health needs of Indian country.
The budget documented the IHS health care funding needs at $18.2
billion. President Bush's proposed appropriation of $2.89 billion falls
well short of the level of funding that would permit Indian programs to
achieve health and health system parity with the majority of other
Americans.
Failure to adequately increase the Indian Health Service clinical
services budget will force numerous Tribal health providers to cut back
services, worsening the plight of an already severely at-risk
population and jeopardizing greater public health. Staff cuts would
also result, increasing waiting periods to get appointments, as well as
reducing clinic hours. Also, without adequate funding, several
successful programs throughout Indian country would have to be
eliminated, such as patient outreach, nutritional programs, preventive
care, referral services, dental and optometric services.
Funding for the Indian Health Service has failed to keep pace with
population increases and inflation. While mandatory programs such as
Medicaid and Medicare have accrued annual increases of 5 to 10 percent
in order to keep pace with inflation, the IHS has not received these
comparable increases. Current Indian Health Service funding is so
inadequate that less than 60 percent of the health care needs of
American Indians and Alaska Natives.
As we have carefully reviewed the President's FY 2004 IHS Budget
Request, several provisions would seriously affect the agency's ability
to carry out its responsibilities pertaining to the health and welfare
of American Indians and Alaska Natives. Below, I will briefly discuss
several of these provisions.
Contract Health Service Funding
The President's Budget Request includes $493 million, which
provides an additional $25 million or 5 percent increase over the
previous year's request, for Contract Health Services. While are very
thankful for any increase, the proposed level of funding is so limited
that only life-threatening conditions are normally funded. In most
other cases, failure to receive treatment from providers outside the
IHS and Tribal health system forces people in Indian country to
experience a quality of life that is far below the level normally
enjoyed by non-Indian Americans.
The documented need for the Contract Health Service Program in
Indian Country exceeds $1 Billion. At present, less than one-half of
the CHS need is being met, leaving too many Indian people without
access to necessary medical services. We recommend an increase of $175
million, which would raise American Indian and Alaska Native tribes to
approximately 60 percent of need.
Contract Support Costs
The President's FY 2004 Budget Request includes $271 million, the
same as the FY 2003 enacted budget, to support tribal efforts to
develop the administrative infrastructure critical to their ability to
successfully operate IHS programs. An increase in Contract Support
Costs is necessary because as Tribal governments continue to assume
control of new programs, services, functions, and activities under
Self-Determination and Self-Governance, additional funding is needed.
Tribal programs have clearly increased the quality and level of
services in their health systems fairly significantly over direct
service programs and failing to adequately fund Contract Support Costs
is defeating the very programs that appear to be helping improve health
conditions for American Indians and Alaska Natives.
We strongly urge reconsideration of this line item in the proposed
budget. As Tribes increasingly turn to new Self Determination contracts
or Self Governance compacts or as they expand the services they have
contracted or compacted, funding necessary to adequately support these
is very likely to exceed the proposed budgeted amount. We ask you to
fund contract support costs at a level that is adequate to meet the
needs of the Tribes and to further the important Trust responsibility
charged to the federal government. We recommend an additional $150
million to meet the shortfall for current contracting and compacting.
Tribal Management/Self-Governance Funding
According to the President's FY 2004 Budget, the number of tribally
managed IHS programs continues to increase, both in dollar terms and as
a percentage of the whole IHS budget. Tribal governments will control
an estimated $1.6 billion of IHS programs in FY 2004, representing 53
percent of the IHS's total budget request. Because of this, it is
critical that funding for self-governance be provided in a manner
reflective of this. Therefore, we feel it is necessary to provide
funding over and above the proposed amount of $12 million. The enacted
FY 2003 budget cut the office of Self-Governance funding by 50 percent
without any notice to tribes.
Proposed IHS Management Initiatives/Administrative Reductions
The President's budget includes savings of $31 million from
administrative reductions and better management of information
technology. The IHS proposes to achieve these savings primarily by
reducing the use of Federal staff. IHS also plans to reduce
administrative costs and to achieve efficiencies through the
development, modernization and enhancement of IHS information systems.
The National Indian Health Board and Tribal governments have long
been concerned about "cost-saving" provisions contained in the
President's Budget Request, both in FY 2003 and FY 2004. The result
will be the elimination of potentially hundreds of full-time staff at
the headquarters and area levels, which would add new burdens to the
provision of health care to American Indians and Alaska Natives, rather
than addressing the widespread health disparities throughout Indian
country.
Over the last several years, the IHS has made significant efforts
to streamline the agency. IHS has previously reduced upper and middle
management positions by 60 and 58 per cent, respectively, and
streamlined the Headquarters organizational structure from 140 to 40
organizational units. The restructuring was made in accordance with the
IHS Tribal consultation policy and the resources gained through the
reductions were reinvested into front-line health delivery positions,
which increased by 12 percent. This achievement ought to be rewarded
rather than ignored. Given the ongoingrestructuring efforts at IHS, any
further reductions would severely hamper the ability of the IHS to
carry out its mission.
In order to fully explore the possible effects and potential
advantages of any reorganization efforts put forth by the
Administration, we feel it is appropriate that the President's
Management Initiatives be delayed for a period of one year in order for
the IHS Restructuring Initiative Workgroup to create feasible
alternatives, which will be developed through a comprehensive tribal
consultation process. Additionally, any savings derived from such
restructuring should be exclusively reinvested in IHS mission-related
activities.
The Need for Homeland Security Funding in Indian Country
The President's FY 2004 budget request for the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) reflects the priorities of the United States
with regard to health and safety concerns relating to Homeland
Security. It reflects the Administration's commitment to anticipating
future threats to America's public health care, health infrastructure
and human services systems. It is important to note that, along with
the Department of Defense and Veteran's Affairs health systems, the
Indian Health Service occupies a unique position within the Federal
Government as a direct health care provider.
Therefore, we are requesting funding be added during FY 2004 to
help the Indian Health Service and Tribal governments prepare for and
respond to potential terrorist attacks, including increases for Data
Systems Improvements and much needed funds to expand the capacity of
tribal epidemiology centers.
Conclusion
On behalf of the National Indian Health Board, I would like to
thank the committee for its consideration of our testimony and for your
interest In the improvement of the health of American Indian and Alaska
Native people. If we are ever to reduce the terrible disparities
between the health of American Indians and Alaska Natives compared to
other Americans, we need to properly fund the Indian Health Service and
we urge the Senate to significantly increase the IHS funding level
during this fiscal year. IHS and the Tribes are continuing to work
diligently to develop health systems of sufficient quality and with
levels of services that our people desperately need. We are deeply
concerned about the Administration's proposed IHS budget and trust you
will share our concern and we look forward to working with you on this
budget.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.108
FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to other business, at 10:10
a.m. in room 485, Senate Russell Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse
Campbell (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell, Inouye, Johnson, Inhofe, Hatch,
Murkowski, and Dorgan.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. The Committee on Indian Affairs will be in
session.
We will now move to the second of our two oversight
hearings on the President's fiscal year 2004 budget request for
Indian programs.
Today we are joined by representatives of five Federal
agencies whose business affects the lives of Native people
across the United States. As I said last week, the President's
budget request reflects what unfortunately looks like a major
conflict in the Middle East in our Nation's efforts to protect
our homeland and our people.
The request for the BIA is $2.314 billion, with an
additional $275 million for the Special Trustee. The Indian
Health Service account would receive $2.89 billion, an increase
of $68 million over fiscal year 2003. The Indian housing grant
request includes $647 million which is level funding compared
to 2003. Unfortunately, the need has grown considerably and
there may not be enough money that is in that program.
There are specific increases in several Indian accounts,
notably Trust reform, substance abuse, school operations, and a
continued effort to eliminate the backlog of BIA school
construction.
I want to assure the members and the audience that these
hearings are only the beginning of the fiscal year 2004
appropriations process, and that this Committee will be
involved for the duration, paying particular attention to the
homeland security budget, and the degree to which it involves
tribal governments, law enforcement, and medical personnel for
our security efforts.
With that, I would like to turn to Senator Inouye. But I
would ask Senator Inouye if Senator Inhofe may make a request
first?
Senator Inouye. Yes; certainly.
Senator Inhofe. Mr. Chairman, I was trying to get down here
to help make a quorum for the appointment of Mr. Swimmer. I
would like to be shown in voting in support of his nomination.
The Chairman. For the record we will reflect you were here
in person.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Inouye.
Senator Inouye. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join you this
morning to welcome the witnesses from the executive branch. I
look forward to receiving their testimony.
The Chairman. Senator Johnson, do you have an opening
statement?
Senator Johnson. None, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. None, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. We will now proceed with our witnesses.
We will now have Louis Kincannon, director of the Bureau of
the Census, from Suitland, MD; Aurene Martin, acting assistant
secretary for Indian Affairs for the Department of the
Interior; Charles Grim, interim director the of Indian Health
Service, from Rockville, MD; Bill Russell, deputy assistant
secretary for Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing
and Urban Development; and Victoria Vasques, director of the
Office of Indian Education, Department of Education.
We will start in that order. I need to tell the witnesses
that I have a fierce cold and may be here only part of the
time. So if you would like to abbreviate your comments, your
full written testimony will be included in the record.
We will start in the order that I introduced you.
Mr. Kincannon, would you please start?
STATEMENT OF LOUIS KINCANNON, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF THE CENSUS,
SUITLAND, MD
Mr. Kincannon. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. On behalf of the
Census Bureau, I would like to express our appreciation for the
opportunity to testify before the committee.
The Census Bureau does not operate ``Indian Programs'' in
the traditional sense of the word. Our mission is to provide
the most timely, relevant, and accurate data about the people
and the economy of the United States. It is our task, in part,
to cooperate with this committee in making sure that the right
kind of information is available to help support its work in
reviewing programs for American Indians and Alaska Natives.
This morning I will focus on information from the Economic
Census, the Survey of Business Owners, the Decennial Census of
Population, and the American Community Survey. The Economic
Census is conducted every 5 years for years ending in ``2'' and
``7.'' We are currently receiving and processing information
for 2002. The Economic Census is a detailed profile of the
economy from the national level, to the local level, and
industry-by-industry.
It provides information on over 23 million businesses and
96 percent of the Nation's economic activity. It is used in
determining the gross domestic product estimates, of course, as
well as other indicators that measure the national economy.
Moreover, the detailed data inform economic, and financial
decisions in the private sector, as well as the Federal,
tribal, State, and local levels.
With each Economic Census we also collect data in a follow-
on survey to provide a detailed portrait of minority and women-
owned businesses. This Survey of Business Owners paints a
portrait of American Indian and Alaska Native owned businesses,
that is used by agencies such as the Commerce Department's
Minority Business Development Agency to evaluate program needs
and opportunities.
In the last available results from this survey for 1997, it
shows that almost 200,000 firms were owned by American Indians
and Alaska Natives, and that the sales from these firms totaled
more than $34 billion annually. The data also suggest that
American Indian and Alaska Native economic activity is diverse
with significant activity across each of the major industrial
sectors.
However, the most useful data at the local and tribal
government levels comes directly out of the Economic Census.
The 2002 Census will show the number of businesses and the
employment and sales for businesses by type of activity at the
State, county, city, and frequently at the zip code level.
These data will be used by tribal government leaders and
planners as well as entrepreneurs to outline potential
opportunities for economic development.
By combining data from the Economic Census and the
Decennial Population Census, tribal governments and businesses,
as well as this committee, can provide a profile rich with
detail to encourage investors and development. The Census of
Population is the great national catalog of human capital
collected every 10 years. To collect these data we visit every
reservation, as well as every off-reservation tribal Trust
land, tribal designated statistical area, and State-recognized
reservation in the Nation.
Beginning with the 2000 Census, respondents were allowed to
check more than one race. This contributed significantly to the
number of people who identified themselves as American Indian
or Alaska Native.
In Census 2000, when asked about their race, almost 2\1/2\
million persons reported American Indian or Alaska Native
alone. An additional 1\1/2\ millions persons reported that they
were American Indian or Alaska Native in connection with one or
more other races. Combining these two totals means that there
were over 4 million persons who reported that they were
American Indian or Alaska Natives.
According to the 1990 Census, fewer than 2 million persons
reported that they were American Indians or Alaska Natives. The
1990 Census respondents were only allowed to mark one box in
the race question. So these data are not strictly comparable.
According to the 2000 Census, the largest tribes and tribal
groupings were Cherokee, Navajo, Sioux, Chippewa, and Choctaw.
In addition to population data, the Decennial Census also
collects a wide range of social, economic, and housing
characteristics. The Decennial Census long form provides the
most comprehensive and in-depth profile of American Indian and
Alaska Natives that's available every 10 years. This data is
used throughout the Federal Government, as well as by tribal
governments to make decisions, allocate funds, and otherwise.
Among the key data that were collected in 2000 about
American Indians and Alaska Natives, we found that over 800,000
were enrolled in schools at every level from preschool to
colleges. There were almost 200,000 veterans among this
population. Over 1 million were participating in the labor
force. The median income for households was slightly over
$30,000 per year. The median property value for owner-occupied
housing units was $81,000.
According to the Census 2000, of 765,000 American Indian
and Alaska Native households, 90,000 did not have telephones,
34,000 lacked complete plumbing facilities, and 30,000 lacked
kitchen facilities.
The Decennial Census offers a comprehensive and in-depth
snapshot of conditions as of census day. These data are
invaluable to the tribes and the government as it tries to work
through planning and evaluating programs. It is not, however,
the best tool for continuing measurement of progress or program
outcomes. As one moves further away from census day, the data
becomes stale and, therefore, less accurate. As late as last
summer, tribal governments were still using 1990 decennial
long-form data to try to meet the needs of their members.
The good news is that we have a plan that will dramatically
improve the way we deliver these data to tribal governments.
With the American Community Survey, we plan to eliminate the
long form in the census in 2010 and to collect these data every
year. The real difference is that we will be able to publish
data equivalent to the long form every year for every county,
reservation, tribal Trust land, tribal statistical area, home
land area, and the census tracts therein. This will allow
tribal governments to measure change, to plan better to manage
their programs more effectively, and take better advantage of
potential opportunities. We have embarked on this path because
it will improve the data that this Nation uses to meet the
needs of all Americans, day-in and day-out.
In summary, entrepreneurs and tribal governments can use
these data to make the case for investments, strengthening the
length between possibility and reality. The Economic Census is
the catalog of economic resources. The Decennial Census and the
American Community Survey are catalogs of human capital. These
data express the tremendous potential for progress, growth, and
opportunity that exists within the United States for every
American Indian and Alaska Native.
I do have longer testimony that I will submit for the
record, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate once again the opportunity
to appear. I would be pleased to answer any questions, of
course.
The Chairman. Your testimony will be inserted in the record
in its entirety.
[Prepared testimony of Louis Kincannon appears in
appendix.]
The Chairman. I understand this is the first time you have
appeared before this committee. I am sure impressed with all
the places you have had to go to find these numbers.
Mr. Kincannon. Well, I can't believe we were as successful
in the 2000 Census as we were without closer advice from this
committee. So I hope that will continue.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Kincannon. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. Ms. Martin, welcome.
STATEMENT OF AURENE MARTIN, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC,
ACCOMPANIED BY DONNA ERWIN, ACTING SPECIAL TRUSTEE, DEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Martin. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman.
Thank you for the invitation to discuss the fiscal year 2004
budget for Indian programs in the Department of the Interior
with you today.
I am accompanied today by Donna Erwin, acting special
trustee for the Department of the Interior, who will assist me
in answering questions with regard to that office.
The fiscal year 2004 budget submitted to Congress
represents large increases in funding for Indian Trust reform
and related programs, and includes funding to address the past,
present, and future of Trust reform. We are addressing
questions about the past by implementing the Department's
historical accounting plan. We are dealing with present
management challenges by reorganizing the Department's Trust
operations to provide better Trust management. Finally, we are
planning for the future by expanding the Land Consolidation
Pilot Program to reduce future fractionation and land
ownership, a root cause of many of the challenges we now face
as an institution.
In total, the fiscal year 2004 budget request for the
Department of the Interior is $10.7 billion. This budget
represents an increase of over $340 million over fiscal year
2003 enacted appropriations. Over one-half of this increase is
dedicated to the Indian Trust budget. The BIA mission is to
fulfill its trust and other statutory responsibilities and
promote self-determination on behalf of tribal governments,
American Indians, and Alaska Natives.
President Bush has proposed a $2.31 billion budget for the
Bureau of Indian Affairs for fiscal year 2004, an increase of
over $48.6 million over the fiscal year 2003 enacted levels to
improve the Department of the Interior's management of
individual Indian and tribal Trust accounts, to operate new
tribally operated detention centers, and to develop tribal
economies.
The request also maintains the President's commitment to
eliminate the school maintenance backlog and to provide tribes
with greater opportunities to directly operate BIA schools.
The Office of the Special Trustee is responsible for the
oversight and coordination of the Department's Trust asset
management and reform efforts to effectively discharge its
Trust responsibilities. The President's fiscal year 2004 budget
for the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians is
$274.6 million, an increase of $134.3 million, or 96 percent
above the fiscal year 2003 enacted level.
The $134.3 million increase will support many of the
reforms discussed in this statement and will be used for Trust
records, administration, management, storage, and accessibility
to meet document production and related litigation costs and to
provide improvements to the Trust fund's accounting system. The
fiscal year 2004 budget for Indian Trust programs includes $554
million for Trust operations and reform. This is 50 percent
higher than the enacted levels for fiscal year 2003.
Fulfilling our Trust responsibilities remains one of the
Department's greatest challenges. In July 2001, the Secretary
created the Office of Historical Trust Accounting within the
Office of the Secretary. The mission of OHTA, as we call it, is
to coordinate all activities relating to historical accounting.
On January 6, 2003, the Department presented a plan
entitled ``The Historical Accounting Plan for Individual Indian
Money Accounts,''[IIM] to the District Court in the Cobell v.
Norton litigation for the historical accounting for about
260,000 IIM accounts.
The work described in the January 6th Historical Accounting
Plan is expected to take five years to complete, and is
preliminarily estimated to cost approximately $335 million. The
budget includes $130 million for these historical accounting
activities. These funds will also be used to provide historical
accounting activities related to tribal accounts.
Under Interior's reorganization proposal, the Bureau of
Indian Affairs retains all natural resource trust asset
management. The management of the Trust functions at the BIA
regional and agency levels has been separated by creating
separate lines of authority for Trust and tribal services.
Within the Office of the Special Trustee for American
Indians, the reorganization proposal has given it additional
operating authority which will be supported by new positions
intended to be filled by skilled staff who are specifically
trained for responsibilities with regard to their Trust
responsibility.
A regional staff will oversee Trust officers and Trust
account managers in field locations under this plan. The fiscal
year 2004 budget provides an increase of $15 million to support
the new organization, which together with base funding
available in both BIA and OST, will provide resources needed
for the new organization.
Another challenge we continue to face is the land
fractionation problem. Today there are approximately four
million owner interests in the 10 million acres of
individually-owned Trust lands, a situation the magnitude of
which makes management of trust assets extremely difficult and
costly. Fractionated interests in individual Indian allotted
land continue to expand exponentially with each new generation.
The BIA has conducted a pilot fractionated interest
purchase program aimed at reducing fractional interests in the
Midwest region and in fiscal year 2002 alone, acquired 10,699
fractionated interests. In 2004, BIA will aggressively ramp up
the Indian Land Consolidation Program. The fiscal year 2004
budget proposes $21 million for Indian land consolidation, an
increase of $13 million. The BIA is designing a nationally
coordinated and targeted purchase program. This program will be
managed by a national program staff.
We are implementing and undertaking a number of other Trust
reform efforts. We are currently developing re-engineered
business processes based on a meticulous review of all of our
current processes. We are improving our information technology.
The proposed $183.8 million increase for Trust management
reforms includes funding to help rebuild the Bureau of Indian
Affairs Information Technology infrastructure to support both
Trust and non-Trust programs.
We are improving our recordkeeping. The fiscal year 2004
budget also proposes an increase of $4.5 million to accelerate
a new strategy to administer, manage, search, retrieve, and
store Trust records.
No task is more important to us than the education of our
children. We are responsible for educating nearly 48,000
students in 23 States at the 185 elementary and secondary
schools that form the BIA school system. The Bureau of Indian
Affairs is committed to the President's promise to improve
Indian education in America.
In January 2002, the President signed into law the ``No
Child Left Behind Act'' of 2001, a landmark education bill that
will help strengthen the BIA funded schools. Flexibility and
local control of schools are among the pillars of the
President's Education Reform Plan. The budget encourages tribes
to assume management of their schools by providing a $3-million
increase in administrative cost grants to support their
programs.
During the year 2000 Presidential campaign, President Bush
promised to provide safe and structurally sound schools for
Indian students. The BIA's request for education construction
continues the President's initiative to repair and replace
schools that are outdated and in need of structural
improvement. The budget includes a request to invest $141.4
million to replace buildings at a minimum of seven schools.
Funding for school construction reflects an increase of
$16.2 million above the fiscal year 2003 levels, resulting from
an internal transfer of funding from education facilities
improvement and repair program, and includes $10 million for
the planning and design of future projects.
Other budget highlights include an increase of $7.6 million
to improve the management of Trust land and natural resources
assets, an increase of $1 million to leverage $20 million in
additional guaranteed and insured loans, and $51.4 million for
payment of authorized Indian land and water claim settlements
in Oklahoma, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah.
In summary, with this budget request, the President has
made clear his firm commitment to improving the lives of Indian
people through Trust reform, education, and economic
development. The BIA and OST are prepared to meet these goals
with Congress' support.
I ask that my written statement be entered into the record.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
The Chairman. Your complete statement will be in the
record.
[Prepared statement of Aurene Martin appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. We will now go to Dr. Grim.
Before you make your statement, Dr. Grim, have you ever
heard of Indian bear root?
Dr. Grim. No, sir.
The Chairman. When I used to get a sore throat some of the
old ladies up home would make me chew bear root. It worked
great. I didn't know if you brought any with you or not.
Dr. Grim. I could probably see if we could find you some,
though. [Laughter.]
The Chairman. I hate to resort to NyQuil but I guess I am
going to have to.
Go ahead with your testimony. [Laughter.]
STATEMENT OF CHARLES W. GRIM, M.D., INTERIM DIRECTOR, INDIAN
HEALTH SERVICE, ROCKVILLE, MD, ACCOMPANIED BY: MICHEL E.
LINCOLN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR; GARY HARTZ, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE
OF PUBLIC HEALTH; AND CRAIG VANDERWAGEN, M.D., ACTING CHIEF
MEDICAL OFFICER
Mr. Grim. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members of
the committee. Good morning. My name is Charles Grim. I am
Interim Director of the Indian Health Service.
I am accompanied this morning by Michel E. Lincoln, our
deputy director of Indian Health Services, Gary Hartz, our
acting director for the Office of Public Health, and Craig
Vanderwagen, our acting chief medical officer.
We are pleased to be here this morning and have the
opportunity to testify before you on the President's fiscal
year 2004 budget. It's a personal honor for me that my first
appearance before a Congressional committee be the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs.
I am a member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, and as
the interim director of the Indian Health Service appointed by
the President, I also represent the primary health program for
1.6 million American Indians and Alaska Natives nationally.
I am here to provide information on behalf of the
President, the Secretary, and the Indian Health Service for
programs that are critical to achieving our shared goals of
eliminating health disparities among all Americans. This budget
request reflects the priorities of this Administration for the
health of the American Indians and Alaska Natives.
It also reflects the Administration's commitment to
honoring the government-to-government relationship between the
Federal Government and the 562 sovereign Indian Nations because
this budget request was developed in consultation with Indian
tribes and organizations.
It also reflects the personal interests and commitments of
the Department leadership to meeting the health needs of Indian
people and honoring the Federal Government's treaties with
Indian Nations to provide health care services.
This is the third budget proposed by President Bush for the
Indian Health Service. While the Nation faces unprecedented
challenges worldwide and at home, the President has proposed an
IHS budget that is 2.6 percent higher than the budget proposed
last year and which still represents an increase even when
compared with the fiscal year 2003 enacted budget.
The collaboration in developing this request ensures that
it is relevant to the needs of Indian Country for public and
personal health services and the infrastructure necessary to
provide them. In addition, beyond the IHS budget request, I
make note that the collaboration between the operating
divisions of the Department of Health and Human Services also
has renewed emphasis and vitality because of Secretary Tommy
Thompson's initiatives to eliminate health disparities, and ask
that all those within the Department act as one department.
Secretary Thompson and Deputy Secretary Claude Allen and
their staff have visited and met with tribes across the Nation
and during tribal visits to Washington, DC. They know first-
hand of the health disparities and access to care issues that
many of our tribal nations face. They are committed to ensuring
that the Department programs that benefit all people also help
to meet the needs of Indian country. They also ensure that the
decisions that would affect the Indian Health Service tribal
and urban Indian health delivery programs are considered before
they are implemented. One recent decision resulted in a waiver
that would have cost the Agency approximately $30 million
immediately and $17 million annually.
Meeting the health needs of the Indian country is also
possible because of the commitment of the members of this
committee. I begin my testimony today with the gratitude and
appreciation for your hard work and the outstanding staff who
support you in your efforts to make a difference in the lives
of American Indians and Alaska Natives.
The recent enactment of a 3.3 percent increase in the
fiscal year 2003 budget appropriation will help us carry out
our important work and allow us to expand or maintain clinical
and dental services. It will allow us to continue construction
of eight health facilities, and continue to provide health
profession scholarships for 716 American Indian and Alaska
Native students and loan repayment for 480 health
professionals, along with maintaining our many other critical
and necessary programs. So let me say thank you for your help
on that.
Improving the health of the American Indian and Alaska
Native population overall, providing health care to individuals
in the population are important and challenging goals.
Comparing the 1997 through 1999 Indian age adjusted death rates
with the United States all races population in 1998, the death
rates in the American Indian and Alaska Native population are
7.7 times greater for alcoholism, 7.5 times greater for
tuberculosis, 2.7 times greater for diabetes, and 2.8 times
greater for unintentional injuries.
The fiscal year 2004 President's budget request and
associated performance plan represent a cost-effective public
health approach to make sure that American Indians and Alaska
Natives have access to health services. Our performance has
been validated by our documented Government Performance and
Results Act Achievements, and most recently by our scores from
the Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment Rating
Tool which were some of the highest in the Federal Government.
The President proposes an increase of $97 million in
program level funding above the fiscal year 2003 enacted level.
Program level funding includes an increase of $50 million for
the special diabetes program for Indians, which was
reauthorized last year, and amounts that we expect to collect
through our third party billing activities in the dollar amount
of approximately $6 million.
The request provides $19.6 million for Federal pay cost
increases and $16 million for tribal pay cost increases. Funds
for staffing newly constructed health care facilities and
operating the new facilities that will open in fiscal year
2004, or have recently opened, are requested in the amount of
$25.5 million. It also provides program increases of $18
million for contract health care and $21 million for sanitation
facilities projects.
The budget request also includes $70 million for health
care facility construction to be used for replacement of
existing health care facilities. This amount will complete
construction of the health centers in Pinon, AZ and Metlakatla,
AK, and partially complete the health centers at Red Mesa, AZ,
and Sisseton, SD.
The fiscal year 2004 budget request incorporates savings in
support of the President's management agenda, and those cost
savings to the Federal budget include $21.3 million in
administrative efficiencies, and $9.3 million through better
management of information technology.
The increases requested are essential to maintaining IHS,
tribal, and urban Indian health programs capacity and
infrastructure to provide access to high quality primary and
secondary medical services, and begin to slow down the recent
declines in certain health status indicators.
The IHS has demonstrated the ability to maximize the use of
available resources to provide services to improve the health
status of the Indian people. In 2002, the IHS exceeded the
healthy people 2010 goal of increasing by 50 percent the number
of annual diabetic hemoglobin A1c tests. In addition, the
health data is now showing a steady increase in the percentage
of American Indian and Alaska Native diabetic patients who have
achieved ideal blood sugar control. I am confident that these
achievements will translate into decreased diabetic mortality
rates in the future.
The requests that I have just described reflect the
continued investment by the President and the Secretary to
maintain and support the IHS tribal and Urban Indian public
health system. The President and the Secretary are also
committed to national defense, homeland security, and
increasing our ability to respond to bioterrorism or health
threats to the Nation. However, while there will be sacrifices
the country will be asked to make during this war on terrorism,
sacrifices at the expense of the health of the American Indian
and Alaska Natives is not acceptable to the Administration, the
Secretary, the IHS, or tribal or urban leadership.
As I mentioned earlier, there are significant disparities
in mortality rates for a variety of conditions between American
Indians and Alaska Native people in the United States general
population. What's particularly alarming is the pattern is
continuing to worsen. The overall mortality rate for the Indian
population increased by 4.5 percent from the period of 1994
through 1996, to 1997 through 1999, while during the same
timeframe the United States all races rate declined by over 6
percent.
While future requests for increases will be affected by
national priorities, the budget requests for the IHS will
always be mindful that this health disparity gap for Indian
people will widen if we are unable to maintain and improve
access to high quality medical and preventive services.
I want to thank you for this opportunity to discuss the
fiscal year 2004 President's budget request for the Indian
Health Service. I would be pleased to answer any questions you
might have.
I would ask that my full statement be inserted in the
record.
The Chairman. Your prepared statement will be placed in the
record in its entirety.
[Prepared statement of Charles Grim appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you, doctor.
Mr. Russell.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM RUSSELL, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Russell. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members
of the committee, thank you for inviting me today to provide
comments on President Bush's fiscal year 2004 budget for HUD's
Indian Housing and Community Development Programs. My name is
William Russell and I am Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public
and Indian Housing at HUD. I am speaking today on behalf of
Assistant Secretary Michael Liu.
I have prepared a statement for Mr. Liu that I would ask be
entered into the record, an abbreviated version of which I will
provide you today.
The Chairman. Your complete testimony will be entered into
the record.
[Prepared statement of William Russell appears in
appendix.]
Mr. Russell. It is a pleasure to appear before you. I would
like to express my appreciation for your continued efforts to
improve the housing conditions of American Indian, Alaska
Native, and Native Hawaiian peoples. HUD's Native American
programs are available to over 550 federally-recognized and a
limited number of State-recognized Indian tribes. We serve
these tribes directly or through tribally-designated housing
entities by providing grants and loan guarantees designed to
support affordable housing and community and economic
development activities.
Our tribal partners are diverse. They are located on Indian
reservations, Alaska Native villages, other traditional Indian
areas, and most recently on the Hawaiian homelands. The
Department of Housing and Urban Development supports the
principle of government-to-government relations with Indian
tribes.
For fiscal year 2004 the President's budget for HUD
proposes a total of $738.7 million, specifically for Native
American and Native Hawaiian housing, community and economic
development, and education programs. The 2004 budget includes
$646.6 million for the NAHASDA program. This is the same as the
2003 request. As with last year's request, reducing set-asides
will actually allow for an increase in grant dollars available
to tribes. The training and technical assistance set-aside has
been increased to $5 million, which is $2 million more than
last year's request.
In the coming year, ONAP is planning to provide additional
training and technical assistance to tribes. The title VI loan
guarantee set-aside is funded at $1 million to continue program
activities. The total program is more fully subscribed. It is
more effective to allocate the funds by a formula directly to
grantees. There is over $207 million in carry-over of unused
budget authority in this program.
The $1 million requested in the 2004 budget for the section
184 loan guarantee program will provide an additional $27
million in loan guarantee authority. In this program there is
over $7 million in carry-over of unused budget authority.
The President's 2004 budget request for the Indian
Community Development Block Grant Program is $72.5 million.
This is identical to the 2003 request and an increase of $1.5
million over the amount appropriated in 2003.
The Department is requesting $10 million for the Native
Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program. This program addresses
the housing needs of Native Hawaiian families eligible to
reside on Hawaiian homelands. An interim regulation
implementing this new program was published in the Federal
Register on June 13, 2002. This allowed us to distribute funds
and implement the program while public comments are being
considered and incorporated into the final regulations.
The budget also requests that $1 million be allowed to the
Section 184(a) Native Hawaiian Loan Guarantee Program which
will provide up to $35 million in loan guarantee authority.
The President's budget request includes $3 million from
competitive grants to tribal colleges and universities, and
$2.4 million to assist Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian
serving institutions.
As of September 30, 2002, $885.6 million remains unexpended
in the NAHASDA program since fiscal year 1998. I would note
that grant recipients have two years from the initial awarding
of the grant to obligate 90 percent of such grant. Combining
all the production numbers reported for the first four years of
funding under NAHASDA there have been 25,819 new and
rehabilitated housing units constructed through the end of
fiscal year 2002.
The President's budget request for HUD's Indian housing,
community development, and education programs supports the
progress being made by tribes in providing housing and housing-
related activities in Indian country.
Thank you, again. I would be happy to answer any questions
you may have.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Before we proceed because I don't how long the Senators are
going to be able to stay when they come in, I would to yield to
Senator Murkowski, a new member with the committee, who
incidentally replaces a Senator Murkowski. Did you have an
opening statement, Senator Murkowski?
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
the opportunity to speak and to address the President's fiscal
year 2004 budget for Indian programs.
First, let me say that 119,000 Alaska Natives or American
Indians currently call Alaska home which makes it the highest
per capita concentration in the country. Many of these
residents live in communities lacking essential services such
as running water and basic health care.
As I am sure you are aware, construction and health care
costs in Alaska tend to be far higher than anywhere else in the
United States. Alaskans must also contend with poor weather
conditions in extreme remoteness, although you guys have had
worse weather here than we have up North. [Laughter.]
I will work to provide the needed funding for Indian
projects to address the discrepancy. I have no control over the
weather so far as I know.
While the President's budget reflects the need for
increased security both at home and abroad, I am encouraged
that overall Indian program funding has increased. I look
forward to working with the rest of the Committee and with the
various agencies to use this funding to further improve the
lives of the 4.1 million American Indians, Alaska Natives, and
Native Hawaiians across the country. Thank you for the
opportunity.
The Chairman. Thank you.
We will now proceed with your testimony, Ms. Vasques.
Welcome.
STATEMENT OF VICTORIA VASQUES, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF INDIAN
EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, DC, ACCOMPANIED
BY CATHIE L. MARTIN, GROUP LEADER, OFFICE OF INDIAN ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY EDUCATION; AND LONNA B. JONES, ACTING DIRECTOR,
ELEMENTARY, SECONDARY, AND VOCATIONAL ANALYSIS DIVISION, BUDGET
SERVICE, OFFICE OF DEPUTY SECRETARY
Ms. Vasques. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Mr.
Vice Chairman, and other members of the committee. I am pleased
to appear before you to discuss the fiscal year 2004 budget
request for the Department of Education programs that serve
American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians.
I request, Mr. Chairman, that my written statement be
entered for the record.
The Chairman. Your complete statement will be in the
record.
[Prepared testimony of Victoria Vasques appears in
appendix.]
Ms. Vasques. Thank you. Since this is my first opportunity
to testify before this committee, I would like to begin by
briefly mentioning my background. I am proud to say that my
understanding of the Indian culture and Indian issues began
with my upbringing, and more importantly with my father who
served for almost 20 years as tribal chairman of the San
Pasqual Band of Mission Indians.
I have a strong commitment to education, especially Indian
education, and have no doubt that this an historic time to be
in the education arena. This past September I was appointed as
the director of the Office of Indian Education. Prior to that,
I served as the Executive Director of the White House
Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities.
The principles of ``No Child Left Behind'' represent a
milestone for the education of over 600,000 Indian students.
The act focuses on improving academic achievement by ensuring
that all children can read by the end of third grade, improving
teacher quality through high quality professional development,
increasing accountability for student achievement, and placing
a stronger emphasis on teaching methods.
The 2004 request for the Department's Indian education
programs is $122.4 million. These programs include formula
grants to school districts, competitive special programs, and
national activities.
We are requesting $97.1 million for the Indian education
grants to local education agencies. This program is the
Department's principle vehicle for addressing the unique
educational and culturally-related needs of Indian children.
Grants supplement the regular school program, helping Indian
children improve their academic skills, raise their self-
confidence, and participate in enrichment programs and
activities that would otherwise be unavailable.
The requested level would provide an estimated $206 per
pupil payment for approximately 471,000 students including
41,000 students in BIA schools. Our request for special
programs for Indian children is $20 million; $10.8 million
would support demonstration grants that promote school
readiness for Indian preschool children and increase the
potential for learning among all Indian students.
In addition, the 2004 request will provide $9.1 million to
continue the American Indian Teachers Corps program, which
trains Indian college students to become teachers, places them
in schools with a concentration of Indian students, and
provides professional development and in-service support as
they begin teaching.
We are requesting $5.2 million for national activities
including research, evaluation, and data collection activities
related to Indian education. The Department developed a
comprehensive research agenda for Indian education through an
Indian consultative process. We are beginning a new large scale
study this year that will establish baseline data on academic
achievement and retention of American Indian and Alaska Native
students.
The fiscal year 2004 funds would be used to continue this
study as well as to continue research grants and data
collections initiated in earlier years.
In addition to the Indian education programs that I just
mentioned, which are administered by my office, the Department
also supports the education of Indians through several other
programs. My written statement describes our proposal for each
of them, but I would like to touch on a few examples.
The title I education for the disadvantaged program
provides supplemental education funding to local educational
agencies and schools to help some 15 million disadvantaged
students, including an estimated 250,000 Indian children, learn
at the same high standards as other students.
The Department is requesting $12.4 billion for title I
grants in fiscal year 2004, a 41 percent increase since 2001.
Under the statute, the BIA in outlying areas receive 1 percent
of title I grants, which is approximately $85 million.
Reading First is a comprehensive effort to implement the
findings of high quality, scientifically-based research on
reading and reading instruction. It is one of the
Administration's highest priorities for education. Providing
consistent support for reading success from the earliest age
has critically important benefits.
Under this formula program, the BIA will receive
approximately $5.25 million. The Higher Education Act for
Strengthening Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities
program authorizes grants that enable these institutions to
improve and expand their capacity to serve American Indian
students. Under the budget request, the Department would award
$19 million for activities to strengthen tribal colleges.
The Special Education Grants to States program provides
formula grants to meet the excess costs of providing special
education and related services to children with disabilities.
Under the budget request of $9.5 billion, the Department would
provide approximately $82.5 million to BIA to help serve
approximately 8,600 Indian students.
The 2004 budget request for Department of Education
programs serving Indians supports the President's overall goal
of ensuring educational opportunities for all students.
I thank you for the opportunity to appear before this
committee. I would be happy to answer any questions you may
have.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Before we go to our first round of questions, I would like
to invite Senator Dorgan to make any opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH
DAKOTA
Senator Dorgan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just briefly, I have been in an appropriations subcommittee
hearing that I have to return to. I have had a chance to review
much of the testimony for this morning. It probably is not
surprising that I think that the budget request for many of
these accounts is woefully inadequate.
For example, the proposal to take action that would
essentially close the United Tribes Technical College makes no
sense at all. Underfunding in a range of education, health
care, and housing accounts is a very serious mistake. Tribal
colleges which, in my judgment, are the core of some very
important progress on Indian reservations are going to see
additional funding problems as a result of this budget.
The hearing that I am attending on my appropriations
subcommittee, we hear exactly the same testimony. But with
respect to our Trust responsibilities for Native Americans, the
circumstances that exist in both housing, health care, and
education, I think are emergency circumstances. I think it's a
full blown emergency in many areas.
My hope is that as we work through this on this committee,
that we can make recommendations to both the authorizing and
appropriations committee, to begin making some significant
progress in these areas.
We have four Indian reservations in North Dakota. I have
visited them a great deal. I want to see us make significant
progress in dealing with the health care needs that exist that
are unmet, particularly the needs of children that are unmet.
We need to make progress dealing with the needs of these
children and education, Mr. Chairman.
I visited a school that had 150 kids with one water
fountain and two toilets. A little girl named Rosie Two Bears
looked at me and she said, ``Senator, will you help build us a
new school?'' She was sitting in a classroom whose desks were
one inch apart in a 90-year-old building, part of which had
been previously condemned.
Well, that's not the way to give a child a good start in
life. Every young child that walks through a classroom door
ought to be able to go into a room that we think is going to
give them a first rate education. That is not the case in many
areas and in particular some reservations these days.
So we have a bundle of challenges. No one is more acutely
aware of that than you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Inouye. Both
of you have provided significant leadership with this
committee. I appreciate being a part of this.
I regret that I can't stay for the entire hearing. I look
forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Inouye,
and my colleagues as well to see if we can't make some real
progress.
We have to turn back some of the recommendations of the
President's budget, build upon them, and make significant
investments in human potential in many of these very important
accounts.
Thank you for calling on me, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. You have been a very consistent
and strong voice in support of Indian country. I look forward
to working with you, particularly on finding a way we can keep
the United Tribes Technical College open. I think, as you do,
that it is extremely important.
As I said earlier, I am going to leave to go find a
medicine man.
I have a number of questions for each of you. I am going to
submit those and ask you to get those back in writing before me
before we close the hearing in a couple of weeks.
There is one I would like to ask Ms. Vasques because it is
something that has been on my mind for a good number of years.
You may not be prepared to answer it, but I would like you to
look into it.
Are you familiar with Fort Lewis College in Colorado? It is
a 4-year liberal arts college that is a State college?
Ms. Vasques. Somewhat, but I have not been there.
The Chairman. Well, it is the only State college in the
United States that gives free tuition for Indian students. I
think there are about 500 students there, if I am not mistaken.
Of course, it costs the State of Colorado about $5 or $6
million to reimburse the college to offset that free tuition
for Indian youngsters--which I support, by the way.
The College came into being because it had been a fort. It
was called Fort Lewis. It had been a fort in the old days. When
it was deactivated by the Federal Government, the land was
given to the State of Colorado on condition that they would
educate young Indian people and that there would be no cost for
tuition to do it. That has been going on. It is a very nice,
fine little school.
But almost all of the other Indian colleges get some
funding through a variety of sources, through Interior,
Education, Agriculture, or some other agencies. It is never
enough, by the way, as you know. But at least they get some.
I have been concerned for some time about that little State
college that gets no reimbursement whatsoever. I don't suppose
you are prepared to talk about it at all.
Ms. Vasques. I do not have an answer for you right now. But
I will look into it at the Department and see if that has ever
come up and if there has been a request from the Fort Lewis
College.
The Chairman. There never has been a request from Fort
Lewis College. But there has been a number of times from the
State government. They get off-set by the money that has to
come from the State. Every State is running a deficit this
year, as you know. I know that has become a bigger point of
contention.
About 15 or 18 years ago, somebody in the State legislature
ran a bill to revoke that reimbursement. Of course, they ran
head-on into the Federal Government who said, ``If you do that,
you are apt to lose the land because that was the original
agreement.''
So the State finds itself in this very uncomfortable
situation where they don't have the money to off-set it in many
cases, and yet they are obligated to by the Federal Government.
Could you try to see if you can find any information on
that to see if anything ever has been done through the
Education Department and supply that information to the
committee?
Ms. Vasques. Certainly.
[Material supplied follows:]
Tuition Waivers for Indian Students
We have no information that would indicate whether or not
the tuition waiver and State reimbursement for American Indian
students at Fort Lewis College are unique or whether other
colleges and States have similar policies. However, we are
aware that many institutions of higher education, foundations,
and corporations provide special scholarships for Indian
students. Information on specific scholarships can be found on
a variety of websites. For example, the American Indian College
Fund website includes one such listing at the following web
address: www.collegefund.org.
Ms. Vasques. Mr. Chairman, it might be a new initiative we
might want to pursue for my office, as well.
The Chairman. Well, I would appreciate it if that could be
done.
Ms. Vasques. Okay.
The Chairman. With that, I will submit questions and would
ask if Senator Inouye could continue with the hearing.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, sir.
Dr. Kincannon, I note that the Census numbers for Indian
country has grown considerably in the last two decades. I am
certain you are aware that tribes have different standards of
citizenship or enrollment. For example, in some tribes if one
can trace his ancestry to an original tribal roll, that would
suffice. In some tribes, there are blood quantum requirements.
If I should approach you and I said to you, ``I am a
Sioux,'' even if I am just one-fourth Sioux, what am I listed
as?
Mr. Kincannon. Mr. Chairman, you are listed in accordance
with how you respond. We don't have a way to individually quiz
people or to know the percent of blood or individual tribal
rules that apply that in a national context. We ask people to
identify their race, and if they are American Indian or Alaska
Native, to identify the tribal membership that predominates. We
accept their word. They are obliged by law to report honestly
to the best of their ability. We accept their word.
Senator Inouye. So if I am proud of my German ancestry, and
I respond German, that is what is listed.
Mr. Kincannon. You couldn't respond German to the racial
question.
Senator Inouye. Well, I mean to the ethnic question.
Mr. Kincannon. Yes.
Senator Inouye. You will be conducting your survey with
Native Hawaiians. What technique will you follow there?
Mr. Kincannon. You are speaking of the American Community
Survey?
Senator Inouye. Yes.
Mr. Kincannon. Yes; we will be conducting that survey on a
similar basis, but we have made special plans. We will conduct
a certain number of interviews in households throughout the
country every month if the full funding of that survey comes
about for fiscal year 2004.
We have made plans for special sampling provisions to
ensure coverage to the extent possible of this rather small
population that is important for us to cover. We have discussed
that with representatives of the community and with the
Advisory Committee to the Census on Native Hawaiians and
Pacific Islanders.
I will be visiting the Hawaiian homelands later this month.
I learn better if I can see it. I will be visiting with
community leaders and Hawaiian homelands in your State later
this month.
Senator Inouye. All political polling organizations have a
caveat saying, ``Three percent, plus or minus.'' What sort of
caveat do you have for your work?
Mr. Kincannon. Any survey result that is based on a
probability sample will have a range of error. The range of
error will depend on the sample size, the population size, and
the characteristic being measured.
I can provide some estimates of that for the record, if you
would like. But it will be an analogous kind of measure of a
plus or minus so many percentage points.
Senator Inouye. Your numbers are very important because
they not only impact upon economic development but on all the
programs that these other witnesses have mentioned. Often times
it is either per capita or per group. Your numbers are the
determinate.
Could you provide us with those variations?
Mr. Kincannon. We can provide you with whatever statistics
we have collected. We can be guided by the needs of the
committee to the extent feasible in shaping future data
collection and tabulation.
[Material to be supplied follows:]
Mr. Kincannon. We use either Confidence Interval (CI) or a
Coefficient of Variation (CV) for each data item we publish
from our surveys. The term ``margin of error'' has a variety of
meanings and is most commonly used by the media. There is a
direct relationship between margin of error and confidence
intervals, and it is synonymous with the ``plus or minus''
quantity in a confidence interval.
A confidence interval gives an estimated range of values
that, with some level of certainty, contains the value of the
estimate that would be obtained from the complete population.
The width of the confidence interval gives us some idea of how
certain we are about the estimate.
For example, from the American Community Survey (ACS), the
median age in Hawaii in 2001 was estimated at 36.7 years with a
confidence interval of +/- 0.2. This means that 90 percent of
the time the estimate of the median age would be between 36.5
and 36.7 years. The median household income in Hawaii in 2001
was $49,960 with a confidence interval of +/- $2,632, that is,
90 percent of the time the estimate of the median income will
be between $52,592 and $47,328.
The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is the ratio of the
standard error of the estimate to the value of the estimate. It
is usually expressed in terms of a percentage. The lower the CV
the higher the relative reliability of the estimate. The
estimates developed from a specific sample survey may differ
from the results of a comparable, complete coverage survey.
This difference is estimated by the standard error.
The Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM), shows the number
of manufacturing employees in Hawaii for 2001 at 14,382 with a
CV of 6 percent. This means that there is about 95 percent
confidence that the interval, 12,656 to 16,108, includes the
true value the estimate is approximating.
Senator Inouye. I would like to ask Ms. Martin a few
questions. I have one question, and I may submit the rest of my
questions.
We were made to understand that there were two new tribal
colleges that will begin operations this year. We also
understood that the Department of the Interior is aware of
these colleges, but no funds were requested. Why is that?
Ms. Martin. Sir, I am not aware of the two new tribal
colleges. I don't know right now why funds were not requested
for them. I will check into that.
Senator Inouye. I will give you the names. I will submit
them to you.
Ms. Martin. Thank you.
According to press reports, in her testimony before the
Senate Energy Committee, Secretary Norton indicated that the
increase in funding in the budget for Trust reform will come at
the cost of reductions in funding in other department programs
for Indians. Have you heard that?
Ms. Martin. I was not specifically aware of her statement
at that hearing, but I have heard in press reports that
statement was made.
Senator Inouye. Well, her testimony has been rather widely
disseminated. However, it seems clear that existing problems
with the Trust management have been caused, not by Indian
beneficiaries, but by the Government. This goes back in
history.
Under these circumstances, do you think it is fair to take
funds from other Indian programs to address a problem that may
be the Government's sole making?
Ms. Martin. We are in a position now where we must fund our
Trust programs. We are doing our very best to prevent the
funding of those programs from affecting our other tribal
services and programs. I regret that to some extent our tribal
services programs may be affected. We are doing everything we
can to minimize that.
Senator Inouye. Well, as you know, I cast my vote in favor
of Mr. Swimmer because we want this matter resolved as soon as
possible. I hope everything turns out well.
You have included in your request $15 million to reorganize
the Office of the Special Trustee for new Trust offices located
in the field. Do you have duties that have been set forth for
these Trust offices?
Ms. Martin. We do have some duties that have been set forth
for the Trust officers. Donna Erwin, the Acting Special Trustee
for American Indians, is accompanying me today. I will defer to
her to answer questions you might have about that.
Ms. Erwin. Mr. Chairman, we do have duties. We have
position descriptions.
The main purpose of putting fiduciary trust officers in the
field is to be able to give the beneficiaries one point of
contact. We are not shifting them all over within the Agency
trying to answer questions. It also will avoid the disruption
of the day-to-day operations of the people that are performing
the operation duties.
The other thing is that these people will be there to add
an additional resource to the BIA and expand resources on
fiduciary duties to make sure we are meeting our
responsibilities and we are representing those beneficiaries,
as well as looking out for the land as we are moving forward in
preserving and conserving land.
Senator Inouye. Have you selected these Trust officers?
Ms. Erwin. No; we have not.
Senator Inouye. Do you have any requirements or standards
that you have set for these new officers?
Ms. Erwin. Yes; we have. We have been working with the BIA.
We have had meetings, in fact, as recently as last week, on
setting out standards and setting out training for both BIA and
the Trust officers in: ``How do you represent the loyalty to
that beneficiary? How do you represent and make sure that you
are meeting your Trust responsibilities?''
So one of the things that we want to be able to do is look
for people that have a fiduciary background, but in addition to
that, to be able to provide this training. We have even
discussed holding these training programs at tribal colleges so
that we can develop Indian people to be able to come into these
positions.
Senator Inouye. Have you advertised this in Indian country?
Ms. Erwin. Pardon me?
Senator Inouye. Have you advertised the need for these
Trust officers?
Ms. Erwin. No; we are just completing the reorganization
and those job descriptions. They will be advertised throughout
Indian country. We have discussed including them in the
American Bar, the Indian Bar, and tribal colleges. We do want
to be able to bring, as we said, the Indian people trained into
those types of positions.
Senator Inouye. I note in your budget request that you have
established a cap for historical accounting at $130 million.
What is the justification for this number?
Ms. Erwin. I don't believe that is a cap. I think that is
the request for this fiscal year; $100 million of that would be
for the individual Indian historical accounting and $30 million
of that would be toward tribal.
We do not have anyone here that can talk to the specifics
today, but if you have additional questions we can certainly
get those back to you in writing.
Senator Inouye. But will you be able to spend more than
that if you do not have it?
Ms. Erwin. I would like to defer that to the experts in
that field.
Senator Inouye. When you set a cap limitation of this sort,
how can the Secretary fulfill the requirements of court orders?
Ms. Erwin. I believe, if you refer to the plan that was
submitted on January 6, it will outline how that funding would
be spent during fiscal year 2004. As I said, I would like to
give you details on that in writing so that we can give you the
specifics.
Senator Inouye. This next question I do not expect a
response, but I would hope you can do it in writing.
I would like to know what we can do in Congress to assist
the Department and the Administration in reaching a settlement
in the case of Cobell?
Ms. Erwin. I think we would appreciate those efforts. I
believe, as the Secretary has previously testified, there is a
disparity in numbers currently. One of the things that you will
be seeing in that historical accounting expenditures, would be
to try to document some of the higher dollar amounts so that
figure could become closer to something that we could settle.
So I think everyone would appreciate moving toward that.
Senator Inouye. Ms. Martin, I will be submitting many more
questions, if I may.
Ms. Martin. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. Doctor, about 10 years ago the committee
took a trip to Alaska. Like most of our trips to Indian
country, the picture is rather sad because the statistics and
what you see is not pretty unless you travel to just casino
places.
For example, in Alaska we were told that at that time,
which was about 1990, of the men in the age group of 18-23, the
suicide rate was 14 times greater than the national average.
Are you aware of those numbers?
Mr. Grim. Not those specific numbers, sir. But yes, I am
aware of the disparity between suicide rates in our population
and the general population.
Senator Inouye. What is it now?
Mr. Grim. It is 2.7 percent higher right now in our
population. It varies by tribe and by region. But the overall
average is 2.7 percent greater.
Senator Inouye. That is for all age groups? In other words,
it has improved?
Mr. Grim. It has gotten better. There is still the
disparity. We are not happy with that.
Senator Inouye. Is that for Alaskan Natives or all Indians?
Mr. Grim. That number was for all Indians.
Senator Inouye. So it is 2\1/2\ times the national norm?
And the numbers that you gave on diabetes is the same as
the national norm?
Mr. Grim. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. Seven times.
Mr. Grim. The diabetes rates are 2.7 times greater.
Senator Inouye. We were told about 10 years ago that if an
Indian man reached the age of 50, the odds were that he would
be diabetic. At least half were diabetic. Is that the ratio
today?
Mr. Grim. I can't answer that specifically. But our rates
are still high. We are not expecting a decrease in the near
future. We have seen some indicators, as I mentioned in my oral
statement, that would lead us to believe that in the not-to-
distant future, the special moneys that have been put out to
tribes in grants, are making an impact on the prevention side.
We are seeing a lot of the clinical markers and laboratory
markers that are increasing in the right direction. But it is
going to take years before the actual diabetes prevalence or
incidence starts to shift in the right direction.
Senator Inouye. The Census Bureau provided us some
information of the number of homes with telephones and the
number of homes with toilet facilities. Obviously it is very
much lower than the American norm.
What sort of health impact would that have on Indian
country?
Mr. Grim. It has a huge impact on Indian country. In the
early days of Indian Health Service, as we saw the numbers
increase in the number of homes that we were able to install
safe water and sanitation facilities, we saw a corresponding
decrease in gastrointestinal and neonatal deaths. So it makes a
huge impact.
We still have huge disparities in the number of Indian
homes that don't have safe water. Our recent statistics show
approximately 7-8 percent of Indian homes still do not have
safe water supplies. The corresponding U.S. rate, I believe, is
around 1 percent. So we still have a huge disparity there. That
is one of the reasons we are very excited about the $21 million
increase that has been proposed for our 2004 budget in
sanitation facilities. It will help us to make a greater impact
in that arena. But we still have needs that are far greater
than that, as you are aware.
Senator Inouye. $81 million will make a greater impact.
What do you mean by ``greater impact?'' Is that 10 percent or 5
percent?
Mr. Grim. We have some specific numbers for you, Senator.
The numbers that we would be able to serve with that
increase in funding is about 765 additional first service
homes.
Senator Inouye. Six hundred. Out of how many?
Mr. Grim. About 21,500 that we have on our list now.
Senator Inouye. Six hundred out of 20,000.
Mr. Grim. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. At that rate it might take us 30 years.
Mr. Grim. It would take a number of years. Right now we
estimate our unmet need in that arena for sanitation facilities
as $1.6 billion. But there is a number that are unfeasible. We
look at the ones that are feasible as costing around $900
million.
Senator Inouye. The American populace has become accustomed
to different color ratings--dangerous, safe, acceptable, et
cetera. Where would you place this? Unacceptable, dangerous, or
moderate acceptable?
Mr. Grim. I think, Senator, for those locations that have
some of the greatest disparities, the families, and the people
that have to live with them, would place them as unacceptable.
I know the Secretary in one of his recent trips to Alaska
also was able to see some of the needs that the Alaskan Natives
have relative to safe water and sewer. He was very supportive
of our $20 million increase that is being proposed in the
President's budget.
Senator Inouye. Are there any plans to limit eligibility
for health care services to only those enrolled members, of
federally-recognized tribes?
Dr. Grim. No, sir; we have no such plans.
Senator Inouye. Are there any plans to privatize or out-
source Indian health care services?
Mr. Grim. If you refer to privatization as in the business
private sector, we have no such plans. But as you are aware,
through Public Law 93-638, anytime the tribe wishes to take
over their health care programs or operations from us, we are
fully supportive of that. In a sense, we look at that as
privatization to the local community. We are not looking for
any great privatization to the private business sector, but we
are still very supportive of tribes taking over their own
programs.
Senator Inouye. Two words have become very important in the
American vocabulary--homeland security. Yesterday, the U.S.
Senate established a new Appropriations Subcommittee on
Homeland Security.
Has your Agency begun any negotiations or discussions with
Indian country as to what can be done to prepare Indian country
for emergency response to some of these problems?
Mr. Grim. There are a couple of things that have been going
on around that, Senator. When the Centers for Disease Control
and the Health Resources and Services Administration put their
grants out around preparedness, some of our staff were involved
in the reviewing of those grants and ensuring that the American
Indian and Alaska Native tribes were included as part of the
State planning and implementation process. A lot of comments
went back indicating a need to ensure that there was inclusion.
The other thing we have been hearing is anecdotal evidence
from a number of tribes relative to the resources necessary to
ensure that all of our tribal homelands are safe and secure.
This also includes the special needs of those on the borders,
the U.S./Mexico border and the United States/Canadian border,
as well as some of the port tribes that are on or near ports.
One of the things that the Indian Health Service is looking
at doing in the near future, is working with the new Department
of Homeland Security. I know that our two Departments, HHS and
Homeland Security, will work closely to coordinate things.
One of the things the Indian Health Service is doing above
and beyond that is we are planning in the spring for a
conference to be held with the tribes. That conference will be
looking at homeland security issues and general security
issues. In essence, we are trying to get prepared to work with
tribes, to hear what they have to say, and where they think we,
as a health care system, tribal health care systems, and urban
health care systems, can fit into the homeland security arena.
We don't have a set date right now. We are looking at the
spring. We have some tribal organization representatives that
will be helping us plan that agenda.
Senator Inouye. Would I be correct in suggesting that there
are no tribal or IHS hospitals or clinics that are presently
prepared to cope with bioterrorism or chemical attacks?
Mr. Grim. No; I wouldn't go that far to say that there are
none prepared. In fact, most of our hospitals and clinics do
get accredited by an organization called the Joint Commission
on the Accreditation of Health Care Organizations, or other
similar external accrediting bodies.
Part of that process requires that they all have a disaster
preparedness plan that they practice on a regular basis. We
have gone further with the development at both headquarters and
regional levels to develop what are called ``Continuity of
Operations'' plans to ensure that if any of our offices are
shut down, we are able to operate.
So I think that much like the rest of the Nation, the
Indian Health Service and Indian tribes are in a better place
than they were 1 year or two ago relative to that sort of
preparedness. There is still a long way to go and a lot that
needs to be done.
Senator Inouye. A few years ago one of the proudest moments
of the Health Service was to announce that infant mortality in
Indian country has now become equal to the national norm. What
is it now?
Mr. Grim. Right now our ratio is just slightly above that,
1.2. It is a little bit higher.
Senator Inouye. But it is still within range?
Mr. Grim. Yes; very close.
Senator Inouye. Now, if I may go to housing, you have
testified that approximately 38 percent of all Indian housing
funds appropriated since the beginning of NAHASDA have remained
unspent. Did I hear wrong?
Mr. Russell. Actually, that percentage represents unspent
funds since 1998. So not since the beginning of NAHASDA which
was 1996.
Senator Inouye. Since 1998?
Mr. Russell. Yes.
Senator Inouye. Are the tribes aware of this?
Mr. Russell. I believe they are. What we are trying to do
is work more diligently to collect tribe-by-tribe data,
actually on the obligations status of those funds. As you know,
it is an unexpended amount of money. Maybe much of that money
has already been obligated. So we are trying to ascertain how
much of it has been obligated and break that down by tribes so
we can have a better idea of where the tribes stand on that.
Senator Inouye. When were these tribes notified that we had
these funds were available for obligation? I was told
yesterday; is that correct?
Mr. Russell. I am not exactly sure when they were notified,
sir. I can look into that.
Senator Inouye. I have been on the Appropriations Committee
now for over 30 years. So I am well aware that in the process
you begin with what you consider to be priorities and then by
the time it gets through your Department and goes to OMB, you
may be lucky if you have half.
For the 2004 budget request, if I may ask Ms. Vasques, some
45 education programs will be eliminated; is that correct?
Ms. Vasques. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. Now, in your budget request, did you
request that they be eliminated?
Ms. Vasques. Yes; in keeping with the President's
priorities, they looked at many of our programs that have been
in existence. I think the exact number is 45 that were targeted
for elimination.
Senator Inouye. Subject to the President's priorities.
Ms. Vasques. Title I, special education.
Senator Inouye. What were your priorities? Would you have
wanted those programs to continue?
Ms. Vasques. I am not familiar with all 45 of them, but I
know for the Office of Indian Education, which is where I am
the biggest advocate, I constantly am at the table to make sure
our priorities are heard in the Office of Indian Education.
Senator Inouye. So as far as your program, you don't think
you are wasting money?
Ms. Vasques. We are not wasting money. We would like some
more money. We have $122 million in the Office of Indian
Education and approximately $97 million of that goes to the
local educational agencies that are serving our Indian students
in the public schools.
Senator Inouye. In order to carry out your mission in the
proper fashion, how much more money would this Congress have to
appropriate?
Ms. Vasques. To the Office of Indian Education?
Senator Inouye. Yes.
Ms. Vasques. I wasn't prepared to answer that question. I
think the exact amount we are asking for is $122 million. I am
shooting for that in my budget.
Senator Inouye. You are requesting that because you were
told to request that, or because you think it is enough?
Ms. Vasques. We worked together within the Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education. We sat down and focused on
our needs.
Senator Inouye. Do you think that amount is enough?
Ms. Vasques. Well, for the Department of Education, yes, it
is enough. If you are asking me personally, I can always
advocate for more.
Senator Inouye. What is the dropout rate for high school
students now?
Ms. Vasques. I can't recall the dropout rate for American
Indian students in high school.
Senator Inouye. Is it worse than the national norm?
Ms. Vasques. Yes, it is. I am sure I have it here in my
notes. I can get that exact number for you for the record and
submit it to the committee.
[Material to be submitted follows:]
Dropout Rates of American Indians
Data pulled together from the 2000 Census indicate that
about 16.1 percent of 16 to 19 year old American Indians are
not enrolled in, and did not graduate from, high school. In
comparison, the rate is 8.2 percent for whites, 11.7 percent
for blacks, 21 percent for Hispanics, and 9.8 percent for the
general population. The percentages are based on responses from
individuals who identified themselves with a single race and do
not include those who identified themselves with more than one
race.
Senator Inouye. You would like to reduce that dropout rate,
wouldn't you?
Ms. Vasques. Absolutely.
Senator Inouye. At least to make it equal the national
norm?
Ms. Vasques. We would like to have no dropouts.
Senator Inouye. Do you think this program can resolve that?
Ms. Vasques. Well, I think it is working in concert with
many of our programs at the Department--the Safe and Drug Free
Schools, Title I, and other school improvement programs.
Senator Inouye. If I may, I would like to submit questions
not only for myself but on behalf of the other members. Can we
secure a response from you in 2 weeks? Would that be okay?
Ms. Vasques. Yes.
Senator Inouye. With that, and on behalf of the chairman of
the committee, I thank you very much for your presence here
today and your answers. Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 11:26 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to
reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Deborah J. Daniels, Assistant Attorney General, Office of
Justice Programs, Department of Justice
Chairman Campbell, Vice Chairman Inouye, and members of the
committee: The Department of Justice appreciates the opportunity to
submit this statement to the committee to discuss the Justice
Department's proposed fiscal year 2004 budget priorities for Indian
country. As the committee is aware, and as we at the Justice Department
are aware, the needs of Indian tribal governments in combating crime
and violence continue to be great. As the Department stated to this
committee last year, the President and the Attorney General remain
committed to addressing the most serious law enforcement problems in
Indian country, including substance abuse, domestic violence, and other
violent crimes, and to ensuring that Indian tribes are full partners in
this effort.
The Justice Department's Office of Justice Programs [OJP] continues
to be the Department's primary resource for funding and other
assistance in Indian country. Through OJP and its component bureaus,
the Department identifies emerging criminal and juvenile justice system
issues, develops new ideas and tests promising approaches, evaluates
program results, collects statistics, and disseminates these findings
and other information to Federal, State, and local units of government,
Indian tribes, and criminal justice professionals. OJP works to prevent
and control crime and help crime victims by providing funding to and
assisting State and local governments, Indian tribes, law enforcement,
prosecutors, courts, corrections, and other service providers.
During the past fiscal year, OJP continued its support to American
Indian and Alaskan Native tribes. OJP has done this through grants to
support innovative approaches to breaking the cycle of drugs,
delinquency, crime and violence and through technical assistance and
training to provide tribal leaders with the knowledge and skills
required to address these issues.
Many of the committee members are aware of OJP's efforts with the
Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement, or
CIRCLE, Project. As was discussed with this committee last year, the
CIRCLE Project recognizes that the most effective solutions to the
problems experienced by tribal communities come from the tribes
themselves. The three tribes that participate in the CIRCLE Project
have each undertaken efforts to combat crime and violence. These tribes
designed their own strategies, while we provided support through direct
funding, training, and technical assistance.
With the conclusion of another fiscal year we continue to see
results from the three CIRCLE Project tribes. We at OJP are hopeful
that the lessons obtained through the CIRCLE Project will be taken as
both examples and possible roadmaps for other tribes to follow as they
attempt to deal with their own unique needs and requirements. For
example, gang activity and domestic violence continue to be a major
problem for many tribal communities. Under the CIRCLE Project, the
Oglala Sioux have seen reduced gang activity and domestic violence
since implementing CIRCLE. We believe that the methods followed by the
Oglala Sioux can be used by other similarly situated tribes. Juvenile
delinquency also continues to plague tribal communities. Under the
CIRCLE project the Northern Cheyenne continue to make progress in this
area with several promising youth programs. Meanwhile the Pueblo of
Zuni continues its efforts to adopt community policing practices to its
community.
The Administration's continued commitment to American Indian
communities is reflected in the President's Fiscal Year 2004 request of
$50.7 million for OJP tribal programs, part of the Department's overall
effort to assist tribal governments in addressing criminal justice
issues in Indian country. This plan will allow us to continue most of
our tribal programs near fiscal year 2003 levels.
As the committee is aware, many of OJP's tribal programs focus on
alcohol and drug abuse, which continue to be major problems in Indian
country. During the last fiscal year, OJP's Bureau of Justice
Assistance [BJA] issued a solicitation and awarded grants for the
Indian Alcohol and Substance Abuse Demonstration Program, an effort to
improve the enforcement of alcohol and drug laws in tribal lands and
provide treatment and other services to American Indian or Alaskan
Native offenders with substance abuse problems. Under this initiative,
recipients are focusing on law enforcement, services, or both. For
fiscal year 2003, we received $4.9 million for this initiative. For
fiscal year 2004, the President requested an additional $4.9 to
continue the effort.
BJA will also address the issue of drug abuse in Indian country
through continued assistance to Indian communities under its Drug
Courts Program, which provides funds for local drug courts that provide
specialized treatment and rehabilitation for non-violent substance
abusing offenders. While this is not solely a tribal program, OJP has
always ensured that tribal governments were included as Drug Court
grantees. Last fiscal year alone, we awarded 16 Drug Court grants
totaling over $2.7 million to Indian tribes. In the last 2 years, OJP
has awarded nearly $6 million in drug court grants to tribal
governments and has established 37 new drug courts in Indian country.
We anticipate that American Indian and Alaskan Native tribes will
continue to apply for drug court funding again this year and that they
will be well-represented among new grantees. For fiscal year 2003, we
received $44.7 million for the overall Drug Courts Program, and for
fiscal year 2004 we have requested $68 million for the overall program.
Further, Mr. Chairman, it continues to be a sad fact that American
Indian and Alaskan Native women still suffer disproportionately from
domestic violence and sexual assault. Since 1994, our Office on
Violence Against Women [OVW] has administered the STOP Violence Against
Indian Women Discretionary Grants Program, which support tribes'
efforts to investigate and prosecute violent crimes against women and
to strengthen services for victims of these crimes. During fiscal year
2002, OJP awarded 43 grants totaling over $5 million under this
program. In fiscal year 2003, we received $9.1 million for this effort.
For fiscal year 2004, we have requested an additional $9.1 million.
During fiscal year 2002, we were pleased to launch the Tribal
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Coalitions Grant Program, a new
program authorized under the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 that is
designed to help non-profit tribal coalitions improve systemic and
community responses to victims in Indian country. We have high hopes
that this program will help tribal communities identify gaps in
services so that no domestic violence or sexual assault victims fall
through the cracks. During fiscal year 2002, OJP awarded six grants
totaling over $1.7 million under this initiative. For fiscal year 2003,
we received $3.3 million for this effort. For fiscal year 2004, we have
requested the same amount.
For fiscal year 2004, we are requesting a total of $20.1 million
for all of our tribal Violence Against Women Act programs, virtually
maintaining the fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003 funding levels.
Similarly, OJP's Office for Victims of Crime [OVC] works with
Indian tribes to provide services for crime victims in areas that are
often under-served. OVC provides direct support through its Victim
Assistance in Indian Country Discretionary Grant Program. Tribes can
use these funds for many different services, including emergency
shelters, mental health counseling, and immediate crisis intervention.
This program is supported through the Crime Victims Fund, which comes
from Federal criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalty fees, and
special assessments. Further, and aside from funds that will become
available through OVC's Crime Victim Fund, the President has also
requested an additional $1.6 million specifically to support victim
assistance programs in Indian country for fiscal year 2004.
OVC also administers grants under the Children's Justice Act to
improve the investigation, prosecution, and handling of child abuse
cases in Indian country. Tribal communities nationwide have used these
grants for activities such as training law enforcement and court staff
on how to work with child abuse victims, and establishing protocols for
handling these cases. We are requesting $3 million for this program in
fiscal year 2004, maintaining the current funding level of $2.9 million
received for fiscal year 2003.
During fiscal year 2004, as during fiscal years 2003 and 2002, OJP
continues its work to help American Indian and Alaskan Native youth
through the Tribal Youth Program, which is administered by OJP's Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP]. The Tribal
Youth Program supports accountability-based sanctions, training for
juvenile court judges, strengthening family bonds, substance abuse
counseling, and other efforts to improve justice operations in Indian
country. Further, with OJJDP funding, American Indian Development
Associates provides training and technical assistance to Tribal Youth
Program grantees. Also, OJP will continue to dedicate funds to support
tribal-related juvenile justice research activities. For fiscal year
2003, OJP received $12.3 million for this program. For fiscal year
2004, the President has requested $12.5 million to allow these efforts
to continue.
In addition to focusing on specific offender or victim populations,
tribes have expressed a need for overall improvement of their justice
systems. Tribal justice systems have existed for hundreds of years, but
lately their workload has grown markedly, while the available resources
have not. OJP has worked to help ease this burden through the Tribal
Courts Assistance Program, which assists tribes in the development,
enhancement, and continuing operation of tribal judicial systems. It
provides resources to help tribes sustain safer and more peaceful
communities. For fiscal year 2003, we received $7.9 million for this
effort. For fiscal year 2004, we have requested $5.9 million.
Another important tool to help tribes enhance their law enforcement
and criminal justice systems is technology. This past September, OJP's
Bureau of Justice Assistance [BJA] awarded funds to the National Center
for Rural Law Enforcement for the first phase of the Inter-tribal
Integrated Justice Pilot Project, a part of OJP's Information
Technology Initiative. The Inter-tribal Integrated Justice Pilot
Project will increase electronic information sharing among the Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe, and Pueblo of Zuni in order to improve 24-hour
emergency services and enforcement of drunk driving violations and
protection orders. We look forward to continuing this project and to
providing training and technical assistance to other tribes that seek
to undertake similar efforts.
One of the many challenges that American Indian and Alaskan Native
tribes face is collecting reliable data on arrests, victimizations, and
other criminal justice-related issues. Last year OJP awarded a grant to
the Justice Research and Statistics Association to create the Tribal
Justice Statistics Assistance Center, which became operational late
last month. The Center will work with tribal justice agencies to
develop and enhance their ability to generate and use criminal and
civil justice statistics. It will provide support specifically tailored
to the tribal community requesting assistance. Among other activities,
the Center will offer tribes training in the use of criminal justice
data to help inform. justice decisionmaking in Indian country.
Not only will improved data gathering help tribes make better
policy decisions, it will also help them to better share and receive
information with the broader criminal justice community, as well as to
participate in national criminal justice data gathering efforts, such
as the National Incident Based Reporting System [NIBRS], the Uniform
Crime Reporting [UCR] program, and other data collections related to
corrections, criminal victimization, court processing, and juvenile
justice. In addition, the Center will provide for tribal participation
and access to national law enforcement data systems, such as the
National Criminal Information Center [NCIC] and the National Protection
Order File.
For fiscal year 2003, we targeted $2 million in Bureau of Justice
Statistics [BJS] funds for the Tribal Justice Statistics Assistance
Center and other tribal-related statistics activities, maintaining the
current funding level. For fiscal year 2004, we plan to dedicate a
similar amount.
Through OJP's National Institute of Justice [NIJ], we at OJP
continue to engage in a number of research efforts to better understand
criminal and juvenile justice problems in Indian country and the many
challenges tribal justice agencies face. We consider this type of
research critical to helping us understand what approaches and
techniques will best serve tribal governments as they work to improve
conditions within their communities. In the past this research has
produced valuable resources such as Policing on American Indian
Reservations, which was developed through a grant to the John F.
Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. We consider
continuing these types of projects an essential part of our assistance
to tribal governments.
Mr. Chairman, so far I have outlined some of our broader efforts to
work with American Indian and Alaskan Native tribes, but there is also
a need for day-to-day assistance. In September 2000, with OJP support,
the National Tribal Justice Resource Center opened its doors. Located
in Boulder, Colorado, the Resource Center is operated by the National
American Indian Court Judges Association and provides tribal justice
systems with assistance that is comparable to that available to Federal
and state court systems. The Resource Center offers onsite training and
technical assistance, a calendar of seminars and conferences, and a
free searchable data base of tribal court opinions. It also features a
``justice system mentoring project,'' which partners a developing
tribal court with a more experienced one. The Resource Center makes
information available through a toll-free number [1-877/976-8572] and a
comprehensive searchable website [www.tribalresourcecenter.org]. OJP
plans to continue our support of this project in fiscal year 2004.
Mr. Chairman, Attorney General Ashcroft has pledged to honor our
Federal trust responsibility and to work with sovereign Indian Nations
on a government-to-government basis. The Attorney General, the Justice
Department, and OJP will honor this commitment and continue to assist
tribal justice systems in their effort to promote safe communities. We
also recognize that the most effective solutions to the problems facing
tribes come from the tribes themselves, and that our role is to help
the tribes develop and implement their own law enforcement and criminal
justice strategies. We are confident that our current activities and
our fiscal year 2004 proposed budget reflect these priorities. This
concludes my statement.
Mr. Chairman, I have attached a budget chart to assist the
committee, and I would welcome the opportunity to answer any questions
you or members of the committee may have.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.128
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.129
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.130
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.131
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.132
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.133
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.134
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.135
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.136
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.137
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.138
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.139
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.140
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.141
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.142
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.143
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.144
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.145
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.146
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.147
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.148
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.149
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.150
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.151
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.152
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.153
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.154
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.155
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.156
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.157
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.158
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.159
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.160
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.161
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.162
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.163
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.164
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.165
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.166
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.167
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.168
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.169
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.170
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.171
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.172
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.173
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.174
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.175
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.176
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.177
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.178
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.179
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.180
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.181
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.182
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.183
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.184
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.185
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.186
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.187
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.188
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.189
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.190
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.191
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.192
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.193
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.194
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.195
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.196
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.197
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.198
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.199
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.200
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.201
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.202
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.203
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.204
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.205
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.206
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.207
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.208
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.209
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.210
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.211
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.212
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.213
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.214
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.215
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.216
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.217
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.218
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.219
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.220
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.221
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.222
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.223
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.224
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.225
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.226
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.227
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.228
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.229
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.230
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.231
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.232
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.233
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.234
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.235
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.236
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.237
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.238
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.239
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.240
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.241
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.242
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.243
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.244
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.245
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.246
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.247
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.248
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.249
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.250
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.251
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.252
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.253
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.254
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.255
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.256
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.257
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.258
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.259
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.260
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.261
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.262
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.263
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.264
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.265
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.266
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.267
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.268
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.269
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.270
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.271
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.272
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.273
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.274
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.275
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.276
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.277
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.278
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.279
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.280
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.281
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.282
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.283
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.284
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.285
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.286
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.287
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.288
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.289
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.290
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.291
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.292
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.293
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.294
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.295
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.296
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.297
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.298
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.299
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.300
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.301
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.302
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.303
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.304
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.305
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.306
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.307
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.308
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.309
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.310
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.311
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.312
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.313
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.314
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.315
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.317
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.318
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.319
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.320
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.321
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.322
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.323
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.324
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.325
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.326
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.327
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.329
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.330
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.331
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.332
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.333
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.334
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.335
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.336
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.337
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.338
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.339
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.340
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.341
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.342
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.343
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.344
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.345
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.346
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.347
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.348
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.349
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.350
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.351
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.352
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.353
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.354
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.355
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.356
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.357
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.358
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.359
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.360
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.361
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.362
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.363
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.364
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.365
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.366
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.367
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.368
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.369
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.370
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.371
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.372
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.373
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.374
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.375
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.376
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.377
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.378
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.379
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.380
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.381
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.382
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.383
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.384
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.385
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.386
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.387
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.388
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.389
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.390
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.391
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.392
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.393
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.394
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.395
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.396
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.397
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.398
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.399
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.400
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.401
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.402
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.403
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.404
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.405
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.406
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.407
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.408
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.409
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.410
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.411
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.412
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.413
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.414
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.415
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.416
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.417
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.418
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.419
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.420
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.421
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.422
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.423
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.424
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.426
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.427
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.428
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.429
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.430
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.431
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.432
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.433
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.434
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.435
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.436
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.437
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.438
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.439
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.440
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.441
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.442
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.443
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.445
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.446
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.447
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.448
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.449
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.450
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.451
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.452
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.453
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.557
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.558
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.559
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.560
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.561
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.562
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.563
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.564
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.565
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.566
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.567
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.568
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.569
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.570
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.571
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.572
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.454
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.455
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.456
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.457
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.458
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.459
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.460
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.461
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.462
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.463
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.464
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.465
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.466
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.467
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.468
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.469
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.470
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.471
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.472
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.473
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.474
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.475
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.476
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.477
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.478
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.479
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.480
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.481
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.482
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.483
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.484
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.485
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.486
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.487
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.488
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.489
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.490
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.491
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.492
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.493
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.495
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.496
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.497
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.498
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.499
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.500
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.501
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.502
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.503
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.504
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.505
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.506
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.507
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.508
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.509
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.510
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.511
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.512
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.513
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.514
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.515
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.516
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.517
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.518
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.519
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.520
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.521
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.522
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.523
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.524
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.525
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.526
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.527
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.528
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.529
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.530
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.531
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.532
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.533
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.534
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.535
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.536
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.537
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.538
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.539
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.540
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.541
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.542
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.543
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.544
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.545
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.546
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.547
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.548
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.549
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.550
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.551
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.552
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.553
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.554
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.555
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5423.556