[Senate Hearing 108-312]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-312
TRIBAL GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS TO THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
S. 578
TO AMEND THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 TO INCLUDE INDIAN TRIBES
AMONG THE ENTITIES CONSULTED WITH RESPECT TO ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY
THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY
__________
JULY 30, 2003
WASHINGTON, DC
89-143 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.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
S. 578, text of.................................................. 2
Statements:
Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii.............. 45
Bennett, Audrey, president, Prairie Island Indian Community
of Minnesota............................................... 30
Edwards, Gary, chief executive officer, National Native
American Law Enforcement Association....................... 50
Filler, Josh, director, Office of State and Local Government
Coordination, Department of Homeland Security.............. 26
Hall, Tex, president, National Congress of American Indians.. 47
Heffelfinger, Thomas B., U.S. attorney, State of Minnesota,
on behalf of the Department of Justice..................... 22
Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 1
Johnson, Roland E., Governor, Pueblo of Laguna............... 33
Juan-Saunders, Vivian, chairperson, Tohono O'odham Nation of
Arizona.................................................... 38
Old Person, Earl, chief and tribal council member, Blackfeet
Tribal Business Council of Montana......................... 36
Raub, William F., principal deputy assistant secretary,
Office of Public Health Emergency Preparedness, Department
of Health and Human Resources.............................. 27
Sanders, Tim, emergency operations coordinator, Gila River
Indian Community Office of Emergency Management, Gila River
Indian Community........................................... 52
Virden, Terry, director, BIA, Department of the Interior..... 25
Windy Boy, Alvin, chairman, Chippewa Cree Business Committee
of Montana................................................. 40
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Bennett, Audrey (with attachment)............................ 60
Edwards, Gary (with attachment).............................. 63
Filler, Josh................................................. 127
Hall, Tex.................................................... 131
Heffelfinger, Thomas B....................................... 137
Johnson, Roland E. (with attachment)......................... 148
Juan-Saunders, Vivian (with attachment)...................... 167
Old Person, Earl............................................. 183
Sanders, Tim (with attachment)............................... 187
Raub, William F.............................................. 59
Viarrial, Jacob, Governor, Publo of Pojoaque, New Mexico..... 199
Virden, Terry................................................ 202
Windy Boy, Alvin............................................. 204
TRIBAL GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS TO THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m. in room
216, Hart Senate Building, Hon. Daniel Inouye (vice chairman of
the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Inouye and Akaka.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII,
VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Inouye. The Committee on Indian Affairs meets this
afternoon to receive testimony on S. 578, a bill to amend the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 to include Indian tribal
governments among the entities consulted with respect to
activities carried out by the Secretary of the Department of
Homeland Security.
[Text of S. 578 follows:]
Senator Inouye. In the current act, there is a definition
of local governments which, as we all know, are political
subdivisions of the States, but this definition of local
government also includes Indian tribes, so one of the
objectives of S. 578 is to remove Indian tribes from the
definition of local government and instead to provide for a
definition of tribal government. S. 578 also proposes to insert
the term ``tribal government'' in each place it is appropriate
to do so in the Homeland Security Act.
Finally, based upon testimony received by this committee
last year from a representative of the Department of Justice,
this measure clarifies that for purposes of homeland security
only. The Congress affirms and declares that the inherent
sovereign authority of an Indian tribal government includes the
authority to enforce and adjudicate violations of applicable
criminal, civil and regulatory laws committed by any person on
land under the jurisdiction of the Indian tribal government.
It is this last section that appears to have generated some
mischief by those who want to read the language as if it
doesn't pertain to homeland security. They cite a parade of
horribles in which the alleged tribal governments might engage
under the authority of this act, including ``stripping several
million U.S. citizens of their constitutional protections.''
They call it a ``breathtaking example of racial tyranny.'' I
think it is important and prudent that we take a moment to
understand the provision to which these outlandish comments are
directed.
Acts of terrorism or activities which threaten the national
security are violations of Federal law. Put another way, if a
person were to engage in an act of terrorism, they would be
violating Federal law and they would be subject to prosecution
in Federal courts, not a tribal court. Should tribal
governments be able to stop, detain and arrest those who
violate Federal law by committing acts of terrorism until such
time as Federal authorities can take over or do those who
reside in Indian country, be they Indian or non-Indian, want to
have hours and sometimes possibly even days go by before
Federal law enforcement officers or the FBI can travel from a
city to a remote rural area in order to arrest those engaged in
terrorism activities?
We do not have to reach far back in our memories to recall
the events of September 11 and to know that in most instances
there will not be the luxury of time to respond in this
fashion. That is why those who are experienced in law
enforcement believe, as we do, that tribal governments must
have the authority to enforce Federal law until such time as
Federal law enforcement officers can assume responsibility.
They will tell you that in many areas of Indian country, tribal
governments are the only law enforcement presence and the only
government capable of responding to threats of terrorism on a
timely basis.
One of the commentators whose opposition to this bill is
widely advertised suggests that this bill will ``place this
country under attack from within.'' I would remind one and all
that in all the military actions and wars in which this Nation
has been engaged in the last century and the beginning of this
century, more Native people of the United States on a per
capita basis have volunteered to serve in the Armed Forces of
our Nation and placed themselves in harm's way than any other
group of Americans.
To suggest that tribal governments are terrorists or that
citizens of this country are subject to attack by Native people
is to me one of the most outrageous assertions I have ever
heard. I hope this kind of inflammatory rhetoric will be seen
for what it is. Yesterday the committee held a full day forum
for tribal leaders and Federal agencies and I believe we
learned a great deal about the critical infrastructure that is
located in or near Indian country. It is far more extensive
than our records would have indicated, so we are very grateful
and gratified that this crucially important information was
shared with the committee yesterday and that it will be made a
part of the official record of this hearing.
Members of Congress are all too familiar with the scare
tactics that are sometimes employed in opposing legislation.
That is why the information from yesterday's forum and the
testimony received today, both oral and written, will serve
such an important role in helping us all to focus on the real
threats at hand because as the highest officials of our
government have repeatedly stated, it is a matter of when
another terrorist act is likely to take place; sadly, it is not
a matter of if.
With that, I would like to call upon the first panel of
witnesses and welcome them to the committee. The first panel
consists of: Thomas B. Heffelfinger, U.S. attorney, Minnesota,
representing the U.S. Department of Justice; Terry Virden,
director, BIA, Department of the Interior; Josh Filler,
director, Office of State and Local Government Coordination,
Department of Homeland Security; and William F. Raub, principal
deputy assistant secretary, Office of Public Health Emergency
Preparedness, Department of Health and Human Services.
Gentlemen, welcome.
May I first recognize U.S. Attorney Heffelfinger.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS B. HEFFELFINGER, U.S. ATTORNEY, STATE OF
MINNESOTA, ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Mr. Heffelfinger. Thank you, Senator Inouye.
In addition to being the U.S. attorney for the State of
Minnesota, I am also the chairman of the Attorneys General
Advisory Committee, Subcommittee on Native American Issues.
This is the subcommittee responsible for developing policy, for
consideration and approval by the Attorney General related to
effective law enforcement in Indian country.
With the Attorney General's approval, the NAIS has
identified terrorism as our number one priority. As you heard,
Senator, and as the record made clear yesterday, more than 25
tribes have land on or near the international borders or
shorelines within the United States as part of our
international borders. In addition, there are numerous
potential terrorist targets located within Indian country that
are a part of this country's national infrastructure.
Therefore, it is our position that it is imperative that our
national homeland security strategy include tribes in the
planning process and in the provision of services relative to
homeland security.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 describes tribes as
``local governments'' along with cities and counties organized
under State law. The U.S. Supreme Court precedent treats tribes
as separate sovereign governments. Administration policies have
afforded tribes sovereign status in accordance with this
precedent. Tribal governments use their governing authority to
provide public safety in Indian country both as to homeland
security issues as well as general criminal issues.
On a wide variety of public safety and criminal issues, the
Federal Government consistently works directly with tribes on a
government-to-government basis. This is consistent with recent
proclamations by many Presidents including the November 12,
2001 statement of President George W. Bush, ``My Administration
will continue to work with tribal governments on a sovereign to
sovereign basis.''
Working directly with tribes to assist them in obtaining
the necessary public safety resources and training and to
conduct strategic planning for homeland security concerns is
not only consistent with Supreme Court precedent and the
direction of all recent Presidents, but also enhances the
effectiveness of our homeland security preparation in these
unique communities.
As the Department of Justice continues our efforts to reach
out to the tribes on these issues, I, on behalf of the
Department, applaud the general goals of S. 578 to maximize the
opportunities for the Federal Government to work with tribal
governments in carrying out the activities needed to protect
our Nation's homeland. Likewise, the Department looks forward
to working with the committee to address some of the technical
issues raised by the bill.
As to section 13 of the bill to which you alluded in your
introductory comments, Senator, section 13 of S. 578 is a
legislative overturn of the Supreme Court decision in Oliphant
v. Suquamish Tribe. Oliphant held that tribal courts do not
have criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians. In the view of
many, the Oliphant decision has created a gap in Indian country
law enforcement and negatively impacts tribes' abilities to
respond effectively to terrorist incidents and other crimes
which may be committed by non-Indians in Indian country.
However, overruling Oliphant in a broad and isolated manner
could result in complicated legal and practical law enforcement
issues such as those of due process concerns, double jeopardy,
resources and appellate rights.
Enacting section 13 prior to working through these
complicated matters is premature and we do not believe that S.
578 provides the best vehicle for doing so. In this connection,
law enforcement in Indian country is primarily a Federal and
tribal function. Those law enforcement officers who work in
Indian country work hard to address the unique and sometimes
confusing jurisdictional challenges associated with protecting
the public on Indian reservations. As an example, in response
to Oliphant's constraints, some tribal law enforcement agencies
have obtained cross-commissions from State, local and Federal
authorities to expand their authority to arrest non-Indian
criminal suspects under State or Federal law. Unfortunately,
such cooperative arrangements are not made in many
jurisdictions due to various factors such as local political
issues or concerns over civil liability. As a result, effective
law enforcement over non-Indians who commit crimes in Indian
country is not consistent from reservation to reservation.
Given the law enforcement constraints imposed by the
Oliphant decision, the question therefore becomes what can
Congress do to improve homeland security in Indian country?
Section 13 of S. 578 is an attempt to deal with the Oliphant
issue head-on. In February 2003, the NAIS, which I chair,
formed an Oliphant Working Group under the leadership of South
Dakota U.S. Attorney Jim McMahon. In addition to other
considerations, the working group studies section 13
extensively. The group did not develop a position on whether or
not it would eventually support such an Oliphant fix. However,
the working group did decide that section 13 as currently
written is too broad. The working group identified a number of
concerns including due process issues that Congress may want to
consider as it addresses this issue and which become
increasingly important as one considers expanding tribal court
jurisdiction in the face of Oliphant. These concerns include
issues such as separation of powers, provision of defense
counsel for indigent defendants, make up of jury pools which
was one of the issues cited in the original Oliphant decisions
and appellate and habeas corpus relief.
A significant expansion of tribal court jurisdiction raises
serious issues regarding protections of individual due process
rights and this I know will be considered. Consideration must
also be given to issues such as disparate tribal resources as
one looks around the country, the impact of any mandate of
legal obligations on the ability of the tribes to provide such
legal protections, and the need for additional training not
currently being provided or for additional experienced tribal
judicial and law enforcement officers that would be required in
response to such a significant change.
Section 13 addresses ``the authority to enforce and
adjudicate violations by any person.'' As such, the section
expands the jurisdiction both for tribal law enforcement and
for tribal courts. Homeland security concerns are primarily a
law enforcement concern and not a tribal court concern. It is
the ability of tribal law enforcement to investigate arrests
and/or detain suspected terrorists that is at issue, not the
ability of tribal courts to prosecute such individuals. It is
highly unlikely that the Federal Government would defer Federal
felony prosecution of terrorists in deference to tribal court
misdemeanor prosecution. Therefore, consideration should be
given to whether there are other options that can allow tribal
law enforcement to be full partners in providing for a secure
homeland while avoiding some of the adverse impact of a
significant expansion of tribal court jurisdiction. These
options include expanded use of ``cross commissions'' and of
tribal law enforcement authority recognized under some district
court and appellate court decisions to detain individuals who
are suspected of violating State or Federal law.
While section 13 might address some of the factors limiting
the widespread use of these options, this section also raises
issues not fully addressed in the proposed legislation and
there are ways of expanding the use of these options.
Therefore, the expansion of tribal jurisdiction reflected in
section 13, we believe, should appropriately be considered as
part of a comprehensive review and clarification of tribal
court jurisdiction such as that we suggested to this committee
last July in discussing the need for a comprehensive
clarification of tribal court jurisdiction.
We look forward to working with this committee on that and
any other issues that the committee wishes. I want to thank you
for the opportunity to address you and I look forward to
standing for questions at the appropriate time.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Heffelfinger appeatrs in
appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you, very much.
Now may I recognize Mr. Virden.
STATEMENT OF TERRY VIRDEN, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Virden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the
Interior on this very important bill to amend the Homeland
Security Act of 2002.
The Department supports the concept of maximizing
opportunities for the Federal Government to work with tribal
governments in carrying out the activities needed to protect
our Nation's homeland.
Indian country consists of 56 million acres of trust lands,
approximately 25 tribes are located on or near international
borders with Mexico and Canada, with additional tribes located
on or near international waterways. Of particular note are the
Tohono O'Odham Nation in Southern Arizona and the St. Regis
Mohawk Nation in upstate New York. Both reservations include
lands that cross the international borders and, therefore, have
tribal members on either side of the border. Border tribes are
faced with attempted illegal border crossings and trafficking
of illicit contraband. Tribal law enforcement works in tandem
with Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies on
helping combat these illegal activities.
Since September 11, 2001, our tribal law enforcement
officers have been on alert and have worked with other law
enforcement officers to protect our Canadian and Mexican
borders as well as the waterways that are part of Indian
country. Our principal responsibility of homeland security is
domestic preparedness to prevent, respond to and recover from
attack. Homeland security for tribes includes law enforcement,
security and emergency management personnel, key components
tribal governance must provide in protecting its members,
residents and visitors. There is a need to have direct funding
streams from the Department of Homeland Security for such
activity.
Tribal law enforcement can be vital in protecting our
borders and waterways. In certain areas of the country, tribal
emergency management may be the only agency able to respond to
a terrorist threat or attack. Tribal public health can provide
valuable expertise in confronting an outbreak of a deadly
disease and tribal members may be the only citizens within
miles to detect terrorist activity.
S. 578 is an appropriate step in recognizing the importance
of American Indians in protecting our homeland. Establishing
the appropriate role for the tribes with the 50 States will
facilitate protection of critical infrastructure and key assets
in Indian country and bring to bear the leadership, expertise
and dedication of Indian people.
We are concerned, however, that Alaska Native villages and
organizations are not included in the definition of Indian
tribe. Alaska Native villages and organizations have been
included in the definition of Indian tribe under laws including
the Indian Self-Determination Act. We believe for this purpose
they should be included in the definition of Indian tribe.
This concludes my prepared statement and I also am
available for questions later.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Virden appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you, very much, Mr. Virden.
Now, may I call upon Mr. Filler.
STATEMENT OF JOSH FILLER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENT COORDINATION, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Filler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you today to discuss the Department of Homeland
Security's views on S. 578. We support S. 578's goals and
objectives of enhancing coordination and cooperation between
the Department and tribal governments regarding homeland
security.
The Department of Homeland Security recognizes and
appreciates the critical role the tribal governments play in
enhancing our homeland security. With tribal lands adjacent to
hundreds of miles of both our northern and southern land
borders including readily accessible coastline and containing
numerous pieces of critical infrastructure, tribal governments
are essential partners in the work of the Department of
Homeland Security. That is why the Department has created a
position specifically for coordination with the tribes. The
director for Tribal Coordination, who participated in panel
discussions hosted by this committee yesterday, is here with me
today.
Since it was created, the Department of Homeland Security
has been actively undertaking outreach to tribal interests to
build the relationships necessary for successful coordination
of homeland security activities within tribal lands. These
efforts have included but are not limited to, the creation of a
specific position as I mentioned before for tribal
coordination. Through this office, American Indian tribes,
Alaska Native villages, tribal organizations and associations
have a dedicated day-to-day point of contact for tribal
concerns.
The U.S. Border Patrol has liaison officers at each sector
and at headquarters specifically focused on tribal law
enforcement coordination with their Native American
counterparts. Coordination includes sharing training,
intelligence, equipment and participating in joint operations.
The Department has met and coordinated with numerous tribal
governments regarding DHS functions, activities and the
Department's programs.
We are currently working with the National Congress of
American Indians on tribal issues. We were pleased to attend
the recent NCAI conference where DHS participated in a workshop
on creating emergency preparedness plans. The workshop covered
what resources are available from DHS, including training
opportunities and emphasized the need for tribal emergency
preparedness plans. We are participating with the National
Native American Law Enforcement Association and are providing
presenters for homeland security-related training at the
upcoming annual training conference. The U.S. Border Patrol is
providing specialized training seminars for this November
conference as well as technical displays of current hardware
being employed by the Border Patrol.
DHS is also currently planning the second U.S. Border
Patrol/Native American Border Security Conference. I believe it
is tentatively scheduled for the first week in October of this
year. The aim of this conference is to identify mechanisms to
better the Patrol's working relationship with Native American
law enforcement to further our shared goal of securing the
Nation's borders.
DHS is in discussion with other executive branch
departments like those represented here today to ensure
coordination of DHS missions in Indian country. We have been
pleased to include tribes in the consultation process for
upcoming discussions on the National Incident Management System
as well as the National Response Plan, both of which are
required by Homeland Security Presidential Directive No. 5.
DHS is a participant in informal, interagency, Indian
country working groups which includes the exchange of
information and presentations on Indian country programs and
program support. This is a very positive, ad hoc forum where
Federal/Indian country representatives get together to exchange
information and provide briefings on different programs.
DHS, as you know, is a young department and we view these
accomplishments simply as a good start to ensuring that tribal
governments are truly integrated into the Department's efforts
to better secure our borders, protect our critical
infrastructure and to be prepared for a terrorist attack or
natural disaster.
As indicated earlier, we support S. 578's objective of
improving the Department's coordination with tribal governments
in the area of homeland security and we welcome the opportunity
to work with the committee regarding the particulars of the
bill.
I thank you for your support of the Department and we would
be happy to answer any questions you might have at the
appropriate time.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Filler appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Mr. Filler.
May I now recognize Dr. Raub.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM F. RAUB, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES
Mr. Raub. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased
to have the opportunity to make some remarks on behalf of the
Department of Health and Human Services.
When we use the term public health emergency preparedness,
that is shorthand for readiness for bioterrorism, other
outbreaks of infectious disease and other public health threats
and emergencies. When we talk specifically about bioterrorism,
the immutable fact is that by definition all terrorism is
local. Therefore, however complex and widespread the event and
incident ultimately may become, it begins in a particular place
and therefore, State, local, and tribal readiness are very high
priorities for us with respect to the way we direct our
investments.
To that end, we use the instrument of the cooperative
agreement with all 50 of the States and certain other eligible
entities to provide funding to enhance public health
departments, hospitals and other health care entities. That is
over and beyond our direct funding of the hospitals of the
Indian Health Service. In fiscal year 2002, we provided
approximately $1 billion through those cooperative agreements.
In the current fiscal year, and we are amidst the reward and
review process right now, we expect to award approximately $1.5
billion in total.
One of the major priorities of each of those awards is to
ensure that we have a systematic involvement with all of the
tribes in the planning and implementation of these programs.
The implementation means that not only the flow of funds to the
tribes as appropriate to achieve the statewide plan, but also
the availability of services such as surveillance and
epidemiologic response to ensure that the health needs of the
tribes are met as systematically as the health needs of anyone
else within those State borders.
We involve our colleagues from the Indian Health Services
in our review panels, we have an internal Bioterrorism Council
of which the Director of the Indian Health Service is a member,
and we have a strategic plan for the Department for
bioterrorism that includes specific roles for the Indian Health
Service.
We look forward to continuing to develop these programs
overall and strengthening the relationship and involvement with
the Indian tribes.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today and will
respond with our colleagues here to questions as best I can.
[Prepared Statement of Mr. Raub appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. I am deeply grateful to all of you for your
testimony and I must say I am very much encouraged. If I may, I
would like to ask a few questions.
Mr. Heffelfinger, your concerns about chapter 13 I think
have merit. Is your office willing to work with the committee
in drafting language that would address the concerns you have
raised?
Mr. Heffelfinger. Yes; very much so, Senator. We believe
this is an area that the Department of Justice and your
committee should be working together on. It is a perfect
vehicle for us to develop a comprehensive clarification of all
of the confusing areas of tribal jurisdiction. We think this
would enhance our ability to provide quality law enforcement
both in the area of criminal misconduct as well as the area of
homeland security and that they really cannot be separated.
Senator Inouye. If I were smart, at this point I would say
the meeting is adjourned. [Laughter.]
I am most grateful for your offer to help us. I think the
staff is prepared to work with you and come forth with a bill
that would meet the needs of all the departments as well as the
needs in Indian country. I think we can do that. So thank you
very much, Mr. Heffelfinger.
If I may ask, Mr. Virden, at yesterday's forum we heard
something about the Conlee Dam, Grand Conlee Dam. I note that
the Department of the Interior has jurisdiction over that. Has
the Department undertaken any activities to secure Grand Conlee
Dam?
Mr. Virden. I'm hesitating.
Senator Inouye. I am not trying to embarrass you but I just
want to know the extent the problem we have.
Mr. Virden. I understand. The Department has an extensive
program of early warning systems that are mandated to be
installed and I believe on most of our dams, we are there. I
know, speaking for the BIA, we have installed in most of our
high priority dams early warning systems.
Senator Inouye. I suppose you would welcome some Indian
assistance there?
Mr. Virden. Yes; we would.
Senator Inouye. I was very much gratified to hear that we
have programs for training Indian tribes and tribal members to
carryout these responsibilities, so I thank you very much.
Mr. Filler, I am grateful that the Administration supports
this measure. Are you also concerned about section 13?
Mr. Filler. Senator, I'll be honest, I lack the expertise
in the details to which that chapter refers, so I would defer.
Senator Inouye. So your department would be satisfied if
Justice and the committee can work out something out?
Mr. Filler. I think we will work with the Justice
Department and follow their lead and work with them on this
issue.
Senator Inouye. Do you have any problems with the
definition of local government as it relates to Indian tribes?
Mr. Filler. I think it is important that everyone be a part
of the homeland security process. That includes tribes, the
territories, local government, State government and obviously
the Federal Government. Our vision is that you create a
coordinated effort through statewide planning, not State
planning but statewide planning, statewide planning, built from
the bottom up, including the tribes, municipalities, counties,
towns, parishes, so on and so forth. I think what is important
is everyone has a seat at the table and that table be the place
where the plan for spending homeland security dollars is
developed. I think if we do that, the issue of State versus
local or tribal becomes less of an issue. We have a
responsibility at the Federal side to ensure that coordination
is taking place.
Senator Inouye. I was very much pleased with the assurance
that your department will be funding programs to enhance the
ability of Indian country to carryout this mission, but
apparently the funds go through the States, don't they?
Mr. Filler. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. Can we get some report from you advising us
as to how much Indian country is receiving for homeland
security?
Mr. Filler. Sure. We will go back to the States. They are
required to file paperwork with us on all the funds they
receive from the Department and we can make a request that they
tell us exactly how much all of the tribes within the State are
receiving.
Senator Inouye. Recently, we were told that Secretary Ridge
established a State and Local Advisory Committee to advise the
Homeland Security Advisory Council but I note that this
committee is made up of governors, legislators, mayors, city
officials, county judges but no representatives from Indian
country. Can we secure some sort of representation there?
Mr. Filler. I will certainly go back and speak with the
executive director of the Homeland Security Advisory Council
and engage him on that issue.
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much.
Dr. Raub, the Indian Health Service has determined that
$51.5 million is needed annually for tribal emergency medical
services. Given the potential for terrorism and the threat in
Indian country, what activities has the Department undertaken
to inform Congress of the need for additional funding?
Mr. Raub. Those matters are under consideration right now
with respect to development of the fiscal year 2005 budget
request. I expect one of the issues that will be joined further
within the Department and between the Department and the Office
of Management and Budget and ultimately our discussions with
the Appropriations Committees will be the size and the
orientation of that investment.
Whatever we spend directly through the Indian Health
Service with respect to terrorism is complemented by the funds
I mentioned before that are sent out in the from of the
cooperative agreements. In fact, in a few of the States, the
State law allows funds from the cooperative agreement to
directly supplement activities of the Indian Health Service.
Other State laws preclude this. To the extent it is possible,
we have tried to use every mechanism available.
Senator Inouye. As a member of the Appropriations
Committee, I can assure you we will do our best to support your
request.
Gentlemen, once again, I thank you very much for your
participation. I am certain I speak for Indian country when I
say that we feel very much encouraged and look forward to
working with you, Mr. Heffelfinger.
Mr. Heffelfinger. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Inouye. Thank you, very much.
Now, may I call on the second panel. It consists of the
following: Roland E. Johnson, Governor, Pueblo of Laguna Pueblo
of New Mexico; Audrey Bennett, president, Prairie Island Indian
Community, Minnesota; Earl Old Person, chief and tribal council
member, Blackfeet Tribal Business Council, Montana; Vivian
Juan-Saunders, chairwoman, Tohono O'odham Nation, Arizona; and
Alvin Windy Boy, chairman, Chippewa Cree Business Committee,
Montana.
I have been advised that President Bennett has to get on a
plane right away, so may I call upon you first?
STATEMENT OF AUDREY BENNETT, PRESIDENT, PRAIRIE ISLAND INDIAN
COMMUNITY, MINNESOTA
Ms. Bennett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon. My name is Audrey Bennett. I am president
of the Prairie Island Indian Community and I want to thank you
for inviting me to testify today.
I am here to offer this committee a perspective that is
unique to our community, emblematic of the homeland security
issue with which many tribal governments in this country must
contend. For your reference, we have provided an aerial photo
of Prairie Island which is located between the Mississippi and
the Vermillion Rivers in the southeastern Minnesota about 50
miles south and east of Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Prairie Island is sacred land. Our people have lived there
for countless generations. It is our home as well as our final
resting place for our ancestors. As you can see, our
reservation is bordered by a nuclear powerplant, a nuclear
waste storage site, two nuclear reactors and 17 large storage
casts filled with highly radioactive nuclear waste sits 600
yards from our homes, church, community center, and business.
Additional casts will be added in the coming years. Our
community is the closest in the Nation to a nuclear powerplant
and a nuclear waste storage site. Yet we have no special role
in helping to protect these facilities or for that matter
ourselves.
For decades, well before terrorism became the issue that it
is today, our tribe had to fight to be properly recognized by
the State of Minnesota and our utility neighbor. In 1997, when
the plant was evacuated after a steam generator leaked
radiation into the atmosphere, no one bothered to inform our
people of the incident. Most tribal members realized something
was wrong only after witnessing numerous cars speeding away
from the plant. Many of us wisely followed.
Today, we are better prepared for a similar incident and we
have reasonably cooperative relationships with the plant and
the State. However, conventional emergency planning is simply
inadequate for this age of catastrophic terrorism. The
radiological exercises in which we participate are based on
scenarios involving a slow leak of radiation into the
atmosphere, not an intentional act of destruction. Currently
our involvement in responding to such an event is as best ill-
defined. As I mentioned previously, we have no formal role
whatsoever in helping to prevent an attack, an attack that
would permanently devastate our community.
Now, imagine being reminded of this vulnerability everytime
you leave your home or look out your window. Imagine to this
day of color coded warnings and credible threats, fearing the
worse everytime an airplane flies by or a news helicopter
hovers the neighboring nuclear plant. Imagine, and this
happened just recently, driving down the road only to see
military humvees, military personnel armed and stationed at
your intersection without any explanation or notice. This is
what we live with every day. We are uninformed. We are victims
in waiting.
Under the existing system, we also have little or no
independent recourse should the worse occur. Instead, we are
largely subject to State authority. It was evident recently
when our community was affected by a major flooding and we had
to go through the State to access Federal resources. Our tribal
government is ultimately responsible for the health and safety
of as many as 10,000 people, including our tribal members,
employees and visitors. Many thousands more live just beyond
our reservation. Their fate along with ours is tied to the
safe, secure operation of a nuclear power plant, a reality not
lost on most Minnesotans.
According to a January 2003 poll, nearly 60 percent of
Minnesotans say they are concerned with that the State's
nuclear power plants could be targeted for terrorism, and 54
percent say they would need to live at least 50 miles from the
nuclear power plant to feel safe. Having lived our lives in the
shadow of the nuclear facility, we share their concern. We
share their concern because we know more can be done to ensure
our safety.
To start, we need to be involved in emergency planning and
terrorism prevention initiatives. We need the resources for
staff to help and maintain our readiness. We have the most to
lose in an attack and we cannot afford not to be prepared. We
also need access to information. We should be notified of
events before reading about them in the newspapers or
experiencing them firsthand. There should be a resource within
the Department of Homeland Security that is committed to
helping our community be informed and prepared.
Reservation lands located along our Nation's borders and
near critical infrastructures such as dams, hydroelectric
facilities and nuclear powerplants are vulnerable. Tribal
governments should be given the same mandate and resources
needed to keep these areas safe. Furthermore, in keeping with
the Federal Government's trust responsibility to tribes, the
Department of Homeland Security should be required to deal with
tribes on a government-to-government basis, just as any other
Federal agency would.
Clearly if it is going to be effective, the Homeland
Security Act must involve tribes and be inclusive of tribe
interests. It should recognize the needs of tribal governments
and demand the vigilance of us that is expected from others
charged with protecting this Nation.
On behalf of our community council and tribe, I thank you
again for this opportunity to testify here today. Each of us
has an obligation as Americans to do our part to protect the
homeland as our ancestors before us protected Mother Earth, it
is up to us to protect it for generations not here yet. We
pledge to do our part, the Prairie Island Community, and to
cooperate in this matter and welcome the opportunity to do our
part.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Bennett appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, President Bennett.
Since you will be leaving us and I hope you don't miss the
plane, do you believe the passage of this measure would in some
way help your situation?
Ms. Bennett. I believe it would, Mr. Chairman. Again, it is
something we always have to keep fighting for as tribes, to be
included in languages that affect us. I think by inserting
``tribes and reservations,'' it is very important, especially
with the threat of terrorism that we know today and also to
have the same representation as governors, mayors and local
units of city people. Tribes should also be on any of those
councils and committees to be a part, to keep information
flowing and communication moving forward to find solutions
everybody can live with. I think it is very important.
Senator Inouye. We will do our best, Madam President.
Ms. Bennett. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. I hope you make the plane.
Ms. Bennett. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. May I now recognize Governor Johnson.
STATEMENT OF ROLAND E. JOHNSON, GOVERNOR, PUEBLO OF LAGUNA
Mr. Johnson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
The Pueblo of Laguna is most appreciative of the
committee's invitation to provide testimony in support of S.
578. The Pueblo of Laguna supports S. 578 because it ensures
consultation and coordination with and the involvement and
inclusion of Indian tribes in the mission of the Homeland
Security Department. It ensures that tribal governments
participate fully in the protection of the homeland of the
United States, including tribal homelands. These purposes are
carried out in a direct relationship with tribal governments
and not as subdivisions of States.
The Pueblo of Laguna needs S. 578 to address three things.
First, to be capable partners, the Pueblo must be well prepared
to handle emergency situations. Second, it must be recognized
as the legitimate governmental authority responsible for
reservation health, safety and welfare. Third, it must have the
resources to ensure that all people in the Laguna Pueblo
homeland receive timely and expert protection and assistance.
Laguna is at the crossroads of vulnerability because it is
located along a major east/west Interstate 40 corridor where a
major accident could potentially cripple the rest of the
Nation. Laguna's 560,000 acres of reservation are situated in
four counties. The Pueblo's six villages are located
approximately 45 miles west of Albuquerque and 25 miles east of
the community of Grants, New Mexico.
Laguna has over 8,000 members, making it one of the more
populated Pueblo areas in New Mexico. The Burlington Northern
and Santa Fe Railroad lines travel approximately 40 miles
across our reservation. In addition, both the El Paso Natural
Gas Company and Transwestern Pipeline Company have high
pressure, interstate gas lines that also cross our reservation.
All routes and pipelines converge within a 1-mile radius of
each other near the Laguna Industries, a manufacturing facility
whose primary customer is the Department of Defense. These
pipelines are also located in very close proximity to many
homes on the reservation. Other jurisdictions are far away.
Laguna must therefore be prepared to serve as the first
responder.
Laguna shares vulnerability with neighbors and the State
because of many defense and energy related facilities that are
located in the State. The Waste Isolation Pilot Project is
located in the southern part of the State of New Mexico.
Interstate Highway 40 is the primary transportation route for
shipment of nuclear waste from sites in Nevada to the site
southern New Mexico. Other facilities include the Sandia
National Laboratories, the Kirkland Air Force Base, the White
Sands Missile Range and the Los Alamos National Laboratory. I
might mention here that waste from the Los Alamos National
Laboratory is transported across a State road which also
crosses the lands of several of the Northern Pueblo in the
State of New Mexico, including the Pueblos of San Ildefonso and
the Pueblo of Pojoaque.
On this past Memorial Day, we had an incident occur at
Laguna which really tested our state of preparedness to respond
to emergency situations. At about 4:15 p.m., 13 cars of a 49-
car freight train derailed at Laguna Pueblo and forced and
evacuation of a sizable area of the reservation. The westbound
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad company was at first
reported to be carrying some hazardous materials. Although no
one was seriously injured in the accident, some 500 people had
to be evacuated from the area where the train derailed and
where approximately 80 family homes, schools, tribal government
offices are situated. Thereafter, the train tracks were closed
in both directions for over 24 hours.
Laguna's response to the situation resulted in both of
Laguna's firetrucks with full crews having to respond to the
situation, all four of its police department cruisers, with
almost all the department law enforcement personnel, Laguna's
two ambulances and medical workers, Laguna's hazardous
materials response teams, emergency equipment and personnel
from adjacent non-Indian communities also responded after
Laguna was first on the scene.
One month before this incident took place, Laguna had
engaged in a hazardous materials spill exercise based on a mock
train derailment. This exercise helped provide a better
organized response to the real derailment. Deficiencies were
revealed, lessons were learned from both situations. The
lessons learned in both situations are quite revealing.
During the actual derailment, five other communities were
left unprotected for lengthy periods of time. No one knew just
what was on the train or which car might contain dangerous
materials. We need to establish clear command systems to
provide on-site decisionmaking leadership. We realized we had
insufficient facilities for use as a central command post.
There were insufficient communications systems to the point
where private cell phones had to be used to coordinate many of
the activities. We currently have no efficient way to warn our
community of impending hazards.
My point here is that approximately 85 trains pass through
the Laguna Pueblo each day and the potential for disaster is
ever present because they do carry hazardous materials
periodically. We need adequate resources to address those
disasters when they occur. Through proper inclusion of tribes
in homeland security efforts, we hope that S. 578 will better
facilitate providing information and assistance to us directly.
We also want to benefit from the financial and other assistance
programs of the Homeland Security Department to assure that we
have adequate planning, training and equipment and have an
improved ability to coordinate and distribute warnings and
other public information.
The second purpose of S. 578 is to recognize tribal
governments as participants in securing the United States
homeland. Such participation requires us to be alert, ready and
able to respond to terrorist activities that are dangerous to
human life, violate criminal laws, are intended to intimidate
or coerce a civilian population or their governments or are
intended to affect the conduct of government by mass
destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Tribes must be able
to investigate, inspect, search, rescue, evacuate, medically
treat and suppress fires.
The tribal government must also make sure that governmental
authorities are in place to guide all these activities and that
the activities are conducted in a manner that is cognizant of
human rights and dignity. The Pueblo Government is also the
only entity with authority to enter into intergovernmental
agreements, best practices and other mechanisms to share and
coordinate with State and local governments. This is the only
way to ensure that tribal, State and local governments together
complete the web of comprehensive, defensive, protection and
response necessary for all citizens wherever they are to
receive the care and services they need. None of us can do it
alone.
Determinations assigning jurisdiction between Federal,
State and tribal forums can be very complex and confusing.
Clarification is needed when the defense and protection of
people, places, and infrastructures are at stake. Emergency
action can not linger in order to assess who can be detained,
medically treated, evacuated or whose premises can be
inspected.
Section 13 of S. 578 provides this clarification by
applying concurrently Federal and tribal law in the context of
homeland security and it eliminates the confusing aspects of
Federal common law. This provision makes use of existing
applicable laws which are already, for the most part, Federal
and tribal law.
Laguna needs resources to pay for the cost of providing
comprehensive health and safety protection and assistance.
Federal funds will help but they are limited. States, counties
and cities can raise revenue to support police, fire, medical,
emergency, and other services. Laguna has a possessory tax to
do this but the validity of the tax has come into question
because of two Supreme Court cases, Strait v. A-1 Contractors,
Adkinson Trading Company v. Shirley. Laguna responded to the
BNSF train wreck with full ability and resources but the
railroad now asserts that these cases would allow them not to
pay the tax that Laguna uses to provide essential governmental
services when needed. We assert that this is unconscionable and
wrong. Congress and Federal agencies have long encouraged
tribal governmental and economic self determination but now the
Judicial Branch is crippling exercise of this determination by
judicial fiat.
Every other government in this country is allowed to engage
in the basis governmental function of raising revenues through
taxation within their physical boundaries to provide the kinds
of services that we have been talking about and yet Indian
tribes are being denied the same opportunity.
Laguna requests amendments to S. 578 that would treat
tribal governments in a manner similar to States for the
purposes of regulation and taxation to provide health, safety
and welfare services on the reservation. Laguna also requests
these amendments to ensure that Indian country includes all fee
lands and rights of way, no matter who owns them within the
exterior boundaries of all Indian reservations and the Pueblo
land grants. To address this matter, the Pueblo of Laguna has
included in its advanced testimony language to be inserted into
S. 578. I refer you to page 8 of the advance testimony of which
you have copies.
S. 578 and the changes we recommend would greatly enhance
the ability of the Pueblo and other Indian tribes to be
prepared for emergencies and terrorism, to provide the
leadership and authorities necessary to work effectively on the
reservation and with States, counties and cities, and to have
the funding and revenue necessary to protect residents,
visitors, businesses and critical transportation and
infrastructure systems and assets. After all, business
activities that are conducted on the reservation benefit from
the health, safety and welfare services that are provided by
our governments.
I appreciate this opportunity to present my testimony.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Johnson appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Governor Johnson.
Now, may I call upon the distinguished Chief Old Person.
STATEMENT OF EARL OLD PERSON, CHIEF AND TRIBAL COUNCIL MEMBER,
BLACKFEET TRIBAL BUSINESS COUNCIL, MONTANA
Mr. Old Person. Thank you, Honorable Senator.
I certainly appreciate this chance to be able to come
before your committee and express our concerns on the homeland
security. I have a prepared statement but I do want to make
just a general statement.
Senator Inouye. It will be made a part of the record, sir.
Mr. Old Person. Last fall and earlier this year, I attended
some meetings pertaining to the homeland security. At that
time, I thought we were going to have a great involvement in
this particular act that was taking place. It seemed less all
the time, knowing more about it. I began to wonder how far it
was going to go and how much involvement we, as Indian tribes,
were going to have.
The reason the Blackfeet people are very concerned is we
have three border crossings that come into the reservation. The
fourth crossing is just off the reservation to the east. There
is traffic going back and forth all year long. In fact, other
Indian people go through these crossings. We sometimes have
problems going across. We have been working with this for many
years now, trying to help the border crossing people. How can
we help make it easier for people to have access or go into
Canada or for people to come into the United States through our
reservation. They have been very cooperative and we try to
cooperate with them as much as we could.
Within Canada, we have three tribes that are the same with
the Blackfeet. We were all together at one time. It is known as
the Blackfeet Confederacy. Recently we had a meeting in Canada
regarding the border crossing. Again, this homeland security
was talked about at that time, what we were doing and how we
were involved. We couldn't really give them the kind of
involvement we were having with homeland security.
Ms. Johnson and Roland Johnson practically hit every area,
the reasons we are here saying we want to be a part of this,
that the Indian tribes want to be recognized because these are
our homelands, the reservation. We are not just trying to help
protect these homelands but also to help protect other lands
adjacent and the whole United States. I have never known our
young men and young women to refuse going into the service,
going abroad into the combat fields and we know we have been
involved in these kinds of things that concern our people that
could cause problems, that could damage the kinds of things our
people hope to continue.
I was here during 911. I saw what took place and that is
why I was concerned. I know other tribal people were here. We
are very concerned about what took place. These are the kinds
of things we want to help protect. As Indian people on the
reservations today, we are having problems in many ways. Our
resources are not that great that we can outright begin to deal
with things and begin to solve things. That is why we are in
need of help. We are in need of help to get together and help
with these kinds of programs that are coming into effect so we
can be a part of them and help ensure there is going to be
protection for our people.
We have a lot of problems, it is true. We have law
enforcement we are trying to upgrade but it takes resources to
do it. During my course of leadership, which goes way back, I
have stressed the fact that in our homelands, our land and our
law enforcement, law and order, is the backbone of our
homelands. If we don't have the land base, if we don't have the
law and order, then we don't have anything. That is why we are
very concerned. We have different entities within our law
enforcement. We have the Bureau of Indian Affairs, FBI, our
tribal law enforcement. They are trying to do things in
cooperation on how we can best deal with the things that
happen. Our young people are at stake today. We need protection
for them, we need to find a way to help them find ways to help
with the situation so they can begin to understand they are
just as important, that they can help us to try to solve some
of the things we are concerned about.
So today I certainly would appreciate if people with the go
sign would include the tribes with this particular bill. It is
going to help our people, help our country, help everyone
concerned. Right now, people back home are concerned about what
is going on in Iraq and in countries abroad because we do have
people over there. So whatever we can do to come together, this
is our country. We are going to be here. No one is going to
leave. That is why we are trying to protect it. I know through
that joint effort we can put together, those people that want
to see things go otherwise, need to understand they are going
to be here too. Anything that affects us is going to affect
them the same.
That is what we are trying to protect today. I hope this
particular bill, everybody comes together and let it go
through, let our answers be to where we can better understand
one another and we know we can work together and there is
protection that is going to help our people.
I see that within the bill and everything set forth. It
addresses a lot of things, even to the Public Health Service,
the Indian Health Service. We need those people, we need that
help.
I appreciate your having me here to testify and to say the
things I'm concerned about because we are concerned. The beef
producers in Canada came to us trying to get us help them to
work out things if we had that mad cow disease that is
affecting them. They are trying to work something out even with
the Blackfeet Tribe. These kinds of things we know about. If
they need our help, how can we do it? We can do it if we are
given the resources and the kinds of things to do it.
I appreciate your having me.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Old Person appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Chief Old Person.
Now, may I recognize Chairwoman Juan-Sanders.
STATEMENT OF VIVIAN JUAN-SAUNDERS, CHAIRPERSON, TOHONO O'ODHAM
NATION OF ARIZONA
Ms. Juan-Saunders. I'd like to thank you for this
opportunity to testify on this important matter impacting the
Tohono O'odham Nation
The Tohono O'odham Nation is located in southern Arizona
and is comprised of 2.8 million acres. We have a tribal
enrollment of 28,000 enrolled members and approximately 10,000
reside on the Nation.
Prior to contact, the aboriginal land base of the Tohono
O'odham Nation extended south to the Gulf of California, east
to the San Pedro River, north to the Gila River and west to the
Colorado River. In 1848, the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo ended
the war between the United States and Mexico and it placed the
first southern boundary at the Gila River and that placed all
of our tribal members in Mexico. Six years later through the
Gadsden Purchase of 1854, the United States and Mexico further
defined the southern boundary and placed it at its present
location. Consequently, that cut into the heart of the
aboriginal lands of our people and today we have 75 miles of
the international boundary which is adjacent to our reservation
lands.
On behalf of the Tohono O'odham Nation, we feel that S. 578
are important tribal amendments to the Homeland Security Act of
2002. The amendments will recognize the important role that
tribal governments play in defense of our homeland and will
help in deterring illegal activities on the Nation's lands.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 is very comprehensive but
it is incomplete because it fails to include tribal governments
as eligible entities entitled to participate in Department of
Homeland Security implementation. In the act, tribal
governments are placed in the local government category, a
designation for counties and municipalities. Our understanding
of the National Homeland Security Strategy is one, to prevent
terrorist attacks; second, reduce our homeland vulnerability to
terrorism; and third, minimize the damage and recover from the
attacks that do occur.
In reducing the vulnerability to terrorism, the Federal
Government must not and cannot ignore the fact that 25 tribal
governments have land located on or near Canada and Mexico. For
the Tohono O'odham Nation due to our geographic location, we
are at the forefront. Please consider the fact that our tribal
police has stretched its resources to the limit and now spends
half of their tribal budget, an average of $2.5 to $3 million
annually in response to border related incidents. On an average
day, our police officers spend 60 percent of his or her time
working on border-related issues.
In 1999, our officers assisted the Border Patrol with 100
apprehensions per month and in 2002, our tribal police officers
recorded 6,000 undocumented immigrants detained pending U.S.
Border Patrol pick-up. In 2002 and 2003, 1,500 undocumented
immigrants crossed our lands every day and they are not just
coming from Mexico; they are coming from Central America,
Guatemala, Honduras and any foreign country for that matter.
Illegal narcotics seizures have more than doubled in the last 3
years to over 65,000 pounds in 2002 and in 2003, we have had 49
undocumented immigrants die on our reservation lands. Our
tribal police pays for autopsies at $1,400 per body.
In Arizona, these types of statistics would require a state
of emergency. Currently it is unfortunate that these statistics
have brought members of Congress and members of Federal
agencies and State agencies and State representatives to the
international boundary adjacent to our lands. However, we need
to take the next step in providing resources to address these
issues.
At our western boundary, we have the Barry Goldwater
military base which is an important note as we discuss
terrorism and likely targets. The Indian Health Service also
spent $500,000 last year for health care for undocumented
immigrants. Health care to our tribal members has been
seriously compromised. We don't get reimbursed for the dollars
spent on foreigners.
We have made a few dents in these problems. For example, a
visit by the Washington, DC Homeland Security
Telecommunications and Wireless staff member resulted in a
$26,000 piece of equipment to allow for operability amongst our
tribal law enforcement and certain units of Department of
Homeland Security like Customs, Border Patrol and local county
law enforcement. It allows them to communicate with one
another. We also received a set of night vision goggles. This
is the extent of the assistance. Communications is still an
issue due to the potential security breach due to airways that
do not stop at the border.
We also participate in the Arizona/Mexico Commission which
allows us to coordinate our planning efforts in the event of
bioterrorism. We are in direct communications and have
scheduled one on one meetings with our health counterparts in
the State of Senora, Mexico to collaborate our efforts.
This year, our Chief of Police by exercising our tribal
sovereignty, accompanied the U.S. attorney to Mexico City to
begin discussions with their law enforcement counterparts in
Mexico regarding collaboration efforts.
The issues we bring today are the lack of government to
government consultation with the Tohono O'odham Nation
regarding the restructuring of Federal law enforcement entities
that have functioned on the Tohono O'odham Nation for over 20
years. We believe that since 2002 with the Federal policies
regarding the restructuring of the Department of Homeland
Security, we were never consulted about the restructuring and
how that would impact the Tohono O'odham Nation. U.S. Customs
has operated on the Tohono O'odham Nation since 1985 and Border
Patrol for 20 years.
One of the concerns we have is the transfer of an elite
unit known as the Shadow Wolves which has 21 Native Americans
whose primary focus was drug interdiction. Now they have been
transferred to Customs and Border Patrol who have a different
mission with regard to immigration. While the GHS has stressed
the mission in terms of the Shadow Wolves will not change, we
still remain cautious. Some of our tribal members are Customs
agents.
Because of the lack of consultation and the restructuring,
the Tohono O'odham Nation took a formal position on Federal
activities and functions on the Nation. We requested and
demanded respect for government to government consultation,
respect for our people, respect for our lands and respect for
sacred sites.
In order for us to be eligible for equipment and training,
we must lobby local counties. In June, I approached the Arizona
Director for Homeland Security when they announced that $3
million was available for Pima County for homeland security
efforts. I asked how much of the $3 million would come to the
Tohono O'odham Nation and the response was none. When I asked
how to access the funds, the response was we would have to
lobby the Pima County Board of Supervisors for funding.
The Tohono O'odham Nation is in three counties, Pinal, Pima
and Maricopa. We do not have the staff nor the resources to
send our people to three different planning sessions for
emergency preparedness. We request the funds come directly to
the Tohono O'odham Nation.
I would just like to conclude by saying that terrorists
don't distinguish between jurisdictions and people. That is our
concern. The Tohono O'odham Nation is at the forefront already.
We already detain foreigners as they come through our Nation
while we await Federal entities. It is important for us to
continue to have the authority necessary.
Our common goal is national security and tribal governments
must be at the table. We believe that the tribal amendments to
S. 578 will allow us to participate in the Department of
Homeland Security activities including information analysis and
infrastructure protection, science and technology, the
Directorate of Boarder and Transportation Security and
emergency preparedness and response. Passing this legislation
together with better communication and sharing of ideas,
coupled with direct Federal funding for manpower and resource
support are effective first steps to deterring these activities
on the Nation's lands.
By working together and continuing to identify and
implement solutions, we can better protect U.S. interests and
enhance government to government relations.
Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Juan-Saunders appears in
appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Juan-
Saunders.
Now may I call upon Chairman Windy Boy.
STATEMENT OF HON. ALVIN WINDY BOY, CHAIRMAN, CHIPPEWA CREE
BUSINESS COMMITTEE OF MONTANA
Mr. Windy Boy. Good afternoon, Senator.
I serve as chairman of the Chippewa Cree Tribe. I am an
advocate for Indian issues, especially when the issue impacts
our government to government relationship with the United
States of America and our right to tribal self determination
and self governance on our reservations.
Today, I am here to support the passage of S. 578 which
allows tribal governments to actively participate in our
national strategy to combat terrorism and to protect our tribal
members and tribal homelands.
Mr. Old Person mentioned agriculture. In the great State of
Montana, agriculture is the primary source of income. In
Montana, we have 3.1 million head of cattle, Indian ranchers
are 26.5 percent owners of those cattle, so the industry also
affects Indian country on the seven reservations.
If Indian tribes aren't a part of the national strategy, it
would leave a huge void in our national security plan. As
mentioned earlier, we are patriotic people. Our people
certainly have paid the ultimate price for freedom. Now our
governments must be involved in retaining that freedom, freedom
to accomplish the national objectives of the homeland security
plan such as border security, the protection of critical
infrastructure on Indian lands, integrated law enforcement and
emergency response and medical capacity planning and
implementation.
In support of S. 578, I'd like to share with the committee
members an experience my tribe had with border security, tribal
court jurisdiction over our homelands and the need to access
homeland security funding to enhance our ability as first
responders and for the protection of our infrastructure.
Last summer my tribe had a horrifying experience with an
across the boarder abduction of tribal children into Canada.
Our inability to do anything was a most frustrating experience.
Upon learning that our tribal children were abducted and taken
across the border to Canada which is approximately 50 miles
from the reservation in extreme, north central Montana, we
contacted all the Federal and State law enforcement agencies
for assistance and no one could help us. It was outside the
jurisdiction of every Federal and State entity. The FBI did not
have the jurisdiction because of the international border
crossings. The State of Montana couldn't help us because it was
out of their purview. Finally, we contacted the State
Department here in Washington, DC and they referred us to the
Child Abduction Bureau. They gave us sound advice but couldn't
do anything to get our tribal children back to the United
States and onto our reservation.
Where they lived, every governmental agency we spoke said
because we are an Indian tribe, they couldn't help us and
didn't understand tribal jurisdiction. Basically, we were on
our own.
As a self-governance tribe, we are used to taking charge
and performing Federal functions to the best of our ability
while maximizing the resources we have access to. With the
limited resources available to us, we charged the abductor in
tribal court for abduction or kidnapping, which is a class III
offense in our tribal law and order code, punishable for up to
6 months incarceration and a $500-fine and immediately issued
an arrest warrant.
We knew the service of process for the arrest warrant
across the border would be a big problem because both State and
Federal authorities couldn't help us. This was as far as we
could go. Everything at that time came to a standstill.
Finally, after weeks of trying to get assistance and access
governmental resources to help us locate and return those
children, we contacted a barrister in the Canadian justice
system. My tribe spent approximately $15,000 to $20,000 to hire
a Canadian attorney to represent us in the Canadian judicial
system to locate our children and return them to Rocky Boy in
the United States.
After several months of agonizing hearings and countless
phone calls, we were successful in getting our tribal children
back in the United States and home on our reservations.
This is an experience I will never forget and have vowed
not to go through such an ordeal again. The helplessness and
lack of coordinated resources is a shame in this day and age
and we can't allow this type of void in jurisdiction to carry
over into the fight against terrorism.
Our ability to access direct governmental resources and to
do so on a government to government basis in order to provide
better border security for our tribal homelands is imperative.
Today, timing is critical. We must have the ability to
immediately access and evaluate any situation we are confronted
with, especially when the protection of our homelands and
members is at issue.
All Indian tribes, especially the tribes bordering
international borders, need to be a part of the comprehensive
maintenance of the homeland security of the United States. We
already have the tribal laws, the tribal court system, law
enforcement personnel and governmental infrastructure. What we
need is the ability to work together as Mr. Old Person
mentioned and coordinate with our Federal counterparts and have
access to the various resources available to all agencies
involved with law enforcement and border security.
It is my hope that S. 578 will assist us in strengthening
our ability to deal with those who intrude on our lands for the
purpose of committing terrorist actions. My tribe, like many
others, is not immune to drug traffic. There were several
Mexican nationals arrested for pedalling drugs on Rocky Boy
only to have them deported and in a very short time, back in
Rocky Boy.
We have created expulsion orders for them to stay off the
reservation but if it is that easy for them to come onto a
little reservation in north central Montana, they have the
whole country. Without S. 578, there is a void and we are
limited in our ability to protect our homelands, our resources
and our people from these relatively new threats to our health,
safety and welfare.
In support of section 13 of the act which supports our
ability to exercise jurisdiction over any terrorists entering
our lands, closing the current jurisdictional gap is imperative
to protecting our homelands. We currently exercise as much
jurisdiction over our lands that the law allows but there are
jurisdictional gaps that cannot be allowed to continue unless
we want Indian reservations to become the points of entry and
activity for terrorist cells. Section 13 will allow us to close
those jurisdictional gaps and to be more responsive to
everyone, tribal and non-tribal, within our jurisdiction.
In terms of law enforcement and judicial capabilities, we
realize it is limited for purposes of the act and should not be
viewed as an access to the broad expansion of tribal
jurisdiction. The Federal authorities have been extremely
helpful with certain law enforcement cases but they are
overburdened. They cover several reservations in our area as
well as other Federal cases off the reservation as well.
Tribes can help offset their enormous load and work
together in a more direct capacity than we currently do. We can
perform law enforcement and judicial duties in a limited
capacity. Section 13 will allow us to work together in a true
government to government relationship and to jointly utilize
our resources to get the job done expeditiously and more
thoroughly.
Unless you have committed some sort of terrorist criminal
act as defined in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 within our
reservation's boundaries, you have nothing to fear from the
enactment of S. 578. Every American should be supporting this
effort to work together to make the reservation environment as
safe as the off reservation environment. The effort to combat
terrorism cannot be a game plan full of loopholes.
In addition to law enforcement on reservations, my
background is in law enforcement but as far as local law
enforcement, I find we are not to capacity as the Federal
system is. Our current funding level certainly needs to be
beefed up, particularly on reservations with large land bases.
With that, Senator, thank you. I would be glad to answer
any questions.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Windy Boy appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Chairman.
Governor, when the Memorial Day train derailment happened
and you were informed, did you hesitate before you gave
assistance?
Mr. Johnson. No; we responded immediately.
Senator Inouye. The train company was not grateful for
that?
Mr. Johnson. Eventually, they did acknowledge our response
and thanked us for the response we made but we had people on-
site within a matter of minutes after the incident occurred.
Senator Inouye. But they do not want to pay for it?
Mr. Johnson. Apparently not.
Senator Inouye. We hope this measure will in some small way
be helpful to you.
Mr. Johnson. It will help us, Senator.
Senator Inouye. Chief Old Person, we have been told that
BIA has decreased the number of law enforcement officers
protecting the northern border of the reservation that is on
the Canadian border. Is that correct?
Mr. Old Person. No; right now we are having some problems
but we are trying to come together at this time to work this
out, the BIA, the tribal law enforcement.
Senator Inouye. So you are trying to work this out now?
Mr. Old Person. We are trying to work it out right now.
Senator Inouye. I hope they will increase their presence
there.
Do you have the same sort of problem that Chief Windy Boy
has with his tribe?
Mr. Old Person. Yes; we all have this.
Senator Inouye. Drugs also?
Mr. Old Person. Drugs. That is why I said our young people
are being affected. We are trying to get them to realize that
they need to be a part of what we are trying to do and that we
are trying to help them. So they are very much affected.
Senator Inouye. You said you support S. 578?
Mr. Old Person. We certainly do.
Senator Inouye. We will try to do our very best, sir.
Mr. Old Person. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. Chairwoman Juan-Saunders, you testified
your police department spends about $3 million annually to
respond to border related incidents. How do you pay for this?
Ms. Juan-Saunders. Through tribal dollars.
Senator Inouye. And there are no Federal funds for this?
Ms. Juan-Saunders. No; there is no reimbursement. We have
made attempts and we bear the cost. We have over 70 tribal
police officers and a seven-member investigative unit.
Senator Inouye. With the assurance provided during the
first panel to share Federal funds with you, I hope they will
recognize your problem. Have you requested reimbursement?
Ms. Juan-Saunders. Yes; we have and no response.
Senator Inouye. No response?
Ms. Juan-Saunders. No.
Senator Inouye. Can you send us a copy of your
communication?
Ms. Juan-Saunders. Yes; in the audience, we have our chief
of police, Richard Saunders, and legislative council member,
Verlon Jose. We are very much concerned about the issues you
raised today.
Senator Inouye. You will send us a copy of that
communication and we will see what we can do.
Ms. Juan-Saunders. Thank you.
Senator Inouye. Chairman Windy Boy, you are going to have a
new campus there. What are you going to name it?
Mr. Windy Boy. Stone Child College.
Senator Inouye. It has been a long time since I have been
there.
Mr. Windy Boy. We would welcome you back.
Senator Inouye. You indicated you have good working
relationships with your local FBI agents but how long does it
take the FBI to respond to calls?
Mr. Windy Boy. Fortunately in the last year or so, they
have located parts of the Great Falls office which is 130 miles
to the west, located them to service both the Chippewa Cree
Tribe and the Gros Vent Tribes.
Senator Inouye. But it takes a couple of hours for them to
drive down?
Mr. Windy Boy. Yes.
Senator Inouye. They cannot respond immediately even if
they tried to?
Mr. Windy Boy. No.
Senator Inouye. Has the FBI refused to investigate or
pursue a crime committed by a non-Indian because of lack of
adequate resources?
Mr. Windy Boy. Depending on the situation. Drugs, which is
getting predominant in our area, they have been helpful in that
arena. The problem that I see, and I will use Rocky Boy as an
example, we have trained a number of officers and a number of
our officers have left tribal service to work for the Bureau of
Indian Affairs where the pay is better and stability with other
fringe benefits.
Senator Inouye. There are ICBM stations near you?
Mr. Windy Boy. Yes.
Senator Inouye. How close are they?
Mr. Windy Boy. The closest one would probably be 9 miles
from the nearest reservation boundary.
Senator Inouye. Have you ever been called upon to respond
to any problem there?
Mr. Windy Boy. In reference to?
Senator Inouye. Some sort of security problem? Have they
ever called you?
Mr. Windy Boy. No.
Senator Inouye. Once again, I thank all of you for your
testimony.
Now may I call upon my colleague, Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Akaka. I want to compliment you and commend you for
having this hearing which is important to our Indian nations
being that the Homeland Security Act is to ensure that the
local tribal governments are consulted and involved in homeland
security.
From what I gathered from your testimonies here, that is
not happening that way. Section 13 helps to ensure that and I
am glad to also hear that you are supporting that section in
the bill.
The Government folks who were here earlier answered the
questions and seemed to indicate that these procedures are
working. As you know, we are modifying the Homeland Security
plan to meet States' needs. The Chairman has asked you about
reimbursements. From what I gather, that has not come through
but I'd like to ask you about grants, whether any of you have
received any grants from homeland security at this time?
Mr. Windy Boy. One that I'm familiar with was through the
Department of Agriculture for $20,000. I believe each of the
tribes in Montana and Wyoming received those but $20,000 was
limited and was acquired through the Montana and Wyoming Indian
Stock Growers Association that I chair.
Senator Akaka. Governor Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. As best as I can recall, we have not received
any funds directly from the Department of Homeland Security
though we have received a limited amount of assistance from the
State and various other Federal agencies that also have
involvement in homeland security activities.
Senator Akaka. Chief Old Person.
Mr. Old Person. As Chairman Windy Boy indicated, some of
that we were involved in but there were units built along one
of the border crossings that we tried to get into without
success. We were unable to be a part of those units being built
under the Homeland Security. There really hasn't been anything
we could recognize that was coming to us. Yet we are still
trying to work with them to be involved. They are wanting to
build more units on one of the other border crossings and we
are hoping to work out something that we could be involved in
because we have people that can build too. We thought we should
be given that chance to work with them.
Senator Akaka. Chairwoman Juan-Saunders.
Ms. Juan-Saunders. Other than the equipment I referred to
in my testimony, no we have not received any grants at all.
Senator Akaka. I also wondered whether any grants were
offered to you at all. I guess not.
I also understand from the officials here before you that
they have done some out reach and day to day contact, training
and intelligence, Border Patrol training. My question to you is
has that happened as far as you know with your tribes?
Governor.
Mr. Johnson. I am not aware of any direct contact by the
Office of Homeland Security. In the forum that was held
yesterday, the representative from the Department of Homeland
Security, I believe her name is Sherry Rowe, indicated that she
had been to Acoma, the community adjacent to ours. I am not
sure she stopped by to speak with any of our personnel there.
So as far as I know, we have not had any direct contact with
the Department.
Senator Akaka. Chief Old Person, has there been any
involvement of the tribe?
Mr. Old Person. I attended a meeting in Helena, MT at the
Fort Harrison Veterans Hospital. It was within the National
Guard unit. At that meeting, we were told by the people working
with the State that the tribes were given a chance to be a part
of $7 million offered and no one responded with the exception
of one. Myself, we did not receive notification. I don't know
about Chairman Windy Boy. If you are not notified of anything
like that, you cannot be involved or you cannot respond. That
was one thing brought out to us.
At the same time, there is a second go round of $2 million
but that never has happened. That is why I said we begin to see
less and less involvement or anything saying we can be a part
of this.
Senator Akaka. You are correct. Dr. Raub did mention there
was a second go round of money and I wondered whether you
received any of that.
Chairwoman Juan-Saunders.
Ms. Juan-Saunders. Just a few discussions. The Arizona
tribal leaders and law enforcement officials expressed concern
to the State of Arizona about our lack of involvement and
access to funding sources. Consequently, the Arizona Department
of Homeland Security scheduled a meeting with the Arizona
tribal leaders and law enforcement.
In terms of the Tohono O'odham Nation, our police chief
currently serves on the Homeland Security Directors Advisory
Committee. I was invited by the border mayors to a meeting with
the Governor of Arizona to discuss these issues with the
Arizona director of Homeland Security. I expressed my concern
that we still, as a tribal nation were not receiving direct
funding and I am pleased to note that the border mayors is at
least supporting our efforts. We are continuing to work in
collaboration with them but we still have not seen any direct
resources come to the Tohono O'odham Nation.
Senator Akaka. Chairman Windy Boy.
Mr. Windy Boy. Certainly the communications as Chief Old
Person mentioned need to be strengthened. I have been involved
to the extent of sending one of my staff persons to those
homeland security meetings in Helena. My thoughts are
government to government and it is very hard as chairman to
have to sit down amongst non-policymakers, State employees,
trying to figure out what is in the best interest of my tribe.
I would like to deal with someone that is going to create
positive change with me as chairman of a sovereign nation.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for your response.
Mr. Chairman, I have an opening statement that I would like
to have entered into the record.
Senator Inouye. Without objection, so ordered.
[Prepared statement of Senator Akaka appears in appendix.]
Senator Akaka. And also some questions for the first panel.
Senator Inouye. Thank you all very much.
I would like to call the last panel which consists of: Tex
Hall, president, National Congress of American Indians; Gary
Edwards, chief executive officer, National Native American Law
Enforcement Association; and Tim. Sanders, emergency operations
coordinator of Gila River Indian Community, Office of Emergency
Management, Gila River Indian Community.
Mr. Hall.
STATEMENT OF TEX HALL, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN
INDIANS
Mr. Hall. Thank you very much for giving us the opportunity
to testify.
I was very concerned about the government officials leaving
the room after they finished with their panel. If that is any
indication of working with tribes, I don't think it is working
very good. I found out there is a Tribal Homeland Security
Director and she left. So I don't know how they are going to
effectively work with tribes when they don't stick around to
listen to the testimony of tribes.
I also want to comment that during 9/11, members of tribes
told me that you were on the Hill during that time, and, as
mentioned tribal leaders were meeting here in Washington, DC.
You took the time to come off the Hill and go down to the Grand
Hyatt and tell the tribes that 9/11 had happened and a tragedy
had happened to our country. I want to just recognize you for
that. You didn't have to do that, but you did and that tells a
lot about who you are and your relationship with Indian tribes.
So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for that.
For the record, my name is Tex Hall, president, National
Congress of American Indians and chairman of the Mandan,
Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation in west central North Dakota
located on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation.
I want to acknowledge the strong role of this committee's
chairman, Chairman Campbell, yourself as Vice Chairman, and
members of the committee, and all of the other sponsors of S.
578. We thank them for their sponsorship and protecting the
sovereign rights of Indian nations and our friendships over the
past years.
I also would like to thank the committee for conducting
this hearing on tribal government amendments to the Homeland
Security Act of 2002.
I am here to express our strong support for the bill and
the committee's effort to correct the troubling exclusion of
tribal governments from nearly all aspects of homeland security
to date. S. 578 will change the Homeland Security Act's
incorrect definition of tribes as local governments and thus
close a critical vulnerability gap in our Nation's homeland
security network.
NCAI has three important recommendations to the committee
regarding S. 578. First, we recommend the bill be amended by
the committee to include Alaska Native Tribal Governments.
Second, we recommend the inclusion of language to strengthen
the jurisdictional provisions in section 13. We have provided
the committee with language for both these recommendations.
Third, for tribes to receive direct Federal services. Tribes
should be provided additional funding to alleviate the
budgetary strains caused by homeland security related problems
such as patient overload in tribal hospitals and clinics
created by illegal immigrants on borders.
In order to give context to my remarks, I want to first
demonstrate how the issue of homeland security impacts my tribe
in Fort Berthold. As you mentioned, hundreds of Minute Men
missile launch sites are located throughout North Dakota. The
Minute Man has played a strategic role in our homeland security
defense system for over 40 years. What you may not know, Mr.
Chairman, is there are up to 18 missile silos located on our
reservation, only 3 miles from the city of New town, the
headquarters for our tribal administration.
Our police officers are regularly called to investigate
trespass calls on or near these U.S. Air Force-controlled
sites, especially when these incidents happen outside of the
Air Force patrols 9 to 5 shift. Despite these services, my
tribe did not receive any funds from the U.S. military or from
the Department of Homeland Security.
The Garrison Dam sits near our reservation and when it was
built, it decimated our remaining tribal land base and nearly
destroyed our culture. The impacts on our loss of life and
property if the dam was to be destroyed by a terrorist attack
is unthinkable. Now it is over 100 miles in distance to our
most southern community from our headquarters.
With regard to State funding, my home State of North Dakota
received over $13.2 million for homeland security. Just under
$73,000 of this amount was earmarked for all of the Indian
reservations in North Dakota. That means just a little over
$14,000 went to my reservation and the other tribes. That is
less than 1 percent of our State's contribution. We were never
consulted about any formula for appropriations or any formula
for determining our unmet needs for securing our tribal
homeland borders. None of that was done.
The $73,000 is going to be spent for an additional State
Homeland Security Liaison to work with Indian tribes. The net
result is that none of these actual monies in the State of
North Dakota will be spent to educate or train tribal law
enforcement concerning domestic terrorism in our State.
Even more disturbing is the fact that the tribes will not
receive any money to coordinate with the State and Federal law
enforcement authorities, which is critical. Coordination is
crucial if events were to happen on or near our reservation.
I have spoken with other tribal leaders throughout the
Nation and the failure of States to consult with Indian tribes
and include them in their homeland security efforts appears to
be the rule rather than the exception.
I want to finally point out that many tribes, such as mine,
are becoming more inviting to terrorism because of the presence
of our casinos our tourist attractions, and economic
development. The Lewis and Clark Bicentennial, which started
this year from 2003-06, will draw millions of people to
reservations in Indian country from St. Louis to the West
Coast. Homeland security funding and training is critical to
ensuring tourist safety.
As my fellow tribal leaders have attested, tribal lands
nationwide host similar sensitive sites. Tribal lands include
over 300 miles of international borders and 28 tribes are
located on or within 5 miles of an international border. These
tribes face serious immigration issues that have been widely
reported and documented. What is less known is the extensive
nature of infrastructure located on or near tribal lands that
is critical to our Nation's security. These include nuclear
power plants, hydroelectrical dams, pipelines, transmission
lines, railroads, airports, highway corridors, nearby military
installations, and huge populations centers. Like all other
governments, tribal governments need the necessary resources to
develop the capacity to respond to threats of terrorism. The
bottom line is that our national defense system is only as
strong as its weakest link.
Many of you have hundreds of thousands of constituents who
like it or not have to count on tribal law enforcement to
protect these sites. Your constituents will have to count on
tribal first responders to take action in the event of the
unthinkable. Yet, for some reason Indian tribes have been left
out of the planning efforts that this Nation has taken to date
to secure our homeland. S. 578, we believe, will correct these
defects.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 established the
Department of Homeland Security as the principal agency to
develop the national effort through a system of counter
terrorism analysis, preparedness and information sharing. Yet
the Act has a glaring weakness. It fails to include tribal
governments as full-fledged participants in the Department of
Homeland Security's program implementation. Instead, the Act
regulates tribal governments to the local government category,
a designation used for counties and municipalities with an
entire different level of responsibility for ensuring public
safety.
This has to change. The Department of Homeland Security is
not the first agency to encounter problems with Federal program
delivery and tribal consultation, but I hope it will be the
last. The bottom line is tribes need adequate funding to do the
job in protecting against terrorist threats. For decades,
States and local governments have received hundreds of millions
of dollars for developing and enhancing their emergency
management infrastructure, including emergency response.
As I testified, tribes have been largely ignored when it
comes to funding and technical assistance from Federal
agencies. We have been forced to ask for funding from States
and counties counter to the Federal policy supporting the
government to government relationship.
Adding to our frustration is the Department of Homeland
Security's lack of communication and consultation with Indian
tribes. The Department has assembled various work groups and
task forces but have not invited tribal leaders and
representatives to sit at the table. S. 578 is the right bill
at the right time to do this. It is almost 2 years since 9/11.
The President of the United States, President Bush,
recently said we have an obligation to future generations of
America to make sure this country is secure and we will keep
that obligation. This measure is a decisive measure and a smart
investment that will fulfill that commitment for our tribal
families and for our future tribal generations.
I would like to add in closing that the jurisdictional
problems that were talked about previously created by the
Oliphant decision denies tribal people the opportunity to
protect our tribal people and that must change. I greatly
appreciate the candid comments made by Mr. Heffelfinger. The
Homeland Security Act is an important vehicle for discussing
this problem because it highlights the very real issues that
tribes face every day, not just in terrorist attacks.
We are interested in having a broader discussion about
jurisdiction in Indian country but this cannot wait forever.
Tribal police need the tools to address crimes committed by
non-Indians in Indian country. Domestic violence and alcohol
and drug crimes are our biggest problems in sheer volume alone.
The most important civil right we all have is the right to be
safe in our homes.
In closing, we would like to have the same opportunity as
the Department of Justice to work on the language with the
committee on section 13.
Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to
testify.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Hall appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, President Hall.
Now may I recognize Chief Executive Officer Gary Edwards.
STATEMENT OF GARY EDWARDS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL
NATIVE AMERICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION [NNALEA]
Mr. Edwards. Vice Chairman Inouye and distinguished members
of the committee, my name is Gary Edwards. I am appearing and
testifying today as the chief executive officer of the National
Native American Law Enforcement Association.
As many of you may be aware, NNALEA is a not-for-profit
organization that promotes and fosters cooperation between
American Indian law enforcement officers, agents, their
agencies, tribes, private industry and the public. NNALEA
recently published its Tribal Lands Homeland Security Report
which details many of NNALEA's current findings and views on
the importance of tribal lands and tribal governments in the
furtherance of the mission of homeland security. We also have
an upcoming Homeland Security Forum in November of this year
wherein we will further pursue vital homeland security issues.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to
discuss some of NNALEA's views on S. 578 and perhaps even
earmark certain issues that need to be pursued in more detail
at our upcoming conference.
I have prepared a written copy of my testimony, along with
a copy of the NNALEA Tribal Lands, Homeland Security Report and
ask that it be accepted into the record.
Senator Inouye. So ordered.
Mr. Edwards. Generally, NNALEA supports the tenets of
sections 1-12 of the tribal government amendments to the
Homeland Security Act of 2002. I will refer to these sections
further in this testimony as ``the amendments.'' In pages 6-9
of the NNALEA Tribal Homeland Security Report, we set forth an
outline of many of the vulnerabilities located on tribal lands
that pose a threat to the homeland security of our entire
country. These vulnerabilities include border security,
critical infrastructure, integration of law enforcement, lack
of jurisdictional clarity, and emergency response and medical
capacity planning and implementation.
Obviously as these vulnerabilities are located on tribal
lands, Indian tribal governments have invaluable insight into
them and the best means to safeguard them against terrorist
attacks. Accordingly, Indian tribal governments must be
included, consulted and involved in carrying out the mission of
the Department of Homeland Security.
Such inclusion, consultation and involvement should occur
directly between the United States and each Indian tribe on a
government to government basis. Indian tribal governments
possess inherent sovereign authority.
With regard to section 13 of ``the amendments,'' NNALEA
generally agrees with the tenet that the inherent sovereign
authority of Indian tribal governments as recognized in section
2 of the amendments include the authority to enforce and
adjudicate its applicable criminal, civil and regulatory law
violated by any person on tribal lands within certain
limitations.
It appears that most everyone agrees these limitations
should include at a minimum those set forth in any treaty
between the United States and an Indian tribe as well as those
set forth in any applicable act of Congress. NALEA is, however,
aware there are certain rights in the enforcement and
adjudication of applicable criminal, civil and regulatory laws
that are at present guaranteed on non-tribal land and by non-
tribal governments but that are not guaranteed on all tribal
lands and by all tribal governments thereby creating a
discrepancy in the enforcement and adjudication of certain
laws.
Such discrepancies invoke a number of concerns such as due
process which probably require a further coming together and
balancing of an Indian tribal government inherent sovereign
rights, the rights of all citizens and the resources available
to the Indian tribal governments to enforce and adjudicate
applicable laws. Such discrepancies will ultimately be
encountered by the legislature and/or by the judicial system
should section 13 be enacted as currently drafted.
Therefore, NALEA suggests that in considering section 13,
the discrepancies of the rights referenced above should be
evaluated in detail along with the lack of parity in resources
provided to non-tribal governments versus those provided to
tribal governments for the purposes of enforcing and
adjudicating applicable laws.
After consideration of such, it might be surmised that
section 13 should be crafted in a way that better ensures both
the present discrepant rights in whole or in part and in a way
that provides for Indian tribal governments to receive an
influx in resources which allow them to bring their authorities
that enforce and adjudicate the laws into parity with those of
non-tribal governments.
In conclusion, NALEA supports the general tenets of the
amendments. However, there are certain specific details of the
amendments, especially regarding section 13, that probably
require further examination and clarification.
Thank you and I am happy to answer any questions you may
have at the appropriate time.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Edwards appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Mr. Edwards.
Mr. Sanders.
STATEMENT OF TIM SANDERS, EMERGENCY OPERATIONS COORDINATOR,
GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT,
GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY
Mr. Sanders. Good afternoon.
On behalf of the Gila River Indian Community of Arizona, I
would like to thank you for allowing us to testify here today.
My name is Tim Sanders and I am the manager of the Gila
River Indian Community Office of Emergency Management. In the
interest of time, I would like to submit my full written
testimony and highlight a few parts for you this afternoon.
We are pleased to be here to discuss S. 578, the Tribal
Government Amendments to the Homeland Security Act. We think
this is an important first step in the attempt to clarify the
roles and responsibilities of tribal governments in the
Homeland Security Act. I want to share with you some of the
experiences we have had with emergency management and homeland
security type issues that I think may be helpful as we further
the discussion.
It has been an honor for me to listen to the tribal leaders
discuss the problems they have and hear about their concerns
for the people for whom they are ultimately responsible. I am
here as the person charged with implementing the Homeland
Security Act and other emergency management measures in our
community. It is a big responsibility. I take it very
seriously. We have some issues that I think S. 578 will help
resolve as we go along.
The Gila River Indian Community is located just south of
Phoenix, Arizona, is home to about 14,000 of the 18,000
enrolled members of the community. It is the largest
reservation in the Phoenix metro area.
We have worked very hard over the past several years to
establish and build a very respected and successful emergency
management program at Gila River. The community also operates a
fire department, a police department, emergency medical
services, department of public health, a hospital and these are
parts of the Arizona State homeland security network.
I think our current emergency management capabilities
demonstrate that tribes can and do play an important role in
homeland security in a regional concept and a State concept of
homeland security.
We are here to support S. 578. The bill makes important
changes to the Homeland Security Act that recognizes the
sovereignty of tribal governments. It proposes to establish a
more direct government to government relationship. We just
received a letter from the Governor of Arizona that supports S.
578 and I think that letter was sent to the committee
yesterday. We have worked very hard with the State on some of
these issues.
In the broader context of homeland security, however, there
are certain other issues about the treatment and role of tribes
that are unclear. S. 578 only corrects one of several omissions
with regard to tribal treatment and tribal sovereignty for both
homeland security and emergency management.
In recent years, we have worked closely with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to address an omission in their
authorizing legislation, the Stafford Act, which has the same
problem the Homeland Security Act does with regard to defining
tribal governments as local government. This means tribes
cannot directly request disaster declarations, they can't enter
a direct government to government relationship with FEMA and
many of their programs.
I want to talk about some examples we have worked on with
FEMA to work around this issue that needs to be fixed. FEMA
worked very well with us on some of these issues. They have
established tribal liaisons in each one of their regions. We
worked with them to develop a measurement instrument that is
now available as software to help tribal emergency management
programs set goals and objectives for their programs and
measure their program capabilities. We also worked with FEMA to
develop a specific tribal emergency management training course
that is available to tribes. They present it twice a year at
their Emergency Management Institute in Emittsburg, MD.
We think homeland security could probably follow the same
lead as FEMA working with tribes that have developed the
capability that can serve as a model to help other tribes.
Unfortunately, we still have that problem that doesn't properly
recognize the role of tribal governments. When the rubber meets
the road sometimes, those Federal agencies will fall back on
that law as a stumbling block to providing the proper technical
assistance, funding assistance and things like that.
While we are excited about the prospects of amending the
Homeland Security Act, we would urge the committee to keep in
mind the Stafford Act is still out there and I think the same
changes may need to be made to that bill as well.
S. 578 doesn't do anything for the funding mechanisms for
tribes. The majority of homeland security funds are distributed
through the States and we have heard several examples of having
to lobby county governments and things like that and have
tribal leaders sit down with staff members from counties to try
to lobby and negotiate for pieces of funding that should be
going to the tribes.
The Department of Health and Human Services has funding for
hospitals and public health departments. That funding goes
through the State and tribes must sit down at the table with
various local governments to negotiate the terms of what if any
kind of assistance they are going to get for this.
None of the programs really direct that grant funding would
go directly to the tribes. It is a matter of how you negotiate
and what kind of relationships you have been able to establish
with your State and local governments. Obviously this is
unacceptable for our community and probably many other Indian
communities in the Nation.
A bill currently under consideration in the Senate, S.
1245, aims to consolidate a lot of the grant funding programs
for the Department of Homeland Security. That bill also has no
provisions for addressing the tribal funding needs. Instead,
the tribes would have to depend upon the States and upon those
counties and local jurisdictions to compete for those funds
they need.
We would urge the committee also to take a look at S. 1245
and see what kind of language may be developed for that bill
that would address some of those issues. We would be glad to
assist with developing some of that language to make sure that
even if we get S. 578 and the Stafford Act changed, if there is
still no funding mechanism, we will still be back to square one
on some of those issues.
We do have some recommendations. We don't come here with
our hands out today. We have invested considerable resources at
the Gila River Indian Community to establish a program to take
care of the needs of our community in the absence of some of
the Federal assistance we should be getting. We are proud we
have a sophisticated program that can take care of some of
those needs that allows us to get out there and build working
relationships with our counties, with the State counterparts.
I think from this experience we can bring some
recommendations that will help strengthen tribal emergency
management programs and perhaps give some other recommendations
for strengthening the homeland security package that you are
considering.
The first recommendation is the same amendment needs to be
made to the Stafford Act that is made to the Homeland Security
Act. I think it makes sense now to bring that under
consideration while S. 578 is under consideration.
Our second recommendation is that we believe that tribal
governments should be given the option of being a reporting
jurisdiction in a State's homeland security plan. Right now
Arizona has made the administrative decision to designate their
15 counties as reporting jurisdictions for the threat
assessments and needs assessments. That means that Gila River
and several other Indian reservations in Arizona must
artificially divide their needs and threat assessments and try
to make it fit into both or three counties they are in and that
complicates things for the counties as they relay that
information to the State. It doesn't give a clear picture of
what the threats and needs are on the reservation. I think it
leaves gaps in the State's homeland security assessment as
well.
Congress should stress to DHS and HHS that tribes should be
given an option if they have the administrative ability to
manage those grants and things like that. We have sent a letter
to our State Director of Homeland Security requesting they give
tribes the option to do that in Arizona. I think we might see
some movement on that in the future.
Third, I think Congress must recognize that tribes have
some unique homeland security issues and needs. Traditionally,
they will come to the table with much less emergency
preparedness infrastructure. I think it is unfair to burden
States that do have tribes with having to dilute their funding.
It may be possible somewhere down the road to have a set aside
amount that goes to States that have tribes set aside
specifically for tribal homeland security needs.
Fourth, despite the relative disadvantage with respect to
emergency management infrastructure, tribes must be given the
opportunity to participate as full partners. I think the
amendments to S. 578 will help local and State governments
realize tribal governments do exist. They are there and should
be treated as equal partners at the table. I think it will
enhance our capability to enter into relationships with them
and work out some of these issues.
Finally, we concur with other colleagues in the emergency
management community that an all hazards approach to emergency
management should be maintained. We see a lot of emphasis on
the law enforcement side, the surveillance side and things like
that. I think based on our experience, it is very important
that the all hazards approach be maintained. I think there is
another bill under consideration, S. 930, that seeks to amend
the Stafford Act to include terrorism aspects under their
umbrella of Federal assistance. There are some vehicles out
there to address some of the concerns and some of the
recommendations we have.
In conclusion, I would like to thank you again for allowing
us to testify. We are encouraged by the attention that some of
these issues have been getting. We have been involved in trying
to get some action on these for many years. We would like to
offer any assistance we can with language, with serving as a
model community, with assisting, whatever we can to help tribal
governments become more active and more participatory in the
homeland security arena.
We look forward to working with you on this bill and any
other homeland security issues we can help you with.
Thank you very much.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Sanders appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Mr. Sanders.
As noted by you, we have received a letter in support of
this measure from the Governor of Arizona, Janet Napolitano,
and that will be made a part of the record.
Her letter is in support of S. 578.
President Hall, you made a very interesting observation
that North Dakota received $13.2 million for homeland security
purposes and yet only $73,000 was set aside for Indian tribes
and all these limited funds could enable the hiring of a
liaison officer with the result that no actual funds were
allocated to the tribes.
Mr. Hall. I got my notice last Friday. It was just under
$73,000 and they are going to use it to hire a liaison. We
really didn't get any money.
Senator Inouye. How much did you get, $3?
Mr. Hall. It really is embarrassing. You can't defend your
homeland with that kind of dollars.
Senator Inouye. This measure will address that.
Mr. Hall. This would be a tremendous help to us. As I
mentioned, there are strategic missile silos, and hydroelectric
dams located on Fort Berthold, a mere $14,000 for homeland
security is embarrassing. There is no way it can cover any
amount of surveillance that is needed.
Senator Inouye. We intend to use S. 578 as a legislative
vehicle to amend the Stafford Act as far as the definition is
concerned. I presume all of you are in favor of that?
Mr. Hall. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. I do not think the Administration would
oppose that. After all, Justice has said they can go along with
that.
President Hall, I am certain you have heard concerns
expressed by certain non-Indians on this measure that it will
create a lot of chaos in reservation communities and authorize
broad civil and criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians. Is
there any reason for them to be concerned?
Mr. Hall. Not at all. If they read the legislation, it is
pretty straightforward, it is limited to the acts of terrorism.
I think people are jumping to conclusions. I think radicals are
jumping to conclusions and those radicals have never been in
Indian country. They don't understand the vastness of Indian
country. Indian country is 56 million acres of trust land as
you know, Senator. There are strategic initiatives, military
installations, airports, railroad, hydroelectric dams located
on Indian land. You put all that together, there is no way we
can defend our homeland for only $14,000 for each tribe?
If there is an attack, heaven forbid, that would be on a
reservation, the tribal government is the closest thing within
hundreds of miles in many rural parts of America. Non-Indian
communities are going to call our reservation because of the
communication system, because of the law enforcement, the
ambulance, the fire system. They are going to call our tribal
governments and we are going to respond as Governor Johnson
indicated when the railroad had their incident, they responded.
They didn't get a thank you until quite some time later but
nevertheless that happens throughout Indian country in the
interest of protecting human life. A terrorist doesn't care
whose jurisdiction it is.
No, those are radical statements that are ill founded and
haven't led to legislation. The legislation is limited to acts
of terrorism and tribes have to have that ability. If our law
enforcement, our emergency response is there, if there is an
act of terrorism, we have to have the ability to move quickly
to protect human life. So we have thought about that and are
ready to assist the committee in any manner whatsoever, but I
believe a lot of those are not really thought out statements.
Those are radical statements by anti-Indian groups that don't
like Indian people for whatever reason. They are very
discriminatory and racist towards our people and they are not
focused on this piece of legislation which is the Tribal
Homeland Security. It amends the Homeland Security Act to
include tribal governments' ability to have direct funding and
to have the authority and jurisdiction to protect all people,
all races if an act of terrorism occurs.
Senator Inouye. Mr. Edwards, has the Department of Homeland
Security had any official contact with your organization?
Mr. Edwards. Yes, sir; they have.
Senator Inouye. What was the nature of that?
Mr. Edwards. To work together to reach out to various
Indian organizations and tribes to work with us on our homeland
security summit. I might add that probably most of that was
initiated by NALEA seeking and looking for help and support
from the Department of Homeland Security.
Senator Inouye. Have members of your organization had the
opportunity to work with the law enforcement officials, and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation on matters of homeland
security?
Mr. Edwards. Yes, sir; we have. NALEA is about
partnerships, it's about building relationships. We work
extremely closely with the FBI. As a matter of fact, just 2
weeks ago we worked with them to develop a plan with missing
and exploited children in Indian country, to take that program
to Indian country. So we work with almost all Federal agencies
as well as tribal, State and local.
Senator Inouye. You think this measure will enhance that?
Mr. Edwards. Yes, sir; I definitely do.
Senator Inouye. Mr. Sanders, thank you for your testimony.
As you know when we report out a measure for consideration by
the full Senate, we accompany that with a committee report. In
that committee report, I will advise the staff to make certain
the provisions are clearly set forth that by this measure or
perhaps another measure, we will make certain that Gila River
will become a reporting jurisdiction and furthermore, we would
like to include clarifying language to assure that when funds
are appropriated, they will not go through the State but go
directly to tribal governments.
Mr. Sanders. That would be excellent.
Senator Inouye. I do not suppose you would oppose that. We
do respond to testimony, believe me. I hope the measure we
report to the full Senate will be one that will address some of
your concerns. We realize that this is not a cure all but I
think as some of you have indicated, it is a good first step.
We hope this will become not just a first step but will serve
as a foundation on which we may add many more steps.
With that, I thank all of you for your participation today.
We will now get to work and report out a bill.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:22 p.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 Statement of William F. Raub, Ph.D., Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary, Office of Public Health Emergency Preparedness
William F. Raub is the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Office of Public Health Emergency Preparedness, Office of the Secretary
of Health and Human Services [HHS]. He has also served as the Principal
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Office of Planning and Evaluation,
also within the Office of the Secretary.
Dr. Raub was the HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science Policy
from 1995 to 2001. He was the Science Adviser to the Administrator,
United States Environmental Protection Agency from 1992 to 1995 after a
1-year assignment as Special Assistant for Health Affairs in the Office
of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President of
the United States. Prior to that, he was the Deputy Director of the
National Institutes of Health [NIH] in the Department of Health and
Human Services from August 1986 through November 1991. From July 1989
through March 1991, he was the Acting Director, NIH.
From 1978 to 1986, Dr. Raub served first as Associate Director, and
later Deputy Director, for Extramural Research and Training at NIH. He
was Associate Director of the National Eye Institute from 1975 to 1978
and Chief of the Biotechnology Resources Branch in the Division of
Research Resources from 1969 to 1975. Dr. Raub was Acting Chief of the
Special Research Resources Branch, Division of Research Resources, in
1968-1969, and was a Health Scientist Administrator in the Division of
Research Facilities and Resources from 1966 to 1968. From 1966 through
1979, Dr. Raub led the development of the PROPHET system, the first
integrated array of computer-based tools for the study of the
relationships between molecular structures and biological effects.
Dr. Raub has received numerous awards from external organizations
for his government service--including the Society of Research
Administrators' Award for Distinguished Contribution to Research
Administration, the American Medical Association's Nathan Davis Award,
and election as a fellow of the National Academy of Public
Administration. In addition, within HHS, he has twice been presented
the Distinguished Service Award and has received the Presidential
Meritorious Executive Rank Award and the Presidential Distinguished
Rank Award.
Born in Alden Station, Pennsylvania, Dr. Raub was graduated summa
cum laude with the A.B. degree in Biology from Wilkes College in
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. He received the Ph.D. degree in Physiology
from the University of Pennsylvania, where he also was awarded a
National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship and was a Fellow of the
Pennsylvania Plan. During 1965-1966, Dr. Raub was an instructor and
post-doctoral fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Medical School.
______
Prepared Statement of Audrey Bennett, President, Prairie Tribal Council
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and committee members. My name is
Audrey Bennett, and I'm president of the Prairie Island Indian
Community. Thank you for inviting me to testify today.
I'm here to offer this committee a perspective that is unique to my
community but emblematic of the homeland security issues with which
many tribal governments in this country must contend.
For your reference, I've provided an aerial photo of Prairie
Island, which is located between the Mississippi and Vermilion Rivers
in southeastern Minnesota, about 50 miles south and east of
Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Prairie Island is sacred land. Our people have lived there for
countless generations. It is my home as well as the final resting place
for my ancestors.
As you can see, our reservation is bordered by a nuclear powerplant
and nuclear waste storage site. Two nuclear reactors and 17 large
storage casks filled with highly radioactive nuclear waste sit just 600
yards from our homes, church, community center, and business.
In fact, our community is believed to be the closest in the Nation
to both a nuclear powerplant and nuclear waste storage site--yet we
have no special role in helping to protect these facilities, or for
that matter, ourselves.
For decades, well before terrorism became the issue that it is
today, our tribe had to fight to be properly recognized by the State of
Minnesota and our utility neighbor. In 1979, when the plant was
evacuated after a steam generator leaked radiation into the atmosphere,
no one even bothered to inform our people about the incident. Most
tribal members realized something was wrong only after witnessing
numerous cars speeding away from the plant. Many of us wisely followed.
Today we are better prepared for a similar incident, and we have a
reasonably cooperative relationship with the plant and the State. But
in this age of catastrophic terrorism, conventional emergency planning
and tangential communication seems grossly inadequate. While we
participate in the State's radiological drills and exercises, we have
no formal role in helping to prevent an attack, and our involvement in
responding to such an event is, at best, ill-defined.
Imagine every time you leave your house or look out your window,
seeing a nuclear powerplant and being reminded of your vulnerability.
Imagine in this day of color-coded warnings and credible threats,
fearing the worst every time an airplane flies by or a news helicopter
hovers over the neighboring nuclear plant. Imagine, and this happened
recently, driving down your road only to see military Humvees stationed
at your intersection without any explanation or notice.
This is what we live with every day. We are uninformed. We are
victims in waiting.
Even in disaster recovery, should the worst occur, under the
existing system we have little to no independent recourse; instead, we
are largely subject to State authority. This was evidenced recently
when our community was affected by major flooding, and we had to go
though the State to access Federal resources.
While there, of course, needs to be cooperation between tribal and
State governments, it is not appropriate for States to be in the
position of deciding what tribes need to prepare for or recover from a
disaster--natural or otherwise.
Our tribal government, not the State, is ultimately responsible for
the health and safety of as many as 10,000 people, including our tribal
members, employees and visitors. But we also have a responsibility to
scores more that live in the area by virtue of our proximity to a
potential terrorist target and our obligation as Americans to help
protect the homeland.
According to a January 2003 poll, nearly 60 percent of Minnesotans
are concerned that the State's nuclear powerplants could be targeted
for terrorism. And 54 percent say that they would need to live at least
50 miles from a nuclear powerplant to feel safe.
Having lived much of my life in the shadow of a nuclear facility, I
share their concern. I share their concern because I know more can be
done to ensure our safety.
Reservation lands located along our nation's borders and near
critical infrastructure such as dams, hydroelectric facilities, and
nuclear powerplants are vulnerable. Tribal governments should be given
the mandate and resources needed to help keep these areas safe.
Furthermore, in keeping with the Federal Government's trust
responsibility to tribes, the Department of Homeland Security should be
required to deal with tribes on a government-to-government basis--just
as any other Federal agency would.
Clearly, if it is going to be effective, the Homeland Security Act
must involve tribes and be inclusive of tribal interests. It should
recognize tribal governments and demand the same vigilance of tribes
that is expected from others charged with protecting this Nation.
On behalf of my community and tribal council, thank you again for
the opportunity to, testify here today. We pledge our full cooperation
in this matter and we look forward to further dialog and prudent
action.
Mr. Chairman, I'd be happy to answer any questions.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.128
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.129
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.130
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.131
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.132
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.133
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.134
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.135
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.136
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.137
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.138
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.139
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.140
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.141
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.142
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.143
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.144
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.145
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.146
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.147
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.148
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.149
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.150
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.151
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9143.152