[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 65, LUMBEE RECOGNITION ACT; & H.R. 1294, THOMASINA E. JORDAN
INDIAN TRIBES OF VIRGINIA FEDERAL RECOGNITION ACT OF 2007
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
__________
Serial No. 110-16
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
-------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
34-823 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska, Ranking Republican Member
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan Jim Saxton, New Jersey
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Elton Gallegly, California
Samoa John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas Ken Calvert, California
Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey Chris Cannon, Utah
Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
Islands Jeff Flake, Arizona
Grace F. Napolitano, California Stevan Pearce, New Mexico
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey Henry E. Brown, Jr., South
Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona Carolina
Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam Luis G. Fortuno, Puerto Rico
Jim Costa, California Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington
Dan Boren, Oklahoma Bobby Jindal, Louisiana
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Louie Gohmert, Texas
George Miller, California Tom Cole, Oklahoma
Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts Rob Bishop, Utah
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania
Maurice D. Hinchey, New York Dean Heller, Nevada
Patrick J. Kennedy, Rhode Island Bill Sali, Idaho
Ron Kind, Wisconsin Doug Lamborn, Colorado
Lois Capps, California Vacancy
Jay Inslee, Washington
Mark Udall, Colorado
Joe Baca, California
Hilda L. Solis, California
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, South
Dakota
Heath Shuler, North Carolina
James H. Zoia, Chief of Staff
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Chief Counsel
Lloyd Jones, Republican Staff Director
Lisa Pittman, Republican Chief Counsel
------
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Hearing held on Wednesday, April 18, 2007........................ 1
Statement of Members:
Rahall, Hon. Nick J., II, a Representative in Congress from
the State of West Virginia................................. 2
Prepared statement on H.R. 65 and H.R. 1294.............. 3
Renzi, Hon. Rick, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Arizona................................................. 4
Shuler, Hon. Heath, a Representative in Congress from the
State of North Carolina.................................... 5
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 6
Statement of Witnesses:
Adkins, Chief Stephen R., Chickahominy Indian Tribe, Charles
County, Virginia........................................... 93
Prepared statement on H.R. 1294.......................... 99
Artman, Carl J., Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, Bureau
of Indian Affairs,, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, D.C............................................ 40
Prepared statement on H.R. 65 and H.R. 1294.............. 41
Barton, Rev. Jonathan, General Minister, Virginia Council of
Churches, Inc., Richmond, Virginia......................... 106
Prepared statement on H.R. 1294.......................... 108
Statements submitted for the record...................... 110
Branham, Chief Kenneth, Monacan Indian Nation, Madison
Heights, Virginia.......................................... 102
Prepared statement on H.R. 1294.......................... 105
Campisi, Dr. Jack, Consultant, Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina, Red Hook, New York............................... 72
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 74
Dole, Hon. Elizabeth, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina..... 22
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 24
Goins, Chairman James E., Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina,
Pembroke, North Carolina................................... 54
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 56
Hayes, Hon. Robin, a U.S. Representative in Congress from the
State of North Carolina.................................... 17
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 17
Hicks, Principal Chief Michell, Eastern Band of Cherokee
Indians, Cherokee, North Carolina.......................... 59
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 62
Jones, Hon. Walter B., a U.S. Representative in Congress from
the State of North Carolina................................ 30
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 32
Letters submitted for the record......................... 33
McHenry, Hon. Patrick, a U.S. Representative in Congress from
the State of North Carolina................................ 37
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 39
McIntyre, Hon. Mike, a U.S. Representative in Congress from
the State of North Carolina................................ 6
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 9
Letters submitted for the record......................... 11
Moran, Hon. James, a U.S. Representative in Congress from the
State of Virginia.......................................... 18
Prepared statement on H.R. 1294.......................... 20
Rountree, Helen C., Ph.D., Professor Emerita of Anthropology,
Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia................. 112
Prepared statement on H.R. 1294.......................... 114
Sampson, Kelvin, Basketball Coach, Indiana University,
Bloomington, Indiana....................................... 68
Prepared statement on H.R. 65............................ 71
Scott, Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby,'' a U.S. Representative in
Congress from the State of Virginia, Statement submitted
for the record on H.R. 1294................................ 26
Wolf, Hon. Frank R., a U.S. Representative in Congress from
the State of Virginia...................................... 27
Prepared statement on H.R. 1294.......................... 29
Additional materials supplied:
Burr, Hon. Richard, a U.S. Senator from the State of North
Carolina, Statement submitted for the record on H.R. 65.... 25
Beckwith, Lyle, Senior Vice President, Government Relations,
The Association for Convenience & Petroleum Retailing,
Letter submitted for the record on H.R. 1294............... 91
Davis, Hon. Jo Ann, a U.S. Representative in Congress from
the State of Virginia, Statement submitted for the record
on H.R. 1294............................................... 117
Kaine, Hon. Timothy M., Governor, Commonwealth of Virginia,
Statement submitted for the record on H.R. 1294............ 93
Locklear, Arlinda F., Esquire, Attorney for the Lumbee Tribe
of North Carolina, Statement submitted for the record on
H.R. 65.................................................... 118
O'Connor, Michael J., President, Virginia Petroleum,
Convenience and Grocery Association, Statement submitted
for the record on H.R. 1294................................ 124
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 65, TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE
LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. ``LUMBEE
RECOGNITION ACT;'' AND H.R. 1294, TO EXTEND FEDERAL RECOGNITION TO THE
CHICKAHOMINY INDIAN TRIBE, THE CHICKAHOMINY INDIAN TRIBE--EASTERN
DIVISION, THE UPPER MATTAPONI TRIBE, THE RAPPAHANNOCK TRIBE, INC., THE
MONACAN INDIAN NATION, AND THE NANSEMOND INDIAN TRIBE. ``THOMASINA E.
JORDAN INDIAN TRIBES OF VIRGINIA FEDERAL RECOGNITION ACT OF 2007''
----------
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Natural Resources
Washington, D.C.
----------
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m. in Room
1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Nick J. Rahall, II,
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Rahall, Young, Christensen,
Napolitano, Boren, Sarbanes, Shuler, Duncan, Renzi, and
Shuster.
The Chairman. The Committee will please come to order. We
are going to go ahead and proceed with our list of witnesses
this morning. It is the Chair's understanding that the Senate
is conducting a roll-call vote at the current time, and
therefore our distinguished visitor from that other body will
be late in getting here. But we will go ahead, and at the very
outset I want to note that Representative Bobby Scott is here
with testimony and may have to leave because of circumstances
that require his presence on the Floor.
We have with us several Native Americans and other
individuals from Virginia who have come here this morning to
give and to listen to testimony of great import. I know the
Virginia community has been hit the hardest by the horror at
Virginia Tech, and I can assure that community that it has
touched all of us very deeply. I think it would be appropriate
if we begin the morning with a moment of silence for the
students, the faculty, and the families of Virginia Tech.
[Pause.]
STATEMENT OF THE HON. NICK J. RAHALL, II, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
The Chairman. Thank you. The Committee is meeting to hold a
hearing on two bills this morning, one pertaining to the Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina and another concerning six tribes in
the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Frankly, I am embarrassed to be here this morning facing
the good people of the Lumbee Tribe yet again. When 240 of us
voted in the House of Representatives for the Federal
recognition during the 102nd Congress, that should have
resolved the question of Lumbee status. When we voted again in
favor of similar legislation in the 103rd Congress, that
certainly should have meant that the United States had finally
taken a stand and done the right thing by acknowledging a trust
relationship with the Lumbee Tribe. But it was not to be.
I personally have sat through several hearings on
legislation of this nature over the course of several
Congresses. Every time this Indian tribe gets close to its goal
of recognition by the Federal government, there is always
somebody somewhere ready to knock them down.
The Lumbee Tribe has been trapped inside a cruel carnival
that never ends. They have been on a roller coaster of exciting
highs, always followed by devastating lows. And just like a
roller coaster ride, the treatment of the Lumbee Tribe quite
honestly is starting to make me sick.
Before this day is over, we will no doubt have those who
say the Lumbee should go through Federal administrative
acknowledgement process. Well, we all know what that is; that
is the never-ending regulatory maze filled with distorted
mirrors, rubber rooms, and trick doors that this committee has
examined in the past.
In the face of adversity, the determination and sheer
stamina of the Lumbee serve as a testament to their strong
belief in who they are as a people. They have endured rejection
by Congress, hostility by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and
have been snubbed in their quest by neighboring Indian tribes.
All the Lumbee want is respect--the respect of being
acknowledged for who they are: an American Indian tribe.
I want to commend our colleague from North Carolina,
Representative Mike McIntyre for picking up the mantle for the
Lumbee people. He has been very forceful on this issue, has
discussed it with me a number of times, and I certainly want to
commend his very effective and determined and persistent
leadership on behalf of the Lumbee people.
I also want to commend Senator Elizabeth Dole for her
efforts in this matter. And it is our hope that we will have
her with us before the morning is out.
This is not the first time that Senator Dole has appeared
before our committee on behalf of the Lumbee Tribe. However, it
is my hope that it will be the last time she finds it necessary
to do so.
And of course, I welcome Representative Walter Jones to the
Committee, as well. A dear colleague, while perhaps on the
other side of the aisle, still a very good friend, and helps us
a great deal on many non-partisan issues.
As for the Virginia tribes, the bill is being advanced by
my good friend, Jim Moran. As we approach the 400th anniversary
of the founding of Jamestown, it is strange, to say the least,
that the very Native Americans who greeted the English settlers
are still not fairly recognized Indian tribes today.
The members of these tribes have faced decades of
deliberate discrimination from policies aimed at stripping them
of their identities. They were targeted and subject to having
their race designation changed on their birth certificates and
other legal documents. Yet they have endured, and all six
tribes that are the subject of H.R. 1294 are recognized by the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
There is new leadership on this committee. There is new
leadership in the Congress. It is a new Congress. So let us now
seriously go about the business of rectifying wrongs to the
Lumbee and the Virginia tribes.
And before recognizing our witnesses, I will recognize the
gentleman from Arizona, the acting Ranking Member today, Mr.
Renzi.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rahall follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Nick J. Rahall, II, Chairman, Committee on
Natural Resources, on H.R. 1294, The Lumbee Recognition Act, and H.R.
65, The Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal
Recognition Act
The Committee will come to order. We have with us several Native
Americans and other individuals from Virginia who have come here this
morning to give and listen to testimony of great import. I know the
Virginia community has been hit the hardest by the horror at Virginia
Tech, but I assure you that it has touched us all deeply. I want to
begin this morning with a moment of silence for the students, faculty,
and families of Virginia Tech. Thank you.
The Committee is meeting to hold a hearing on two bills this
morning, one pertaining to the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina and
another concerning six Tribes in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Frankly, I am embarrassed to be here this morning, facing the good
people of the Lumbee Tribe yet again.
When 240 of us voted for Federal recognition during the 102-
Congress, that should have resolved the question of Lumbee status. When
we voted again in favor of similar legislation in the 103rd Congress,
that certainly should have meant that the United States had finally
taken a stand and done the right thing by acknowledging a trust
relationship with the Lumbee Tribe. But it was not to be. I personally
have sat through several hearings on legislation of this nature over
the course of several Congresses.
Every time this Indian Tribe gets close to its goal of recognition
by the Federal government, there is always somebody ready to knock them
down.
The Lumbee Tribe has been trapped inside a cruel carnival that
never ends. They have been on a roller coaster of exciting highs always
followed by devastating lows. And just like a roller coaster ride--the
treatment of the Lumbee Tribe is starting to make me sick.
Before this day is over, we will, no doubt, have those who say the
Lumbee should go through the Federal administrative acknowledgement
process. You know what that is--that is the never-ending regulatory
maze filled with distorted mirrors, rubber rooms, and trick doors that
this committee has examined in the past.
In the face of adversity, the determination and sheer stamina of
the Lumbee serve as testament to their strong belief in who they are as
a people. They have endured rejection by Congress, hostility by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, and have even been snubbed in their quest by
neighboring Indian Tribes.
All the Lumbee want is the respect of being acknowledged for who
they are--an American Indian Tribe.
I want to commend our colleague, Mike Mclntyre, for picking up the
mantle for the Lumbee people. I also want to salute Senator Elizabeth
Dole for her efforts in this matter. This is not the first time Senator
Dole has appeared before this Committee on behalf of the Lumbee Tribe.
It is my hope, however, that this will be the last time she finds need
to do so.
As to the Virginia Tribes, and the bill being advanced by my good
friend Jim Moran as we approach the 400th anniversary of the founding
of Jamestown, it is strange to say the least that the very Native
Americans who greeted the English settlers are still are not federally
recognized Indian Tribes today.
The members of these tribes have faced decades of deliberate
discrimination from policies aimed at stripping them of their
identities. They were targeted, and subjected to having their race
designation changed on their birth certificates and other legal
documents.
Yet they have endured, and all six tribes that are the subject of
H.R. 1294 are recognized by the Commonwealth of Virginia.
There is new leadership in this Committee, this is a new Congress.
Let us now seriously go about the business of rectifying wrongs, to the
Lumbee and to the Virginia Tribes.
Thank you.
______
STATEMENT OF THE HON. RICK RENZI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Mr. Renzi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning to you
all. The decision to recognize a tribe is one of the most
important decisions this committee will ever make, and there
are many reasons for this.
Recognition entitles a tribe to services and benefits,
immunities and powers that can have profound impacts on the
tribe's members, the surrounding communities, the states in
which they live. But most importantly, it is a nation-to-nation
recognition of independence and sovereignty.
It affects the Departments of Interior, Health and Human
Services, Justice, and every agency that interacts with the
tribes, whether it is meeting a trust responsibility, dealing
with water rights, land claims or studying impacts of Federal
actions.
Although the Department of Interior would prefer
Petitioners to meet the seven mandatory criteria of the Office
of Federal Acknowledgement, Congress reserves the power to have
the final say. And given the inherent delays in the
administrative process, Congress may well have to step in and
make that decision for some of these tribes.
I want to thank the Chairman for again holding a hearing on
this issue. I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses
today, and thank you all for coming by.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. The Chair did fail to recognize as
well another colleague of ours that is here, a very important
Member of the Appropriations Committee, Representative Frank
Wolf. We do welcome you, as well.
Before going further, though, I do want to recognize a new
Member of our committee, I guess I should say, and a very
superb Member of the Freshman class--not the Freshman class, I
take it back. We don't call them Freshmen, we call them new
Members, right, Heath?
Mr. Shuler. Majority.
The Chairman. Majority Members, right. Majority makers;
they make us who we are, I guess. So I do want to recognize the
gentleman from North Carolina; indeed, a valued Member of this
committee, Mr. Heath Shuler.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. HEATH SHULER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Shuler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young for holding this
hearing today, and for all the good work that they have done on
behalf of Native Americans throughout their careers.
I also want to welcome Principal Chief Michell Hicks and
other leaders of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians who have
traveled from western North Carolina to the hearing today.
Mr. Chairman, I grew up in North Carolina near the Eastern
Band of Cherokee Indian Reservation. I have heard the Cherokee
speak their native language. I have seen them play a game that
belongs to them they call stickball. I conducted youth camps on
the Eastern Band Reservation for young men and women who attend
the reservation school.
The Cherokee people have a distinct living culture that
makes them different from any other people in the world. I am
embarrassed to say that our Federal government at one time
tried to take their language and their culture away from them.
I respect the Cherokee people because the resistance of these
efforts, and continue to maintain these separate cultures.
Mr. Chairman, in 1978 the United States Department of
Interior recognized the need to end the inconsistent process of
native recognition, and adopted uniform guidelines for Federal
acknowledgement.
H.R. 65, the Lumbee Recognition Act, would circumvent that
process. I cannot support such legislation. I believe that the
Federal government's process allows for the uniform and
rigorous evaluation necessary to make an informed and accurate
decision. This process requires that any petition group must
meet mandatory criteria in order to become Federally
recognized.
This process is a thorough one, managed and overseen by
qualified experts in the field of genealogy, anthropology, this
establishment process by any group, including Lumbees. Members
of Congress should not arbitrarily rule on the identity of a
people without establishing the facts.
And the best way to establish those facts is to let the
system work, and let the experts do their job. The fair way to
address this situation is to allow the Lumbees to complete the
administrative process at the Office of the Federal
Acknowledgement in the Department of Interior. This process
protects not only the interests of the United States, but
allows the political and cultural integrity of established
Indian tribes.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I yield back my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Shuler follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Heath Shuler, a Representative in Congress
from the State of North Carolina, on H.R. 65
I want to thank Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young for
holding this hearing today and for all the good work they have done on
behalf of Native Americans throughout their careers.
I also want to welcome Principal Chief Michell Hicks and the other
leaders of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians who have traveled from
Western North Carolina to be here for this hearing.
Mr. Chairman, I grew up in North Carolina near the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indian Reservation.
I have heard the Cherokee people speak their native language, and I
have seen them play a game that belongs to them they call ``stick
ball.''
I conducted youth camps on the Eastern Band Reservation for young
men and women who attended the reservation schools.
The Cherokee people have a distinct, living culture that makes them
different from any other people in the world.
I am embarrassed to say that our Federal Government at one time
tried to take their language and culture away from them.
I respect that the Cherokee people resisted these efforts and
continue to maintain their separate culture.
Mr. Chairman, in 1978, the United States Department of Interior
recognized the need to end the inconsistent process of native
recognition, and adopted a uniform guideline for federal
acknowledgement.
H.R. 65, the ``Lumbee Recognition Act,'' would circumvent that
process. I cannot support such legislation.
I believe the federal acknowledgement process allows for the
uniform and rigorous evaluation necessary to make an informed and
accurate decision.
This process requires that any petitioning group meet seven
mandatory criteria in order to become federally recognized.
The process is a thorough one, managed and overseen by qualified
experts in the fields of genealogy, anthropology, and Native American
history.
I strongly oppose any attempts to circumvent this established
process by any group, including Lumbees. Members of Congress should not
arbitrarily rule on the identity of a people without establishing the
facts.
And the best way to establish those facts is to let the system
work, and let the experts do their job.
The fair way to address this situation is to allow the Lumbees to
complete the administrative process at the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement in the Department of the Interior.
This process protects not only the interests of the United States
but also the political and cultural integrity of established Indian
tribes.
Thank you.
______
The Chairman. The Chair thanks the gentleman from North
Carolina, and also wishes to recognize another of our Members
of the House that has joined us today: our colleague, Mr.
Patrick McHenry. And we will look forward to his testimony, as
well.
At this point, the Chair will recognize a gentleman from
North Carolina, Mr. Mike McIntyre.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MICHAEL McINTYRE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify before you
regarding Federal recognition for the Lumbee Indians.
Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, the members of
the Lumbee Tribe and I greatly appreciate your support of the
Lumbee Tribe in the past, your willingness to conduct this
hearing today, and your support in the present; and also your
willingness to let us act and move forward in the future.
The Lumbee Tribe has two true friends on this committee--
Chairman Nick J. Rahall and Representative Don Young, the
Ranking Member. We greatly appreciate your commitment and your
concern about this situation.
I also want to thank my North Carolina colleagues who have
joined us, and especially Senator Dole, who will be joining us,
for her leadership, as well as Senator Burr's commitment to
this. And to my colleague, Congressman Robin Hayes, whose
district adjoins mine, and who also has a large constituency of
the Lumbee people.
Chairman Rahall, I would like to unanimous consent to place
into the record three letters from the last three Governors for
the last 31 years in North Carolina, both Republican and
Democrat, who have written letters in support of the
recognition of this tribe. For 31 years our top official in our
state from both parties have recognized the need to allow
Federal recognition to go forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Over the last four years the Lumbee Tribe and many of its
members have faithfully traveled to Capitol Hill. They are now
attending their fourth hearing in the last four years to
present this strong and solid case for Federal recognition. And
this doesn't even take into account the numerous other times
that members of the tribe, over the last several decades, have
come up here to seek recognition. They have been patient, they
have been respectful, and yes, they have been persistent.
But Mr. Chairman, the time for action has come now. The
time has come for moving this legislation. And I greatly
appreciate your allowing this hearing to be this early in this
session, so we can do just that. The time has come for
discrimination to end, and recognition to begin.
During the past few hearings the Lumbee Tribe has heard
concerns raised about whether or not they are ``true Indians,''
and I am certain that will be raised here again today.
Chairman Rahall, that question is a dagger in the heart of
the good, decent, and honorable citizens who compose the Lumbee
Tribe. It represents a weak attempt to try and confuse the
issue of Federal recognition.
Mr. Chairman, the record and the facts are crystal clear
that the Lumbee Tribe exists as an Indian tribe, and has done
so over its long history. In fact, the U.S. Department of
Interior has on several occasions concluded that the Lumbees
are a distinct Indian community.
You will also hear comments today about the names that they
have had. The various names by which the tribe has been known
were the result of state law. In no case, except for the name
Lumbee, were these other names chosen by the tribe itself. All
of these other names were imposed on the tribe, or chosen for
them.
Furthermore, the BIA regulations on acknowledgement of
Indian tribes specifically provide--again, the BIA regulations
specifically provide that changes in name are not relevant to
Indian identity.
Now, why the need for Federal legislation? Why not let the
tribe go through the regular process? We are going to hear that
today; in fact, it has already been alluded to. Because in 1956
Congress passed the Lumbee Act, which acknowledged the Lumbee
as Indians in name only, but denied them any further Federal
recognition or benefits.
Since then, the tribe has tried to go through the BIA
process, faithfully following the regulations put forth. But in
1989, the Solicitor General of the United States himself ruled
that only Congress could extend full recognition because of the
1956 Act. That in a nutshell is why we are here today.
There is exact precedent for this case. The Tiwa Tribe of
Texas were recognized in name only in 1968, just as the Lumbee
Tribe. In fact, that bill was patterned after the 1956 Lumbee
bill. And the Department of Interior said it could not proceed
with the regular process because of the fact of the Solicitor
General's opinion, that they would have to go back before
Congress to correct this unfortunate and unfair situation.
And so in 1987, Congress did enact legislation to grant the
Tiwas full recognition. So now what are we left with? The only
Indian tribe in America in this unique situation, the only
tribe where Congress has recognized the tribe in name only, but
then never granted the full recognition, and left this tribe in
perpetual limbo.
Now, the Lumbee Indians have been inhabitants of this land
since Englishmen first arrived on the coast of North Carolina
and discovered Native Americans in the late 1500s. In fact,
included among those Native Americans were both the Cheraw and
Pee Dee Indians, who are direct ancestors of the Lumbees.
Later, in 1888, the Lumbees made their first effort at
gaining Federal recognition. What does that mean? It means for
over half the time that our country has been in existence, 119
of the 231 years of our great American history, the Lumbee
Indians have been seeking the recognition and respect they
deserve from our U.S. Government. As the largest tribe east of
the Mississippi and the largest non-recognized tribe in
America, it is unfathomable that this tribe of 55,000 people do
not have the dignity to be recognized by our Federal
government.
I was born and reared in Robeson County, North Carolina,
the primary home of the Lumbee people. I go home virtually
every weekend. I have the honor of representing approximately
40,000 members of the Lumbee Tribe who live in my home county.
In fact, there are more Lumbees in Robeson County than there
are any other racial or ethnic group.
The Lumbee Indians, many of whom are here in the audience
today, many of whom are lining the halls who came up here by
the busloads for this hearing, as they have done in the past,
are honorable friends, many friends who I have known all my
life. And they are supportive to the success of everyday life
in southeastern North Carolina, and indeed, to our nation.
From medicine and law, to banking and business, from farm
and factories to the schools and the churches, from the
government, military, and community service to entertainment
and to athletic accomplishments, as you will hear from our
friend, Coach Kelvin Sampson, the Lumbees have made tremendous
contributions to our county, state, and nation. In fact, in my
home county, the former Sheriff, the current Clerk of Court,
the Registrar of Deeds, the school superintendent, several
county commissioners and school board members, and my own
representative in the State Legislature up in Raleigh are all
members of the Lumbee Tribe, as well as two of our District
Court Judges and one of our Superior Court Judges.
The Lumbees are fully incorporated into society. I have
Lumbee members in every facet of society that are involved, as
I know, even in my own church. Friends of mine that I have
known all my life.
Mr. Chairman, the contributions recognized by our
colleagues here in the U.S. House through their support of H.R.
65 have been to let this recognition proceed. I am pleased that
we have 206 Members of the U.S. House from both parties who
have cosponsored the Lumbee recognition.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, let me urge this committee and
this Congress not to delay any more on this issue. Justice
delayed is justice denied. And as we will hear from the next
panel, on the evidence, it is clear, cogent, and convincing. It
is time to say yes to dignity. It is time to say yes to
respect, yes to fundamental fairness, yes to decency, yes to
honor; indeed, yes to Federal recognition.
As I said earlier, it is time for discrimination to end,
and recognition to begin.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify. I
look forward to working with you and the Committee for this
long-overdue recognition. Indeed, may God grant that justice
will finally be done. And with your help, I am confident it
will. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McIntyre follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Mike McIntyre, a U.S. Representative from
the 7th Congressional District of North Carolina, on H.R. 65
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today regarding federal recognition
for the Lumbee Indians.
Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, the members of the Lumbee
Tribe and I appreciate your support of the Lumbee Tribe in the past,
your willingness to cosponsor our bill for federal recognition in this
Congress, and your willingness to listen again today as the tribe
presents its case for federal recognition. The Lumbee Tribe has two
true friends in Representatives Nick Joe Rahall and Don Young, and I
know that I speak on behalf of all the Lumbee members when I say,
``thank you.''
A special thanks to my North Carolina colleague--Senators Dole for
her leadership and work on this important effort and for being here
today to testify.
Chairman Rahall, I would like to ask unanimous consent to place
into the record 3 letters from North Carolina's only Governors over the
last 31 years--Jim Hunt, James Martin and Mike Easley. These letters
show bipartisan support for federal recognition for the Lumbee Tribe
from our state's highest official.
Mr. Chairman, over the last four years, the Lumbee Tribe and many
of its members have faithfully traveled to Capitol Hill. They are now
attending their fourth hearing in four years to present their strong
and solid case for federal recognition by the U.S. Congress. And this
does not take into account the numerous times the Congress has
discussed this issue prior to this time. The Lumbees have been patient.
They have been respectful. And, yes they have been persistent.
But Mr. Chairman, the time has come for action. The time has come
for movement of legislation. The time has come for discrimination to
end and recognition to begin! The time for Lumbee recognition is now!
During the past few hearings, the Lumbee Tribe has heard concerns
raised about them as to whether they are ``true Indians,'' and I am
certain that it will be raised again here today. Chairman Rahall, that
question is a dagger in the heart of the good, decent, and honorable
people who compose the Lumbee Tribe! It represents a weak attempt to
try and confuse the issue of federal recognition.
Mr. Chairman, the record and the facts are crystal clear--the
Lumbee Tribe exists as an Indian tribe and has done so over its long
history. The Department of Interior has, on several occasions,
concluded that the Lumbees are a distinct Indian community. The various
names by which the tribe has been known were the result of State law.
In no case, except for the name Lumbee, were the names chosen by the
tribe itself. All the other names were imposed upon the tribe or chosen
for them! Furthermore, the BIA regulations on acknowledgement of Indian
tribes specifically provide that changes in names are not relevant to
Indian identity.
In the late 1500's, when English ships landed on the shores at
Roanoke Island on the North Carolina coast, the Englishman discovered
Native Americans. Included among those Native Americans were both the
Cheraw and Pee Dee Indians, who are direct ancestors of the Lumbee
Indians. Later, in 1888, the Lumbees made their first effort at gaining
federal recognition. For at least 500 years, Lumbee Indians have been
inhabitants of this land, and for over half of the time that our
country has been in existence, 119 (First petition to Congress was in
1888) of the 231 (2007-1776 = 231) years, the Lumbee Indians have been
seeking the recognition and respect that they deserve. As the largest
tribe east of the Mississippi and the largest non-recognized tribe in
America, it is unfathomable that this tribe of 55,000 people has never
been fully recognized by our government.
I was born and reared in Robeson County, North Carolina, the
primary home of the Lumbee people. I go home there virtually every
weekend, and I have the high honor of representing approximately 40,000
of the 55,000 Lumbees who live in my home county. In fact, there are
more Lumbees in Robeson County than any other racial or ethnic group.
The Lumbee Indians, many of whom are in the in the audience today, are
my friends, many of whom I have known all my life. They are important
to the success of everyday life in Southeastern North Carolina, and
their contributions to our society are numerous and endless. From
medicine and law to business and banking, from the farms and factories
to the schools and the churches, from government, military, and
community service to entertainment and athletic accomplishments, the
Lumbees have made tremendous contributions to our county, state, and
nation. In fact, in my home county, the former sheriff, the current
clerk of court, the register of deeds, the school superintendent,
several county commissioners and school board members, and the
representative in the state legislature of the area where I live, as
well as two of the district court judges and one of the superior court
judges are all Lumbee Indians.
Mr. Chairman, those contributions are being recognized by our
colleagues here in the U.S. House through their support of H.R. 65,
legislation that I have introduced to grant the Lumbees federal
recognition. I am pleased to report to the Natural Resources Committee,
that 206 members of the U.S. House from both parties have cosponsored
Lumbee recognition!
Lumbee contributions are also being recognized at home by both the
public and private sector. From City Councils to County Commissioners,
from the Chamber of Commerce to the Southeastern Regional Medical
Center--all have endorsed the effort to grant the Lumbees federal
recognition.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, let me urge this Committee, and this
U.S. Congress, not to delay any more on this issue. Justice delayed is
justice denied! As you will hear from the next panel, the evidence is
clear, cogent, and convincing. It is time to say ``yes''--yes to
dignity and respect; yes to fundamental fairness; yes to decency; yes
to honor; yes to federal recognition! And as I said earlier, it's time
for discrimination to end and recognition to begin!
Thanks again for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to
working with you and the committee for this long over-due recognition.
May God grant that justice finally be done! With your help, I am
confident that it will!
______
[NOTE: Letters submitted for the record by Mr. McIntyre
follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Mike. The Chair at this time
will ask unanimous consent that all Members' testimony will be
made part of the record as if actually read, and they are
encouraged to summarize. And we are going to recognize Members
in the order that is listed here. And that would be Robin Hayes
next, but there needs to be room made for Robin at the
testimony table.
Mr. Renzi. A lot of room.
The Chairman. I didn't say that. Your friend, Rick, up here
said a lot of room, Robin.
Mr. Renzi. Make some space over there.
The Chairman. Welcome. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. ROBIN HAYES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Hayes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was fortunate enough
to hail from Robinson County until recent redistricting, so
this is very special to work with Mike McIntyre and others to
get this done.
Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, and in this case,
Ranking Member Renzi, thank you for taking time to hold this
hearing on the Lumbee Recognition Act, H.R. 65.
Since I have been a Member of Congress I have worked hard
to see that the Lumbee Tribe receives full Federal recognition.
I am very pleased that Lumbee Tribal Chairman Jimmy Goins is
able to join us today and testify on this important issue, as
well.
As you know, I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 65, which
was sponsored by my friend and colleague, Congressman Mike
McIntyre. Mike has been a very strong advocate of the Lumbee
Tribe for years. It has been an honor to work with him on this
important issue, as well.
Senator Dole and Senator Burr are working hard to garner
support for the Lumbee Recognition Act in the Senate, and I
appreciate their leadership on this issue.
The Lumbee Indian Tribe has an extensive history in North
Carolina, ranging back to 1724 on Drowning Creek, which is now
referred to as the Lumbee River. The Lumbee Tribe has been
recognized by the State of North Carolina since 1885.
The Lumbee Tribe has over 40,000 members, the largest tribe
in the state. I think Mike corrected it to 65,000. Eighth
District, which I serve, is home to many of the Lumbees that
reside in North Carolina, primarily in Hoke, Scotland, and
Cumberland Counties. These important members of my constituency
should be Federally recognized so they are able to receive
various Bureau of Indian Affairs and other Federal government
services and programs that they rightly deserve.
The heritage of the Lumbee Tribe is as strong today as when
first recognized by North Carolina. And the tribe should be
proud of the rich and valued cultural contribution they have
given to our communities.
My hope is that we, as a Congress, do what the Federal
government should have done decades ago, and give the Lumbee
Tribe the distinction of a Federally recognized tribe.
Thank you all again for holding this hearing. I look
forward to continuing to work with you on this important issue.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hayes follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Robin Hayes, a Representative in Congress
from the State of North Carolina, on H.R. 65
Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, I appreciate you taking
the time to hold this hearing on the Lumbee Recognition Act, H.R. 65.
Since I have been a Member of Congress, I have worked hard to see that
the Lumbee Tribe receives full federal recognition. I am very pleased
that Lumbee Tribal Chairman Jimmy Goins is able to join us today and
testify on this important issue as well.
As you know, I am a proud original cosponsor of the H.R. 65, which
was sponsored by my friend and colleague Congressman Mike McIntyre.
Mike has been a strong advocator of the Lumbee Tribe for years and it
has been an honor to work with him on this important issue as well. I
know Senator Dole and Senator Burr are working hard to garner support
for the Lumbee Recognition Act in the Senate, and I appreciate their
leadership on this issue.
The Lumbee Indian Tribe has an extensive history in North Carolina
ranging back to 1724 on Drowning Creek, which is now referred to as the
Lumbee River. The Lumbee Tribe has been recognized by the state of
North Carolina since 1885. The Lumbee Tribe has over 40,000 members and
is the largest Tribe in the state of North Carolina.
The 8th District, which I serve, is home to many of the Lumbees
that reside in North Carolina, primarily in Hoke, Scotland and
Cumberland counties. These important members of my constituency should
be federally recognized so they are able to receive various Bureau of
Indian Affairs and other federal government services and programs they
rightly deserve.
The heritage of the Lumbee Tribe is as strong today as when first
recognized by North Carolina and the Tribe should be proud of the rich
and valued cultural contribution they have given to our communities. It
is my hope that we as a Congress do what the federal government should
have done decades ago and give the Lumbee Tribe the distinction of a
federally recognized Tribe.
Thank you all again for holding this hearing. I look forward to
continuing to work with you all on this important issue.
______
The Chairman. All right. The next witness is Representative
Jim Moran from the State of Virginia.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JIM MORAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
Mr. Moran. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
your leadership. And the other Members of the Committee, Mr.
Renzi, the Ranking Member.
I do appreciate your willingness to hold this hearing and
provide me with an opportunity to tell the story of six of
Virginia's Native American tribes.
This is one of the worst cases of injustice that was
perpetrated by the European settlers upon Native Americans. And
this is a long and very troubling history. But I think you will
find that this is one of the unique aspects of that history.
Back in 1607 it was these six tribes that welcomed the
English settlers at Jamestown, and in fact, enabled them to
survive. In 1677, however, after having been subdued and pushed
off their land, they did sign a treaty with what was then the
government; of course, there was no sovereign United States at
that time. It was with England, King Charles II.
This treaty is the longest existing treaty. It spans 329
years. It has been recognized by the Commonwealth of Virginia
every year, and by the English Government.
But unfortunately, throughout the history of these tribes,
they have been treated in a fashion that gave them no rights,
treated them in the same despicable manner that the children of
slaves were treated in the Commonwealth of Virginia; denied
them the ability to live on their land, denied them the ability
to get an education, a public education; denied them the
ability to hold down jobs. And yet, they survived, these six
Indian tribes.
Now, in addition to the uniqueness of having the longest
treaty, which incidentally was ratified by Chief Justice John
Marshall, and will be recognized this year in Jamestown when we
celebrate the Jamestown Settlement, the 400th Anniversary of
the Jamestown Settlement, there is a second unique circumstance
with regard to these tribes. And that is the paper genocide
that was allowed to occur.
In 1924, at the time that Native Americans were being given
the right to vote in other states, the Eugenics Movement, which
was this racial superiority concept, was very strong in
Virginia, and it culminated with the enactment of the Racial
Integrity Act of 1924. And that empowered state officials to go
into state and local courthouses, and to destroy the records
that pertained to these Indian tribes. If they didn't destroy
them, they changed their designation as, in the language of
that day, colored. The actual term was issued.
As a result of this Act in 1924, every resident of the
state had to check a box whether you were white or colored or
issued. And they were put in the same category as the
descendants of slaves, which obviously is another aspect of
Virginia's history that is despicable.
But Native Americans were particularly targeted in order to
eliminate their identity. The guy that was pushing this
movement bragged about having eliminated the Indian population.
And in fact, it was a crime to identify yourself as an Indian,
punishable with a year's jail time.
If you wanted to take your child out of a hospital, you
could not take your child out of a hospital if you were an
Indian spouse without identifying them as non-white or colored.
And by the implementation of that law, which incidentally in
Virginia existed for more than 50 years--it was not struck down
until 1967--it, as a result, denied the existence of these
tribes. And they have tried now, as a result of legislation
that Governor George Allen signed back in 1997, to try to
recoup these records, but most of them have been destroyed.
They have gone to the Bureau of Acknowledgement in BIA to
get recognition, but it is extraordinarily difficult because
their records were legally destroyed. And they had been told by
the Bureau of Acknowledgement that the process cannot be
completed within their lifetimes.
They have suffered. They were not allowed education, they
were not allowed employment. They are very conservative in a
cultural sense, because the only people who were willing to
educate them were Christian missionaries. I know gambling is an
issue. They believe gambling is a sin.
Down the street from where they live, there are Bingo
parlors run by the American Legion, the VFW, whatever. They
don't participate. As far as I have been told, they don't even
participate in the state lottery, which Virginia uses to
finance its education system, because they believe gambling is
a sin.
But nevertheless, the last seven years they have been
denied recognition.
Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt that the Chickahominy, the
Eastern Chickahominy, the Monacan, the Nansemond, the
Rappahannock, the Upper Mattaponi Tribes all exist. They have
existed on a continuous basis since before the Western European
settlers stepped foot in America. They are here with us today.
Helen Rountree, who will testify today, has spent her
career verifying their history and their existence. Her
publications are well known and well regarded. Her expertise on
Virginia tribes cannot be matched at the Bureau of Indian
Affairs.
I know there is great resistance from some Members in
Congress to grant any Native American tribe Federal
recognition. And I can appreciate how the issue of gambling and
its economic and moral dimensions have influenced many Members'
perspective on tribal recognition issues. But I think the
circumstances of the situation that these tribes have endured,
and the legacy that they still confront today, outweigh these
concerns, which have little to do with these Indians, but are a
larger issue.
These are Native American people who have been subject to
grievous injustice for hundreds of years. In this legislation
we have made substantial compromises to give the Governor of
Virginia and the Virginia General Assembly, who I think anyone
would recognize is a pretty conservative Legislature, the
option to say no to any kind of gaming compact.
So I stand ready to work with you to find the right
equation that is respectful of tribal sovereignty and rights,
and the Members' concerns about this issue. But the Congress
has the power to recognize these tribes. It has exercised this
power in the past, and it should exercise this power again with
respect to these six tribes.
The Jamestown Settlement is going to be celebrated very
soon. It would be almost criminal to be celebrating that
settlement without recognizing the very Indian tribes that
enabled that settlement to survive.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your cosponsorship of this. I
had a very good talk with Mr. Young last night. He has told me
he is strong in favor of this. This is the right thing to do,
and I have every confidence that this committee will do the
right thing with regard to these six Indian tribes.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Moran follows:]
Statement of The Honorable James P. Moran, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Virginia, on H.R. 1294
Good morning and thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of this
Committee.
I appreciate your willingness to hold this hearing and provide me
with an opportunity to help tell the story of six of Virginia's Native
American tribes. This is not the first time this story has been told.
Nor is it the first time I or my fellow witnesses have been on a panel
before this committee to plead our case that Virginia's historic tribes
should be recognized by the federal government.
Like most Native Americans, the Virginia tribes first welcomed
western settlers, but quickly became subdued, pushed off their land,
and, up through much of the 20th Century, denied full rights as U.S.
citizens. Despite their devastating loss of land and population, the
Virginia Indians successfully overcame years of racial discrimination
that denied them equal opportunities to pursue their education and
economic security and to preserve their cultural identity. Their story
of survival doesn't encompass decades, it spans centuries of racial
hostility and coercive state and state-sanctioned actions.
Their story, however, is unique in two ways:
First, unlike most tribes that resisted encroachment and obtained
federal recognition when they signed peace treaties with the federal
government, Virginia's tribes signed their peace treaties with the
Kings of England. Most notable among these was the Treaty of 1677
between these tribes and Charles II. This treaty has been observed by
Virginia every year for the past 329 years when the Governor accepts
tribute from the tribes in a ceremony now celebrated at the State
Capitol every November. I understand that this is the longest
celebrated treaty in the United States.
In the intervening years between 1677 and the birth of this nation,
however, these six tribes were dispossessed of most of their land and
became too weak pose a threat. They were never in a position to
negotiate with and receive recognition from our nascent federal
government. Last year, the English government reaffirmed its
recognition and hosted a visit by the modern Virginia tribes. But, as
we are about to kick off the 400th anniversary of Jamestown, scheduled
for early next month, these same tribes, who ensured the survival of
this first English permanent settlement in the new world, have yet to
be recognized by the federal government.
The second unique circumstance for the Virginia tribes, and this
point speaks to the reason why Congress must act to recognize them, is
that the Virginia tribes have experienced what has been called a
``paper genocide'' perpetrated by the Commonwealth of Virginia. At the
time when the federal government granted Native Americans the right to
vote, Virginia's elected officials were embracing the eugenics movement
and began adopting racially hostile laws targeted at those classes of
people who did not fit into the dominant white society.
These actions culminated with the enactment of the Racial Integrity
Act of 1924. This act empowered zealots, like Walter Plecker, a state
official, to destroy state and local court house records and reclassify
in Orwellian fashion all non-whites as ``colored.'' It targeted Native
Americans and sought to deny them their identity. To call yourself a
``Native American'' in Virginia was to risk a jail sentence of up to
one year. The law remained in effect until it was struck down in the
federal courts in 1967.
For up to 50 years, state officials waged a war to destroy all
public and many private records that affirmed the existence of Native
Americans in Virginia. Historians have affirmed that there is no other
state that compares to Virginia's efforts to eradicate its citizens'
Indian identity. All of Virginia's state-recognized tribes have filed
petitions with the Bureau of Acknowledgement seeking federal
recognition.
But it is a very heavy burden the Virginia tribes will have to
overcome and one fraught with complications that officials from the
bureau have acknowledged may never be resolved in their lifetime. The
acknowledgement process is already expensive, subject to unreasonable
delays, and lacks dignity. Virginia's legacy of paper genocide only
further complicates these tribes' quest for federal recognition, making
it difficult to furnish corroborating state and official documents and
aggravating the injustice already visited upon these tribes.
It wasn't until 1997 when Governor George Allen signed legislation
directing state agencies to correct state records that the tribes were
given the opportunity to correct official state documents that had
deliberately been altered to list them as ``colored.'' The law allows
living members of the tribes to correct their records, but the law
cannot correct the damage done to past generations. Two years later,
the Virginia General Assembly adopted a resolution calling upon
Congress to enact legislation recognizing the Virginia tribes. I am
pleased to have honored that request and beginning in 2000 and in
subsequent sessions, I and Virginia's Senators have introduced
legislation to recognize the Virginia tribes. I also greatly appreciate
the fact that you, Mr. Chairman, and several Members of this Committee
have agreed to cosponsor this year's bill.
Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt that the Chickahominy, the Eastern
Chickahominy, the Monacan, the Nansemond, the Rappahannock and the
Upper Mattaponi tribes exist. These tribes have existed on a continuous
basis since before the first western European settlers stepped foot in
America, and, they are here with us today. Helen Rountree, who will
testify today, has spent her career verifying their history and their
existence. Her publications are well known and well regarded. Her
expertise on Virginia tribes cannot be matched at the Bureau of Indian
Affairs.
I know there is great resistance from Congress to grant any Native
American tribe federal recognition. And, I can appreciate how the issue
of gambling and its economic and moral dimensions have influenced many
Members' perspectives on tribal recognition issues. I think the
circumstances and situation these tribes have endured and the legacy
they still confront today, however, outweigh these concerns. We have
made significant compromises to give the Governor and the Virginia
General Assembly the option to say ``no'' to a gaming compact. And, I
stand ready to work with you to find the right equation that is
respectful of tribal sovereignty and rights and Members' concerns about
this issue.
Congress has the power to recognize these tribes. It has exercised
this power in the past, and it should exercise this power again with
respect to these six tribes. I stand ready to work with you and this
committee to make it happen.
Thank you.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Moran. The Chair has already
recognized the gentlelady from North Carolina, the Senator, Ms.
Dole. We welcome you to the Committee. If a gentleman would
yield his seat there, maybe we can have you up to testify.
We always welcome you to the Committee. We know this is not
your first time on this issue. We hope it will be the last time
on this issue, but we welcome you back all the time.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. ELIZABETH DOLE, A UNITED STATES SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Senator Dole. Chairman Rahall, thank you very much. And my
apologies. Two votes were scheduled in the Senate this morning,
and so I am a bit late. But I want to thank you very much for
holding this important hearing today. I want to thank you for
your leadership on so many issues affecting Native Americans,
in particular for your attention to the plight of the Lumbees,
and for strongly considering full Federal recognition of this
tribe.
I deeply appreciate the hard work and the leadership of
Congressman Mike McIntyre on this issue. Mike's district
includes Robinson County, the traditional home of the Lumbee
Tribe. This recognition effort enjoys bipartisan support both
in the House, including Congressman Robin Hayes and others,
with, of course, Robin's adjacent district has many Lumbee
residents, and in the Senate, where I have introduced companion
legislation to the bill we are considering today.
I welcome the support of my good friend, Senator Richard
Burr, who is a cosponsor of my bill. Senator Burr wishes he
could be here today, and Mr. Chairman, I request that his
statement be included in the record.
The Lumbee Recognition Act was the very first bill that I
introduced as a Member of the U.S. Senate. I have since
continued to champion this cause because I passionately and
fervently believe that Congress must act to provide full
Federal recognition for the Lumbees.
With more than 50,000 members, the Lumbee Tribe is the
largest east of the Mississippi River, as well as the largest
non-Federally recognized tribe in America. For more than a
century the Lumbees have been recognized as American Indians.
North Carolina formally recognized the tribe in 1885, and three
years later, in 1888, the tribe began what has become a very
long quest for recognition and assistance from the Federal
government.
Over the years many bills were introduced in Congress to
provide the Lumbees with Federal recognition, but these bills
were never acted upon, or they were passed by only one Chamber.
Finally, in 1956, Congress passed the Lumbee Act, which
recognized the tribe, but it included a terribly unfair caveat.
The Lumbees were denied the benefits that every other Federally
recognized tribe receives.
Refusing to accept this partial nod to their legitimacy,
the Lumbees and their allies in Congress have remained
dedicated to the quest for the full recognition that this tribe
deserves.
I know there are those who have argued, and will do so
again today, that the Lumbees should be required to go through
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, rather than receive full
recognition through an Act of Congress. However, the Lumbee Act
of 1956 actually prohibits the tribe from going through the BIA
process. As the law now stands, the Lumbee Tribe can only be
recognized by an Act of Congress.
Just one other tribe, the Tiwas of Texas, faced a similarly
unfair situation following the passage of a comparable bill in
1965. But in 1987, Congress enacted special legislation to
recognize them. This makes the Lumbees the only tribe in this
country still trapped in this legal limbo, and ineligible for
the administrative acknowledgement process because of an
earlier Act of Congress.
But the BIA process is actually reserved for tribes whose
legitimacy must be established. And as we know, that is
certainly not the case with the Lumbees. Their legitimacy has
been established time and time again, Mr. Chairman. There have
been numerous studies by the U.S. Department of the Interior,
beginning as early as 1912 and again in 1914, and yet again in
1943. And each time it has been determined that the Lumbees are
indeed an Indian tribe, descended from the historic Cheraw
Indians.
There is no need to waste the tribe's time and money or the
government's time and money again. It has also been documented
by GAO that getting through the BIA process can be arduous and
extensive. A 2001 GAO report revealed that it can take up to 15
years to resolve petitions for recognition. And a 2005 follow-
up report underscored that even with some improvements to the
BIA process, it would still take years for BIA to work through
its current backlog of recognition petitions, and even longer
to consider new petitions.
It is clear that even if the Lumbees could legally go
through BIA, this would only impose yet another lengthy delay.
I have had many opportunities to visit with the Lumbees.
They are a people of great pride, and I am in awe of their
steadfastness on this issue, even after years of
disappointments. One occasion in particular stands out in my
mind. This is a 2003 rally in Robinson County with Congressman
McIntyre.
This rally brought together the entire community, folks
from all backgrounds and walks of life uniting for a common
goal: getting the Lumbee Indians the full recognition and
benefits they deserve.
Today we continue working to achieve that goal, Mr.
Chairman. Since my arrival in the Senate in 2003, this is the
third committee hearing that Lumbee Chairman Jimmy Goins and
members of the Lumbee Tribe have journeyed to Washington to
attend. Each time they have made their case for Federal
recognition. Even though we have been delighted, and I must say
I have been very proud that a number of times the Senate
Committee has approved this legislation, the full House and
Senate have yet to take positive action.
Undeterred, the Lumbee tribal leadership is here once
again. And I am inspired, and again immensely proud, to
continue this fight alongside them.
I am confident that after hearing testimony today, this
committee will agree that the Lumbee Tribe deserves full
Federal recognition. And I urge you to report out this
legislation as expeditiously as possible. The long record
compiled by the Congress and the Department of the Interior
demonstrates the legitimacy of the Lumbee Tribe. And let me
again underscore, the State of North Carolina has acknowledged
the Lumbee Tribe's existence for well over a century.
Simply put, this is about righting a wrong and allowing
future generations of Lumbees to benefit from the recognition
for which their ancestors have tirelessly fought. The time is
now, Mr. Chairman, the time is now. It is time for decisive
action by Congress. Providing the tribe full recognition and
benefits is the only fair and just course.
So I thank you again for giving this issue the attention it
deserves, Mr. Chairman. And I thank you for the privilege, and
all the Committee Members, thank you for the privilege of
presenting my heartfelt concerns regarding the need for full
Lumbee recognition.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Dole follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Elizabeth Dole, a U.S. Senator from the
State of North Carolina
Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, thank you very much for
holding this important hearing today. Thank you for your leadership on
so many issues affecting Native Americans--in particular, for your
attention to the plight of the Lumbees and for strongly considering
full federal recognition of this tribe.
I greatly appreciate the hard work of Congressman Mike McIntyre on
this issue. Mike McIntyre's district includes Robeson County, the
traditional home of the Lumbee Tribe. This recognition effort enjoys
bipartisan support both in the House--including Congressman Robin
Hayes, whose adjacent district has many Lumbee residents--and in the
Senate, where I have introduced companion legislation to the bill we
are considering today. I welcome the support of my good friend Senator
Richard Burr, a cosponsor of my bill. Senator Burr wishes he could be
here today, and Mr. Chairman, I request that his statement be included
in the record.
The Lumbee Recognition Act was the very first bill I introduced as
a member of the United States Senate. I have since continued to
champion this cause because I passionately and fervently believe that
Congress must act to provide full federal recognition for the Lumbees.
With more than 50,000 members, the Lumbee Tribe is the largest east of
the Mississippi River, as well as the largest non-federally recognized
tribe in America. For more than a century, the Lumbees have been
recognized as American Indians. North Carolina formally recognized the
tribe in 1885, and three years later, in 1888, the tribe began what has
become a very long quest for recognition and assistance from the
federal government.
Over the years, many bills were introduced in Congress to provide
the Lumbees with federal recognition, but these bills were never acted
upon or were passed by only one chamber. Finally, in 1956, Congress
passed the Lumbee Act, which recognized the tribe ``but it included a
terribly unfair caveat: the Lumbees were denied the benefits that every
other federally recognized tribe receives. Refusing to accept this
partial nod to their legitimacy, the Lumbees--and their allies in
Congress--have remained dedicated to the quest for the full recognition
that the tribe deserves.
I know there are those who have argued--and will do so again
today--that the Lumbees should be required to go through the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, rather than receive full recognition through an act of
Congress; however, the Lumbee Act of 1956 actually prohibits the tribe
from going through the BIA process. As the law now stands, the Lumbee
Tribe can only be recognized by an act of Congress. Just one other
tribe, the Tiwas of Texas, faced a similarly unfair situation following
the passage of a comparable bill in 1965. But in 1987, Congress enacted
special legislation to recognize them. This makes the Lumbees the only
tribe in the country still trapped in this legal limbo and ineligible
for the administrative acknowledgement process because of an earlier
act of Congress
The BIA process is reserved for tribes whose legitimacy must be
established, and as we know, that is certainly not the case with the
Lumbees. Their legitimacy has been established--time and time again.
There have been numerous studies by the U.S. Department of the
Interior, beginning as early as 1912, then again in 1914, and yet again
in 1933. Each time, it has been determined that the Lumbees are indeed
an Indian tribe, descended from the historic Cheraw Indians. There is
no need to waste the tribe's or the government's time and money again.
It has also been documented by GAO that getting through the BIA
process can be arduous and extensive. A 2001 GAO report revealed that
it can take up to 15 years to resolve petitions for recognition. And a
2005 follow-up report underscored that even with some improvements to
the BIA process, it would still take years for BIA to work through its
current backlog of recognition petitions, and even longer to consider
new petitions. It is clear that even if the Lumbee could legally go
through BIA, this would only impose yet another lengthy delay on this
tribe.
I have had many opportunities to visit with the Lumbees. They are a
people of great pride, and I am in awe of their steadfastness on this
issue, even after years of disappointments. One occasion in particular
stands out in my mind, a 2003 rally in Robeson County with Congressman
McIntyre. This rally brought together the entire community--folks from
all backgrounds and walks of life--uniting for a common goal: getting
the Lumbee Indians the full recognition and benefits they deserve.
Today, we continue working to achieve that goal. Since my arrival
in the Senate in 2003, this is the third committee hearing that Lumbee
Chairman Jimmy Goins and members of the Lumbee tribe have journeyed to
Washington to attend. Each time they have made their case for federal
recognition. Even though we've been delighted a number of times by the
Senate committee approval of this legislation, the full House and
Senate have yet to take positive action. Undeterred, the Lumbee tribal
leadership is here once again, and I am inspired and immensely proud to
continue this fight alongside them.
I am confident that after hearing testimony today, you will agree
that the Lumbee Tribe deserves full federal recognition, and I urge you
to report out this legislation as expeditiously as possible. The long
record on this effort compiled by the Congress and the Department of
the Interior demonstrates the legitimacy of the Lumbee Tribe. The State
of North Carolina has acknowledged Lumbee tribal existence for well
over a century.
Simply put, this is about righting a wrong--and allowing future
generations of Lumbees to benefit from the recognition for which their
ancestors have tirelessly fought. The time is now Mr. Chairman. The
time is now. It is time for decisive action by Congress--and providing
the tribe full recognition and benefits is the only fair and just
course.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, for giving
this issue the attention it deserves. And thank you for the privilege
of presenting my heartfelt concerns regarding the need for Lumbee
recognition.
______
[The statement submitted for the record by Senator Burr
follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Richard Burr, a U.S. Senator from the State
of North Carolina
Good morning Chairman Rahall and Ranking Member Young, and Members
of this Committee. I appreciate the Committee's time and effort
regarding federal recognition of the Lumbee tribe. I would also like to
thank my North Carolina colleagues, Senator Elizabeth Dole and
Representative Mike McIntyre, for their passion and dedication to this
issue. Upon taking office, Senator Dole made it her first legislative
priority that the issue of Lumbee recognition be resolved. In the House
of Representatives, Mike McIntyre has relentlessly pursued federal
recognition of the Lumbees. Unfortunately, committee votes in the
Senate prevent me from being at the hearing in person today. But it is
a pleasure to share my support for federal recognition of the Lumbee
tribe with Senator Dole and Representative McIntyre.
To me, the most important aspect of the Lumbee recognition issue is
simple--fairness. In 1956 Congress designated the Indians ``residing in
Robeson and adjoining counties of North Carolina'' as the ``Lumbee
Indians of North Carolina'' in the Lumbee Act. However, this Act also
prevented the Lumbees from being eligible for any services performed by
the federal government or any benefits derived by law on behalf of
other recognized tribes.
When the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) established its process for
formal recognition of Federal Indian tribes, the Lumbees were
effectively denied from pursuing this option. In 1989, the Department
of Interior decided that the 1956 Act prevented the Lumbees from being
considered for federal recognition under the BIA process. Therefore,
the limited federal recognition of the Lumbees in the 1956 Act has been
as much a detriment as a benefit. Simply put, this is not fair.
Congress should consider the difficult situation the Lumbees have
been in since 1956, and finally fulfill its commitment to achieve
fairness and justice in the federal recognition process for the tribe.
Congress has indeed fixed these situations before. For example, in 1987
Congress enacted special legislation to recognize the Tiwa Tribe of
Texas, a tribe that was similarly prevented from gaining recognition
through the BIA process due to a previous Act of Congress. As a result
of the Tiwa's eventual Congressional recognition, the Lumbees find
themselves as the only tribe in the United States who are prevented
from gaining recognition through the BIA process. How can that be fair?
The Lumbees have been part of eastern North Carolina's history for
centuries. They have served their community as farmers, doctors and
lawyers, small business owners and bankers. They have provided their
county with sheriffs and clerks of courts; served our state as
legislators and judges; and have protected our nation by serving in the
U.S. Armed Forces.
Although some members of this Committee may prefer to resolve this
issue by changing the BIA recognition criteria to allow the Lumbees to
work through this process, I believe this option is simply too little,
too late. How long must this go on? It is clear to me that after fifty
years the Lumbees deserve to have their status quickly, and finally,
resolved.
I appreciate the opportunity that this Committee has provided to
the Lumbees today, and I hope that their pursuit of fairness, again
this Congress, will be successful.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Dole, for your testimony.
And I did note your leadership on this issue. And once again,
welcome you back to the Committee. We hope it is your last
time, as I said, although you are welcome again any time.
And I want to also recognize a former colleague of ours and
a dear friend of mine, Charlie Rose, with whom we worked very
much on this issue when he was in the Congress. And I failed to
mention his strong leadership on this issue in the past, as
well.
We understand your schedule. You are free to stay if you
like, you are free to leave if you would like.
The Chair would like to recognize out of order very quickly
the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands for a unanimous consent
request.
Ms. Christensen. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, as you noted,
Congressman Scott had to leave. That is why I would like to ask
unanimous consent to include his statement into the record.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you,
Donna.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Scott follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, a Representative
in Congress from the State of Virginia, on H.R. 1294
Good Morning and thank you, Chairman Rahall, Ranking Member Young,
and members of this Committee for holding this hearing on H.R. 1294,
the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition
Act, introduced by my fellow Virginian, Congressman Jim Moran.
This year marks the 400th Anniversary of the founding of Jamestown,
Virginia, the first permanent English settlement in North America.
Jamestown is the cornerstone of our great republic and its success
relied heavily on the help of the indigenous people of Virginia.
Virginia's Native Americans played a critical role in helping the first
settlers of Jamestown survive the harsh conditions of the New World.
After the Jamestown colony weathered its first couple years in the
New World, the colony expanded and the English pushed further inland,
and the same Native Americans that helped those first settlers were
coerced and pushed from their land without compensation. Treaties, many
of which precede our own Constitution, were often made in an effort to
compensate the Virginia Native Americans. As history has shown, these
treaties were rarely honored or upheld.
Like many other Native Americans, the Virginia Indian Tribes were
marginalized from society. They were deprived of their land, prevented
from getting an education, and denied a role in our society. Virginia's
Native Americans were denied their fundamental human rights and the
very freedoms and liberties enshrined in our Constitution.
The bill before this Committee will finally grant federal
recognition to the Chickahominy, the Eastern Chickahominy, the Upper
Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, the Monacan Indian Nation, and the
Nansemond tribes. Some may argue that H.R. 1294 supersedes the standard
process of federal recognition through the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Unfortunately this route towards federal recognition by an act of
Congress is necessary and long overdue because of the actions of one
state government official in the early 20th century. During that time,
Virginia's leaders experimented with eugenics, the so-called science of
improving the human race by controlled breeding to increase the
occurrence of desirable heritable traits, and implemented harsh racial
laws. These laws led to the actions of Walter Plecker, State Registrar
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, who purged Virginia's birth and
marriage records of ``Indian'' and other non-white classifications.
Virginia's Native Americans refer to Plecker's actions as the ``paper
genocide.'' Without this paper trail, standard federal recognition
through the BIA is all but impossible. The legacy of Walter Plecker's
actions and Virginia's regrettable harsh racial laws should no longer
stand. The legislation before this Committee will be the first step in
correcting this injustice.
The tribes in Virginia have made great strides in protecting their
culture and history, even without the aid of federal recognition.
During my time in the Virginia General Assembly, I had the privilege to
serve on the study committee that looked into state recognition of
Virginia's tribes. Based on the study committee's recommendations, the
Commonwealth of Virginia recognized these tribes in the 1980s and has
made great efforts to correct these injustices at the state level. H.R.
1294 will ensure the rightful status of Virginia's tribes in our
national history. Federal recognition will provide housing and
educational opportunities to those who cannot afford it. Federal
recognition will also promote tribal economic development that will
allow Virginia's tribes to become self-sustaining. These new
opportunities will allow Virginia's tribes to flourish culturally and
economically, which will lead to a brighter future for a whole new
generation.
In 2002, this Committee held hearings on a similar bill to grant
federal recognition to Virginia's tribes and many of my colleagues on
this panel have heard about the struggles of Virginia's Native
Americans before. As the Commonwealth of Virginia, our entire Nation,
and the international community commemorate the 400th anniversary of
the founding of Jamestown, there is no better time to grant federal
recognition to the descendants of the Native Americans who were first
to welcome the English settlers at Jamestown.
We have waited too long to recognize Virginia's tribes. The time
has come for this Congress to act and I urge you to support H.R. 1294.
Thank you again for allowing me to address you on this issue.
______
The Chairman. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Virginia, whom I recognized in the beginning as a very powerful
Member of the House Appropriations Committee, and a dear friend
to myself, Mr. Frank Wolf.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. FRANK WOLF, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
Mr. Wolf. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to begin by
thanking you for your comments about the Virginia Tech at the
beginning. It has impacted our community, our state, and quite
frankly, the nation, and I appreciate that very much.
I want to thank you and Mr. Young for the hearings, and for
the other Members for giving us the ability to testify.
The Virginia Indian tribes were the first to greet the
settlers at Jamestown when they arrived 400 years ago. Without
the Indians' friendship, the Jamestown Settlement very likely
would not have survived. We owe the Virginia tribes a huge debt
of gratitude.
I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that without
them, our great nation may not have been born, or born at that
time. However, I remain very concerned that Mr. Moran's
legislation to provide sovereign status for six Virginia Indian
tribes could lay the foundation for casino gambling in the
Commonwealth, and threaten Virginia's long history of clean
government, economic growth, and low crime.
Specifically, the legislation does not, unfortunately, shut
the door on the opportunity for these tribes to acquire land,
and eventually establish tribal casinos. I know, and I believe
that the current tribal leadership has indicated they do not
want to pursue gambling, and I believe them. I believe them
when they say that. But I worry that future leadership of the
tribes may not share their views, and will pursue establishing
tribal casinos.
There is no guarantee that a future generation of
Virginia's tribes would hold the same view as the current
leaders. Case in point, and I have attached two stories to the
testimony, an Indian tribe in the Michigan area reassured
Congress that it did not intend to pursue gambling when it was
granted Federal recognition in the early 1990s. And yet, only
months after, the tribe voted unanimously to pursue the
gambling. And if you can look at testimony and the articles
that attach to it, both of these Members were shocked, because
at the time they were promised that there would not be any
gambling.
More recently, Mr. Chairman, an Indian tribe in California,
whose chairman in 2000 said they weren't interested in
gambling, changed his mind in 2003, and moved to develop off-
reservation casino sites. I am submitting with my statement
newspaper articles about both tribes.
Why won't the tribes accept a law that would prevent
gambling on tribal lands? If the tribes are not interested in
gambling, why not make the law? I want to support the
legislation to recognize the tribes, and have offered, when
Congressman Hanson was the Chairman here, the lobbyists for the
tribes came around, and we said fine, put the prohibition with
regard to gambling. And that was not of interest at that time,
and unfortunately efforts were rebuffed.
If gambling casinos come to our state, we will be opening a
door to the myriad of financial and social ills associated with
gambling. Virginia's tourism sector, its economy, and its
communities are some of the strongest in the country. Places
such as Williamsburg, Yorktown, Jamestown are national
treasures that draw visitors from all over the world. Small
businesses thrive in Virginia. The Commonwealth should not risk
tarnishing its reputation by allowing casino-style gambling
within its borders.
There are examples of places across the country which have
been overwhelmed with problems attendant to gambling since the
arrival of gambling casinos. Virginia does not have casino
gambling. And because we do not, we have avoided the crime, the
corruption, and the scandal that a number of other states have
fallen victims to.
A few years ago I asked the Library of Congress to provide
me with a list of all the government officials across the
country who have been implicated in gambling-related corruption
cases or have been forced to resign due to gambling-related
activities during the year. I haven't had it updated. I was
sickened by what I saw.
The package was about two inches thick. It was page after
page after page of media reports of officials being caught in
gambling-related schemes. And I am submitting with my statement
the list of officials.
And we ought not forget, this Congress was rocked over the
last several years, and this city was rocked, and this country
was rocked by the Abramoff scandal. And it resided and began on
this very, very issue. And so we in the State of Virginia do
not want that to come to our state.
We have great respect for whatever other states want to do,
but we do not want that. And we say you can have recognition,
but let us have that prohibition. As the author of the
legislation which created the National Gambling Impact Study
Commission that released its two-year study in 1999, a
bipartisan commission that looked at this in depth, I know
first-hand about the devastating social and financial costs of
gambling. Crime, prostitution, corruption, suicide, destroyed
families, child abuse, bankruptcy. Probably a week or two don't
go by that I still get calls from people all over the country
saying that their son or their daughter or their husband or
their wife, because of the effort that we did in that time,
have gotten addicted by this, and cannot control it. And there
is convenience gambling and destination gambling. And the
closer it is to that location, the greater the danger.
But just look at that report. Just look at the report, what
it said in a bipartisan way. My concern is not with the Federal
recognition of the Virginia Indian tribes. My concern, and
hopefully you can recognize them, that provide us with this
opportunity. But my concern is with the explosive spread of
gambling and the potential for casino gambling to come to
Virginia, no bill should become law unless it protects the
interests of the Commonwealth.
I stand ready to work with my Virginia colleagues and the
tribes seeking recognition to make sure the proud state that is
home to presidents and many other well-known Americans is not
vulnerable to the political and the social corruption, the
destruction of families that it leaves in the wake. And so I
would ask you, and I sense that Mr. Moran feels pretty
confident with regard to this bill, and Jim is a good friend.
We worked closely on a lot of issues. You live out in my area.
You know my record. You know my interests, you know my
concerns.
But what I would ask as you move this bill, if you do move
it, that you protect us, so that whatever others may want to do
around the country they will be able to do. But that we not get
calls here in this state with regard to the potential of what I
see, where you generally will have a situation whereby a
wealthy non-Indian will come in. Sometime it will be a big
billionaire from South Africa, sometime it will be a Donald
Trump, sometime it will be somebody else, and begin to bring
these influences here that we do not want.
So Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the hearing. I thank you
for the opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wolf follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Frank Wolf, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Virginia, on H.R. 1294
Good morning. Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to testify
today.
The Virginia Indian tribes were the first to greet the settlers at
Jamestown when they arrived 400 years ago. Without the Indians'
friendship, the Jamestown settlement very likely would not have
survived.
We owe the Virginia tribes a huge debt of gratitude. I don't think
it's an exaggeration to say that without them, our great nation may not
have been born. However, I remain concerned that Mr. Moran's
legislation to provide sovereign status for six Virginia Indian tribes
could lay the foundation for casino gambling in the Commonwealth and
threaten Virginia's long history of clean government, economic growth
and low crime.
Specifically, the legislation does not shut the door on the
opportunity for these tribes to acquire land and eventually establish
tribal casinos. I know that the current tribal leadership has indicated
that they do not want to pursue gambling--and I believe them--but I
worry that future leadership of the tribes may not share their views
and will pursue establishing tribal casinos.
There is no guarantee that future generations of Virginia's tribes
would hold the same view as the current leaders. Case in point: an
Indian tribe in the Michigan area reassured Congress that it did not
intend to pursue gambling when it was granted federal recognition in
the early-1990's, yet only months later the tribe voted unanimously to
pursue gambling. More recently, an Indian tribe in California whose
chairman in 2000 said they weren't interested in gambling, changed his
mind in 2003 and moved to develop off-reservation casino sites. I am
submitting with my statement newspaper articles about both tribes.
Why won't the tribes accept a law that would prevent gambling on
tribal lands? If the tribes are not interested in gambling, why not
make that the law? I want to support legislation to recognize the
Virginia tribes and have worked with the tribes to find language that
would accomplish their aim of recognition without opening the door to
casino gambling in Virginia. Unfortunately, my efforts have been
rebuffed.
If casino gambling comes to our state we will be opening the door
to the myriad of financial and socials ills associated with gambling.
Virginia's tourism sector, its economy and its communities are some of
the strongest in the country. Places such as Williamsburg, Yorktown and
Jamestown are national treasures which draw visitors from all over the
world. Small businesses thrive in Virginia. The Commonwealth should not
risk tarnishing its reputation by allowing casino-style gambling within
its borders. There are examples of places across the country which have
been overwhelmed with problems attendant to gambling since the arrival
of Indian casinos.
Virginia does not have casino gambling, and because we do not, we
have avoided the crime, corruption and scandal that a number of other
states have fallen victim to. A few years ago I asked the Library of
Congress to provide me with a list of all the government officials
across the country who had been implicated in gambling-related
corruption cases or had been forced to resign due to gambling-related
activities during the year.
I was sickened by what I saw. The package was about two inches
thick. It was page after page after page of media reports of officials
being caught in gambling-related schemes. I am submitting with my
statement the list of officials.
As the author of legislation which created the National Gambling
Impact Study Commission that released its two-year study in 1999, I
know firsthand about the devastating social and financial costs of
gambling. Crime. Prostitution. Corruption. Suicide. Destroyed families.
Child and spouse abuse. Bankruptcy.
My concern is not with the federal recognition of Virginia's Indian
tribes. My concern is with the explosive spread of gambling and the
potential for casino gambling to come to Virginia. No bill should
become law unless it protects the interests of the Commonwealth. I
stand ready to work with my Virginia colleagues and the tribes seeking
recognition to make sure the proud state that is home to presidents and
many other well known Americans is not vulnerable to the political and
social corruption that gambling leaves in its wake.
NOTE: Additional information submitted for the record by
Congressman Wolf has been retained in the Committee's official files.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Frank, for your testimony. The
Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina who has been
very patient with us all morning, Walter Jones.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. WALTER JONES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Jones. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And I thank
the Ranking Member, as well, and the Members of this committee.
I miss not serving on this committee, but circumstances
sometimes are beyond our control.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to make a
statement today on H.R. 65, the Lumbee Recognition Act. Like
many in North Carolina, I feel strongly about this bill. My
view is that the Lumbees should be given a fair opportunity to
attain Federal acknowledgement as an Indian tribe through the
Interior Department's Office of Federal Acknowledgement. We
should leave these complicated matters to the expert agency.
It would be unfair to the United States and other Indian
tribes to pass H.R. 65 and circumvent the established
administrative process.
Mr. Chairman, I have met with another Indian group from
North Carolina, the Tuscarora, who find themselves in a similar
situation to the Lumbee. And I understand there might be a few
here of the Tuscarora Tribe.
The Tuscarora also want to be Federally recognized as a
tribe, but are constrained from accessing the process because
of the 1956 Lumbee Act. They, too, oppose this bill because it
would undermine their efforts to maintain their separate
identity as Tuscaroras. Their solution, Mr. Chairman, give us
access to the process.
Another North Carolina organization, the North Carolina
Family Policy Council, also opposes this bill, but for
different reasons. Mr. Chairman, I have a letter from the
Policy Council that I would like to be part of the record. I
ask unanimous consent that it be submitted.
From that letter I would like to briefly read a paragraph.
This is a letter that was sent to Congressman Mike McIntyre,
and he is my friend, he is my brother in Christ. I have a lot
of respect for him, and on this issue we just disagree.
From the letter from the North Carolina Family Policy
Council, and I read. ``I am writing to express our concern over
H.R. 65, Lumbee Recognition Act. The North Carolina Family
Policy Council does not oppose full Federal recognition for the
Lumbee Tribes of North Carolina, but we strongly oppose the
potential that full Federal recognition would have toward the
expansion of gambling in North Carolina.
``In its current form, H.R. 65 could set the stage to allow
the Lumbee Indians to establish gambling operations along the
I-95 corridor in Robinson and perhaps Cumberland, Hoke and
Scotland Counties. As a result, we ask that you amend H.R. 65
to expressly prohibit the Lumbee Tribe from obtaining the
authorization to conduct any form of gambling in North Carolina
should this legislation move forward.''
I am pretty much asking the same thing that Congressman
Wolf was asking. The Family Research Council is very concerned
that I-95, which is a major corridor between north and south,
south and north, that what could happen in four counties, that
there could be gambling created that would create a serious
problem to the people of North Carolina, in my humble opinion.
Mr. Chairman, in addition, another organization of
Federally recognized tribes, the United South and Eastern
Tribes known as USET, also oppose this bill. I have a letter
from this group, and I ask unanimous consent that this might be
submitted, as well. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would hope that this committee
would consider legislation that would give the Lumbee, the
Tuscarora, and other Indian groups in North Carolina and across
this nation a fair opportunity for tribal acknowledgement
through the appropriate administrative process.
And Mr. Chairman, again I want to thank you for the
opportunity to make these brief statements. Again I want to say
that I believe that the process should be expedited, so that
not only the Lumbees but other tribes could have an opportunity
to present their case to the proper agency, and the agency have
the authority to move in an expeditious way toward a final
decision as to these tribes and their recognition.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I close my comments. And thank
you again for this opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Walter Jones, a Representative in Congress
from the State of North Carolina
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to make a statement
today on H.R. 65, the ``Lumbee Recognition Act.'' Like many in North
Carolina, I feel strongly about this bill. My view is that the Lumbee
should be given a fair opportunity to attain federal acknowledgement as
an Indian tribe through the Interior Department's Office of Federal
Acknowledgement. We should leave these complicated matters to the
expert agency. It would be unfair to the United States and other Indian
tribes to pass H.R. 65 and circumvent the established administrative
process.
I have met with another Indian group from North Carolina, the
Tuscarora, who find themselves in a similar situation to the Lumbee. I
understand representatives of the Tuscarora are here today. The
Tuscarora also want to be federally recognized as a tribe, but are
constrained from accessing the process because of the 1956 Lumbee Act.
They too oppose this bill because it would undermine their efforts to
maintain their separate identity as Tuscaroras. Their solution: give us
access to the process.
Another North Carolina organization, the North Carolina Family
Policy Council, also opposes this bill, but for different reasons. I
have a letter from the Policy Council that I would like to be a part of
the record, Mr. Chairman. The Policy Council is concerned about the
proliferation of gambling in North Carolina, and I share their views.
This bill would open the door to an enormous expansion of gambling in
North Carolina and could harm many communities in the region.
Another organization of federally-recognized tribes, the United
South and Eastern Tribes (USET), also opposes this bill. I have a
letter of opposition from USET, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to
include in the record. USET also supports the idea of the Lumbee having
access to the administrative process.
My House colleagues, let's address this issue fairly. I urge the
Committee to reject this bill, and to consider legislation that would
give the Lumbee, the Tuscarora, and other Indian groups in North
Carolina and across this nation a fair opportunity for tribal
acknowledgement through the appropriate administrative process.
Thank you.
______
[Letters submitted for the record by Mr. Jones follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Walter. The Chair recognizes
the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. McHenry.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. PATRICK McHENRY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. McHenry. I thank the Chairman. Thank you for having us
here today, and for having a lot of opening statements or a lot
of testimony from colleagues that are interested in this issue.
Being from North Carolina, I have a distinct interest in
this issue. And thank you for letting me testify today on H.R.
65, the Lumbee Recognition Act.
My position on this bill is very straightforward. All
groups seeking Federal acknowledgement as Indian tribes should
go through the administrative process at the Department of
Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
The Chairman spoke passionately about the need to reform
that department, and that is a whole separate issue that is so
important to the larger context of Federal recognition. And I
will get to that in a second.
At the Office of Federal Acknowledgement, it is staffed
with expert historians, anthropologists, and genealogists whose
focus is to evaluate data provided by petitioning groups, and
determine the merits of the group's claim for Federal
recognition as an Indian tribe, including whether the group
existed since historical times as a distinct political entity.
In this case the Department of Interior has said the 1956
Lumbee Act prevents Lumbee from going through this process, as
my colleague from eastern North Carolina, Mr. McIntyre, said.
Congress should lift this restriction.
Like all other groups, Lumbee should have the opportunity
to attain Federal recognition as a tribe. But I cannot support
this legislation, which would allow the Lumbee, or any other
group for that matter, to circumvent the process, while other
groups diligently work toward the goal of Federal
acknowledgement through the Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
This would be unfair to those groups. And also, there have
been internal groups within the Lumbee that have raised serious
questions about the tribal identity of the Lumbee. In fact, the
name Lumbee is based on the group's proximity to the Lumbee
River. The same Lumbee group has sought Federal
acknowledgement, as my colleague Mr. McIntyre mentioned, they
have sought Federal acknowledgement from Congress on numerous
occasions as Cherokee, Croatan, Cheraw, among other names.
As a matter of fact, I, along with other Members of
Congress, in order to remedy this problem, this issue that is
before us here today, have sponsored legislation that would put
the Lumbee at the front of the line and allow them to go
through the Federal acknowledgement process. Put them at the
front of the line, remove the burden of the 1956 Lumbee Act.
In the previous Congress, my colleagues from North
Carolina, including Mr. Jones, as well as Representatives Foxx
and Myrick, cosponsored a bill written by Charles Taylor. His
successor in the 11th District, Mr. Heath Shuler, as I
understand it, intends to file the same bill, which I will be
proud to cosponsor. A bipartisan bill that would remedy this
problem, and actually adheres to the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement's role in recognizing Indian tribes.
Additionally, it is unfair to existing Federally recognized
tribes, such as the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, who
simply don't want to diminish or undermine their cultural
identity by legislation such as this. The Eastern Band has a
tremendous cultural and historical impact on western North
Carolina and the region in large. And you will soon hear
testimony by Principal Chief Michell Hicks about the interest
at stake for the Eastern Band.
Look, Federal recognition is really an emotional issue, I
understand that. There is a lot of politics at play here. But
this legislation I think would diminish the longstanding
government-to-government relationship the United States has
with established tribes. We should take the politics out of
Federal recognition, and allow the experts at the Office of
Federal Acknowledgement to do their job.
If there is concern about the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement and their ability to get through the backlog of
cases that they have, that is the duty of this committee to
remedy this process through the oversight process. And to clean
up that process for all those that seek recognition.
I don't believe that going around and circumventing that
process is the right way to go. And I concur with my colleague
in the 11th District on this matter, and that it is important
that we actually look for a remedy for the Lumbee group to have
Federal recognition. But in order to do that, they should go
through the longstanding process that we have established as a
Congress, and it is a regulatory process. As we know,
regulatory processes are not very easy to comply with, but it
is intended to have the experts within the bureaucracy work
their will and understand the details and the historical
records in this case and all cases involving Indian tribe
recognition.
And I urge my colleagues to vote down the Lumbee
Recognition Act, and support what my colleague in the 11th
District is seeking to do, which is another way to remedy this
Lumbee group's concerns.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I appreciate
your patience.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McHenry follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Patrick T. McHenry, a Representative in
Congress from the State of North Carolina, on H.R. 65
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on H.R. 65, the
Lumbee Recognition Act. My position on this bill is very
straightforward and fair.
ALL groups seeking federal acknowledgement as Indian tribes should
go through the administrative process at the Department of the
Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
The OFA is staffed with expert historians, anthropologists and
genealogists whose focus is to evaluate data provided by petitioning
groups and determine the merits of a group's claim that it is an Indian
tribe, including whether the group existed since historical times as a
distinct political entity.
In this case, the Department Interior has said the 1956 Lumbee Act
prevents the Lumbee from going through the process, Congress should act
to lift that restriction. Like all other groups, the Lumbee should have
the opportunity to attain federal recognition as a tribe.
I CANNOT support this legislation, which would allow the Lumbee or
any other group, to circumvent the process, while other groups
diligently work toward the goal of federal acknowledgement through the
Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
This would be unfair to those groups, and in addition there have
been internal groups within the Lumbee that have raised serious
questions about the tribal identity of the Lumbee.
In fact, the name ``Lumbee,'' is based on this group's proximity to
the Lumber River. The same ``Lumbee Group'' has sought federal
acknowledgement from Congress on numerous occasions as Cherokee,
Siouan, Croatan and Cheraw Indians.
As a matter of fact, I, along with other members of the North
Carolina delegation, cosponsored legislation by Former Congressman
Charles Taylor that would have cleared the way for ALL groups in North
Carolina seeking federal acknowledgement under the 1956 Lumbee Act to
complete the process through the Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
Additionally, it is unfair to existing federally recognized tribes,
such as the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, who does not want to see
its cultural identity undermined by legislation such as this.
The Eastern Band has a tremendous cultural and historical impact on
Western North Carolina and you will soon hear the testimony of
Principal Chief Michell Hicks about the interests at stake for the
Eastern Band.
Federal recognition matters get caught up in emotion and, let's
face it, politics. This legislation would diminish the longstanding
government-to-government relationship the United States has with
established tribes. We should take the politics out of federal
recognition and allow the experts at the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement to do their job.
Thank you.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Patrick. The Chair at this time
would ask unanimous consent that our colleagues who have been
on the witness table this morning, any of them that wish to
join us on the dais be allowed to do so and participate in the
remainder of the hearings today.
The Chair will now recognize The Honorable Carl Artman, I
am sorry. Carl J. Artman, the Assistant Secretary for Indian
Affairs, Bureau of Indian Affairs in Washington. And at this
point, while he is coming to the table, I would like to
congratulate Mr. Artman on his confirmation as Assistant
Secretary of Indian Affairs. I enjoyed meeting you a few weeks
ago, and appreciate your coming by my office, and I'm looking
forward to your testimony today.
STATEMENT OF CARL J. ARTMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, INDIAN
AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Artman. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Young and Members of the Committee.
I am here today to provide the Administration's testimony
on H.R. 65 and H.R. 1294. I would also like to take a moment to
introduce the Director of our Office of Federal
Acknowledgement, Leif Fleming, to my right. I think he has been
here before.
I will summarize my statements and ask that my entire
written statement be entered into the record.
The Chairman. Without objection. And the Chair would ask
that of all the panelists today.
Mr. Artman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Artman. We recognize that under the United States
Constitution Commerce Clause that Congress has the authority to
recognize a distinctly Indian community as an Indian tribe.
Congress has plenary power.
But along with that authority, it is important that all
parties have the opportunity to review all of the information
available before recognition is granted. That is why we support
a recognition process that requires the groups to go through
the Federal acknowledgement process found under 25 CFR, part
83, because it provides a deliberative and uniform mechanism to
review and consider groups seeking Indian tribal status.
Legislation, such as H.R. 65 and H.R. 1294, allows the groups
to bypass the Federal acknowledgement process.
In reference to H.R. 65, Congress designated Indians then
residing in Robeson and adjoining counties of North Carolina as
the Lumbee Indians of North Carolina in the 1956 Act. In 1989,
the Department's Office of the Solicitor advised that the 1956
Act forbade Federal relationship within the meaning of the
Federal Acknowledgement Regulations, thereby precluding the
Lumbee Indians from consideration under the acknowledgement
process. Legislation is necessary for the Lumbee Indians to
petition for tribal status under those regulations.
If Congress enacts H.R. 65 as drafted, we do have some
comments. H.R. 65 extends Federal recognition to the Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina, and permits any other group of Indians
in Robeson and adjoining counties whose members are not
enrolled in the Lumbee Tribe to join the Lumbee Tribe, or to
petition under the acknowledgement process. We recommend
Congress clarify the Lumbee group that would be granted
recognition under this bill. Not doing so could potentially
expose the U.S. Government to numerous lawsuits, and possibly
delay the acknowledgement process.
We are concerned with the provision requiring the Secretary
to, within one year, to verify a membership roll and develop a
determination of needs and budget to provide Federal services
to the Lumbee group's eligible members. H.R. 65 is silent as to
the meaning of verification for inclusion on the Lumbee group's
membership roll.
And H.R. 65 may raise a constitutional problem, by
requiring the President to submit annually to the Congress, as
part of his annual budget submission, a budget that is
recommended by the heads of departments for programs and
services and benefit to the Lumbee. Under the Recommendations
Clause of the Constitution, the President submits for
consideration of Congress such measures as the President judges
necessary and expedient.
In the alternative, the Department supports an amendment to
the 1956 Act to afford the Lumbee Indians the opportunity to
petition for tribal status under the acknowledgement process.
In our review of H.R. 1294, the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian
Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act provides Federal
recognition for Indian tribes for six Virginia Indian groups.
To date, none of these petitioning groups have submitted
completed documented petitions demonstrating their ability to
meet all seven of the criteria under the acknowledgement
process. In addition, there are six additional petitioners that
are not included within the legislation, and two state-
recognized tribes within the reservations are also missing from
the legislation.
We ask that the Office of Federal Acknowledgement be a
resource as you deliberate H.R. 65 and H.R. 1294.
That concludes my remarks, and I would be happy to take
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Artman follows:]
Statement of Carl J. Artman, Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs,
U.S. Department of the Interior
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is
Carl Artman. I am the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the
Department of the Interior (Department). I am here today to provide the
Administration's testimony on H.R. 65, the ``Lumbee Recognition Act''
and H.R. 1294, the ``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia
Federal Recognition Act of 2007.''
The acknowledgement of the continued existence of another sovereign
is one of the most solemn and important responsibilities delegated to
the Secretary of the Interior. Federal acknowledgement enables Indian
tribes to participate in Federal programs and establishes a government-
to-government relationship between the United States and the Indian
tribe, and has considerable social and economic impact on the
petitioning group, its neighbors, and Federal, state, and local
governments. Acknowledgement carries with it certain immunities and
privileges, including exemptions from state and local jurisdictions and
the ability of newly acknowledged Indian tribes to undertake certain
economic opportunities.
We recognize that under the United States Constitution, Congress
has the authority to recognize a ``distinctly Indian community'' as an
Indian tribe. But along with that authority, it is important that all
parties have the opportunity to review all the information available
before recognition is granted. That is why we support a recognition
process that requires groups go through the Federal acknowledgement
process because it provides a deliberative uniform mechanism to review
and consider groups seeking Indian tribal status.
Legislation such as H.R. 65 and H.R. 1294 would allow these groups
to bypass this process--allowing them to avoid the scrutiny to which
other groups have been subjected. While legislation in Congress can be
a tool to accomplish this goal, a legislative solution should be used
sparingly in cases where there is an overriding reason to bypass the
process.
The Administration strongly supports all groups going through the
Federal acknowledgement process under 25 CFR Part 83. The
Administration believes that the Federal acknowledgement process set
forth in 25 CFR Part 83, ``Procedures for Establishing that an American
Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe,'' allows for the uniform and
rigorous review necessary to make an informed decision establishing
this important government-to-government relationship. Before the
development of these regulations, the Federal government and the
Department of the Interior made determinations as to which groups were
Indian tribes when negotiating treaties and determining which groups
could reorganize under the Indian Reorganization Act (25 U.S.C. 461).
Ultimately, treaty rights litigation on the West coast, and land claims
litigation on the East coast, highlighted the importance of these
tribal status decisions. Thus, the Department, in 1978, recognized the
need to end ad hoc decision making and adopt uniform regulations for
Federal acknowledgement.
Under the Department's regulations, petitioning groups must
demonstrate that they meet each of seven mandatory criteria. The
petitioner must:
(1) demonstrate that it has been identified as an American Indian
entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900;
(2) show that a predominant portion of the petitioning group
comprises a distinct community and has existed as a community from
historical times until the present;
(3) demonstrate that it has maintained political influence or
authority over its members as an autonomous entity from historical
times until the present;
(4) provide a copy of the group's present governing document
including its membership criteria;
(5) demonstrate that its membership consists of individuals who
descend from an historical Indian tribe or from historical Indian
tribes that combined and functioned as a single autonomous political
entity and provide a current membership list;
(6) show that the membership of the petitioning group is composed
principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged North
American Indian tribe; and
(7) demonstrate that neither the petitioner nor its members are
the subject of congressional legislation that has expressly terminated
or forbidden the Federal relationship.
A criterion shall be considered met if the available evidence
establishes a reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts
relating to that criterion. A petitioner must satisfy all seven of the
mandatory criteria in order for the Department to acknowledge the
continued tribal existence of a group as an Indian tribe. Currently,
the Department's workload of 17 groups seeking Federal acknowledgement
consists of 8 petitions on ``Active Consideration'' and 9 petitions on
the ``Ready, Waiting for Active Consideration'' lists.
H.R. 65
In 1956, Congress designated Indians then ``residing in Robeson and
adjoining counties of North Carolina'' as the ``Lumbee Indians of North
Carolina'' in the Act of June 7, 1956 (70 Stat. 254). Congress went on
to note the following:
Nothing in this Act shall make such Indians eligible for any
services performed by the United States for Indians because of
their status as Indians, and none of the statutes of the United
States which affect Indians because of their status as Indians
shall be applicable to the Lumbee Indians.
In 1989, the Department's Office of the Solicitor advised that the
1956 Act forbade the Federal relationship within the meaning of the
acknowledgement regulations, and that the Lumbee Indians were,
therefore, precluded from consideration for Federal acknowledgement
under the administrative process. Because of the 1956 Act, legislation
is necessary for the Lumbee Indians to be afforded the opportunity to
petition for tribal status under the Department's regulations. The
Department would welcome the opportunity to assist the Congress in
drafting such legislation.
If Congress elects legislative recognition of the Lumbee, then the
Department makes the following comments on H.R. 65, as currently
drafted.
H.R. 65 extends Federal recognition to the ``Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina'' and permits any other group of Indians in Robeson and
adjoining counties whose members are not enrolled in the Lumbee Tribe
to join the Lumbee Tribe or to petition under the Department's
acknowledgement regulations. The Department's Office of Federal
Acknowledgement (OFA) has received letters of intent to petition from
eight groups that may overlap with each other: the Cherokee Indians of
Robeson and Adjoining Counties, the Lumbee Regional Development
Association, the Cherokee Indians of Hoke County, Inc., the Tuscarora
Nation of North Carolina, the Tuscarora Nation East of the Mountains,
the Hatteras Tuscarora Indians, the Tuscarora Indian Tribe--Drowning
Creek Reservation, and the Tuscarora Nation of Indians of the
Carolinas. In addition, OFA has identified over 90 names of groups that
derive from these counties and are affected by the 1956 Lumbee Act.
Some of these groups claim to be the ``Lumbee'' Tribe. Therefore, we
recommend Congress clarify the Lumbee group that would be granted
recognition under this bill. Not doing so could potentially expose the
Federal government to unwarranted lawsuits and possibly delay the
Federal acknowledgement process.
Under H.R. 65, the State of North Carolina has jurisdiction over
criminal and civil offenses and actions on lands within North Carolina
owned by or held in trust for the Lumbee Tribe or ``any dependent
Indian community of the Lumbee Tribe.''
We are concerned with the provision requiring the Secretary, within
one year, to verify the membership roll and then to develop a
determination of needs and budget to provide Federal services to the
Lumbee group's eligible members. Under the provisions of this bill, the
``Lumbee Tribe'', which the Department understands includes over 53,000
members, would be eligible for benefits, privileges and immunities that
are similar to those possessed by members of other Federally recognized
Indian tribes. In our experience verifying a membership roll is an
extremely involved and complex undertaking that can take several years
to resolve with much smaller Indian tribes. While we believe there are
approximately 53,000 members, we do not currently have access to the
Lumbee's current membership roll and thus do not have the appropriate
data to estimate the time to verify them nor do we know how many Lumbee
members may be eligible to participate in Federal needs based programs.
Moreover, H.R. 65 is silent as to the meaning of verification for
inclusion on the Lumbee group's membership roll.
In addition, H.R. 65 may raise a constitutional problem by
purporting to require the President to submit annually to the Congress
as part of his annual budget submission a budget that is recommended by
the head of an executive department for programs, services and benefits
to the Lumbee. Under the Recommendations Clause of the United States
Constitution, the President submits for the consideration of Congress
such measures as the President judges necessary and expedient.
Should Congress choose not to enact H.R. 65, the Department feels,
at a minimum, Congress should amend the 1956 Act to afford the Lumbee
Indians the opportunity to petition for tribal status under the
Department's Federal acknowledgement regulations.
H.R. 1294
H.R. 1294, the ``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia
Federal Recognition Act of 2007,'' provides Federal recognition as
Indian tribes to six Virginia groups: the Chickahominy Indian Tribe,
the Chickahominy Indian Tribe--Eastern Division, the Upper Mattaponi
Tribe, the Rappahannock Tribe, Inc., the Monacan Indian Nation, and the
Nansemond Indian Tribe.
Under 25 CFR Part 83, these six groups have submitted letters of
intent and partial documentation to petition for Federal
acknowledgement as Indian tribes. Some of these groups are awaiting
technical assistance reviews under the Department's Federal
acknowledgement regulations. As stated above, the purpose of the
technical assistance review is to provide the groups with opportunities
to supplement their petitions due to obvious deficiencies and
significant omissions. To date, none of these petitioning groups have
submitted completed documented petitions demonstrating their ability to
meet all seven mandatory criteria.
We look forward to working with you as you deliberate H.R. 65 and
H.R. 1294.
This concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to answer
any questions the Committee may have.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Carl. I just have one question. I
do thank you for your testimony this morning, particularly your
specific recommendations to language in the Lumbee Bill
affecting certification of membership rolls and future
presidents' budget.
As we move forward, we will take a hard look at addressing
your concerns. Your testimony is silent, almost silent, on the
Virginia tribes recognition. And I am not sure what to make of
that, but I think that I will not push our luck on that issue
and just move on.
I do want to ask you about the proposal to pass a law to
permit the Lumbee Tribes access to the administrative Federal
acknowledgement process. I happen to reject the notion by some
that legislative recognition is fraught with emotions and
potential politics, but the administrative process is not. I
don't know how you can differentiate that. But if people in
this town are involved, you know, both are possible in both the
processes.
The Lumbees are certainly not the only tribe which is
prohibited from going through that process. There are, to take
one example, several terminated tribes in California, which are
also prohibited from going through the process.
Do you support changing the law to permit all of those
tribes to go through the process, as well? And what would that
do to the decades-long wait tribes have in the process now?
Would you be able to guarantee that the President would request
the needed number of positions in funding in future budgets to
accommodate such a process? I know that is a couple questions,
more than one.
Mr. Artman. Well, if I miss any, please let me know, Mr.
Chairman. And thank you for the question.
The Federal acknowledgement process can be sometimes
cumbersome and seemingly opaque, but it does lead to a very
important result. Either if the tribe, the petitioners are
acknowledged or if they are denied acknowledgement, the end
result is, if positive, is a sovereign relationship with the
United States Government; a government-to-government
relationship. Something that is a solemn responsibility on both
parties. So we view it as a very serious deliberative,
investigative, and sometimes academic process.
The staff currently in the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement not only stays within the narrow bounds of
reviewing it, but also helps tribes, helps petitioners through
the process as well, through the technical assistance letters,
extensions, what-have-you. So it is something that is, there is
a dedicated group of individuals over there, to be sure.
In terms of how the process works, its efficiency, whether
or not there are the right number of people there, that is
something that I mentioned during the confirmation process,
that is something of great importance to me. And I will be
spending a lot of time with the Office of Acknowledgement to
look into that matter. And I will be looking forward to working
with Mr. Fleming on that matter.
If, as you mentioned, we were to lift the ban on the Lumbee
Tribe from petitioning for recognition, you do hit on a very
important point. How that would impact the process. Not
touching on the California tribes, the additional California
tribes you mentioned, but just focusing on the Lumbee for just
a moment, there are potentially 50,000 members there. And
determining the correct membership rolls is going to be a
cumbersome process.
In the bill it notes that the Department would have one
year to determine that, and then another year to determine the
impact on the budget afterwards. We think that it would
probably take closer to four years to determine whether or not
the membership roll is correct. But if we were to get it down
to one year, we would need additional funds and additional
individuals to assign to that process. So that is something
that we are very concerned with.
With regards to the California tribes, I haven't had a
chance to review that, Mr. Chairman, but I would be happy to
look into that as this process continues forward.
The Chairman. Fair enough, thank you. The Chair recognizes
the gentleman from Alaska.
Mr. Young. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I have a series of
questions. I would also like to make a statement, if I could.
Because what brings me up to this tribal recognition action by
the Department, and I think we should be talking about another
tribe that is called the Shinnecock Indians in New York.
The State of New York has formally recognized the
Shinnecock Indian Nation for over 340 years. It was half the
tribes and their members currently live in the reservation set
aside under state law. By all intents and purposes, the State
of New York, in fact the County of New York has always treated
the Shinnecock as a tribe. And this, Mr. Artman, is for you
because in 1978 they asked the Federal government for
assistance in filing a lawsuit to obtain justice for the theft
of their lands. They testified to this in some of the hearings
a year ago.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs, Mr. Artman, decided they
first should be Federally recognized and treated to litigation
because of the petition for Federal acknowledgement. In
response, they created the Shinnecock Federal Recognition
Committee to manage the petition for Federal recognition with
the Department of Interior. That was 30 years ago, and they are
still waiting for that decision.
Despite the three decades of delay, I hope we can commit to
helping them, as well. On November 7, 2005, a Federal court, in
a case in which their tribal status was at issue, and after
receiving a petition to the Department of Interior, thousands
of pages of legal briefs and documents, issued a decision
holding that the Shinnecock Indian Nation is a sovereign Indian
tribe as a matter of Federal law.
It is from this perspective that the Committee needs to
consider the Shinnecock as a tribe, who has played by the
rules, has met with years of bureaucratic inaction, and
deserves to be put on the list of Federally recognized tribes.
They should not be penalized by the Department of Interior's
prolonged inaction and response for the application to
acknowledge a status as an Indian tribe.
In fact, Mr. Artman, I think the Shinnecock should be
placed on the list of Federally recognized tribes immediately.
And I say this, and I bring this up, Mr. Chairman, because I
have heard about the Virginia tribes, the Lumbee tribes, and
let us go back to this recognition process. It doesn't work.
We have had two hearings on this in the last two
Congresses, and all I hear is excuses. I am one of these people
that have been supporting the American Indian tribes for years;
I have to. And if I don't, I get killed.
But the reality is the Bureau itself is non-functional. And
this is why--and by the way, Mr. Artman, how many tribes have
been recognized by the legislative process?
Mr. Artman. I believe nine have been recognized by the
legislative process.
Mr. Young. Twenty. Twenty.
Mr. Artman. Twenty?
Mr. Young. Twenty. And so this is not new. This is a
process we have gone through. And usually it is because of
inaction of the, what we call the Federal acknowledgement
process. And I believe one of them said maybe we ought to
change this process, maybe we need a little bit of
reorganization downtown. The Bureau is not my favorite bureau
right now; hasn't been for years.
You have grown, you have asked for money. It is not your
fault, you just got sworn in. You have asked for money each
year, and I have followed those dollars, and it doesn't get to
the recipients. It stays with the Administration, and the
Administration grows every year. And that is not what it should
be like. That is why I support the contracting privileges in
trying to get, you know, more tribes involved in running their
own businesses.
I think that is something that we really ought to look at.
Because, Mr. Chairman, I have not seen the growth in this
agency it should have, as far as recipients receiving those
dollars.
And as we go through this authorization process in asking
for dollars, maybe we ought to think about where we are going.
I do support the Virginia tribes. I do support the Lumbee.
I know there are some in this room who do not. But I have been
on this committee long enough to know, 34 years, there has been
little action downtown.
And by the way, let us go back to how many tribes have been
recognized by your agency in the last 20 years?
Mr. Artman. In the last 20 years I think that there have
been 14.
Mr. Young. Fourteen. Twenty years and 14. How many in 30
years?
Mr. Artman. Forty have been determined through the
acknowledgement process.
Mr. Young. Forty?
Mr. Artman. Forty.
Mr. Young. That is better than you said the first number,
yes. OK. How many about in the last 35 years?
Mr. Artman. That I don't know, sir. I think that goes all
the way back to, I am actually not sure.
Mr. Young. OK, well, find that out. Now, how many have been
recognized in the last four years?
Mr. Artman. The last four, I think that is getting closer
to one.
Mr. Young. One.
Mr. Artman. Yes.
Mr. Young. In four years.
Mr. Artman. Strict to the math, yes, one.
Mr. Young. What I am leading up to, Mr. Artman, my problem,
my concern is you are being asked, let us go through the
process, go through the Federal acknowledgement process. One in
four years? And how many people have applied?
Mr. Artman. How many people have applied?
Mr. Young. How many tribes?
Mr. Artman. There have been 62 petitions. But we are not
going to, the ones that have, with complete petitions, 62.
Mr. Young. And you have one.
Mr. Artman. In the last four years.
Mr. Young. In the last four years. Mr. Chairman, my case
rests.
Mr. Artman. Just to clarify, though, that has been
acknowledged. There have been six others that have been denied
through the process, as well.
Mr. Young. One in four years out of 62. My case rests.
The Chairman. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North
Carolina, Mr. Shuler.
Mr. Shuler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Artman, one of the
questions, we are obviously talking about the budget and
restraints, and obviously to go through the recognition you
would have to obviously increase the budget.
But what about if, in fact, the Lumbees are recognized as a
tribe? What would the impact be on the budget of the BIA?
Mr. Artman. A couple of years ago, when asked a similar
question, we did a study on that. And for the year, at that
time that was Fiscal Year 2006, we determined that the initial
implications to the budget would be approximately $80 million.
After that, from 2007 to 2011, we determined that the impact
would be $403 million, I believe.
Mr. Shuler. So almost a half a billion dollars.
Mr. Artman. Yes.
Mr. Shuler. So if Congress didn't fund the increase on that
budget, what would happen to the funds with the recognitions of
the new tribes? What would happen if Congress did not increase
the budget?
Mr. Artman. Well, we would, of course, follow the letter of
the law. And as written, I suspect that we would have to push
back some of the petitioners that are in the acknowledgement
process right now, and focus on the needs as mandated by
Congress.
Mr. Shuler. So we would actually be taking from other
tribes some of the, basically the needs that they are so
lacking now, as the Ranking Member Young had indicated, that
some of the funds aren't necessarily getting totally to the
people who need it.
Mr. Artman. That is correct, Congressman.
Mr. Shuler. When was the last time a tribe received
recognition?
Mr. Artman. The last time the Lumbees applied, do you have
that, Leif? There have been a number of letters. We have
received, we can focus on eight groups that have submitted
petitions throughout the process, throughout the years, that
could be recognized as Lumbee. Let us focus on the Lumbee
Regional Development Association, 1980.
Mr. Shuler. Was the process complete? Was it followed
through completely?
Mr. Artman. No, it wasn't. Right now the law prohibits us
from considering them through the acknowledgement process.
Mr. Shuler. All right. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Duncan.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand that our
colleague, Mr. Wolf, expressed some concerns about the Indian
gambling process, and I was not here to hear his testimony. But
I read an article in Business Week Magazine a few months ago
which said that Indian gambling was just about out of control,
and that it was now more than a $30 billion industry, and
growing by leaps and bounds.
And in fact, I think there would not be nearly as much
interest in getting recognition by some of these Indian tribes
if it was not for their interest in this very lucrative Indian
gambling business.
We now have half of the land in some type of government
ownership, Federal, state, or local. Yet we keep taking over
more. This sounds so good for a politician to create a park,
yet we can't take good care of the parks that we already have.
My point is we keep shrinking the tax base at the same time
the schools and everybody else is coming to us wanting more
money. And so I read a George Will column a few months ago
which said that now every state but two, Utah and one other, I
think, have some form of gambling. And we are just going
gambling crazy in this country. And I am not opposed to some of
it, but I am afraid the gambling addiction is going to become a
big problem in this country in the years ahead, and maybe
already is.
And what I am wondering, Mr. Artman, then, have you ever
considered recognizing that Indian gambling is excessive at
this point, or almost out of control, and asking some of these
tribes if they would be willing to accept recognition, but
waiving or giving up their right to get into the gambling
business?
Mr. Artman. Thank you, Congressman. Right now Secretary
Kempthorne has stated his concerns with the two-part
determination, which seems to be where many of the tribes are
focused right now in terms of Indian gaming. And right now we
are currently finishing up the development of the Section 20
regulations, which would further define the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act, specifically on areas such as allowing restored
tribes, tribes with initial reservations, and tribes settling
land claims, and how they would game through that, and also the
two-part determination.
In addition, we are beginning the deliberative process of
amending the 151, or defeated trust regulations, as well. And
there will be a heavy emphasis, and there has, as already been
stated by both Secretary Kempthorne and myself, that we are
going to be looking at the off-reservation gaming question in
particular.
So the Department of the Interior is doing what it can do
within its parameters to take a look at that issue. We will be
in consultation with both the tribes and the local communities
that are impacted by this industry, as well.
Mr. Duncan. Well, I can tell you that I think it is getting
out of control. I know all the states have gone to it in a
desperate attempt to get more and more revenue, but it is just
becoming excessive. And I think it is creating a real problem.
I would probably go along with some of these Indian
recognition efforts--in fact, many of them--if these tribes
would waive or give up their right to get into this lucrative
gambling business in return for being granted recognition. But
I don't believe they will do it. I believe that their primary
goal is to get into this gambling business, and I think it has
gone beyond the point of being at a reasonable level. And I
wish that your department would take that into consideration.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Artman. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Oklahoma, Mr. Boren.
Mr. Boren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't really have a
lot of questions for the member of our panel, just really one.
I do want to say thank you for having this hearing. I was
able to meet with Chief Hicks, and I appreciate the dialogue
that we have had. I also want to recognize a former Oklahoman.
He is now in Indiana, our former basketball coach at the
University of Oklahoma. We do miss him. He is a former neighbor
of mine, actually. I used to live just a few blocks away, and
would see him working out. Of course, I was the one who was
sitting in my front yard.
But anyway, I want to talk a little bit about the
administrative process. I know there is a lot of motions going
on right now; there are a lot of people on different sides of
this issue.
I have received several letters, one from Chief Smith,
another from Chief Gray, that is in my packet, expressing their
concerns about the legislation. But really what I want to do is
talk about the process, the recognition process and the seven
criteria.
Could you describe that a little bit for some of us that
are new to this recognition process? I don't want you to go in
great detail, but talk a little bit about where the Lumbees
would fall in if they were to go through this process, starting
off with one, existence as an Indian tribe on a continuous
basis since 1900; two, existence predominantly as a community,
on down the list.
Could you just touch in general terms about--because we
have talked about only so many tribes have been recognized
through the process. A lot of people are frustrated, and that
is why you see a lot of people going to the legislative route.
Could you tell us where the Lumbees would fall in? And I
know you can't really go into great detail, but it would be
nice to hear. Thank you.
Mr. Artman. Sure. Thank you, Congressman. It would be
difficult to sit here today and tell you exactly where the
Lumbee are going to fall into how they would match up against
the seven criteria for a number of reasons.
First of all, since 1956 the Lumbee haven't been allowed to
go through the Federal acknowledgement process. So as a rule,
we haven't had an opportunity to review their record. And it
would be likely to expect that because of that Federal mandate,
that their record at this point might be incomplete, the record
that we possess. I am sure that after this many years and with
that many potential members, they probably have very complete
records. So I can't really say which way, how they would fall
in against all the criteria.
Now, the criteria generally look at how far back is the
existence, a continuous existence going back to a date certain.
And you are looking at records, you are looking at government,
you are looking at existence through oral history; any number
of criteria. And generally, that is the core from which all
seven of those criteria emanate.
So without a complete record, because of that prohibition,
without us having the ability to go through that, and I think
it would be predeterminative to sit here and actually go
through that. But so far the process has worked with the seven
criteria.
And again, just to reiterate, as I said before, the seven
criteria are general rules that we follow to achieve what we
consider to be, if it is a positive determination, a very
solemn event. And that is the government-to-government
recognition. It is a status that not many have. It is a status
that is unique and special to American Indians. And it is one
that we believe in protecting and making sure that it is done
correctly.
Mr. Boren. Just a real quick follow-up, and I look forward
to our next panelists talking. There are some discussions about
ancestry, and there is some debate. Could you tell us a little
bit about, for those--I am just a second-termer on this
committee--about how long the process takes?
You know, there was some mention that hey, it doesn't take
very long, others are very frustrated that it is taking a long
time. Just about the process in general, not specifically about
the Lumbee, but anyone who is coming through the BIA and
needing assistance. And our Ranking Member mentioned that
earlier.
Could you talk about the timeliness of getting decisions
and why it is taking so long? Or if not, if it is not taking
long, could you talk to us a little bit about that?
Mr. Artman. Sure. In a best-case scenario, starting with
the best-case scenario, if we have a complete record and
nothing, no other petitioners in front of that petitioning
group, it should take about 25 months to do, to go through the
process, assuming there are no challenges, no extension
requests and what-have-you. But you do start looking at
challenges. You have some groups split, or perhaps members will
peel off and seek petition in another, seek their own petition
for recognition.
At the current time, with the 17 entities ahead--that is
what we have on the ready and active list right now, 17
petitioners--they have complete petitions. We have groups of
four that include anthropologists, sociologists, genealogists,
looking at, examining these records, and sometimes immense
records: thousands of pieces of paper, reams of paper. Going
through and making sure that they are accurate, that there is
no fraud involved in the development of those records.
With all that, at its current pace, if someone were to come
on the ready and active list right now, and again in the best-
case scenario with that kind of line, you are looking at
probably four to seven years for the recognition process. And I
know with some there is accusations that it has taken decades,
or over a decade, up to multiple decades. And I would say if
you go back and look at a lot of those situations, you are
looking at either incomplete records, requests for extensions.
There are extenuating circumstances to that.
Again, we used to have two groups that were looking at
this. It was recently expanded to four groups in the last
couple of years, I believe. And those individuals are working
as hard as they can, both with what is in front of them, and
also helping the other petitioners get into that, potentially
get into that ready and active list.
Again, I think it is probably, well, time is certainly
where there is a lot of focus, and for good reason. Many of
these tribes have been petitioners for many years.
But I think it is probably best to look at the results, and
the reason why we take so much time. Again, we are
deliberative, because it is an important result. And as has
been mentioned here today, there are privileges and immunities
associated with becoming an Indian tribe, one of which is the
potential for gaming. Others is a potential for funds, for 638
funds for economic development, healthcare, education. A
special status and standing compared to states, the United
States and local governments.
So this isn't something that we necessarily want to jump
into quickly. We want to make sure we are right in doing this.
Mr. Boren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentlelady from the Virgin Islands, Ms.
Christensen.
Ms. Christensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Assistant
Secretary Artman, the Chairman did make mention of the fact
that your testimony was pretty silent on some of the issues
regarding the Virginia tribes. But having heard, I want to ask
a question that arises out of some of the testimony we did hear
from Members of Congress.
As you know, we are going to be receiving testimony from
some of the Virginia tribes documenting deplorable actions
taken by various individuals and the Commonwealth of Virginia
against the native people of Virginia, which may prevent them
from meeting all of the Federal acknowledgement criteria. And
in addition, unlike tribes in the Western United States,
historical times for the Virginia tribes goes back to the
1500s, when little written documentation exists which may help
them to meet the criteria. And then we heard that the other
documents, much of the other documentation was destroyed.
So what allowances do the Federal acknowledgement criteria
make for actions such as these?
Mr. Artman. Thank you, ma'am. There was testimony about a
deplorable history there, and that goes without saying. And we
have not yet received complete petitions from many of the six
potential tribes, the six petitioners on the list.
Ms. Christensen. But what I am particularly referring to is
that there is a lot of documentation that is just not going to
be available. So what allowances?
Mr. Artman. That was one statement that was made. And
without a complete record, without being able to look at the
complete record, it is hard for us to make the determination,
if what would be missing is something that would be important
to us in this determination.
For example, there was made mention of the fact that
individuals would go into the records of the Native Americans
and change their descendancy.
Ms. Christensen. Yes.
Mr. Artman. From I for Indian to C for color. That does not
prohibit that record from being used as part of the petition.
That is still something that we can look at. We can verify the
descendancy of the ancestors in another, through other methods.
That could be a piece of the puzzle that would complete the
whole picture for us.
So to say that they have been destroyed and unusable may be
rushing to a conclusion. We, I guess, these records are
thousands of pieces of paper. And we made these pieces
together. We are looking at long and disparate histories, in
some cases, and yet we still manage to put together a complete
record.
Ms. Christensen. So the lack or the changing or the
destruction of the records does not have to be an obstacle to
them going through the process successfully.
Mr. Artman. In the hypothetical, it does not have to be,
does not have to be an obstacle. Without seeing a completed
petition submitted, it is difficult to answer that question
thoroughly. But in the hypothetical, it does not have to be.
Ms. Christensen. But you do recognize that some
extraordinary steps would have to be taken by the Department
because of the lack of complete or accurate records, due to
some of the actions of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Mr. Artman. Yes, ma'am. The history of the tribes in
Virginia is not unique. This is a story that is played out all
across the country, and something that our Office of Federal
Acknowledgement has had to contend with.
Ms. Christensen. OK. And my next question, in 1956 Congress
specifically enacted legislation recognizing the Lumbees as
Indians, and some argued then terminating them at the same
time, as other people have alluded to.
Regardless, it was Congress's intent to demonstrate that in
fact they are an Indian tribe. So I think you are saying that
the Lumbee Tribe should go through the Federal acknowledgement
process. Are you saying that the Department should have the
authority to review and overturn Congress's decision to
recognize the Lumbees as Indians? And if so, are you saying
this power should apply to all Congressionally recognized
tribes, or only the Lumbees?
Mr. Artman. No, ma'am. And I would never say the Department
has the ability to overturn a Congressional Act. I wouldn't
even insinuate that.
In this particular case, if we are to--the Lumbees have a
complex history. And we have seen that, we have received
numerous letters and petitions from various groups in Robeson
County and the surrounding counties. So to say that one
particular tribe is, or one particular group of people are
Lumbee or not, we would need to look at a complete record. And
that is all we are asking for, is the ability to do that.
For example, are we to combine all of the groups, the
Tuscarora, potential Cherokee, and Lumbee into one group, much
as sometimes has been done in California, and recognize it as a
Lumbee? Or are there distinct lines of different tribes, or
perhaps even different branches of the same tribe?
This is a history we haven't had the opportunity to look
at. And as mentioned at the very beginning, Congress has
plenary power, and we follow the letter of the law.
Ms. Christensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Donna. The gentleman from North
Carolina, Mr. McIntyre.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you. I will be brief because I am eager
to allow our next panel to come before the full Committee.
In summary, Mr. Assistant Secretary, you stated that you do
agree that the 1956 Lumbee Act did not grant the Lumbees the
full recognition that they would have as a Federally recognized
tribe, correct?
Mr. Artman. That is correct. There are privileges and
immunities that the Lumbee cannot access.
Mr. McIntyre. And you agree that the Solicitor General's
opinion of 1989 forbids that from proceeding under the regular
process, as currently stated, is that correct?
Mr. Artman. Yes, sir.
Mr. McIntyre. And then you also state that legislation is
necessary for the Lumbee Indians to be afforded the opportunity
to proceed with recognition, correct?
Mr. Artman. Yes, sir.
Mr. McIntyre. OK. Now, you have stated, in answering to Mr.
Shuler earlier, you say that benefits the tribe would be due
would be approximately $80 million per year, is that correct?
Mr. Artman. That is the budget that we were required to go
through the processes as mandated by the current law.
Mr. McIntyre. And for every year that they suffer not
having recognition, that is another year that passes that they
receive absolutely no Federal benefits, is that correct?
Mr. Artman. That is correct.
Mr. McIntyre. OK. No further questions. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Sarbanes.
Mr. Sarbanes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no questions.
The Chairman. The Chair will call panel number two to the
table, with testimony on H.R. 65. And the panel is composed of
the following individuals. Chairman James E. Goins, Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina, Pembroke, North Carolina; accompanied
by Ms. Arlinda Locklear, Esquire, the attorney for the Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina; Principal Chief Michell Hicks, Eastern
Band of Cherokee Indians, Cherokee, North Carolina; Mr. Kelvin
Sampson, the Indiana University head basketball coach from
Bloomington, Indiana. We welcome him to the Committee, and at
the outset, of course, I would like to congratulate you, Coach,
for your success in your first year as the basketball coach at
Indiana, leading the Hoosiers to the NCAA tournament and an
undefeated record of 15 wins at home. With what is reputed to
be a great recruiting class coming to Bloomington, I wish you
continued success, and of course that is excluding my alma
mater, Duke. I also want to welcome Dr. Jack Campisi, the
anthropologist consultant for the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina.
Lady and gentlemen, we welcome you to the Committee. We
have your prepared testimonies, and they will, of course, be
made part of the record as if actually read. And Mr. Chairman,
do you want to start off? Mr. Chairman Goins, sorry.
STATEMENT OF JAMES E. GOINS, CHAIRMAN, LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH
CAROLINA, PEMBROKE, NORTH CAROLINA; ACCOMPANIED BY ARLINDA
LOCKLEAR, ESQUIRE, ATTORNEY FOR THE LUMBEE TRIBE OC NORTH
CAROLINA
Mr. Goins. Chairman Rahall and Members of the Committee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 65,
a bill to extend full Federal recognition to the Lumbee Tribe
of North Carolina.
On behalf of the Lumbee people, I want to express our
particular gratitude to you, Chairman Rahall and Congressman
Young, for your support for our cause. Also on behalf of the
Lumbee people I want to express our heartfelt appreciation to
Congressman McIntyre, Congressman Hayes, Senator Dole, and
Senator Burr for their leadership on this issue.
I would like also to thank my elders, my veterans, and my
leaders to tribal council for their attendance and support
today.
Mr. Chairman, my name is James E. Goins, and I am the
Chairman of the Lumbee Tribe. I have a written testimony that I
request be entered into the record.
I am the great-great-grandson of Solomon Oxendine, who,
along with 45 other Lumbee tribal leaders, petitioned the
Federal government for Federal recognition in 1888. Today I
stand before you once again requesting that you grant full
Federal recognition to my people, the Lumbee.
I am joined by Kevin Sampson, an enrolled member and
celebrated basketball coach of Indiana, who will tell the
Committee what Federal recognition means to our people. Dr.
Jack Campisi will testify that we are in fact an Indian tribe.
Finally, I am accompanied by the tribe's attorney, Ms. Arlinda
Locklear, who will be available to answer any technical
questions for the Committee.
Some people try to create confusion about our name. These
were the state-imposed names, not ours. The only thing we have
chosen is the Lumbee Tribe, which derives from the river from
where we have always lived. This short series of film clips
that was taken earlier this month will show you key parts of
our community and history. It has always amazed me how critics
of the Lumbee people become believers once they visit Lumbee
territory.
So this morning I bring to you the land of the Lumbee, and
I respectfully request that this short video segment be entered
into the record.
This panoramic view of St. Anna Church is we see the Lumbee
River Holiness Methodist Conference. Excuse me, let me start
over. I am a little nervous there.
St. Anna Church, a historical Indian church, and one of
more than 120 in our territory, shown here has been led by the
Lumbee pastors for more than 100 years. This church is located
in the Cheraw settlement, and was the perfect staging area for
Fred Baker, a special Indian Agent ordered by the Commission of
Indian Affairs to study the history and conditions of my
people.
The Indians report, one of 12, by the Department of
Interior, stated that over 2,000 Lumbee met him at St. Anna.
Mr. Chairman, I have these 12 reports here, and I would like to
request they be made part of the record.
Every single one of these reports identify us as Indian,
and notes the strength of our community and leadership. In this
panoramic view of St. Anna Church we see the Lumbee River
Holiness Methodist Conference, created in 1900, and today this
association remains the only all-Indian religious conference in
the country.
Education has always been important to our people. When the
state recognized us in 1885, it established a school system
controlled by the tribe, and lended it eligibility to our
children. It is one of the earliest pictures of our Indian
schools.
Here is Prospect School that today sits on a portion of a
Cheraw settlement. Prospect School has a student population of
99.8 percent Indian. The principal, most of the teachers, and
yes, even the superintendent of the Robeson County Public
Schools are all Indian. This school is very dear to my heart.
My grandfather attended this school, my father attended this
school, I attended this school, even my children and now my
grandchildren attend this school.
The Indian Normal School, founded in 1887, established to
educate Indian teachers, is now in the University of North
Carolina at Pembroke. Due to the efforts of early leaders, our
youth today attend predominantly Indian schools and live in
Indian communities.
This is the family home and burial site of the tribe's most
noted hero, Henry Berry Lowrie. Lowrie led the effort to
protect our people against constriction and to hard labor by
the local militia during the Civil War. Lowrie watched militia
execute his father and brother in 1865, and it is here where
they are buried. This began his 10-year quest to protect his
family and the Indian community against tyranny.
Here you see Red Banks. This is where the BIA proposed to
establish a resettlement program for our people in 1935. But
the BIA transferred the program to the Department of
Agriculture. Even so, the Red Banks Mutual Association, a long-
running all-Indian agricultural farming co-op, was established
here.
Now you see scenes of Lumbee homecoming, held annually in
Pembroke, where over 25,000 Lumbee people gather to celebrate
our culture and heritage. It is during this time that I give my
state-of-the-tribe address, as mandated by our tribal
constitution. These streets were closed to celebrate the
passage of the 1956 Lumbee Act. We thought we had been
recognized at last, only to discover that Congress had instead
terminated Federal responsibility for our tribe.
Finally, our veterans. Honor, duty, and love of country are
qualities our brothers, our Lumbee veterans instill in our
youth. These are not just empty words, but this is our way of
life. My father, who served in World War II, passed these same
qualities down to me. Lumbee veterans have defended your way of
life and our way of life. No words can truly express my sincere
appreciation for all Lumbee veterans who have served in every
war and conflict since Bennett Locklear, one of my ancestors
who fought in the Revolutionary War. As a result, I proudly
served my country by enlisting in the Army, and served in
Vietnam. For my service in Vietnam I was awarded the Purple
Heart, the Bronze Star, and the Air Medal.
We think it is time for Congress to complete what it
started in 1956. In the words of my dear friend, Congressman
Mike McIntyre, it is time for discrimination to end and
recognition to begin.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Goins follows:]
Statement of Chairman James E. Goins,
Chairman, Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina
Chairman Rahall, Congressman Young, and members of the committee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of H.R. 65, a
bill to extend federal recognition to the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina. On behalf of the Lumbee people, I want to express our
particular gratitude to you, Chairman Rahall and Congressman Young, for
your support for our cause. Also on behalf of the Lumbee people, I want
to express our heartfelt appreciation to Congressman McIntyre, Senator
Dole, and Senator Burr for their leadership on this issue. With their
efforts, the Lumbee people are hopeful that we will finally reach our
goal of federal recognition this Congress.
Mr. Chairman, my name is James Ernest Goins and I am the Chairman
of the Lumbee Tribe. I am joined by Kelvin Sampson, an enrolled member
and Head Basketball Coach for Indiana University, who, after my
statement, will tell the Committee what the prospect of federal
recognition means to our people. Finally, Dr. Jack Campisi, an expert
anthropologist who has worked with the Tribe for more than twenty
years, will testify that the Lumbee qualify as an Indian tribe. We are
accompanied by the Tribe's attorney on recognition, Arlinda Locklear,
who will be available to answer any technical questions for the
committee.
The Lumbee Tribe is well known in Indian country, both because of
the Tribe's long quest for federal recognition and the number of
prominent Lumbees who work throughout Indian country--political
appointees in Indian affairs, educators, doctors, lawyers, and others,
like Coach Sampson. In our relations with other tribes, we sometimes
encounter people with questions about the Tribe's entitlement to
federal recognition. We always invite these people to visit the Lumbee
community, to walk among us in all Lumbee churches and schools, and to
see where our history took place and continues to be made every day.
When they do this, they are struck by the fact that Lumbee territory is
Indian country: it is visible in the faces of our people and in the
strong community ties that bind the Lumbees.
Mr. Chairman, we wish the committee could visit our community and
see these things as well. Since that is not possible, we have done our
best to bring our community to you. I will present a series of short
film clips, all of which feature key parts of our community and
history. We believe you'll see through these clips that Lumbee
territory is Indian country. As such, we are entitled to the same
federal recognition enjoyed by the rest of Indian country.
Before I show the film clips, though, I want to address something
that the committee members are likely to hear a lot about today, and
that is the name Lumbee Tribe. We Lumbees have not always been known by
that name. In 1885, the State of North Carolina first recognized our
ancestors as the Croatan Indians of Robeson County. In 1911, the State
changed the law to recognize our ancestors as the Indians of Robeson
County. And in 1913, the State again changed the law to recognize our
ancestors as the Cherokee Indians of Robeson County. The Tribe did not
choose any of these names. Instead, they were chosen by members of the
State Legislature at the time who thought of themselves as amateur
historians. Our people grew tired of all these names imposed by state
law and, in 1952, asked the State to conduct a referendum on the
adoption of the name Lumbee, drawn from the Lumber River where our
people have always lived. The State agreed and the referendum passed
overwhelmingly. In response, the State changed the law once again in
1953 to recognize the Tribe as the Lumbee Indians of Robeson and
adjoining counties. We have been recognized by the State as the Lumbee
Tribe ever since. But whatever name the State called us, we are the
same people that the State first recognized in 1885. In fact, I am a
lineal descendant of one of the Croatan leaders who the State
recognized in 1885 and who first petitioned the Congress for federal
recognition in 1888. So the Lumbee community that you are about to see
is the same Indian community that the State of North Carolina has
recognized since 1885.
St. Anna's Church
The first video clip shows St. Anna's Church. This church is more
than a hundred years old. It has today and has always had a Lumbee
minister and an all Lumbee congregation. There are more than 120 such
churches in Lumbee territory. They are an important part of our
community, with most people's social lives organized around their
church and their families. This particular church is significant
because this is one of the places where Fred Baker, then the BIA
Superintendent for the Sisseton Indian Agency, held meetings with the
Lumbee people in 1935. Agent Baker was sent to Lumbee territory by the
Commissioner of Indian Affairs to study the history and condition of
the Lumbee people. He reported that 2,000 Indians showed up at his
meeting at St. Anna Church and that he was deeply moved by their hope
for federal involvement in the Indian community there. His report on
the Lumbees was one of twelve that the Department of the Interior has
done, starting as early as the 1912 Pierce Report. All these reports
document the Indian ancestry of the Lumbees, our tight knit
communities, and the need for assistance for federal Indian services.
The panoramic view around St. Anna's Church is also important. It
shows other all Indian institutions in our community, for example, the
Pembroke Volunteer Fire Department and the headquarters of the Lumber
River Holiness Methodist Conference established in 1900, an all Indian
conference of Holiness Methodist churches. This panoramic view also
shows that our people continue to live in the same areas as their
ancestors. The family settlement of Reverend Zimmie Chavis is here. The
Chavis family has owned this land since before the Civil War and
remains there today.
Prospect Elementary School
This school is located in what the early land records identify as
the Cheraw Old Field, the heart of the eighteenth century Cheraw
community. Today, that community is known as Prospect. This school has
an Indian principal, Indian teachers, and virtually all Indian student
population. I attended this school as a child and my grandchildren
attend it today.
There are many other schools like this in our community. Indian
education and schools have been an important part of our history. Our
people first sought recognition from the State because our children
were not allowed to attend white schools after the Civil War. So, in
the 1885 state statute that first recognized the Tribe, the state
established a separate school system just for Lumbee children. Tribal
leaders were authorized to control the schools and determine
eligibility to enroll; our people established what we called blood
committees for this purpose. As far as we know, the Lumbee Tribe is the
only one in the country to control its own school system under state
law. And we did so for nearly a hundred years. We use the records of
those blood committees today as one of the base documents to establish
eligibility for tribal enrollment.
In 1887, our people petitioned the State for a normal school to
train Lumbees as teachers for our school system. In response, the State
authorized and gave us some funding for the Pembroke Indian Normal
School; today, the Normal School is the Pembroke campus of the
University of North Carolina. The State gave us too little money,
though, to maintain the Normal School, so we first asked for federal
recognition in 1888 so that we could get federal Indian education
assistance. We continued to operate our school system until the early
1970's, when a federal judge ordered North Carolina to desegregate its
schools. That judge told the Tribe that it could not maintain a
separate school system since it was not federally recognized. So we
lost our separate school system, but because most of our communities
are predominantly Indian, many of our schools remain predominantly
Indian.
A particular incident in the history of our Indian schools shows
the strength of Lumbee leadership and independence. In 1913, the North
Carolina Attorney General issued an opinion saying that the county
board of education could overrule decisions by the Tribe's blood
committees on who was eligible to attend Lumbee schools. This was not
acceptable to the Tribe. The Tribe's leaders convinced the North
Carolina Legislature to effectively set aside the Attorney General's
opinion by passing a statute which established a committee of all
Lumbees, named in the statute, with exclusive authority to hear
challenges to enrollment decisions in our schools.
Lowrie site
This next film clip shows the homesite of Allen Lowrie, the father
of Henry Berry Lowrie who led the Lowrie gang. This site is an
important part of the Tribe's history dating back to the Civil War.
Tribal members were prohibited from serving in the Confederate Army,
but the Home Guard in the county conscripted our people into labor
gangs and assigned to build fortifications to protect the City of
Wilmington. Those who could escape did so and returned home where they
hid out in the swamps of Robeson County, with the protection of other
tribal members. Tension increased to the point of open hostilities by
the end of the Civil War. Eventually the Home Guard captured Allen
Lowrie and his son, William, at the Lowrie homesite, and executed them.
This was in the winter of 1865. Henry Berry Lowrie, Allen's other son,
launched a virtual war against the Home Guard and, by 1870, was able to
strike the local authorities with impunity because of the protection of
the Indian community. This continued until 1872, when Henry Berry
disappeared in the swamps, never to be seen again. Henry Berry Lowrie
is a folk hero among our people and we celebrate his exploits every
year in an outdoor drama we hold called, ``Strike at the Wind.''
Red Banks
This particular area is called Red Bank, located on the Lumber
River. You'll remember the 1935 Baker Report that I mentioned before.
Well, Agent Baker recommended to the Department of the Interior that it
acquire land for settlement of the Lumbees under the recently enacted
Wheeler-Howard Act, also known as the Indian Reorganization Act. He
recommended that the land be purchased here, at Red Bank. The Bureau of
Indian Affairs initiated the project, but the project was transferred
from the BIA to the Resettlement Administration of the Department of
Agriculture, for reasons that were never explained to the Tribe. Indian
families did eventually settle here and established the Red Banks
Mutual Association, a long running farming cooperative that was all
Indian. The effort to use this land base to organize under the IRA
failed, though, when local white were allowed to settle a portion of
the land.
Another effort by the Tribe to organize under the IRA should also
be mentioned. At the same time that the resettlement effort was
underway, Assistant Solicitor Felix Cohen wrote to Lumbee tribal
leaders and laid out a plan that would allow the Tribe to become
organized. First, tribal members had to consent to physical
examinations to determine whether they were one-half or more Indian
blood. Most of our people refused to consent to these examinations,
testing hair, teeth, head size, and other such demeaning things. 209 of
our people agreed to submit to these examinations and the BIA certified
22 of these individuals as one-half or more Indian blood. This was
really just made up science--in some cases, full blood brothers and
sisters were said to have different quantum of Indian blood. But this
effort eventually failed, too, when the BIA refused to take land into
trust for these half-bloods so that they could organize under the IRA.
Main Street, Pembroke
This film clip shows Main Street in the Town of Pembroke. Pembroke
is in the heart of Lumbee territory. All its elected and appointed
officials are members of the Lumbee Tribe--the mayor, the town council,
town clerk, police department, etc. This particular clip shows an event
that takes place in Pembroke every year that is important to Lumbees--
the annual Lumbee Homecoming that takes place every year at the Fourth
of July. Thousands of Lumbees come home for this event because Robeson
County is always home to us wherever we may live. During Homecoming we
visit family and participate in tribal events such as a parade, beauty
pageants, and a pow-wow.
In 1956, the streets of Pembroke were closed for a parade and
celebration of the passage of the 1956 Lumbee Act by Congress. As I
mentioned earlier, the Tribe first sought federal recognition in 1888
so that we could get federal assistance for the Indian normal school.
That request was turned down by the Secretary of the Interior in 1890,
because as he said, he had too little education funding for tribes
already under his jurisdiction and the Lumbees, as a so-called
``civilized'' tribe recognized by the State, should look to the State
for assistance. After that, the Tribe's congressional delegation
introduced a series of bills in Congress to extend federal recognition
to the Tribe. These bills generally were copied from the most recent
state legislation recognizing the Tribe. After the State amended state
law to recognize the Tribe as Lumbee in 1953, an identical bill was
introduced in the Congress to achieve federal recognition on the same
terms. When this bill passed Congress in 1956, the Tribe celebrated in
the streets of Pembroke.
However, the 1956 Lumbee Act was not identical to the State law
passed in 1953. The Department of the Interior had requested that
Congress amend the federal bill by including termination language,
language that the Department of the Interior said was necessary so that
the Tribe would not get federal Indian services. The Congress included
this termination language in the 1956 Lumbee Act. And because of that
termination language, the Lumbee Tribe is not eligible for federal
Indian services. Also because of that termination language, the Lumbee
Tribe is not eligible for the administrative acknowledgement process at
the Bureau of Indian Affairs. So as the law stands now, the Lumbee
Tribe can be federally recognized only by an act of Congress. As far as
we know, the Lumbee Tribe is the only tribe in the country in this
position.
VFW Post, Pembroke
This last film clip is particularly significant to me--it shows the
VFW Post in Pembroke. All the members of this post are Lumbee Indians.
It includes veterans from World War II, the Korean War, Viet Nam, and
Dessert Storm. We also have a tribal color guard of our Indian
veterans. Our tribal color guard members wear a special uniform that
shows our pride in being Lumbee and our pride in our service to our
country.
I'm a proud member of this Post. I enlisted in the Army and served
in Viet Nam. The men in my squad called me ``Chief.'' For my service in
Viet Nam, I earned the Purple Heart, the Bronze Star, and the Air
Medal. My father, too, serviced this country in World War II. Lumbee
people have always served this country as far back as 1775 when we
fought with the colonists. Many of our veterans' records identify them
as Indian, yet the United States does not officially recognize us.
Conclusion
Mr. Chairman and members of the community, our people have been at
this work for federal recognition for more than one hundred years. The
Bureau of Indian Affairs has studied us and the Congress has developed
a voluminous congressional record on us. No other tribe has come to
Congress with such an extensive record, one that consistently supports
our Indian ancestry, our descent principally from the aboriginal Cheraw
Tribe, and our separate community with distinct and strong leadership.
Mr. Chairman, we hope these film clips have shown you what visitors to
our community see, that we are Indian country and should be recognized
as such.
______
The Chairman. Thank you. Principal Chief Hicks.
STATEMENT OF MICHELL HICKS, PRINCIPAL CHIEF, EASTERN BAND OF
CHEROKEE INDIANS, CHEROKEE, NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Hicks. Hello and good morning. Chairman Rahall, I
appreciate the opportunity to be here today.
Congressman Shuler, thank you for all that you did. You
have made a very good name for yourself here in D.C., and
Western North Carolina thanks you and we appreciate you.
I want to thank the Members of the Resources Committee for
allowing me to say a few words today and to testify on the
views of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee. The Eastern Band is
a fairly recognized tribe in Western North Carolina. We reside
on the Cherokee Reservation known as the Kwala Boundary. It is
about 56,000 acres. We have 13,700 members. We are the largest
Federally recognized tribe east of the Mississippi; also, a
member of the 25 USET tribes.
The Eastern Band's ancestors were the Cherokees who
resisted the Trail of Tears, this ugly scar on our American
history that caused the deaths of thousands of our people, the
Cherokee people. And for centuries the Cherokee people have
fiercely protected our separate cultural identity, and that is
what we are here about today is identity.
We have a living, breathing culture with a unique spoken
language, and also obviously a written language. The Federal
government worked hard to destroy our language and destroy our
ways, destroy our culture, but the Cherokee people have
survived and flourished nonetheless.
Our long-defended identity is threatened by several groups
throughout the Southeast who have illegitimately claimed our
Cherokee identity as their own. Without a doubt, the Lumbee are
one of these many groups who fall unfortunately into this
category.
Since 1913, over 90 years ago, the Eastern Band has been
concerned about the issue of Lumbee recognition. Long before
they took the name Lumbee, this group sought recognition from
the State of North Carolina as the Cherokee Indians of Robeson
County. Over our opposition, that recognition was granted. And
for more than 40 years they were state-recognized as a Cherokee
tribe.
In 1924 the Lumbee sought Federal recognition from the U.S.
Congress, and I quote, ``The Cherokee Indians of Robeson and
adjoining counties.'' In 1932 they sought once again to be
recognized by Congress as a Cherokee tribe. Congress rejected
both of these attempts.
This uncertain history of Lumbee identity helps to explain
the Eastern Band's position on Lumbee recognition and this
bill. The Eastern Band opposes any legislation that would
Congressionally acknowledge the Lumbee as an Indian tribe.
Doing so would undermine the cultural and political integrity
of the Eastern Band and other Federally recognized tribes who
value the government-to-government relationship with the United
States.
We would not oppose, however, legislation that would clear
the way for the Lumbees to get a fair shot--and I repeat, a
fair shot--at Federal recognition through the Department of
Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement. And I want to
repeat, we would not oppose legislation that would allow the
Lumbee to go through the process.
Credible experts in genealogy raise serious questions about
Lumbee identity that this committee cannot ignore. Dr. Virginia
DeMarce, the former Chair of National Genealogical Society, and
Paul Heinegg, an award-winning genealogist and author, have
published research on Lumbee family genealogies, and reached
conclusions that contradict the fundamental basis for the
Lumbee Recognition Act.
Heinegg summarizes his conclusions concerning Lumbee
identity, referring to the Lumbee as a ``in all due respect, an
invented North Carolina Indian tribe.''
Dr. DeMarce's research demonstrates that many Lumbee
families migrated into the Robeson County, North Carolina area
from other places prior to 1800. Heinegg concurs. Dr. DeMarce
also states that genealogical evidence does not bear out that
these families significantly married into Indian families upon
arrival in the Robeson County area in the 1800s.
In fact, there is evidence that non-Indians in the area did
not consider these Lumbee families to be Indians in the 1840s.
Beyond these families, Dr. DeMarce also states that other
notable genealogists frequently refer to other self-
identified--let me repeat, self-identified--Lumbee families as
residing in other areas prior to any settlement in the Robeson
County area.
This uncertain background may somewhat explain why the
Lumbees have sought Federal recognition as four different
tribes over the years: The Siouan, the Croatan, the Cherokee,
and now the Cheraw.
This leads to my second point. The cultural and political
integrity of the Eastern Band of the Cherokees and other tribes
with living tribal languages and longstanding government-to-
government relationships with this great United States is
undermined when this Congress acts arbitrarily in Federal
acknowledgement matters, allowing politics and emotion to drive
decision making, rather than facts about the real tribal
identity.
Eastern Cherokee leaders have raised these identity
concerns about the Lumbees since at least 1913, when the
Lumbees first claimed to be Cherokees. And for 40 years
thereafter, they were known by the State of North Carolina to
be Cherokees.
Third, the Department of the Interior's Office of Federal
Acknowledgement, while imperfect, is the only Federal entity
equipped to make an informed, merits-based determination of
Lumbee tribal identity and its recognition. Congress is not
well equipped to evaluate and make these decisions, with all
due respect.
And finally, Congress should be absolutely certain that the
Lumbees meet the objective criteria at Interior before it
enacts a bill that would cost more than $800 million of
taxpayer dollars estimated over a five-year period, based on
the latest CBO numbers. And I hope through this process that a
new CBO calculation is done.
Today the Lumbees claim, as I understand--I have heard
about four or five estimates of the membership--over 60,000
members. This raises a rather obvious question. Where was the
so-called Lumbee Tribe when President Andrew Jackson, in the
1830s, and the U.S. Army were rounding up all the Indians in
the Southeast, and forcibly removing us to the West?
For these reasons, we strongly oppose the passage of H.R.
65. And Mr. Chairman, there is an established process to review
these issues and make a fact-based decision.
We urge you to consider another approach, which I have
heard earlier today, one that would give the Lumbee a fair
chance, an equitable chance, a timely chance to meet the
standard established criteria at the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement. If they can meet those standards, then they
will be recognized as a tribe, and we will welcome them, as we
do all the other brothers as a Federally recognized tribe. And
they deserve all the benefits that come with that.
But please remember, the Lumbees submitted a petition for
acknowledgement to the Interior Department on January 7, 1980.
On November 20, 1989, the Solicitor determined they could not
complete the process because of the 1956 Lumbee Act. That was
over 18 years ago. If the Lumbee had agreed to legislation
giving them a fair shot, which again we offer today a fair
shot, at the administrative process, then they would have their
answer today. There would be no questions.
And the question we ask is whether the Lumbee want to avoid
the administrative process because they believe it is unfair,
or because they know it would truly examine the factual issues
about Lumbee identity. The Eastern Band of Cherokee urges you
to protect the integrity of all Indian nations, and oppose this
current legislation today.
I thank you for the opportunity to speak.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hicks follows:]
Statement of Principal Chief Michell Hicks,
The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
Chairman Rahall, Ranking Member Young, members of the House Natural
Resources Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today
before this Committee to provide the views of the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians.
The Eastern Band strongly believes that Congress should not enact
H.R. 1324. As I testified on behalf of the Eastern Band three years ago
before this Committee and last year before the Senate Indian Affairs
Committee, this bill has factual and policy flaws that fundamentally
make the bill unfair to the United States and existing federally-
acknowledged Indian tribes.
First, there are serious problems with the tribal and individual
identity of the Lumbee. Credible experts in the area of genealogy, who
are not affiliated with the Eastern Band, have reached difficult
conclusions concerning Lumbee identity that this Committee should not
ignore. Paul Heinegg, whose work has been recognized by The American
Society of Genealogists, concludes that the Lumbee are ``an invented
North Carolina Indian tribe,'' 1 and that many of the
persons who first self-identified as Indian in Robeson County, North
Carolina, are not of Indian ancestry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The Lumbees' Long and Winding Road,'' Roll Call 13 (July 17,
2006) (published following the Senate Indian Affairs Committee hearing
on the Lumbee Recognition Act in 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another indisputable expert in this area is Dr. Virginia DeMarce,
who formerly served as Chair of the National Genealogical Association
and as an expert in this area at the Department of the Interior. Dr.
DeMarce concludes from her genealogical studies that many Lumbee
families do not originate from the Robeson, North Carolina, area, but
migrated there from other places.
As you know, in past testimony before the Congress, Department of
Interior officials also have raised serious concerns about Lumbee
individual and tribal identity as well.
This uncertain background may somewhat explain why the Lumbee have
sought federal recognition as descending from four different tribes
over the years: Cherokee, Siouan, Croatan, and now Cheraw.
This leads to my second point. The cultural and political integrity
of the Eastern Band and other tribes with living tribal languages and
long standing government-to-government relations with the United States
is undermined when Congress acts arbitrarily in federal acknowledgement
matters, allowing politics and emotion to drive decision making, rather
than facts about tribal identity. Eastern Cherokee leaders have raised
these identity concerns about the Lumbee since at least 1910, when the
Lumbees first claimed a Cherokee identity.
Third, the Department of the Interior's Office of Federal
Acknowledgement (OFA), while imperfect, is the only federal entity
equipped to make an informed, merits-based determination of Lumbee
tribal identity and recognition. Congress, while it certainly has the
power to recognize tribal groups, is not as well equipped to evaluate
and make these decisions as the Department of Interior.
And finally, Congress should be absolutely certain that the Lumbees
meet the objective criteria at Interior before it enacts a bill that
could cost the taxpayers more than $800 million over five years,
undermine the integrity of existing federally-recognized tribes, and
further decrease the funds existing tribes and Indians receive. But due
to the problems with Lumbee identity, Congress cannot be confident in
the merits of this bill.
A fair approach would be for Congress to clear the way for the
Lumbees to get a fair shot at federal acknowledgement through the
Department of the Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
Serious Problems with Claimed Lumbee Identity
``An Invented North Carolina Indian Tribe'': Credible Experts Raise
Serious Problems With Lumbee Identity
Dr. Virginia DeMarce, the former Chair of the National Genealogical
Society, and Paul Heinegg, an award-winning genealogist and author,
have published research on Lumbee family genealogies and reached
conclusions that contradict the fundamental bases for the Lumbee
Recognition Act. Heinegg summarizes his conclusions concerning Lumbee
identity, referring to the Lumbee as ``an invented North Carolina
Indian tribe.'' 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``The Lumbees' Long and Winding Road,'' Roll Call 13 (July 17,
2006) (published following the Senate Indian Affairs Committee hearing
on the Lumbee Recognition Act in 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. DeMarce's research demonstrates that many Lumbee families
migrated into the Robeson County, North Carolina, area from other
places prior to 1800. 3 These include the Brayboy, Chavis
(Chavers), Cumbo, Gowen, Locklear, Kersey, and Sweat families. Heinegg
concurs and adds the Lumbee families of Carter, Hammond, Jacobs, James,
Johnston, Lowry, Manuel, and Roberts to this list. 4 Dr.
DeMarce also states that genealogical evidence does not bear out that
these families significantly married into Indian families upon arrival
into the Robeson County area in the 1800s. 5 In fact, there
is evidence that non-Indians in the area did not consider these Lumbee
families to be Indians in the 1840s. 6 Beyond those families
listed earlier, Dr. DeMarce also states that other notable genealogists
frequently refer to other self-identified Lumbee families as residing
in other areas prior to any settlement in the Robeson County area.
7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Virginia DeMarce, ``Looking at Legends--Lumbee and Melungeon:
Applied Genealogy and the Origins of Tri-Racial Isolate Settlements,''
National Genealogical Society Quarterly 81 (March 1993): 27-31.
\4\ Paul Heinegg, Free African Americans of North Carolina and
Virginia (Baltimore, MD: Clearfield, 1997, 3rd Ed.): 23.
\5\ DeMarce, Legends at 37.
\6\ DeMarce, Legends at 27. These genealogical findings are
supported by Historian John Hope Franklin quoting a petition from the
North Carolina Legislative Papers for 1840-41 that showed Robeson
County inhabitants during the first half of the nineteenth century did
not agree with the theory that the Lumbees were Indians but were
migrants from Virginia. Id.
\7\ DeMarce, Legends at 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More broadly, Heinegg states that the Lumbees from Robeson County
were not Indians but ``African American as shown by their
genealogies.'' 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Heinegg at 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DeMarce states that Lumbee families had good reason to identify
themselves as Indian at the time. The ``legal, social, educational, and
economic disadvantages of being African-American were so great that it
was preferable for a person to be considered almost anything else.''
9 Heinegg adds that until about 1835, ``free African
Americans in Robeson County attended white schools and churches, voted,
and [congregated] with whites. However, the relations between the
whites and free African American communities deteriorated rapidly after
1835, and by the end of the Civil War they were strained to the
breaking point.'' 10 The Lumbee claims of Indian ancestry
allowed Lumbee children to go to different schools from the children of
newly freed slaves. 11 According to DeMarce, not until after
the Civil War did most communities of African Americans advance a claim
of also being of Indian ancestry. 12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Virginia DeMarce, ``Verry Slitly Mixt'': Tri-Racial Isolate
Families of the Upper South--A Genealogical Study,'' National
Genealogical Society Quarterly 81 (March 1992): 6.
\10\ Heinegg at 25.
\11\ Heinegg at 25. According to the 1956 Lumbee Act, the Lumbees
themselves were persons ``owning slaves.''
\12\ DeMarce, Tri-Racial Isolates at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1900, over 120 Lumbee families, including the ones above, self-
identified as ``Indian'' in the federal census. Dr. Campisi relies on
federal census records as the ``best source of evidence concerning the
Lumbee community.'' 13
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 109th Congress, Campisi testimony at 38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lumbee Have Self-Identified As Four Different Tribes
This uncertain genealogical background illuminates the remarkable
story of Lumbee efforts to attain federal acknowledgement as four
different Indian tribes, including the ``Cherokee Indians of Robeson
and Adjoining Counties.''
The Lumbee group seeking Congress's acknowledgement today has been
before the Congress on numerous occasions in the past, beginning in
1899. The tribal identity of the Lumbees, who have over the course of
history self-identified themselves as four different tribes before
Congress ``Croatan, Cherokee, Siouan, and now Cheraw--is highly in
question. These appellations do not correlate with each other.
Linguistically, the Croatan were Algonquian, the Cherokee Iroquoian,
and the Cheraw were Siouan. Thus, these disparate references themselves
implausibly covered three distinct and separate linguistic groups.
Moreover, referring to themselves as the ``Siouan Tribe'' did not make
sense because the term ``Siouan'' is simply a reference to a broad
generic linguistic classification that encompassed many distinct tribal
languages in North America, including Osage, Assiniboine, Dakota,
Lakota, Catawba, Hidatsa, Crow, Mandan, Ponca, Biloxi, and Quapaw, to
name a few.
The origin of the Lumbee name comes not from a historic tribe but
from a geographic location in the State of North Carolina, a place
along the Lumber River. The term ``Lumbee'' is a modern creation that
the group selected as its name in 1952.
Lumbee's Self-Identification as ``Croatan'' Indians
The Lumbee sought federal services from the Congress as ``Croatan''
Indians in the 1880's and early 1900's. 14 In 1993, this
Committee's House Report contained the following relating to the
history of the Lumbee group, including its ``Croatan'' origins:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ``Testimony of Dr. Jack Campisi, in Support of S. 420, United
States Senate Committee on Indian Affairs'' (September 17, 2003) p. 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The story of how the progenitors of the Lumbee came to live in
this area of North Carolina is a multifarious one. In fact,
there are almost as many theories as there are theorists. Up
until the 1920's, the most persistent tradition among the
Indians in Robeson County was that they were descended
primarily from an Iroquoian group called the Croatans. This
theory, though highly conjectural, is as follows. In 1585, Sir
Walter Raleigh established an English colony under Gov. John
White on Roanoke Island in what later became North Carolina. In
August of that year, White departed for England for supplies,
but was prevented from returning to Roanoke for 2 years by a
variety of circumstances. When he finally arrived at the
colony, however, he found the settlement deserted; no physical
trace of the colonists was found.
The only clue to their whereabouts were the letters ``C.R.O.''
and the word ``Croatoan'' carved in a tree. From this it was
surmised that the colonists fled Roanoke for some reason, and
removed to the nearby island of Croatoan which was inhabited by
a friendly Indian tribe. There, according to the theory, they
intermarried with the Indians, and the tribe eventually
migrated to the southwest to the area of present-day Robeson
County. The theory is lent some credence by reports of early
18th century settlers in the area of the Lumber River who noted
finding a large group of Indians--some with marked Caucasian
features such as grey-blue eyes ``speaking English, tilling the
soil, ``and practicing the arts of civilized life.'' In
addition, many of the surnames of Indians resident in the
county match those of Roanoke colonists. 15
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ H.R. Rep. No. 103-290, 103rd Cong., 1st Sess. at 179 (1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genealogist Paul Heinegg refers to this theory of Lumbee tribal
background as well as the one posited today by the Lumbee as
``fantastic theories on [Lumbee] origin....'' 16
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Heinegg at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lumbee's Self-Identification as ``Cherokee'' Indians
In the state of North Carolina, the Lumbee group sought recognition
from the North Carolina legislature in 1913 as the ``Cherokee Indians
of Robeson County.'' This legislation was passed, despite the Eastern
Band's opposition, and the group was recognized in North Carolina as
``Cherokee'' Indians. That continued for 40 years until 1953 when the
North Carolina legislature, at the Lumbee group's request, passed
legislation recognizing them as the ``Lumbee'' Indians instead of as
the ``Cherokee'' Indians.
After World War I, the Lumbees sought federal legislation in
Congress for recognition as ``the Cherokee Indians of Robeson and
adjoining counties.'' Specifically, in 1924, Dr. Campisi noted that the
now-called Lumbee group had legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate
that would have recognized them as ``Cherokee'' Indians. However, the
Commissioner of Indian Affairs Charles H. Burke opposed the legislation
and it failed to pass.
In 1932, the Lumbees sought legislation that was introduced in the
Senate that would have recognized them as ``the Cherokee Indians,'' but
this effort failed also. 17
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1933, another Lumbee acknowledgement bill failed because the
Lumbees themselves did not agree on whether the tribal affiliation
should be changed from ``Cherokee Indians'' to ``Cheraw Indians.''
18
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Campisi testimony, 109th Congress at 40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lumbee's Self-Identification as ``Siouan'' Indians
According to the Lumbee, they sought federal recognition as
``Siouan'' Indians in 1924. In the 1930's, for purposes of the Indian
Reorganization Act, the Lumbees self-designated themselves as the
``Siouan Indian Community of Lumber River.'' 19 As stated
above, the term ``Siouan'' is a reference to a generic linguistic
classification that is spoken by many tribes in North America and is
not a term that describes a distinct historical tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id. at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was not until 1952 that the Lumbees decided to refer to
themselves as ``Lumbee'' based upon their geographic location next to
the Lumber River. In 1956, Congress, at the request of the Lumbees,
passed legislation commemorating their name change. 20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Id. at 9-10. Contrary to Lumbee claims that the 1956 Lumbee
Act both acknowledged the Lumbee as a tribe and terminated that tribal
status in the same law, the Act itself states that the Lumbee are
individuals only ``claiming joint descent from remnants of early
American colonists and certain tribes of Indians originally inhabiting
the coastal regions of North Carolina....'' The legislative history of
the Act also makes clear that it only commemorates a name change. 102
Cong. Rec. 2900 (1956).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lumbees' Current Efforts to Link Themselves to the Cheraw Tribe Are
Tenuous
The federal acknowledgement criteria require that the membership of
a petitioning group consist of ``individuals who descend from a
historical Indian tribe or from historical Indian tribes which combined
and functioned as a single autonomous political entity.'' 21
The regulations define ``historical'' in this context as ``dating from
first sustained contact with non-Indians.'' 22 The origin
and ties to a historical tribe have been the subject of uncertainty not
only among experts in the area but also the Lumbee themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 25 C.F.R. Sec. 83.7(e).
\22\ Id. at 83.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experts at the Bureau of Indian Affairs have testified that the
Lumbee ties to the Cheraw Tribe are tenuous. On August 1, 1991,
Director of the Office of Tribal Services Ronal Eden testified on
behalf of the Administration regarding federal legislation that would
congressionally acknowledge the Lumbee. Regarding the Lumbee petition
for federal recognition before the agency, the Director testified to a
``major deficiency'' that ``the Lumbee have not documented their
descent from a historic tribe.'' 23
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Statement of Ronal Eden, Director, Office of Tribal Services,
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, Before the Joint
Hearing of the Select Committee on Indian Affairs, United States
Senate, and the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, United States
House of Representatives, on S. 1036 and H.R. 1426 (August 1, 1991) p.
3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The testimony also stated that the 18th century documents used by
Lumbee to support its claim that it is primarily descended from a
community of Cheraws living on Drowning Creek in North Carolina in the
1730's needed extensive analysis corroborated by other documentation.
24
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In his September 17, 2003 testimony before the Senate Indian
Affairs Committee, Lumbee expert Jack Campisi relies on a report of Dr.
John R. Swanton of the Bureau of Ethnology for concluding ``in the
1930s that the Lumbees are descended predominantly Cheraw Indians.''
25 The House Report specifically refutes this claim, stating
that Swanton chose ``Cheraw'' rather than another tribal name he
identified--``Keyauwee''--because the Keyauwee name was not well known.
``In other words, the choice of the Cheraw was apparently made for
reasons of academic ease rather than historical reality.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Campisi Testimony at 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, the head of the BIA's acknowledgement process
questioned the adequacy of the underlying proof of Cheraw descent. He
testified in 1989 that:
The Lumbee petition...claims to link the group to the Cheraw
Indians. The documents presented in the petition do not support
[this] theory....These documents have been misinterpreted in
the Lumbee petition. Their real meanings have more to do with
the colonial history of North and South Carolina than with the
existence of any specific tribal group in the area in which the
modern Lumbee live.
Arlinda Locklear, Counsel to the Lumbee, in her 2003 testimony
before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee admitted that these concerns
continue today. ``Department staff that administers the administrative
acknowledgement process have expressed some concern about the absence
of a genealogical connection between the modern day Lumbee Tribe and
the historic Cheraw Tribe.'' 26
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ ``Testimony of Arlinda Locklear, Patton Boggs LLP, Of Counsel
for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina in Support of S. 420 United
States Senate Committee on Indian Affairs'' (September 17, 2003) p. 4
fn. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 12, 2006, an Interior official testifying before the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee restated the problem the Lumbee have had in
identifying their historic tribe.
``[T]he uniqueness is the lack of pinning down of the
historical tribe. ``There is a considerable period of time
where evidence would be needed to fully understand who this
group was and is...[because] there have been approximately 26
bills introduced since 1899...[that] have provided possible
historical tribes and there are quite a number of them...One
report indicated...the Cherokee, another...the Cheraw,
another...the Croatan. One report included a whole group of
different historical tribes, such as the Eno, the Hatteras, the
Keowee, the Shakori. Even John R. Swanton, who is a renowned
anthropologist, in a 1946 report for the Bureau of Ethnology,
stated that there were several possibilities that the Lumbee
could descend from either the Cheraw, the Siouan Indians of
Lumber River, the Keowee, and another group known as the
Washaw. There is a whole number of possibilities.''
Claimed Lumbee Membership Not Tied to Cheraw Individuals
The various documents on which the Lumbee membership list is based
similarly cast doubt as to the ability of the Lumbee to meet the
acknowledgement criteria. The Lumbees claim over 62,000 enrolled
members who are descended from anyone identifying as ``Indian'' in five
North Carolina counties and two South Carolina counties in either the
1900 or 1910 federal census. The Lumbee Constitution refers to these
census lists as the ``Source Documents.'' Yet the individuals on these
lists cannot be specifically identified and verified as Cheraw Indians.
In fact, these individuals cannot be identified as belonging to any
tribe whatsoever. These are lists of people who self-identified or were
identified by the census as ``Indian.''
Members of this Committee have recognized the weaknesses and
complexities in the Lumbee group's claim to tribal recognition in the
past:
The Lumbee...have never had treaty relations with the United
States, a reservation, or a claim before the Indian Claims
Commission; they do not speak an Indian language; they have had
no formal political organization until recently; and they
possess no autochthonous ``Indian'' customs or cultural
appurtenance such as dances, songs, or tribal religion. One of
the groups consultant anthropologists, Dr. Jack Campisi, noted
this lack of Indian cultural appurtenances in a hearing
colloquy with then-Congressman Ben Nighthorse Campbell:
Mr. Campbell: Do [the Lumbee] have a spoken language...?
Dr. Campisi: No.
Mr. Campbell: Do they have distinct cultural characteristics such
as songs, dances and religious beliefs and so on?...Do the Lumbees have
that?
Dr. Campisi: No. Those things were gone before the end of the
18th Century.
This absence of cultural appurtenances in part identify the Lumbee
as part of what sociologist Brewton Berry has termed the ``marginal
Indian groups.'' As Berry notes:
These are communities that hold no reservation land, speak no
Indian language, and observe no distinctive Indian customs.
Although it is difficult to establish a firm historical Indian
ancestry for them, their members often display physical
features that are decidedly Indian. Because they bear no other
historic tribal names, they often emphasize a Cherokee
ancestry.
These characteristics...point out that this is a case replete with
out-of-the-ordinary complexities which require more than just a simple
one-page staff memo to understand fully. Needless to say, if those
[Members of Congress] charged with the day-to-day oversight of Indian
affairs do not have the necessary expertise--or even knowledge--in this
area, how will the balance of our Members appropriately exercise those
judgments as they will be called upon to do when this legislation
reaches the floor? 27
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ H.R. Rep. No. 103-290, 103rd Cong., 1st Sess. at 186-87
(1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, in his 2006 Senate testimony, the BIA director
identified ``over 80 names of groups that derive from these
counties...[including] the Cherokee Indians of Robeson and Adjoining
Counties, the Lumbee Regional Development Association, the Cherokee
Indians of Hoke Count, Inc., the Tuscarora Nation of North Carolina,
The Tuscarora Nation of Indians of the Carolinas...[in which] there is
an overlapping of membership, there is an overlapping of some of the
governing bodies and there is an overlap of the ancestry of these
groups with the Lumbee.''28
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ S. Hrg. 109-610, Lumbee Recognition Act, July 12, 2006, page
16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Legislation Impacts the Integrity of Eastern Band and other
Established Tribes
Since before the coming of Europeans to this continent, the
Cherokee have lived in the southeastern part of what is now the United
States, in the states of North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama,
Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. Through these years, the
Cherokee have faced unending threats to our very existence--including
the tragic Trail of Tears where more than 15,000 Cherokee Indians were
forcibly removed by the U.S. Army from their ancestral homelands to the
Indian Territory as part of the federal government's American Indian
Removal Policy. Thousands died. The Cherokee came to call the event
Nunahi-Duna-Dlo-Hilu-I or Trail Where They Cried. The Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians are the descendants of those Cherokees that resisted
removal in the Great Smoky Mountains and escaped the Trail of Tears or
who were able to return to their homeland in the Smoky Mountains after
the Trail of Tears.
Yet, through all of this, the Cherokee people have fiercely
protected our separate identity as Cherokees. Many of our tribal
members are fluent in the Cherokee language. We have a separate culture
that makes us different than any group of people in the world.
Leadership of the Cherokee and the Cherokee people themselves, with
tenacity and determination, have fought to ensure that our way of life,
our beliefs, and our sovereignty will survive. And we are still here
today--proud and strong.
Like other tribes across the country, we hold in high regard the
long-standing government-to-government relationship the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians has with the United States. We are proud that the
United States has entered into treaties with the Cherokee that helped
shape the government-to-government relations with all tribes.
But today, like other tribes, we face a new threat to our separate
identity: groups of people who claim, or who have claimed Cherokee, or
other tribal affiliations whose legitimacy is doubtful at best.
Unfortunately, we believe this to be the case with this bill.
If Congress recognizes groups whose tribal and individual identity
as Indians is seriously in doubt, it will dilute the government-to-
government relationships that existing federally recognized tribes have
with the United States. We strongly believe that this bill would
undermine the integrity of existing federally recognized Indian tribes
due to the real problems that the Lumbee have in demonstrating that it
is a tribe, including their inability to trace the genealogy of its
62,000 members to a historic tribe.
Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement Is the Proper Forum for
Deciding Whether the Lumbee Should be Federally Recognized
The Department of the Interior through the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement (OFA) has an established, uniform administrative
process with objective criteria that can make exactly the kind of
substantive, merits-based determinations that the Congress is not able
to make. To allow the Lumbees to circumvent that process would also
undermine the federal recognition process, as it has evolved at the
Department of Interior, and would be patently unfair to the hundreds of
applicants that have gone through or are going through the process
developed by the Department. Congressional approval of this legislation
will short circuit the process and allow the Lumbee to avoid the proven
regulatory process, which we believe the Lumbees seek to do because
they have significant historic, cultural and genealogical gaps for
which they can provide no proof of their existence as a sovereign
entity, in favor of old-fashioned politics.
Members of the Resources Committee have noted the harm that would
come to long-standing federally recognized tribes from legislation like
this:
Bypassing the [administrative] process not only ignores the
problem [with that process], but is unfair to all of the
recognized tribes. There exists a formal government-to-
government relationship between the recognized tribes and the
United States. If Congress creates tribes at will, without
meaningful uniform criteria or substantial corroborated
evidence that the group is indeed a tribe, then we dilute and
weaken that relationship. 29
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Id. at 202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Members of this Committee have acknowledged that a large number of
tribes and tribal organizations supported strict adherence to a
systematic administrative procedure, including:
[T]ribes in twelve states, from regional intertribal
organizations representing all the tribes of the Pacific
Northwest, Montana and Wyoming, the United South and Eastern
Tribes (representing all the tribes from Maine to Florida and
west to Louisiana), all of the ten southwestern Pueblo tribes,
and twenty-five of the twenty-six tribes in Arizona.
30
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Id. at 202-03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, while the Lumbee have argued that the process is unfair,
their bill, contrary to their argument, provides that the other North
Carolina groups, who the Solicitor's office at Interior has also
determined are barred from accessing OFA under the 1956 Lumbee Act,
would be authorized to submit petitions to OFA for federal
acknowledgement. If it is fair for these other groups to go through the
OFA process, then it should be fair for Lumbee also.
When substantially similar legislation came up in the past, members
of this Committee argued strongly that the Lumbee should be required to
follow the administrative process:
[T]he argument that the Lumbee should be allowed to bypass the
process because it is too cumbersome and backlogged
is...specious. While the BIA recognition process is in need of
repair, it is not as decrepit as the majority would have us
believe. There is only a backlog of nine petitions, not the 120
cases often cited; and while we concede that the process is
imperfect, the most rational solution is to fix it. Bypassing
the process only ignores the problem, undermines the role of
the BIA, and is unfair to both recognized and unrecognized
tribes. 31
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Id. at 206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress Should Not Obligate Enormous Spending Where the Identity of
the Tribe is Uncertain at Best
The impact on appropriations to other Indian tribes would be
unprecedented in the history of federal acknowledgement. The
Congressional Budget Office has determined that, based on an estimate
of 34,000 Lumbees, that the cost of this legislation would be $430
million over four years. Yet the Lumbees claim over 62,000 members.
Based upon the Congressional Budget Office's estimate and the 62,000
members claimed by Lumbee, the real cost of this bill would be over
$835 million dollars.
Accordingly, this bill would have a huge, negative impact on the
budgets of Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service and
would decrease even further the badly needed funds Indian people
receive as a result of promises and trust obligations of the United
States to Indians and tribes. This Committee and the Congress should
not dive into support for this legislation for emotional or political
reasons, particularly without being absolutely certain that this group
constitutes an Indian tribe in accordance with the objective criteria
utilized by the Office of Federal Acknowledgement for evaluating
petitions for federal acknowledgement.
CONCLUSION
If this Committee and the Congress choose to pass this legislation,
the consequences will be dramatic for existing federally recognized
tribes.
First and foremost, politics will have won a decided victory over
sound policy. The notion of ``taking the politics out of federal
recognition'' will have suffered its most severe setback in history.
Second, with federal acknowledgement comes the ability of a group
to engage in serious activities associated with sovereign status, such
as the ability to tax and enjoy certain tax advantages, the ability to
exercise civil jurisdiction over non-Indians as well as Indians, and
the right to engage in gaming. Enacting legislation like this only arms
those who seek to erode sovereign rights with evidence that some of
those with such rights were haphazardly afforded them.
The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians would welcome the Lumbees into
the family of federally recognized tribes if they can successfully make
it through the administrative process at the Department of the
Interior. Absent their meeting the objective criteria at Interior, with
complete vetting of their claimed tribal identity, membership lists,
and other requirements, we believe that passing this legislation would
be a serious mistake, with politics winning out over sound policy.
If you determine that legislation is necessary to address this
situation, we urge you to require the Lumbee provide evidence to
Congress which shows that it meets the equitable and standardized
requirements established in the administrative process.
______
The Chairman. Coach Sampson.
STATEMENT OF KELVIN SAMPSON, HEAD BASKETBALL COACH, INDIANA
UNIVERSITY, BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA
Mr. Sampson. Good morning, Chairman Rahall. I would also
like to thank Congressman McIntyre for what he is doing for the
people of Robeson County, not just the Native Americans, but
all people.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the Committee
this morning to testify in support of H.R. 65, a bill that
would extend Federal recognition to the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina, which is my tribe.
I am the head basketball coach at Indiana University. I am
also an enrolled member of the Lumbee Tribe. And it is my
experience as a tribal member, a member of a tribe not
recognized by the United States, that I would like to address
this morning.
Chairman Goins spoke about a 1956 Lumbee Act. This Act left
the Lumbee Tribe in a legal limbo, lacking the status of all
other Indian tribes in Indian country, and yet Indian
nonetheless.
The Lumbee people have suffered the same economic
disadvantages of other Indian tribes. Discrimination by the
dominant society, poor social services and resources as
compared to the dominant society, and limited opportunities.
But the Lumbee people have not enjoyed the Federal support that
Federally recognized tribes enjoy. Support for our tribal
government advantages in attracting industry to the area and
special education opportunities.
Nonetheless, many Lumbees have risen to prominence in their
chosen fields, and made major contributions in the Indian
country, as doctors, lawyers, judges, and yes, even major
college basketball coaches.
I would like to tell you my own story this morning. I want
to tell you a story about a young boy growing up in Pembroke,
North Carolina. My father held as many as four jobs every
summer outside of his main occupation, which was high school
teacher and coach at one of the many all-Indian high schools in
Robeson County. And yes, it is pronounced Robeson County.
One of his summer jobs was a foreman of a crew at a tobacco
market. I was part of his crew. A memory that is etched in my
mind forever was the names on the public restrooms. There was
three. One was marked white, in relation to that time in our
history. Another was marked colored, and the other was marked
other.
I was told to use the one marked other. Even though this
had a profound effect on how I viewed others at the time, I did
not allow this experience to define me or my family.
As always, I moved on in life, as this served to motivate
me, but not deter me. Growing up in Pembroke I always had great
role models, including my mother and father, Ned and Eva
Sampson, both Lumbees and both college graduates.
Good or bad, we are all known for something. What I have
just described is an identity. Looking back at my time living
in Pembroke, I think the strength of the Lumbee people was our
local college, which started as Indian Normal College, then
became Pembroke State College, Pembroke State University, and
is presently known as the University of North Carolina at
Pembroke.
Education became our foundation and our strength. Because
of University of North Carolina at Pembroke being local and
affordable, we had many of our people that could afford to go
to college. With the University of Pembroke, we would not have
as many college graduates.
Living my life as a Native American Division One basketball
coach, I have had the opportunity to influence and affect many
lives. It has been an honor and a pleasure to speak at many
Native American Indian seminars, symposiums, and heritage
events over the years. When asked about my tribe, the Lumbees,
many times the subject of Federal recognition comes up.
I do think this carries a stigma, that somehow because we
are not recognized or have full benefit, that we are different
than other tribes. The issue of acceptance has created a
perception of Lumbees not being completely whole.
I know that a lot of highly successful Lumbees that would
love to be here today, and I am honored to represent them and
speak for them with my voice. Lumbee people have served, and
continue to serve, other Indian tribes throughout the country
as doctors, lawyers, judges, administrators, pharmacists,
nurses, and educators. We have contributed our talents, time
and efforts, because we believe in the support of the
advancement of all native people.
Indian country knows about all the contributions that
Lumbee people have made in their tribal communities. We have
worked with Indian people in national organizations such as the
National Congress of American Indians, the National Council on
Indian Education, and the National Indian Education
Association. I am honored to speak on behalf of all of those
Lumbees today.
We are a proud and persistent people. My family taught me
the value of hard work, the importance of going to school and
earning the best education possible, understanding the value of
family. And maybe most importantly, the importance of giving
back to others.
I have a camp scholarship program at Indiana University for
Native American kids all over the country. This allows me the
opportunity to not only help Lumbee kids, but Native American
kids all over the United States.
I think there are two areas that the Lumbee people will
benefit most from being Federally recognized. Those are medical
benefits and educational opportunities.
I know a lot was said here about gaming. There is a large
percentage, don't put every Native American, every Lumbee under
a blanket, and say because someone thinks that this is the
majority of what we believe, don't think that everybody
believes that. Our people will be able to get much-needed
medicine, and will also allow more deserving Lumbee children to
dream of furthering their education all over the United States.
You see, gentlemen, you not only have an opportunity to
right a wrong; you more importantly have the power to create a
legacy. I do not need your permission to call myself Native
American, but unfortunately in today's world I do need your
validation. This is what we, as Lumbee Indians, can accomplish.
With Federal recognition, the Lumbee Tribe would become a full
player in Indian country, no longer second-class Indians in the
eyes of the Federal government. As such, we would employ our
substantial skills and abilities to help correct problems faced
by Indian country, and make significant contributions.
I go back to Pembroke every year for Lumbee Homecoming. As
a basketball coach, you learn the importance of motivation. And
I have always thought the easiest people to motivate are those
people who have a high self esteem. Most successful coaches,
their motivational techniques will involve building people's
self esteem.
I was born in 1955. I viewed a lot of Lumbee Homecomings,
if you will. If you go back and look at the last five Lumbee
Homecomings, you see kids that walk around with their chests
stuck out, their heads held up high. They are proud of their
heritage. Chairman Goins and what he is doing for the Lumbee
pride and the Lumbee people is apparent in every walk of life
through our churches, through our schools, through our
families.
This is sometimes debated. And I don't think we should be
narrow-minded people and only look at our side. And certainly,
as Lumbees, we can't be like that, either. But sometimes
through bureaucracy and through political means, sometimes we
have to look through all the bad and say what is the right
thing to do. Regardless of what our arguments may be. Some of
them may be political in nature, some of them may be selfish in
nature. But at the end of the day, sometimes common sense is
our greatest map, sometimes it is our greatest compass.
The only thing that I ask you to do today, as you view H.R.
65, is don't look at why we should not do this; look why we
should. And do the right thing.
I thank you for giving me this incredible opportunity to
come here and represent the Lumbee people.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sampson follows:]
Statement of Coach Kelvin Sampson, Head Basketball Coach, Indiana
University, Enrolled member of the Lumbee Tribe, North Carolina
Good morning, Chairman Rahall and Congressman Young. I appreciate
the opportunity to appear before the committee this morning to testify
in support of H.R. 65, a bill that would extend federal recognition to
the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina--my tribe. I am the Head Basketball
Coach at Indiana University. I am also an enrolled member of the Lumbee
Tribe. And it is my experience as a tribal member, a member of a tribe
not recognized by the United States that I'd like to address this
morning.
Chairman Goins spoke about the 1956 Lumbee Act. This act left the
Lumbee Tribe in a legal limbo--lacking the status of all other Indian
tribes in Indian country and yet Indian nonetheless. The Lumbee people
have suffered the same economic disadvantages of other Indian tribes--
discrimination by the dominant society, poor social services and
resources as compared to the dominant society, and limited
opportunities. But the Lumbee people have not enjoyed the federal
support that federally recognized tribes enjoy--support for our tribal
government, advantages in attracting industry to the area, and special
education opportunities. Nonetheless, many Lumbees have risen to
prominence in their chosen fields and made major contributions to
Indian country--as doctors, lawyers, judges, and yes, even major
college basketball coaches.
I'd like to tell you my own story this morning...I want to tell you
a story about a young boy growing up in Pembroke, North Carolina. My
father held as many as four jobs every summer outside of his main
occupation, which was school teacher, and coach, at one of the many all
Indian High Schools in Robeson County. One of his summer jobs was a
foreman of a ``crew'' at a tobacco market--I was part of his ``crew''.
A memory that is etched in my mind forever was the names on the public
restrooms. There were three. One was marked white, another was marked
colored, and the last marked other. I was told to use the one marked
other. Even though this had a profound effect on how I viewed others at
the time, I did not allow this experience to define me, or my family.
As I moved on in life, this served to motivate me, not deter me.
Growing up in Pembroke, I always had great role models, including my
mother and father, Ned and Eva Sampson, both Lumbees and college
graduates. Good, or bad, we are all known for something. Looking back
at my time living in Pembroke, I think the strength of the Lumbee
people was our local college which started as Indian Normal College,
then Pembroke State College/University to what it is presently known as
UNC--Pembroke. Education became our foundation and our strength.
Because of UNC-P being local and affordable, we had many of our people
that could afford to go to college. Without UNC-Pembroke, we would not
have as many college graduates.
Living my life as a Native American, Division I basketball coach, I
have had the opportunity to influence, and affect, many lives. It has
been my honor and pleasure to speak at many Native American education
seminars, symposiums, and heritage events. When asked about my tribe,
many times, the subject of Federal recognition comes up. I do think
this creates a stigma--that somehow because we are not ``recognized''
or have ``full benefit'' that we are different than other tribes. The
issue of acceptance has created a perception of not being completely
``whole''. I know there are a lot of highly successful Lumbees that
would love to be here today. Lumbee people have served and continue to
serve other Indian tribes throughout the country as doctors, lawyers,
judges, administrators, pharmacists, nurses, and educators. We have
contributed our talents, time, and efforts because we believe in and
support the advancement of all native peoples. Indian country knows
well the contributions that Lumbee people have made in their tribal
communities. We have worked with Indian people in national
organizations such as the National Congress of American Indians, the
National Council on Indian Education, and the National Indian Education
Association. I am honored to speak on behalf of all these Lumbees
today. We are a proud, and persistent, people. My family taught me how
to work hard, go to school and earn the best education possible,
understand the value of family and maybe, most importantly, give back
to others. I have a camp scholarship program through my camps at
Indiana University, for Native American kids, all over the country.
This allows me the opportunity to not only help Lumbee kids but Native
American kids all over the United States.
I think the two areas that the Lumbee people will benefit most from
being federally recognized will be in medical benefits and education.
Our people will now be able to buy much needed medicine, and will also
allow more deserving Lumbee children to dream of furthering their
education all over the United States.
You see, gentlemen, you not only have an opportunity to right a
wrong, you more importantly have the power to create a legacy. I do not
need your permission to call myself Native American but unfortunately
in today's world I need your validation.
This is what we Lumbee Indians can accomplish. With federal
recognition, the Lumbee Tribe would become a full player in Indian
country, no longer second class Indians in the eyes of the federal
government. As such, we would employ our substantial skills and
abilities to help correct problems faced by Indian country and make
significant contributions.
We ask for that opportunity.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Coach. Dr. Campisi.
STATEMENT OF JACK CAMPISI, ANTHROPOLOGIST, CONSULTANT, LUMBEE
TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Campisi. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee. I am Dr. Jack Campisi. I worked on Lumbee history
and community study for over 20 years, including document
research and field work. I am also the principal author of the
petition for Federal acknowledgement submitted by the tribe to
the BIA in 1987.
I will restrict my oral testimony to three points: Cheraw
origins of the Lumbee Tribe, the name changes imposed by the
State of North Carolina, and evidence of contemporary
community.
The Cheraw origin. As shown on the map, there is a
collection of 18th century documents that identifies an
historic Cheraw settlement on Drowning Creek. And that links
the modern-day Lumbee community to this community.
These documents include a 1733 map, a Moseley map, that
shows the Cheraw and Keyawee settlement east of the Pee Dee
River. Land record documents between 1737 and 1739 that
specifically refer to the retention by the Cheraw of two old
fields in what is now the Lumbee Community of Prospect.
A 1753 statement by North Carolina Governor Rowan that
identified the area occupied by present-day Lumbee Tribe as ``a
frontier to the Indians.'' A 1754 report of 50 families living
on Drowning Creek. A 1771 South Carolina newspaper article that
identified a Cheraw community on Drowning Creek. And a 1773
list of names taken by Bladen County that identified 21
individuals with 11 surnames that are present among today's
Lumbees.
In 1809, North Carolina changed the name of Drowning Creek
to the Lumbee River. Taken together, these documents show a
presence of historic Cheraw community, and the descent of the
Lumbee Tribe from it.
Dr. John Swanton of the United States Bureau of American
Ethnology was the first to make the connection between the
Cheraw and Lumbee Tribe. The Department of Interior adopted Dr.
Swanton's opinion in 1934, when it testified to Congress that
the Lumbees descend from the Cheraw and related Siouan-speaking
tribes.
Dr. Swanton published his findings in 1936 and 1946. Later
experts on Southeastern Indians, including the late Dr. William
Sturdevant, Chief Ethnologist of the Smithsonian Institution
and General Editor of the Handbook of North American Indians;
Dr. James Merrow, Professor of History and a specialist in
Catawba history; Dr. Ray Fogelson, Professor of Anthropology
and a specialist in Cherokee history and culture, and Editor of
the Southeast Volume of the handbook; and Dr. William Starner,
Professor Emeritus of Anthropology and Iroquois specialist, all
agree with Dr. Swanton's analysis.
Name changes. Much is being made of changes in the name, in
the tribe's name by the State of North Carolina over time. But
we need to put this in perspective.
In 1885 the state attached the name Croatan to the tribe
because of an erroneous belief by the State Legislature that
tribal members were descendants from the lost colony.
Again, in 1911 and 1930, the tribe's name was changed by
the state. Finally, in 1933, after a tribal referendum, the
name was changed to the Lumbee. The important points are that
regardless of the name applied, present-day tribal members are
descendants of the same people for whom the 1885 law was made.
While there was confusion over names on the part of the
state, the tribal members certainly knew who they were and who
their members were. And changes in the tribe's names are
irrelevant. The regulations make that clear and certain.
Contemporary community. The two most difficult criteria for
tribes to prove under the Department's acknowledgement
regulations, and the ones that every unsuccessful petitioner
has failed to meet, are those relating to community and
political authority. These are key to tribal existence.
Under the Department's regulation, a tribe that proves
community by so-called high evidence also conclusively proves
political authority. Following a sampling protocol established
by the then Branch of Acknowledgement and Research, I drew a 1
percent systematic sample of the enrolled members of the Lumbee
Tribe in 2002. The results showed that 64.6 percent of the
tribal members live in the core area, many of these in
communities that are almost exclusively Lumbee.
A second part of the study consisted of analyzing the
marriage patterns. The results show that 70 percent of tribal
marriages were between tribal members. Under the regulations,
these results meet the high-evidence standard, and thereby
conclusively prove both of these most difficult criteria.
Finally, I would note that this legend on the map listing
present leaders of the tribe, and links them to the leading
families of the tribe 100 years ago. Clear evidence of
continuity of leadership.
Because of its repeated efforts to obtain Federal
recognition, there is a voluminous administrative Congressional
record on the Lumbee Tribe. Not once does this record reflect
any doubt by the Department of the Interior or the Congress
about the Indian identity of the Lumbee people. In my opinion,
the Lumbee meet every definition of an Indian tribe known to
me.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Campisi follows:]
Statement of Dr. Jack Campisi, Anthropologist,
Consultant, Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, on H.R. 65
I hold a doctorate in anthropology, have dedicated my career to
research in tribal communities, and have taught these subjects as an
adjunct professor at Wellesley College. Between 1982 and 1988, I
conducted a number of studies for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.
Each of these included fieldwork in the community for periods of time
varying from a week to three weeks. In all, I spent more than twenty
weeks in Robeson County carrying out a variety of research projects.
Besides being responsible for synthesizing the thousands of pages of
documentation collected during the ten years it took to carry out the
archival research, and for designing and carrying out the community
research, I had the honor of writing the petition that was submitted on
December 17, 1987, to the Branch of Acknowledgement and Research (now
the Office of Federal Acknowledgement) under the federal regulations
that govern acknowledgement of eligible Indian tribes, 25 C.F.R. Part
83. Specifically, I drafted the Historical Narrative section, and
researched and wrote the sections dealing with community and political
continuity. Subsequent to the completion of the petition, I continued
research with the Lumbee Tribe, most recently in 2002. The material
that follows is based on my twenty years' research on the Tribe's
history and community.
Over the course of the past twenty-five years, I have worked on 28
tribal petitions for federal acknowledgement. None has exceeded the
Lumbee petition in documentation and no group has exhibited more
evidence of community cohesion and political continuity than the Lumbee
Tribe. It is my professional opinion that the Lumbee Tribe exists as an
Indian tribe and has done so over history. I will outline below the
main arguments and evidence in support of this conclusion.
An Overview of Lumbee Tribal History
Aboriginal origins of the Tribe
At the time of sustained white contact, there existed a Cheraw
Indian community precisely where the Lumbees reside today and this
Cheraw community had the same, unique surnames as those common to the
modern-day Lumbee community. A 1733 Moseley map showed the Tribe
between the Pee Dee River and Drowning Creek, in 1737 John Thompson
purchased land in the area from Robert, Chief of the Cheraw, and in
1754, Governor Arthur Dobbs of North Carolina identified on ``Drowning
Creek on the head of Little Pedee 50 families a mixt Crew [or Breed] a
lawless people filled the lands without patent or paying quit rents
shot a Surveyer for coming to view vacant lands being enclosed by great
swamps.'' A document written in 1771 refers to ``the Charraw
Settlement'' on Drowning Creek, and another document dated 1773
contains a list of names that connect this community to the Cheraw in
1737. Some of the same surnames as today's Lumbee population appeared
on the list: Ivey, Sweat, Groom, Locklear, Chavis, Dees, and Grant (see
Dr. James H. Merrill letter to Congressman Charlie Rose, October 18,
1989 for further discussion). The 1790 federal census identifies
families with these same surnames around Drowning Creek and modern day
enrolled Lumbees can prove genealogical descent from those Indians.
Thus, the community mentioned in the references cited in above and the
community of Indians described in nineteenth century documents was the
same, and were the antecedents of today's Lumbee Tribe.
Early land records link the modern day Lumbee community to the
historic Cheraw Tribe located on Drowning Creek. A 1754 deed refers to
Major Locklear, who resided at the time on the north side of Drowning
Creek. Present-day Locklears in the Tribe descend from or are related
to Major and his brother John Locklear. These early Locklears and their
descendants intermarried with other members of the Indian community
whose surnames (Oxendine, Chavis, and Lowry) are prevalent among
present day Lumbees. Genealogical records of present day members show
that the vast majority descend from Locklear, Oxendine, Chavis, or
Lowry families with many descending from more than of these family
groups who comprised the early Cheraw settlement.
These places are shown in relation to the boundaries of modern day
Robeson County on this map. As you can see, the Cheraw settlement
(spelled Saraw at the time) first identified on the 1733 Mosely map, is
located within the Cheraw old fields, which in turn are identified in
early land records as the location of families with traditional Lumbee
surnames, and nearby Drowning Creek. In 1809, the North Carolina
Legislature changed the name of Drowning Creek to the Lumber River. The
modern day Lumbee Tribe, many of whose members trace back to families
residing at the Cheraw old fields near Drowning Creek in the early
eighteenth century, still reside today on and around that river. This
genealogical connection is demonstrated by this overlay which shows the
descent of the current tribal council members from those families.
The federal census records are by far the best source of evidence
concerning the early Lumbee community. It is clear from the names of
the heads of households that the area of Robeson County around Drowning
Creek, now the Lumber River, was occupied almost exclusively by tribal
members. Based on the 1850 census (the first census to provide the
names of the individual's resident in each household), it is possible
to describe the residency patterns of the Lumbee community. We can
identify 168 households headed by ancestors of present day Lumbees from
the 1850 census. These households were clustered in three settlements
that were almost exclusively Lumbee, with white settlements between
them. The data also show that the Lumbee ancestors in these three
settlements were all closely related, including multiple first cousin
marriages. All of the signers of the 1887 and 1888 petitions for
assistance to the Tribe, the first to the State of North Carolina and
the second to the United States, appear as heads of households in these
settlements. Thus, there can be no doubt that there was an Indian
community present along Drowning Creek from the mid-1700s, separate
from other communities in the area. It is also certain that this
community had a well-established leadership structure and that it
managed its affairs with relative autonomy.
The oldest Lumbee community that can be continuously documented was
called Long Swamp, now called Prospect and located within the core area
in Pembroke and Smith townships--the heart of the modern day Lumbee
community. It is also located right in the heart of the so-called old
field of the Cheraw, documented in land records between 1737 and 1739.
The earliest census records show the presence in this community of an
extended Locklear family continuously since 1790. Members of this
extended family appeared among the tribal leaders, both by descent and
marriage, who petitioned Congress for federal recognition in 1888.
Members of this extended family were also among those who were tested
by physical anthropologist Carl Seltzer in 1936 for blood quantum. This
includes Duncan Locklear and Henry Locklear, whose pictures are
attached. The Tribe's attorney, Arlinda Locklear, is also descended
from this extended family.
The Civil War period
Federal census and state court records document the continued
existence of a separate Indian community in Robeson County during the
ante-bellem period. Although generally classified as free non-whites
during the post-Revolutionary War years, the Lumbees appear to have
been treated more generously than free blacks, being allowed to vote
without challenge and to own property. However, in the 1830s two
seemingly unrelated actions--one by the national government and the
other by the State of North Carolina--converged, with disastrous impact
on the Indians of the state. In 1830, Congress passed legislation
providing for the removal of all Indian tribes east of the Mississippi
River to land set aside in the ``Indian Territory'' in Oklahoma. Tribes
such as the Cherokee and Creek were forced to leave. In the climate of
removal, it did not benefit a tribe to overtly manifest its identity.
Lumbees, like other Indians in the state, held their land in severally,
but often without patents. Thus, they were in a precarious position.
Added to the problem of tribal survival was the steadily worsening
relationship between whites and ``people of color'' in North Carolina
following Nat Turner's uprising in 1831. In 1835, the state passed a
constitutional amendment denying tribal members rights they had
previously enjoyed. Many refused to abide by the changes and some were
charged with violations. One case, in particular, went far toward
recognizing the Lumbees as Indians. In 1857, a William Chavers was
arrested and charged as ``a free person of color'' with carrying a
shotgun, a violation of state law. He was convicted, but promptly
appealed, claiming that the law only restricted free Negroes, not
persons of color. The appeals court reversed the lower court, finding
that ``Free persons of color may be, then, for all we can see, persons
colored by Indian blood, or persons descended from Negro ancestors
beyond the fourth degree.'' The following year, in 1859, in another
case involving a Lumbee, the appeals court held that forcing an
individual to display himself before a jury was tantamount to
compelling him to furnish evidence against himself. These cases
generally resulted in the Lumbees establishing a special status under
the law as Indians, one outside the limitations placed on others who
were classified as ``free persons of color.''
There is abundant evidence of tribal activity of 1860. During the
Civil War, the Lumbee Indians were prohibited from serving in the
Confederate Army and were, instead, conscripted into labor gangs and
assigned to build the fortifications at the mouth of the Cape Fear
River to protect the city of Wilmington. The conditions were harsh and
the treatment brutal. Many Lumbee men escaped and returned home where
they hid out in the swamps of Robeson County. Besides Lumbees, the
swamps provided a refuge for Union soldiers who had escaped from nearby
Confederate camps. Because of their treatment by the Confederacy, and
more particularly the Home Guard, the Lumbees gave assistance and
protection to the Union soldiers. As the number of Lumbees and Union
soldiers ``laying out'' increased, so did the burden of feeding them.
With so many men in hiding or conscripted, there were few to do the
farm work. Gradually, the attitude of the Lumbees changed from a
passive one to one marked by belligerence. In short order, a band
emerged, led by the sons of Allen Lowrie.
Matters came to a head in 1864 when members of the Allen Lowrie
family, a leading Indian family, and the local authorities came into
armed conflict and a number of individuals on both sides were killed.
In March of 1865, the Home Guard captured Allen Lowrie and his son,
William, and after holding them for a short time, executed them in a
field near the father's house. This was followed by a virtual reign of
terror during which the Home Guard tortured members of the Lowrie
family and their kinsmen in order to learn the whereabouts of the band.
With the death of his father and brother, Henry Berry Lowrie, who was
barely twenty years old, took over the leadership of the band. For the
next decade, led by Henry Berry Lowrie, and with the Indian community's
support and protection, the band fought against local authorities who
sought by a variety of means to oppress the Indian population in
Robeson County. The Lowrie Band led a struggle that ended only after
the disappearance of its leader in 1872, and the capture and death of
the last of the band members in 1874. Henry Berry Lowrie remains a folk
hero to the Lumbee Indians and his story is told every year in an
outdoor drama called ``Strike at the Wind.''
By the 1870s, the Lumbees were openly acknowledged to be Indians.
While the Lowrie Band was carrying out its defense, others in the tribe
were taking equally effective actions to assert their independence.
Lumbees were denied access to the white schools in the county and they
refused to attend the schools for blacks. This impasse was broken in
1885.
Formal State recognition of the Tribe and efforts to obtain Federal
recognition
In 1885, the State of North Carolina formally recognized the Tribe
as the Croatan Indians as a means of addressing the school issues. The
state statute established a school system for the children of tribal
members only. Tribal members exercised complete control over who could
attend the schools. Each Lumbee settlement had a school committee that
determined eligibility. In order to be eligible, an individual had to
prove Lumbee ancestry back through the fourth generation, that is, back
to the 1770's. Because of the rigorous manner in which these rules were
enforced in the nineteenth century, school enrollment records provide
an accurate basis for determining present-day membership.
Officials at the Bureau of Indian Affairs have acknowledged the
particular significance of this early state recognition of the Lumbee
Tribe. George Roth, an anthropologist who recently retired from the
office that processes applications for acknowledgement from Indian
tribes, wrote regarding the Lumbees:
North Carolina legislation in 1885 established in law a
distinct status as Indian for the Lumbee (designating them as
Croatan Indians) and provided for a school system separate from
blacks. Though not colonially derived nor involving the
distinct legal status of the colonially derived reservations,
this North Carolina action was perhaps the earliest and
strongest postcolonial state-Indian relationship before the
modern era.
Roth, G., Indians of the Southeastern United States in the Late 20th
Century (1992 U. of Alabama Press).
In 1887, tribal members petitioned the state legislature again,
requesting the establishment of a normal school to train Indian
teachers for the Tribe's schools. Permission was granted, tribal
members raised the funds, and along with some state assistance, the
normal school began training teachers for the expanding Lumbee school
system. That normal school has been in operation continually since,
evolving into Pembroke State University and, recently, the University
of North Carolina at Pembroke.
The Tribe had difficulty, though, in supporting the Indian normal
school financially. In 1888, the Tribe petitioned Congress for
assistance for its normal school. The request was sent by the House
Committee on Indian Affairs to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, but
no action was taken for nearly two years. Finally, in 1890,
Commissioner Morgan responded to the Tribe, telling them that, ``So
long as the immediate wards of the Government are so insufficiently
provided for, I do not see how I can consistently render any assistance
to the Croatans or any other civilized tribes.'' There is no doubt that
the government's rejection of assistance was based solely on economic
considerations, the commissioner implying that if sufficient funds had
been available, services would have been provided to tribes he referred
to as ``civilized.''
The Lumbees made frequent attempts over the course of the next
fifty years to receive assistance from the United States. In 1899,
Congressman John D. Bellamy introduced legislation to provide
educational assistance for the Croatan Indians (as the Lumbees were
then called). Again, in 1910 and 1911, legislation was introduced in
Congress to change the Tribe's name and to establish ``...a school for
the Indians of Robeson County, North Carolina.'' To secure information
on the Tribe, the Indian Office sent Charles F. Pierce, Supervisor of
Indian Schools, to investigate. He reported favorably on the Tribe,
finding ``...a large majority as being at least three-fourths
Indian.''' He described them as being law abiding and industrious and
``crazy on the subject of education.'' Pierce had no doubt that the
Lumbees were Indians, or that they were a tribe. Nor did he doubt that
federal educational assistance would be beneficial. He opposed the
legislation because, in his words, ``[a]t the present time it is the
avowed policy of the government to require states having an Indian
population to assume the burden and responsibility for their education,
so far as is possible.'' After lengthy deliberations, the bill passed
the Senate, but not the House, because the chairman of the House
committee felt that the Lumbees were eligible to attend the various
Indian boarding schools.
The Tribe continued its efforts to secure federal educational
assistance, and in 1914, sent a delegation to Congress. Another
investigation was carried out by the Indian Office at the direction of
the Senate. Among other things, Special Indian Agent, O.M. McPherson
found that the Tribe had developed an extensive system of schools and a
complex political organization to represent its interests. He noted
that the Lumbees were eligible to attend federal Indian schools, but
doubted that these schools would meet their needs. His recommendation
was that if Congress saw fit to establish a school, it should be one
emphasizing agricultural and mechanical skills. Again, Congress took no
action. Parenthetically, it should be noted that during this period
tribal activity was generally at a low level across the United States.
Not so for the Lumbees, who actively involved their congressmen in
their efforts to achieve federal recognition.
During the 1930s, the Tribe renewed its efforts to achieve federal
recognition. In 1934, the Bureau of Indian Affairs asked the eminent
anthropologist at the Bureau of American Ethnology John Reed Swanton
for his professional opinion on the Lumbees. Swanton was emphatic
concerning their Indian ancestry, specifying a Cheraw and other eastern
Siouan tribes as their ancestry. A later report by Indian Agent Fred
Baker (1935), who had visited the Lumbee community, gave further
support that they constituted a tribe. Baker discussed a resettlement
project with the Tribe in which the government would acquire land for
the Lumbees' support, an alternative to the share-cropping and credit
system then the predominant means of Lumbee livelihood. Baker reported
to Congress:
It may be said without exaggeration that the plan of the
government meets with practically the unanimous support of all
of the Indians. I do not recall having heard a dissenting
voice. They seemed to regard the advent of the United States
government into their affairs as the dawn of a new day; a new
hope and a new vision...
I find that the sense of racial solidarity is growing stronger
and that the members of this tribe are cooperating more and
more with each other with the object in view of promoting the
mutual benefit of all the members. It is clear to my mind that
sooner or later government action will have to be taken in the
name of justice and humanity to aid them.
However, the Bureau of Indian affairs did not support recognition of
the Tribe, despite four studies that all found the Lumbee to be Indian.
The apparent reasons were the size of the Tribe and the costs to the
government.
Twentieth Century efforts to obtain Federal Recognition
Following the First World War, the Lumbees renewed their efforts,
both in the state and with Congress, to improve their educational
system. At the state level, they were able to get an appropriation of
$75,000 for capital improvements at the Indian Normal School. The issue
of the Tribe's name had become a concern, and tribal leaders sought
legislation in Congress to recognize the name adopted by the state
legislature--The Cherokee Indians of Robeson and Adjoining Counties in
North Carolina. Such a bill was introduced in the Senate in 1924, and
at first received favorable support from the Secretary of the Interior,
although Commissioner of Indian Affairs Charles H. Burke opposed the
legislation. The Secretary later dropped his support and the bill died.
The efforts to obtain congressional recognition were resumed in
1932. Senator Josiah W. Bailey submitted a bill designating the Indians
of Robeson and adjoining counties as ``Cherokee Indians,'' but this
effort also failed. The following year another bill was proposed, this
time designating the Tribe as the ``Cheraw Indians,'' at the suggestion
of Dr. Swanton. This name caused a split in the Tribe, with those
tribal members led by Joe Brooks favoring it, while others, led by D.F.
Lowry opposing it, fearing it would jeopardize the Tribe's control over
its schools. Because of the split in the Tribe, the effort failed.
With the passage of the Indian Reorganization Act, Brooks and his
supporters attempted to organize the Tribe under a federal charter.
Because the Tribe did not possess a land base, it was advised by
Assistant Solicitor Felix Cohen to organize under the half-blood
provision of the act. Cohen urged that the Tribe apply for land and a
charter under the name of the ``Siouan Indian Community of Lumber
River.'' Brooks immediately submitted a proposal that mirrored Cohen's
recommendations. Over the course of the next two years, the two
projects of establishing recognition under the IRA and receiving land
through the Bureau of Indian Affairs proceeded, when suddenly, in 1936,
the land acquisition proposal was shifted from the BIA to the Rural
Resettlement Administration of the Department of Agriculture, and the
land that was to be purchased solely for Lumbee use, was opened to non-
Indians. After a lengthy struggle, Brooks was able to have a part of
the land set aside for tribal members, and incorporated under the name
of the Red Banks Mutual Association.
The Tribe was no more successful in achieving recognition under the
IRA. The BIA formed a commission of three to investigate the blood
quantum of the Lumbees. In 1936, Dr. Carl C. Seltzer, an anthropologist
and member of the commission, visited Robeson County on two occasions
and took physical data on 209 Indians applying for recognition as one-
half or more Indian blood. He found that twenty-two met the criteria.
They were certified by the Secretary of the Interior. What made
Seltzer's work so ludicrous was that in several cases he identified
full siblings in different ways, one meeting the blood quantum
requirement and the other not.
After the Second World War, the Lumbees again tried to achieve
federal recognition of their status as an Indian tribe. The issue of
their name continued to cause them problems so, in 1952, the Lumbee
leadership conducted a referendum on the name; at the Tribe's request,
the state funded and provided other assistance for the conduct of the
referendum. Of 2,144 tribal members who voted, all but 35 favored the
use of the name ``Lumbee,'' derived from the Lumber River upon which
they had always dwelled. Armed with this overwhelming support, the
leader of the movement, D.F. Lowry, asked the state legislature to
adopt the change. The legislature approved the name change in 1953. The
Lumbee Tribe then took its case to Congress, which in 1956 passed the
Lumbee Bill.
There can be no doubt that for more than 200 years the Lumbees have
been continuously and repeatedly recognized as American Indians. This
was made explicit by the state in the 1880's and by the federal
government from at least the beginning of the twentieth century on.
Federal and state officials have, on numerous occasions, reviewed the
evidence and at no time have they questioned the fact that the Tribe
consisted of people of Indian descent. Federal reluctance to
acknowledge the Tribe centered on questions involving the extension of
services. It was unfortunate that each effort by the Lumbees to clarify
their federal status and to receive services coincided with federal
Indian policy shifts away from the trust relationship: the General
Allotment Act in 1887; the Citizenship Act of 1924, and the termination
policy of the 1950s. The exception, the Indian Reorganization Act,
which could have provided a means to recognition, was subverted by bad
anthropology and bureaucratic indolence.
Recent Lumbee History
Challenges to the Lumbee community and independence
Since the passage of the Lumbee Act, the Tribe has faced a steady
string of problems, beginning with an attempt by the Ku Klux Klan to
intimidate tribal members in 1958 by a rally held within the Lumbee
community. The Tribe's reaction to this threat was a spontaneous
gathering that drove the klansmen from the field and broke up their
rally, a confrontation that focused national attention for a time on
the Lumbee community. The tribal members have exerted their influence
in other ways. In the 1960's they organized voter registration drives
that made their influence felt on local politics, electing members of
the Tribe to state, county, and local public offices. When the local
school authorities attempted to integrate only the black and Indian
schools in the county, tribal members staged sit-ins and filed lawsuits
to prevent the loss of tribal control over the schools. It must be
understood that the school system was and is a key and integral part of
tribal identity, and any threat to the Tribe's control would be
resisted. And resisted it was!
While the Tribe was struggling to maintain its schools, it was
actively opposing the so-called ``double voting'' system, which allowed
whites in the towns (which had separate school districts) to vote with
whites in the county, who were in the minority, to maintain white
control over the county school system. The students in the county
school system were predominantly Indian and black. Tribal leaders took
the case to federal court, and after losing at the district court, won
a reversal at the court of appeals, thus ending double voting.
At about the same time, tribal leaders became involved in an issue
with high symbolic value to the Tribe. In 1972, the Board of Trustees
of Pembroke State University decided to demolish the main building on
the campus of the former Indian normal school and replace it with
another structure. Very quickly, a group formed to ``Save Old Main.''
The group waged a statewide and national campaign to save the building,
and just at the point when it seemed that they would be victorious, the
building was burned to the ground. The Tribe overcame this blow and
campaigned hard for the reconstruction of Old Main, which they
eventually accomplished. The building was completed in 1975 and is now
the site of the University of North Carolina at Pembroke's Native
American Resource Center.
Since the end of World War II, the Tribe has grown in stature and
influence. It was a primary mover in the establishment of North
Carolina Commission of Indian Affairs, an organization that has become
a model for state Indian commissions. The Lumbees have played an
instrumental role in county affairs, where they have represented a
moderating influence.
The Lumbee history is one of continual resistance to outside
domination, beginning in the eighteenth century. In 1754, the ancestors
of the Lumbees were described as a community of 50 families living on
Drowning Creek, ``mixt Crew [or breed] a lawless people.'' In 1773,
they were identified as ``A List of the Mob Railously Assembled
together in Bladen County [later subdivided to create Robeson
County].'' In the 1830s, Lumbees opposed the laws limiting their
freedoms, and in the Civil War and Reconstruction years, under the
leadership of Henry Berry Lowrie, they actively opposed, first the
Confederate government, and later the United States.
The distinct and strong Lumbee community
There is a variety of definitions of the term ``Indian tribe''
employed in a variety of contexts. Most experts agree that the most
exacting definition is that used by the Department of the Interior in
its federal acknowledgement regulations, 25 C.F.R. Part 83. Even as
judged by this definition, though, there is no question that the Lumbee
Indians constitute an Indian tribe.
The Lumbees are held together by the same mechanisms and values
that have kept them together for the past two hundred years or more,
mechanisms and values that are typically Indian. First and foremost is
the family, which serves as the center of Lumbee social activities.
There is continual and widespread visiting among adults, particularly
in the homes of parents and grandparents. Often, children live near
their parents on land that was part of the family homestead. Members of
families speak to and visit each other on an almost daily basis.
The knowledge that the average Lumbee has of his or her kin is
truly astounding. It is very common for individuals to be able to trace
their parents' genealogies back five or more generations. Not only are
individuals able to name their grandparents, great grandparents, great
great grandparents etc., but often they can name the siblings of their
ancestors, the spouses of their ancestors' siblings, relate where they
lived in Robeson County, the church they attended, and the names of
their offspring. It is common for an individual to name two or three
hundred individuals as members of the immediate family. Every year
there are family reunions that attract members from all over the
country. They vary in size from small gatherings of a few hundred close
kin to reunions involving a thousand or more persons.
This kinship pattern is well illustrated by the mapping of all
Lumbee heads of household based upon the 1850 federal census that I
prepared for the Tribe's petition for federal acknowledgement. I
identified 168 households headed by Lumbees in 1850. These heads of
household are the ancestors of present day Lumbees and include
descendants of the Locklear extended family documented on the old
Cheraw field in 1790. The households were clustered in what is the core
area today of the Lumbee Tribe; some areas, such as the Prospect
community, were almost exclusively Lumbee. The households showed an
extremely high rate of in-marriage, resulting in complex and multiple
kinship and marriage ties among the members. This same kinship pattern
persists today. When the relationships, both marital and kin, between
the list of tribal leaders who appear on the 1887 petition to the state
and the 1888 petition to Congress are mapped, it again reveals a
remarkably tight community. And as I mentioned before, the modern day
tribal leaders are related in the same way to the Tribe's historic
leaders and households.
Religion also serves to maintain the social boundaries of the
Lumbee Tribe. By social boundaries, I mean that there are membership
rules, special beliefs and values, a unique history, and a system of
political authority and decision-making that marks the Lumbees as a
separate community. There are more than 120 Lumbee Indian churches in
Robeson County, and with one or two exceptions, each has a Lumbee
minister. There are also two all Lumbee church conferences--the Burnt
Swamp Baptist Association and the Lumber River Holiness Methodist
Conference. Church membership crosses family lines and settlement
areas, thus drawing together different sectors of the Tribe.
For the Lumbees, church is more than a religious experience; it is
one of their most important social activities. It involves many of them
on a daily basis. The churches have Sunday schools, youth
organizations, senior citizens' programs, Bible study programs, and
chorus practices, to mention but a few of the activities available. It
is common for members of the same household to attend different
churches, and this behavior further acts to bring the tribal membership
together.
The family and the churches also provide the main avenues for
political participation. In studying the Lumbee community, it is clear
that leadership over the years has tended to surface in the same
families from generation to generation, something like a system of
inherited leadership. These leaders have gained prominence through
their participation in the educational system and as church leaders. In
the past, many of the Tribe's most dynamic leaders were ministers and
teachers. Today, there are other avenues for the demonstration of
leadership qualities, but family, education and religious values still
command attention.
The importance of the role played by the Lumbee churches in the
political life of the Tribe cannot be overstated. During the 1990s, it
was the leadership from the churches that initiated and sustained the
process for preparing a tribal constitution. The delegates to the
constitutional convention were selected by the churches and represented
every segment of the Tribe. After nearly ten years of meetings,
negotiations, court actions, and re-drafts, the constitution was
presented to the tribal members for their approval. On November 6,
2001, the tribal members voted on the constitution. Eighty-five [85]
percent of those voting voted in favor of adoption. The approved
constitution is recognized by the State of North Carolina, and it is
the Tribe's governing document.
Geographic concentration of Lumbee Tribe
Today, there are approximately 55,000 enrolled Lumbee tribal
members. Each of these members completed a documented application for
enrollment to establish that he or she meets the enrollment criteria.
There are two membership criteria: first, that he or she descends from
an individual who appears on the Tribe's base roll; and second, that he
or she maintains contact with the Lumbee Tribe.
Historically, there has never been a complete list of tribal
members, since no federal or other purpose required the compilation or
maintenance of such a list. So the base roll used by the Tribe consists
of a collection of documents dating back to the late nineteenth or
early twentieth century that consists of partial lists of tribal
members. These records include the 1900 federal Indian census, Indian
school records, and church records. In the few instances where an
individual cannot identify an ancestor in these documents (which are,
by definition, incomplete lists of tribal members), the person's
ancestry is considered by an Elder's Review Committee. This is a group
of tribal elders with great, personal knowledge about Lumbee kinship.
The maintenance of tribal contact means that the tribal member
maintains ties to the Tribe, through visits and otherwise, even if the
member does not reside in the area. Again, if there are questions
regarding a member's maintenance of contact, the Elder's Review
Committee will make a determination. Individuals who do not maintain
contact are not eligible for enrollment; those already enrolled can be
disenrolled if they fail to maintain contact.
Even though the Tribe is large, the Tribe remains concentrated even
today in the area in and around the historic Drowning Creek, known
today as the Lumber River. To determine the level of geographic
concentration, a random sampling of tribal members was prepared. This
is a methodology approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs in its
analysis of a tribe's community in the administrative acknowledgement
process. A 1 percent systematic sample was drawn from the Lumbee
membership files as of December 2002. Of the 543 files drawn, 29 were
found to contain names of deceased individuals, or were missing from
the files, leaving a balance of 514 files. This corresponds closely
with the number of active members (52,850) as reported to the Lumbee
Tribal Council in December 2002.
The residency pattern of the Lumbee Tribal members is divided into
three categories: core area where the tribal members live in either
exclusively or nearly exclusively Lumbee geographical areas; those
living somewhere in North Carolina; and those living elsewhere.
Included in the first category are the following communities in Robeson
County: Pembroke, Maxton, Rowland, Lumberton, Fairmont, St. Paul's, and
Red Springs. Within these communities, there are areas that are
exclusively (or nearly so) occupied by Lumbees. This is consistent with
the analysis of tribal membership concentration used by the Office of
Federal Acknowledgement, Department of the Interior, under its
acknowledgement regulations.
The data show that of the 511 for whom there was residency data,
330 (64.6%) live in the core area. One hundred and two (19.9%) live in
the State of North Carolina, and the 79 (15.4%) live elsewhere, almost
all of them in the United States. This high degree of geographic
concentration establishes the existence of a Lumbee community, even
without any further evidence (see discussion below). Based on census
and other data, the Tribe demonstrates the same high level of
geographic concentration going back well into the nineteenth century,
or as far as there are data available.
A second indication of community is the level of in-marriage within
a community. Using the same sample, there were 276 records that
provided information on the age and marital status of individuals. Of
these, 49 were younger than 16, the age selected as marriageable.
Another 23 were identified as single, leaving 204 with known marriage
partners. Of this number 143 (70%) were married to another Lumbee
tribal member. Of the remaining 61, 59 were married to non-Indians and
2 were married to members of other tribes. Again, this high in-marriage
rate establishes the existence of a Lumbee community, even without any
further evidence (see discussion below). As with residency, based on
census and other data, it is certain that the Tribe can demonstrate
comparably high in-marriage rates for the preceding periods, going back
well into the nineteenth century, or as far as there are data
available.
Political leadership among the Lumbee
As discussed above, the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina organized,
ran, and largely financed its own school system and teacher's training
college for nearly one hundred years. It has had and continues to have
a complex network of churches that exclusively or nearly exclusively
serve the tribal members. All of these demonstrate clear political
authority within the community that is accepted as such by the outside
world.
A specific example of tribal political authority in the education
context is illustrative. In 1913, State Attorney General Thomas Bickett
issued an opinion that the Robeson County Board of Education, then
controlled by non-Indians, had authority to overrule a Lumbee Indian
school committee's decision to exclude a child who did not meet the
Tribe's eligibility requirements from an Indian school. This was
unacceptable to the Tribe. Tribal leaders sought and obtained state
legislation in 1921 that reaffirmed the Tribe's authority to determine
eligibility to attend the Lumbee schools.
Another example of Lumbee political autonomy outside the context of
education involved the ultimate political control--the ability to
directly elect leadership for the Town of Pembroke--located in the
heart of the Lumbee community and occupied almost exclusively by
Indians (excluding the students and employees of the University of
North Carolina, Pembroke). At the time of its incorporation in 1895,
state law required that public officials of the town be appointed by
the Governor rather than elected--the only incorporated town in the
state so governed. Under pressure from Lumbee tribal leaders, this
state law was changed in 1945 to allow for direct election of town
officials by the residents there, just as in all other incorporated
towns in the state. Since then, the mayor and town council of Pembroke
have all been Lumbee Indians.
From the 1960s on, the Lumbee leadership sought to maintain control
over their schools and college, and when that was no longer possible,
to share political power in Robeson County. They instituted lawsuits to
abolish double voting, fought to save the college's main administration
building, and when that burned down, to have it rebuilt, and elect
Lumbee leaders to county positions. The Tribe submitted a petition for
federal recognition under 25 CRF 83. Finally, beginning in 1993, the
Tribe began the process that eventually led in 2002 to the present
constitution and tribal government. The process started with funds from
a Methodist Church grant, the delegates were chosen from the
participating churches, and the process was deeply influenced by church
leaders. The results were overwhelming endorsed by the tribal
population in two referenda--1994 and 2001.
Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina and The Federal Acknowledgement
Regulations
In 1978, the Department of the Interior established a regulatory
process for the acknowledgement of Indian tribes. 25 C.F.R. Part 83.
The Department has determined that the Lumbee Tribe is not eligible for
this administrative process because of the 1956 Lumbee Act. However,
the history and data establish that the Tribe nonetheless meets the
seven mandatory criteria used in the Department's regulations to define
an Indian tribe. Those seven mandatory criteria are:
(a) identification as an American Indian entity on a substantially
continuous basis since 1900;
(b) a predominant portion of the petitioning group comprises a
distinct community and has existed as a community from historical times
until the present;
(c) the petitioner has maintained political influence or authority
over its members as an autonomous entity from historical times until
the present;
(d) a copy of the group's present governing document including its
membership criteria;
(e) the petitioner's membership consists of individuals who
descend from a historical Indian tribe or tribes which combined and
functioned as a single autonomous political entity;
(f) the membership of the petitioning group is composed
principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged North
American Indian tribe;
(g) neither the petitioner nor its members are the subject of
congressional legislation that has expressly terminated or forbidden
the Federal relationship.
Criterion (a) Identification as an Indian entity
This criterion can be met by showing evidence of federal, state, or
county relationships, or identification by historians or social
scientists, in books or newspapers, or by relationships with other
tribes or national, regional or state Indian organizations since 1900.
There are repeated and numerous identifications of the Lumbee Tribe as
an Indian entity since 1900, as shown in the summary of the Tribe's
efforts to obtain federal recognition above. There can be no serious
question that the Lumbee Tribe can and has demonstrated this criterion.
Criterion (b) Community
This criterion provides a number of ways to demonstrate community,
foremost among these are rates of in-marriage and residency patterns.
The regulations provide that an Indian group has conclusively
demonstrated this criterion by proof that 50 percent or more of its
members reside in a geographical area composed exclusively or almost
exclusively of tribal members, or that at least 50 percent of its
members are married to other tribal members. These are the so-called
high evidence standards. As established above, the Lumbee Tribe meets
both these high evidence standards, both historically and in modern
times. This means that the Lumbee Tribe has conclusively demonstrated
community as defined by the regulations, typically the most difficult
part of the administrative process for petitioning tribes. It should
also be noted that this criterion specifically provides that changes in
name of the group, such as those experienced by the Lumbee under state
law, are irrelevant.
Criterion (c) Political authority
The regulations provide that if community is proven by high
evidence as exhibited by the Lumbee community, this is considered
conclusive proof of political authority as well. In other words, the
same high evidence of community exhibited by the Lumbee also
conclusively demonstrates political authority for the Lumbee Tribe,
both historically and in modern times. In addition, the actual evidence
of political authority summarized above--from the substantial and
active political relationship maintained with the State of North
Carolina since 1885, repeated efforts organized by tribal leaders to
obtain federal recognition, and persistent resistance to challenges to
tribal independence--show vibrant and effective political leadership
within the Tribe, both historically and in modern times.
Criterion (d) Governance
This criterion requires that a petitioner submit either a statement
describing its system of governance or its governing document. By the
adoption of a tribal constitution, one that has been recognized by the
State of North Carolina, the Tribe clearly demonstrates this criterion.
Criterion (e) Descent from a historical tribe or tribes
As to criterion (e), Dr. John R. Swanton, a member of the staff of
the Bureau of American Ethnology, a federal government agency, and one
of the nation's foremost anthropologists and experts on American Indian
tribes, particularly in the southeast, concluded in the early 1930s
that the Lumbees are descended predominantly from Cheraw Indians. The
Department of the Interior adopted this position in its 1934 statement
to Congress on one of the proposed recognition bills, relying on Dr.
Swanton's report. This has also been confirmed and supported by
scholars such as Dr. William C. Sturtevant, Chief Ethnologist of the
Smithsonian Institution and general editor of the Handbook of American
Indians and Dr. James Merrell, Professor of History, Vassar College,
and a leading authority on the colonial Carolinas.
Criterion (f) Petitioner's members are not members of any federally
recognized tribe
The members of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina are not members
of any federally recognized tribe. This can be demonstrated by a review
of the Tribe's genealogical data.
Criterion (g) The petitioner has not been the subject of a federal
termination act
The Solicitor for the Department of the Interior has determined
that the 1956 Lumbee Act is an act forbidding the federal relationship.
Summary
Typically, Indian tribes petitioning for acknowledgement under the
administrative process have most difficulty with criteria (b) and (c),
community and political authority respectively. Every tribe that has
been denied acknowledgement through the process to date has failed
because of the inability to prove these criteria, and perhaps others.
As demonstrated above, the Lumbee Tribe's case on these criteria is so
strong as to be conclusive. In light of the heavily documented history
of the Tribe since 1900, neither can there be any doubt about the
Tribe's ability to demonstrate the other criteria.
In the past few years, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has expressed
doubt as to the Tribe's evidence on criterion (e), that there is too
little data on criterion e to prove descent from the Cheraw Tribe,
specifically that a genealogical link between the Cheraw Tribe on
Drowning Creek and all present-day members of the Lumbee Tribe on the
renamed Lumber River cannot be made, despite the occurrence of shared
and uncommon surnames and the clear descent of significant numbers of
members from the Locklear family known to reside in the Drowning Creek
area. Of course, the failure of the dominant society to record the
births and deaths of Lumbees before 1790 is no fault of the Tribe; nor
does this absence suggest that the Lumbee Tribe is not descended from
the Cheraw Tribe. In fact, the Department testified in 1934 that the
Tribe was descended from the Cheraw Tribe, based upon the work of the
eminent Dr. Swanton. The Department's earlier opinion is also
corroborated by the professional opinions of Drs. Sturtevant and
Merrill. Thus, the Department's more recent view should be taken as
more intellectual curiosity than serious doubt about the origins of the
Tribe. And this new found curiosity should be judged in the context of
the Department's long-standing determination to oppose recognition of
the Tribe, even in the face of its past judgment that the Lumbees truly
are an Indian tribe.
The extensive record of the Tribe's history in the eighteenth,
nineteenth, and twentieth centuries establish that the Lumbee Indians
constitute an Indian tribe as that term is defined in the Department of
the Interior's acknowledgement regulations. The Tribe fails only on the
last criterion, that is, Congress has prohibited the Department from
acting on the Tribe's petition in the 1956 Lumbee Act. Thus, the
Congress can act on H.R. 65 with full confidence that the Lumbees are,
in fact, an Indian tribe.
______
The Chairman. Thank you. Let me ask my first question to
Chairman Goins. Some have questioned the Lumbee as a tribe
because of different names the tribe has been known as over the
years.
Did the Lumbee Tribe request or work with the state on
amendments to state law regarding your name?
Mr. Goins. In 1952 that did occur, sir. We went to the
legislation that allowed us, for our people to come out and
vote on their own particular name. That name was derived from
the Lumbee River. Up until that point it was all designated by
the State of North Carolina.
The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Campisi, let me ask you about
the numerous studies that have been conducted over the years by
Congress and the Department of Interior on Lumbee ancestry.
Have any of these studies expressed doubt of the tribe's
Indian ancestry?
Mr. Campisi. No, Mr. Chairman, I have not read any study
that expressed doubt about Indian ancestry.
The Chairman. I appreciate that. Coach Sampson, I might ask
you. First, your testimony was very eloquent, and your
dedication to education is most commendable.
After all that you have accomplished in your life, it seems
you still yearn to be known as a member of a Federally
recognized Indian tribe. And I highly respect you for that. How
do you think that recognition will change the young Lumbee men
and women growing up now?
Mr. Sampson. It is my belief, and I speak from personal
experience, when I travel across the United States with my team
to play basketball--it may be in Los Angeles, it could be in
Chicago. When I was in Oklahoma in the Big Twelve, the State of
Oklahoma having the largest influence of Native Americans in
the United States. They all accepted me as a Native American.
They felt I was a Native American.
But I knew that, in an almost sinister way, that there is a
but at the end of the way that we are recognized. We are Native
American, but there is a but at the end.
What we would like to do, and I think this is where the
self esteem and almost a complete generation could put their
hands around this and embrace it, we would like to remove the
but. I think our people deserve that.
We are Native American. I don't look at my people as
anything but Native American, never have. My father was Indian,
my mother is Indian. Their mother and their father were Indian.
I lived my life as an Indian, accepted as an Indian. But we
have the problem with the word but. We need to remove but.
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Coach. The gentleman from
North Carolina, Mr. Shuler.
Mr. Shuler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank
all the members of the panel and their testimony today, and for
all your works. And Chairman Goins, a special thank you for
your commitment to our country and serving in our foreign wars.
Mr. Goins, or Chairman Goins rather, why did the Lumbee
community seek recognition under, or did they seek recognition
under the Cherokee name? I know you have alluded to this.
Mr. Goins. Arlinda, do you want to answer?
Ms. Locklear. If I may, Congressman, for the Chairman.
There were two names that you referred to. The first, as a
process of state law, the tribe itself did not seek that name
change. That occurred in 1913. Chief Hicks is correct about
that year. It happened because the State Legislature in both
1885, 1911, and 1913, who thought they knew where the Lumbees
came from, and enacted into state law their own version of
amateur history.
However, the Chief is also correct that there were efforts
made in the Federal Congress to achieve recognition on the same
terms that the state law had been passed. There was a simple
reason for that.
If you will recall from our history, in 1885 the state
established a separate school system for Lumbee children. The
record establishes that the tribal leaders feared use of any
other name other than the one imposed by state law, or else
they would lose their schools. And the record is clear on the
Federal bills that there was, in fact, debate among the tribal
leaders at the time on that issue. But the tribal leaders
resisted use of any other name other than that imposed under
state law, so that they could maintain control under state law
of their state schools.
Mr. Shuler. And Mr. Campisi, you had also alluded to that
several times legislation has changed the names of the
community, correct?
Mr. Campisi. That is correct.
Mr. Shuler. So Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that many times
before, that legislative bodies have continued to be wrong,
correct?
Mr. Goins. Wrong about the name?
Mr. Shuler. Correct.
Mr. Goins. Correct.
Mr. Shuler. Or the recognition thereof. So it seems like
that we should continue to go through the due process to allow,
in this circumstances that we are looking at, that the due
process, that Members of Congress are, just as other
legislators in our State of North Carolina have done, they too
have been wrong, from what you are, the information which you
have submitted today in front of our, in the hearing, that you
said the state legislatures are wrong.
So I guess my question would be if, in fact, that North
Carolina has been wrong, and obviously Chief Hicks had alluded
to that the use of the Cherokee name now being recognized,
trying to be recognized under the Lumbee name, that at that
point in time, we have seen how legislation has been wrong in
not going through the due process, or actually having your
community involvement was incorrect.
Ms. Locklear. If I may comment on that.
Mr. Shuler. Sure.
Ms. Locklear. Congressman Shuler, there were two questions
here. One is the use of a name. As Dr. Campisi testified
earlier, the regulations make very clear that the use of
various names is irrelevant.
The other, however, is tribal existence. None of those
bodies was wrong with regard to the tribal existence question.
The Lumbee have existed, as Dr. Campisi testified, as an
independent Indian community entitled to recognition, under
whatever name they may have used at the time.
So while they may have been incorrect on the name, they
were not incorrect with regard to the recognition issue.
Mr. Shuler. Well, in my heritage, our surname Shuler had
been passed down, and I know where that has gone. So the
Lumbee, when does the name Lumbee community come about?
Ms. Locklear. As the Chairman indicated, out of frustration
with the state's various names, the tribe did ask the state to
conduct a referendum in 1952 on the adoption of the name.
Because of the tribe's long-time association with Drowning
Creek, later renamed Lumber River, the tribe itself chose the
name Lumbee, derived from the Lumber River. That is the name
that the tribe itself chose.
Mr. Shuler. And what year was that?
Ms. Locklear. It was chosen in 1953. The state recognized
the name--I am sorry, 1952. The state recognized the name in
1953. And the Congress did so in 1956 in the Lumbee Act.
Mr. Shuler. So for many years the ancestors of the
community have not had a name.
Ms. Locklear. That is not correct. That is not correct. For
many years this community has not been recognized by the United
States. It is generally a function of Federal recognition that,
number one, technical roles are prepared. We never had a
technical role. And that number two, a legal body known by a
particular name is authorized to represent a particular Indian
people.
Mr. Shuler. So what was the name of the tribe before 1952?
Ms. Locklear. Under state law we were recognized----
Mr. Shuler. No, in the community.
Ms. Locklear. We didn't use a name other than Indian,
because we were all Indian. We all knew who we were.
Let me tell you a little story. We have one of our members
who explains it this way. I am going to use Drew's grandfather
as an example. He was born in 1886. When he was born, he was a
Croatan Indian, under state law.
When he married in 1913, he was, under state law, an Indian
of Robeson County. When his children were born, he was, under
state law, a Cherokee Indian of Robeson County. And by the time
of his death, he was, under state law, a Lumbee Indian.
Now, this is the same individual, mind you. And every
individual in his family knew they were Indian, and really
actually paid little regard to what the state law designated
them as, other than the ability to maintain their separate
schools.
Mr. Shuler. OK. Mr. Chairman or whoever would like to
answer this, if the mandate, the 1956 Congressional Ban was
lifted, would you seek that recognition through the Department
of Interior?
Mr. Goins. Congressman, the question is, and it has always
been since the 1956 Act, that Congress put us in this fix. And
we are not the only tribe that has been treated like this, but
we are the only tribe that is being left in this predicament.
You have corrected the situation with the Tiwas. And I was
saying is just treat us like you did the other tribes that
Congress put in this fix. That is all we are saying. Just go
back to right or wrong.
Mr. Shuler. So would you seek the recognition, to my
question, would you seek the recognition if the ban was lifted?
Mr. Goins. If the ban was lifted, if that was the consent
of the Congress, we would have no other choice but to go
through the BIA process.
Mr. Shuler. Chief Hicks, how has this affected the
community? If, for an example, Congress does not increase
funding, what impact would it be if we didn't increase the
funding, and the resources were divided on a much greater, the
pile was divided many more times? What impact would it have
upon your community and the Kwala boundary?
Mr. Hicks. Well, obviously I think the Committee is very
privy to the current limitations in front in specifically
healthcare, as an example. We are funded at about a 60 percent
level of need at this point, so I think it would be
overwhelming to not just the Eastern Band of Cherokee, but all
tribes across the nation, especially the direct service tribes.
It would have a significant effect.
And again, the numbers at this point are still questionable
in regards to whatever the latest CBO report is going to
report.
Mr. Shuler. Thank you. Chairman Goins, again, seeking
recognition obviously with the caveat of banning gaming, would
you also agree that being able to be recognized, but not having
gaming?
Mr. Goins. Congressman, if you noticed in that film clip I
talked about the Lumber River holding this, holding this
Methodist Conference. Sir, I am a member of that conference,
and I take my relationship with my Lord very serious. In my
personal opinion, I am not in favor of the lottery, but I
cannot speak on behalf of the Tribal Council and the Lumbee
people. It would be up to them to take on a referendum to vote.
But personally, forget about gaming, as far as I am
concerned.
Mr. Shuler. Very good. And, Mr. Chairman, I note my time
has expired, but I just would like to extend my special thanks
to my colleague, McIntyre. It is not often the two of us
actually ever disagree on any issue, and I continue to cherish
my friendship, along with he and the Chairman, under these
circumstances.
And also, once again, Coach, congratulations to you and
your hard work and your dedication. And Chief Hicks, thank you
and your counsel for what you have been able to help both in
the economic impact in our community, and for the wellness of
our community. Growing up just six miles from the Kwala
boundary was a very special time of my life and a time that I
will always remember. And I thank all of you for your testimony
here before us today.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. McIntyre.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know the hour is
late, and I will be brief. I do want to thank the Chairman for
your patience and for your willingness to hear all of this
testimony today. And thank you to my colleague, Congressman
Shuler, for his kind words. I do greatly respect him, and is
excited that he is here as a Member of our Congress and of this
committee. And thank you for being with us today, and in a
better understanding of this situation that my constituents in
the Lumbee Tribe face.
I would like to just ask Arlinda Locklear, who is the
attorney for the tribe, if there is anything else from a legal
standpoint. Ms. Locklear, I would like to give you that
opportunity to speak to. I notice you have submitted for the
record an excellent memorandum.
And I notice one comment that you had here, that if you
would just like to speak to. When you say Congress should deal
with the Lumbee Tribe just as it has every other tribe in the
same situation. That is, by an Act of Recognition Legislation,
because the tribe is ineligible for the administrative process.
Congress, you say, has never passed special legislation
that will require administrative action on a tribe that is,
under present law, ineligible for the administrative process.
So in your reference here, if you would just expound upon that
briefly. And we thank you again for your excellent preparation
of this memorandum.
Ms. Locklear. Thank you, Congressman McIntyre, I appreciate
the opportunity. And I also thank you for your work on this
bill. The community is very grateful.
Yes, that is correct, Congressman McIntyre, that the
Congress has never done as some have proposed today, which is
to repeal a statute that precludes a tribe from going through
the administrative process, and then require administrative
action on that tribe's history. That was proposed by some in
the Congress's consideration of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe in 1978.
It was also mentioned by some in Congress's consideration of
the Ysleta del Sur Tribe in 1987.
And in both cases, the Congress declined to do so, and
instead enacted comprehensive legislation for those tribes.
Both of those tribes were subject to Acts of Congress
comparable to the 1956 Lumbee Act that precludes administrative
action on the tribe's status.
But let me also point out that in the past, this committee
has rejected that same alternative with respect to the Lumbee
Tribe, as well. In both 1992 and 1993 when the issue was before
the Committee, the Committee voted down that alternative in
both Congresses.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you. And just one other clarification.
You also mentioned as another point following that paragraph in
your discussion of that particular issue that the Department of
the Interior, and I quote, ``and the Congress have already made
inquiry with regard to the Lumbee Tribe on numerous occasions
in response to the tribe's repeated requests to Congress and
the Department for Federal recognition.''
The Congress and the Department have compiled a voluminous
record on the tribe's history and community. In fact, what Dr.
Campisi has referred to today and what you have submitted, can
you tell us, in brief, the history of those records being
provided already to this Congress with regard to the Lumbee
status as Indians?
Ms. Locklear. Yes, sir. Those investigations and reports
arose out of the tribe's long effort to obtain Federal
recognition. Typically what occurred was when the bill was
introduced, Congress would request or direct the Secretary of
the Interior to dispatch a special Indian agent to study the
history and condition of the Indians in Robeson County.
And it is important to point out that these were Indian
agents with substantial background and experience among
Federally recognized tribes. Mr. Baker, for example, who
visited the community in 1935 was the agency at, the Sisseton
Wahpeton agent at the time, agency at the time. They all, as
instructed by Congress, produced reports which were then made
part of the legislative history on those bills. And as Dr.
Campisi testified, they all conclude that it is an Indian
community in Robeson County, with a strong community sense and
strong political leadership.
And in fact, one of those, one of the early ones of those,
done in 1934 by Dr. Swanton, as Dr. Campisi testified,
concluded that the Lumbee Indians descend from the Cheraw and
related Siouan-speaking tribes.
The Department of the Interior relied on that report, in
fact, in its testimony, adopted that view in its testimony to
Congress on a bill in 1934. So it is a little disingenuous we
believe for the Department now to express some doubt as to the
ancestry of the Lumbee, when they appear to have known it for
some time.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank
you again for your indulgence today, and for the opportunity to
present this case on behalf of the Lumbee Tribe.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mike. The gentleman from Maryland,
Mr. Sarbanes, do you have any questions?
Mr. Sarbanes. A very brief question for Ms. Locklear. You
say there is other tribes that have been sort of similarly
situated by having Congress recognize them, but deny them
access to the administrative process.
Ms. Locklear. Yes.
Mr. Sarbanes. And in those instances, have those, have any
of those occurred since 1956?
Ms. Locklear. They both did.
Mr. Sarbanes. They both did.
Ms. Locklear. Yes.
Mr. Sarbanes. OK. And in both of those instances there was
subsequent legislation that did not require them to go through
the process, is that correct?
Ms. Locklear. That is correct.
Mr. Sarbanes. OK. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. The gentleman from Pennsylvania,
Mr. Brewster.
Mr. Shuster. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it.
The Chairman. Mr. Shuster, I am sorry.
Mr. Shuster. You combined the Bill with the Shuster.
The Chairman. That is what I did.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. The gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Shuster.
Mr. Shuster. It is not the first time that I have been
mistaken for other people.
Thank you for correcting the record. And thank all of you
for being here today.
I generally support tribal recognition legislation. But it
has been brought to my attention that some of the tribes around
the country, and especially in the Northeast, I am aware of a
situation where they have not been collecting state taxes or
sales tax or excise taxes, and it has put some small
businesses--mainly what I am talking about it convenience store
operators, whether it is gas or whether it is tobacco,
especially tobacco. I know there has been a pretty significant
problem.
When the tribes are exempt from charging the tribal members
taxes, which I understand, but when they are selling it to
people that aren't tribal members, members of the tribe, that
causes a great hardship on these businesses. They can't
compete, and in some cases I am aware that cigarette sales for
one convenience store operator has dropped 80 percent because
the tribe refuses to collect the taxes when they are selling it
to people who aren't members of the tribe.
And what I would like to do also is, for the record, put a
letter in from the National Convenience Store Association,
National Association of Convenience Stores, into the record.
They oppose this legislation. And I understand why they oppose
it, because they want to know what kind of protection are they
going to have, what kind of mechanisms are in place in this
legislation to make sure that the tribes are collecting those
taxes.
So I don't know if any of you can answer that question, but
I would like you to speak to that matter. Because it is of
great concern to convenience store operators, especially, as I
said, with tobacco, sales of tobacco. So could anybody address
that for me?
Ms. Locklear. If I may, Congressman, I am aware of that
concern. It does exist in several places in Indian country
where there has been tension between the local government,
among the local governments, the state governments, and the
tribal governments with respect to the collection of taxes that
are owed and payable. Largely, cigarette sales tax and other
sales tax, cigarette excise tax and other sales tax.
However, let me point out that the situation of Lumbee is
politically different from those situations, because of its
longstanding history with the State of North Carolina. The
tribe has had, since 1885, a cooperative arrangement with the
State of North Carolina, a very active political relationship,
and has addressed all of its issues with the state through a
true, genuine government-to-government basis.
In those areas of Indian country where the issues on
taxation do not exist, that is how it is solved there, as well.
I am aware, for example, of the tribes in Wisconsin. I
represent some tribes there who have entered into compacts with
the State of Wisconsin to address those issues there, so that
the tribes actually do pre-collect and remit those taxes to the
state, and then the state rebates back a certain percentage of
the tax to the tribes.
That is the key. The key is a respectful government-to-
government relationship between the tribes and the states. And
we fortunately already enjoy that at the Lumbee Tribe in North
Carolina.
Mr. Shuster. That is great to hear. And I would hope
sometime maybe, Mr. Chairman, we could hold a hearing with some
of these tribes that aren't collecting the taxes. Because as I
said, for a lot of small business owners, a lot of these
convenience stores are small businesses, they are facing great
hardships.
I appreciate you letting me know what is happening in your
part of the world. And if anybody else would care to touch on
that, that is fine. I think it is a huge problem, something we
have to do. And again, if I could submit this letter into the
record, thank you. And I yield back my time.
[The letter submitted for the record by Mr. Shuster from
Lyle Beckwith, Senior Vice President, Government Relations, The
Association for Convenience & Petroleum Retailing, on H.R. 1294
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. The Chair thanks the panel very much for
your patience this morning and your superb testimony. Thank
each of you.
Due to the limited seating in the Committee room and the
Chair's desire to be fair to all this morning, we had to limit
the seating for this morning's portion of the hearing to those
interested in the Lumbee Tribe. There are others waiting
outside the room that wish to enter in regard to the next
panel's testimony, so I would ask if we could, in an orderly
fashion, vacate the seats now to allow those that have been
outside waiting to come in. And in order to accommodate that,
the Chair will take a five-minute recess.
[Recess.]
The Chairman. The Committee will resume its sitting, and
call to the witness table panel number three in regard to H.R.
1294. The panel is composed of Chief Stephen R. Adkins, the
Chickahominy Indian Tribe, Charles County, Virginia; Chief
Kenneth Branham, the Monacan Indian Nation, Madison Heights,
Virginia; Reverend Jonathan M. Barton, General Minister,
Virginia Council of Churches, Inc., Richmond, Virginia; and Ms.
Helen Rountree, Professor Emerita of Anthropology of Old
Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia.
Lady and gentlemen, we welcome you to the full Committee on
Natural Resources. And you may proceed in the order that I have
announced. And as with previous witnesses, we do have your
prepared testimony; it will be made a part of the record as if
actually read, and you are encouraged to summarize.
Chief Adkins.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN R. ADKINS, CHIEF, CHICKAHOMINY INDIAN
TRIBE, CHARLES CITY COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Mr. Adkins. Thank you. I would say Charles City County,
Virginia, versus Charles County. Charles City County.
But thank you, Chairman Rahall and other distinguished
Members of the Committee, for inviting me here today. And
before I begin my talk, I would like to thank you for that
moment of silence that you invoked, and for the galvanizing
effect it had on the hearts and minds of the folks in this
room. When something touches the Senecamaca, my homeland, it
hits very hard.
But even if this had not been in that territory, what you
did was very appropriate, and I think it joined our hearts
together. So thank you very much for setting the tone of this
very, very important hearing today.
The bill introduced by Congressman Jim Moran is titled
``The Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal
Recognition Act of 2007,'' and it is H.R. 1294. And I am proud
to appear today before this Congressional committee on behalf
of the six named tribes in this legislation.
As part of my testimony, or as part of the record, I would
like to submit the statement from Governor Tim Kaine of
Virginia. I think you got it electronically. As part of my
statement, I would like to enter that into the record today.
The Chairman. It will be.
[The statement submitted for the record by Governor Kaine
follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Timothy M. Kaine, Governor,
Commonwealth of Virginia, on H.R. 1294
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a written statement
supporting the long overdue Federal Recognition of the Native American
Tribes of Virginia. In Virginia we are proud of the State Recognized
Indian Tribes and the contribution their communities have made to our
Commonwealth and the Nation.
As a part of my Inaugural Address on January 14, 2006 at the
Colonial Capital in Williamsburg, Virginia, I stated:
``Our Virginia might not exist today were it not for the
generosity extended to those first settlers by the native
Virginia tribes living in this region. Without the hospitality
of Chief Powhatan...those in Jamestown would have
perished...And, we should use this historic time to help those
who first helped us by working with the federal government to
see that Virginia's native Indian tribes are finally
recognized.''
Next month we will be honoring the heritage of the Virginia Tribes
and our early colonial history as we commemorate the 400th anniversary
of the first permanent English Settlement at Jamestown.
Almost immediately after first landing at Jamestown in 1607, the
early English settlers and explorers came into contact with the
Virginia Tribes living throughout Eastern Virginia. While the
relationship between the Native Tribes and the English was not always
easy, there can be little doubt that had it not been for accommodations
on both sides, the settlement would not have survived. Indeed,
Virginia's Native American Tribes played an integral role in helping
settlers survive those first harsh winters.
In this special anniversary year, it is especially tragic that
these tribes still have not received equal status with the 562 other
Federally Recognized Tribes in the United States. How can we
commemorate their history and not recognize their existence? Now is the
time to reconcile history. Let us, once and for all, honor their
heritage. A heritage, I might add, that has been sorely tested by
centuries of racial hostility and state-sanctioned coercive actions.
Virginia Tribes are unique. Unlike most tribes that obtained
federal recognition when they signed peace treaties with the federal
government, tribes in Virginia signed their peace treaties with the
British Monarchy.
Most notable among these was the Treaty of 1677 between
Virginia's Tribes and Charles the II--well before the establishment of
the United States. This treaty has been recognized by the Commonwealth
of Virginia every year for the past 330 years when the Governor of
Virginia accepts tribute from the Tribes in a ceremony now celebrated
at the State Capitol.
However, while the Virginia Tribes have received official
recognition from the Commonwealth of Virginia, acknowledgement and
officially recognized status from the federal government has been
considerably more difficult due to systematic mistreatment over the
past century.
Recent History of Tribal Recognition Issue in Virginia
For 34 years, from 1912 to 1946, Walter Ashby Plecker, at the
Virginia Bureau of Vital Statistics, led an effort to actively destroy
vital records and evidence of Indian existence in the Commonwealth.
This practice was supported when the eugenics movement was endorsed by
Virginia Universities and the Virginia General Assembly enacted the
Racial Integrity Act in 1924--a race based statue that forced all
segments of the population to be registered at birth in one of two
categories ``white'' or ``colored''. No reference was allowed for other
ethnic distinctions and no reference was allowed for Indian Tribal
peoples in Virginia. Members of Virginia's Tribes were denied their
identities as Native peoples. Essentially, Virginia declared, by law
and the systematic altering of key documents, that there were no
Indians in the Commonwealth as of 1924. The passage of these race based
statutes in Virginia made it criminal for Native peoples to claim their
Indian Heritage.
For instance, married couples were denied marriage
certificates or even forbidden to obtain the release of their newborn
child from a hospital until they changed their ethnicity on the state
record to read ``colored.''
The Racial Integrity Act was not struck down by the Federal Courts
until 1967.
The eight Virginia Tribes are the Chickahominy, Eastern
Chickahominy, Mattaponi, Monacan Indian Nation, Nansemond, Pamunkey,
Rappahannock and the Upper Mattaponi.
From 1983-1989 each Tribe gained official Recognition in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. In 1997, then Governor George Allen signed
legislation acknowledging the ``paper genocide'' of Indians in
Virginia. This legislation provided that state records be corrected
that had been deliberately altered to list Virginia Indians on official
state documents as ``colored.'' In 1999, the Virginia General Assembly
adopted a resolution calling upon Congress to enact legislation
recognizing the Virginia Tribes.
Each of the six tribes have also petitioned the U.S. Department of
Interior and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for official
recognition under the process set forth in 25 CFR Part 83, ``Procedures
for Establishing that an American Indian Group Exists as an Indian
Tribe.'' Such Federal acknowledgement enables Indian Tribes to
participate in Federal programs and establishes a government-to-
government relationship between the United States and the Indian Tribe.
The Virginia Tribes have also submitted letters of intent and
partial documentation to petition for Federal acknowledgement.
Helen Rountree, noted anthropologist and expert on Native-Americans
in Virginia, who will also be testifying today, has spent her life
documenting the Virginia Tribes. Through her thorough analysis and
research the Commonwealth of Virginia was provided with sufficient
authentication to officially recognize these tribes. I believe that
that research should also be sufficient to address the damage of the
Racial Integrity Act era and meet the BIA's criteria.
Need for Congressional Action
Six of the Tribes first came to Congress seeking recognition in
1999. They joined together to request Congressional action on their
application for Federal Acknowledgement through the ``Thomasina E.
Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act'' (this year
it is H.R. 1294). The six Tribes view Federal recognition as a basic
issue of equality with the other 562 tribes.
Under the United States Constitution Indian Commerce Clause,
Congress has the authority to recognize a ``distinctly Indian
community'' as an Indian tribe. I believe that the Tribes' situation
clearly distinguishes them as excellent candidates for Congressional
action.
Under H.R. 1294, the six Tribes would finally, and at long last, be
granted federal recognition. At the same time, I feel that the
safeguards provided in this legislation would address some Virginians'
concerns about Class III style gaming in the Commonwealth. Indeed, this
legislation would give both the Governor and the General Assembly
strict control over any possibility of the development of Indian
Gaming.
Specifically, sections 106(b), 206(b), 306(b), 406(b), 506(b), and
606(b) of H.R. 1294 include the following language:
(1) GAMING.--No reservation or tribal land or land taken into
trust for the benefit of the Tribe or a member of the Tribe shall be
eligible to satisfy the terms for an exception under section
20(b)(1)(B) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25
U.S.C.2719(b)(1)(B)) to the prohibition on gaming on land acquired by
the Secretary in trust for the benefit of an Indian tribe after October
17, 1988, under section 20(a) of that Act (25 U.S.C. 2719(a)).
(2) APPROVAL OF COMPACTS.--No compact for class III gaming shall
be valid unless approved or ratified by the Virginia General Assembly.
I commend the committee for giving its time and attention to the
Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act.
I would like to especially thank House Natural Resources Chair Nick
Rahall (D-WV) for his leadership on this important issue.
I would also like to thank Representative Jim Moran (D-VA) for his
years of work on behalf of the native peoples of Virginia and his
testimony today. I am heartened by the bipartisan Virginia Delegation
support for H.R. 1294 and thank Representatives Jo Ann Davis (R-VA),
Tom Davis (R-VA), and Bobby Scott (D-VA) for their original
cosponsorship of the legislation.
I would also like to commend the other individuals testifying
today: Helen Rountree, Jon Barton from the Council of Churches, Chief
Stephen R. Adkins of the Chickahominy Indian Tribe, and Kenneth Branham
of the Monacan Indian Nation. Thank you for your efforts.
Last summer, during ceremonies commemorating the 400th anniversary
of the settlement of Jamestown, the British government reaffirmed its
recognition treaties with the modern Virginia Tribes. It is time for
these Virginia native peoples to be recognized by their own country.
Recognition of the Tribes of Virginia is long overdue.
Congress has the power to recognize these Tribes. It has exercised
this power in the past, and it should exercise this power again with
respect to our Virginia Tribes during this momentous year. Indeed, our
commemoration of the 400 years of modern Virginia history will be
incomplete without successful Federal recognition of these Virginia
Tribes.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on this important
issue. I welcome your efforts to finally right an historic wrong for
Virginia and the Nation.
______
Mr. Adkins. But Governor Kaine in his inaugural address
pledged his strong support for the Federal recognition of the
Virginia tribes. That remains paramount in his objectives
during his administration.
Chairman Rahall, we are in the midst of many events in
Virginia. The United Kingdom and even across this nation
commemorating the 400th anniversary of the founding of the
first permanent English settlement in America at Jamestown in
May 1607. Reflecting on some of the comments I heard today,
perhaps our mistake was trusting people. Little did we know
that this very settlement would mark the beginning of the
diminution of a culture that we had enjoyed for many thousands
of years.
But that spirit of trust still caused us to remain part of
that infrastructure that helped that first permanent English
settlement at Jamestown thrive.
During the anniversary weekend in Jamestown, May 11 through
the 13th of this year, visitors from all over the world,
including leaders representing the United States, England,
Native Americans and African-Americans and others will gather,
acknowledging the birth of this great Republic, the United
States of America, which blossomed in Jamestown.
In July 2006, a delegation of 54 tribal members
representing the gender and age demographic of the six tribes
that we are talking about today had the opportunity to visit
the United Kingdom as part of its 2007 commemoration
activities. For many of us, it was the very first time to visit
St. George's Church at Gravesend, which, by the way, is the
final resting place of Pocahontas, the daughter of Paramount
Chief Powhatan, and who became the wife of Englishman John
Rolfe.
And for us, through the experience we know so well what has
happened to our people since the days of Pocahontas, the
connection we felt to both the congregation at St. George's and
Pocahontas was very palpable, sir, very real. The English have
paid honor and tribute to her in a manner that no member of her
family or her descendants has ever received in this country.
This feeling of respect and honor in the church through its
living congregation suffused the entire Virginia Indian
delegation.
I would like to share with you the words from the plaque on
the wall of St. George's. I believe from these words you can
sense the very sincere regard that English people feel for
Pocahontas, and I quote. ``This stone commemorates Princess
Pocahontas or Metoak, daughter of the mighty American Indian
Chief Powhatan, gentle and humane. She was the friend of the
earliest struggling English colonists whom she nobly rescued,
protected, and helped. On her conversion to Christianity in
1613, she received in Baptism the name Rebecca, and shortly
after she became the wife of John Rolfe, a settler in Virginia.
She visited England with her husband in 1616, and was
graciously received by Queen Anne. In the 22nd year of her age,
she died at Gravesend preparing to revisit her native country,
and was buried near this spot on March 21, 1617.''
Sir, as descendants, we have not felt the honor here at
home that those in England feel for Pocahontas and bestowed
upon us. Through this visit to Gravesend we saw Pocahontas as
more than the legend we live behind. We in fact saw her as the
first to brave the new world that opened up with first contact
by the English. We saw Pocahontas as one with whom we can
identify, as a soul who today can still touch us and remind us
of who we are, and remind us that we have a proud heritage.
She is not a myth. She is still inside all of us. And her
death and burial in England remind us of how far and
challenging our path has been since she braved that voyage to
England. It was a tremendous experience to step into that
church and feel the love of the English congregation.
I wish there was time today to tell the full story of what
has happened to the Virginia tribes since Pocahontas visited
England and the Court of Queen Anne. The story of Chief
Powhatan and his daughter Pocahontas is well known across this
land. As a matter of fact, her very picture is in this Capitol
Building with her English husband, John Rolfe.
But public school textbooks throughout Virginia in the past
had scant mention of who we are. The fact that we were so
prominent in early history, and then so callously denied our
Indian heritage, is a story that most don't want to remember or
recognize.
I and those Chiefs with me here today stand on the
shoulders of many others besides Pocahontas and Powhatan. One
story that has always made me sad, and which brings in a
different picture than the love we experienced in England, is
that of the Paspahegh led by Chief Wowinchopunk, whose wife was
captured and taken to Jamestown Fort and run through with a
sword. His children were tossed overboard, and then their
brains were shot out as they floundered in the water, and whose
few remaining tribal members sought refuge with a nearby tribe,
possibly the Chickahominy.
With this horrific action in 1610, August 1610, a whole
nation was annihilated. This was the Nation that befriended
strangers, and ultimately died at the hands of those same
strangers. As we commemorate Jamestown 2007 and the birth of
our nation today, those of Indian heritage in Virginia are also
reminded of this part of history.
Let me tell you how we got here today. The six tribes in
this bill gained state recognition in the Commonwealth of
Virginia between 1983 and 1989. Although there were meager
attempts to gain Federal acknowledgement by some of the tribes
in the mid 20th century, our sovereignty movement began
directly after the passage of a legislation acknowledging the
attack on our heritage.
In 1997 this legislation, sponsored by Governor George
Allen, acknowledged the state action that attacked our
heritage, but it couldn't fix the problem. The damage to our
documented history had been done. In 1999 we came to Congress,
where we were advised by the BAR, which is the Bureau of
Acknowledgement and Research, which is now the Office of
Federal Acknowledgement, but we were advised that many of us
would not live long enough to see our petition go through the
administrative process. We were advised by employees, by folks
at the BIA, that that was the reality we faced.
Sir, I will tell you that that prophecy has come through. I
am sad to say that we have buried three of our Chiefs since
then, three Chiefs who worked a large portion of their lives
trying to help us gain Federal recognition through the BIA
process.
Given the realities of the OFA and the historical slights
suffered by the Virginia Indian tribes over the last 400 years,
the six tribes referenced in H.R. 1294 feel that our situation
clearly distinguishes us as candidates for Congressional
Federal recognition.
On a personal note, I have been asked why I do not have a
traditional Indian name, and the answer is quite simple. My
parents weighed the risks of assigning me an Indian name, of
giving me an Indian name, opposite the risks of going to jail
for one year. And guess what won out? I don't have an Indian
name.
The documentary genocide the Virginia Indians suffered at
the hands of Walter Ashby Plecker, a rabid white separatist who
ruled over the Bureau of Vital Statistics in Virginia for 34
years, from 1912 to 1946, was well documented in an article
written by Peter Harding of the Richmond Times-Dispatch in
2000. It was socially unacceptable to kill Indians outright,
and I thank God for that. But Virginia Indians became fair game
for Plecker, as he led efforts to eradicate all references to
Indians on vital records, a practice, sir, that was supported
by the state's establishment when the eugenics movement was
endorsed by leading state universities, and was further
supported when the state's legislature enacted the Racial
Integrity Act in 1924, a law that stayed in effect until 1967,
and caused my parents and many other couples to have to travel
to Washington, D.C. on February 20, 1935, in order to be
married as Indians. This vile law forced all segments of the
population to be registered at birth in one of two categories:
white or colored.
Our anthropologist says there is no other state that
attacked Indian identity as directly as the lost past during
that period of time in history. No other ethnic community's
heritage was denied in this way. Our state by law declared
there were no Indians in the state in 1924, and if you dared to
say differently, you went to jail or worse.
The Racial Integrity Act stayed in effect for half of my
life. Our parents lived in the heart of the Plecker years, and
carried those scars to their graves.
Chairman Rahall, the story I just recounted to you is very
painful. Quite frankly, I do not like to tell that story. Many
of my people will not discuss what I have shared with you, but
I felt that you needed to understand recent history opposite
the romanticized, inaccurate accounts of 17th century history.
You needed to know these facts.
The legislation sponsored by former Governor George Allen
in 1997 acknowledged the aforementioned injustice.
Unfortunately, while this legislation allowed those of the
living generation to correct birth records, the legislation,
the law has not and cannot undo the damage done by Plecker and
his associates to my ancestors, who endured pain and
humiliation, and things as disparate as trying to obtain
marriage licenses or being inducted into the armed forces of
the United States as Indian. Again, all of this was because of
distorted, altered, incorrect records.
So we are seeking recognition through an Act of Congress,
rather than the BIA, because actions taken by the Commonwealth
of Virginia during the 20th century erased our history by
altering key documents as part of a systematic plan to deny our
existence. This state action separates us from the other tribes
in this country that were protected from this blatant denial of
Indian heritage and identity.
We are seeking recognition through Congress because this
history of racism in very recent times intimidated the tribal
people in Virginia, and prevented us from believing that we
could fit into a petitioning process that would understand or
reconcile this state action with our heritage. We feared the
process would not be able to see beyond the corrupted
documentation that was designed to deny our Indian heritage.
Many of the elders in our community also feared, and for good
reason, racial backlash if they tried.
As Chiefs of our tribes, we have persevered in this process
for one reason. We do not want our families or our tribes to
let the legacy of Walter Plecker stand. We want the assistance
of Congress to give the Indian communities in Virginia their
freedom from a history that denied their Indian identity.
Without acknowledgement of our identity, the harm of racism is
the dominant history. We want our children and the next
generation to have their Indian heritage honored, and to move
past what we experienced, and our parents experienced.
We, the leaders of the six Virginia Indian tribes, are
seeking Congress, asking Congress to help us make history for
the Indian people of Virginia, a history that would honor our
ancestors who were there at the beginning of this great
country. We want to experience the honor and love that we felt
was still alive in the congregation at St. George's.
After our visit to England, I truly believed that Federal
recognition of Virginia Indian tribes during the year of the
400th commemoration will make a significant difference. It will
reconcile history in this country between two cultures in a way
that honors our history of learning to live together in peace
and in love. This is what I want for our people and for our
nation.
Our decision to honor Pocahontas at her grave has
strengthened our resolve to obtain Federal acknowledgement. It
has made us understand that we deserve to be on a level playing
field with the other 562-odd tribes who are Federally
acknowledged. It has made us unwilling to accept being
discriminated against because of both a historical oversight
and the concerted efforts of our commonwealth to deny to us our
rightful heritage.
The aforementioned visit, invitation to visit England was
not easy to give, not easy for us to accept.
The Chairman. Chief, I am going to have to ask you to start
wrapping up.
Mr. Adkins. All right, sir. This year the Virginia tribes
are part of the 400th commemoration of Jamestown. This year,
with Jamestown expected to be visited by the Queen of England
and the President of the United States, the Virginia tribes
will have a much deeper understanding of who we are, fueled in
part by our learning gained from our trip to England, and in
our involvement in researching the truth about the
underpinnings of the first permanent English settlement at
Jamestown, and what our contribution meant to its success.
We believe it is time for the U.S. Congress to stand
alongside us and grant us the recognition we deserve, as we
commemorate the birth of the greatest nation in the world. Yes,
it is essential for Virginia's indigenous peoples to receive
that honor in this significant year in the history of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the history of the United States of
America, the history of the world, and then the history of
indigenous peoples around the globe.
I implore you to pass the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes
of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2007.
Thank you, Chairman Rahall, and thank you for being the
friend that you have been to our people.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Adkins follows:]
Statement of Chief Stephen R. Adkins,
Chickahominy Indian Tribe
Thank you Chairman Rahall and other distinguished members of this
committee for inviting me here today to speak on House Bill 1294 which
is pending before your Committee. The bill, introduced by Congressman
Jim Moran is titled the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia
Federal Recognition Act of 2007--H.R. 1294. A hearing on our Federal
Recognition bill was held by this committee in 2002. I am proud to
appear before this Congressional Committee today on behalf of the six
Tribes named in H.R. 1294 the Eastern Chickahominy, the Monacan, the
Nansemond, the Upper Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, and my Tribe the
Chickahominy. As part of the record today I am submitting the statement
from our current Governor, Timothy Kaine, who in his inaugural address
pledged his strong support for Federal Recognition of the Virginia
Tribes. Beside me today is Dr. Helen Rountree, a renowned
anthropologist specializing in the heritage of the Virginia Tribes, who
worked on the petitions we filed with the BIA, and is prepared to
assist with any questions you may have about our history. Also, with me
today is Rev. Jon Barton from the Virginia Council of Churches who has
worked tirelessly on our effort to gain Federal Recognition and Chief
Ken Branham of the Monacan Indian Nation.
Chairman Rahall, I am sure you are well aware of the events
occurring this year in Virginia and the United Kingdom commemorating
the 400th anniversary of the first permanent English Settlement in
America in May 1607 The settlement became known as Jamestown and is
located on the James River in Tidewater Virginia. On Anniversary
Weekend at Jamestown, May 11-13, 2007, visitors from all over the world
including leaders representing the United States Government, England,
Native Americans and African Americans et al will gather acknowledging
the birth of this Great Republic, the United States of America, which
blossomed at Jamestown. In July 2006 a delegation of 54 tribal members
representing the gender and age demographics of the Tribes recognized
by the Commonwealth of Virginia had the opportunity to visit the United
Kingdom as part of its 2007 Commemoration Activities. For many of us it
was a first time visit to St Georges Church at Gravesend, the final
resting place of Pocahontas, the daughter of Paramount Chief Powhatan
and the wife of John Rolfe. History tells us that Pocahontas died when
she returned with John Rolfe to England in 1616.
The impact of our experience in Gravesend is something I want to
share with you because it was beyond what any of us could have possibly
imagined. The congregation of St. Georges Church brought home to us,
the very real connection the English people feel with our heritage. And
for us, who have experienced and know so well what has happened to our
people since the days of Pocahontas, the connection we felt to both the
congregation and Pocahontas was palpable and real. The English have
paid honor and tribute to her in a manner that no member of her family
or her descendants has ever received in this country. This feeling of
respect and honor in the church through its living congregation
suffused the entire Virginia Indian Delegation. But to my utter
amazement, this attitude of honor and respect transcended the spiritual
and emotional service within the church and was extended to us in every
venue we attended from Kent University, to Kent County Council to the
House of Commons and the House of Lords. If you would indulge me, I
would like to share with you the words from a plaque which hangs on a
wall of St. Georges Church I believe from these words you can sense the
very sincere regard English people feel for Pocahontas. ``This stone
commemorates Princess Pocahontas or Metoak daughter of the mighty
American Indian Chief Powhatan. Gentle and humane, she was the friend
of the earliest struggling English colonists whom she nobly rescued,
protected, and helped. On her Conversion to Christianity in 1613, she
received in Baptism the name Rebecca, and shortly afterwards became the
wife of John Rolfe, a settler in Virginia. She visited England with her
husband in 1616, was graciously received by Queen Anne wife of James I.
In the twenty second year of her age she died at Gravesend preparing to
revisit her native country and was buried near this spot on March 21st
1617.
I believe for our people to go back to England and be embraced by
this church congregation was a significant reconciliation and healing.
As descendants, we have not felt the honor here at home that those in
England both feel for Pocahontas and bestowed upon us. Through this
visit to Gravesend, we saw Pocahontas as more than the legend we live
behind, we saw her as the first to brave the new world that opened up
with first contact by the English. We saw Pocahontas as one with whom
we can identify, as a soul who today can still touch us, and remind us
of whom we are and remind us that we have a proud heritage. She is not
a myth for she is still inside all of us, and her death and burial in
England, remind us of how far and challenging our path has been since
she braved that voyage to England. She was brave and she was alone. It
was a tremendous experience to step into that church and feel the love
of that English congregation. Appropriately, the St. George's Church
Guide, contains this prayer:
May your Church, Lord, be a light to the nations, the sign and
source of your power to unite all men. May she lead mankind to the
mystery of your love? Amen
I could tell you the much publicized story of the 17th Century
Virginia Indians, but you, like most Americans, know our first contact
history. I wish there was time today to tell the full story of what has
happened to the Virginia Tribes since Pocahontas went to England to the
Court of Queen Ann. The story of Chief Powhatan and his daughter
Pocahontas is well known across this land, her picture being in this
very capitol building with her English husband John Rolfe. But what
about our story, for years the Commonwealth of Virginia did not care
about our story? Our public school textbooks had scant mention of who
we are. So, what do you know or what does mainstream America know about
what happened in those years between the 17th century and today. The
fact that we were so prominent in early history and then so callously
denied our Indian heritage is the story that most don't want to
remember or recognize. This year we, the Virginia Indian Tribes, are a
part of the commemoration of Jamestown. This year, 2007, when Jamestown
is expected to be visited by the Queen of England and the President of
the United States, the Virginia Tribes will have a much deeper
understanding of who we are, fueled in part by our learning gained from
our trip to England and in our involvement in researching the truth
about the underpinnings of the first permanent English Settlement at
Jamestown and, finally, what our contributions meant to its success.
Our connection to Pocahontas and, by extension, to England must come
full circle and extend to the Congress of the United States of America.
We must feel the same honor and love from leaders of the United States
of America as we do from the people from England with whom our last
treaty was signed in 1677.
I and those Chiefs here with me, stand on the shoulders of many
others besides Pocahontas and Powhatan. One story that has always made
me sad, and which brings in a different picture than the love we
experienced in England, is that of the Paspahegh led by Chief
Wowinchopunk whose wife was captured and taken to Jamestown Fort and
``run through'' with a sword, whose children were tossed overboard and
then their brains were ``shot out'' as they floundered in the water,
and whose few remaining tribal members sought refuge with a nearby
tribe, possibly the Chickahominy. With this horrific action in August
1610, a whole Nation was annihilated. A Nation who befriended strangers
and ultimately died at the hands of those same strangers. As we
commemorate Jamestown 2007 and the birth of our Nation today, those of
Indian heritage in Virginia are also reminded of this history.
We are seeking recognition through an act of congress rather than
the BIA because actions taken by the Commonwealth of Virginia during
the 20th Century erased our history by altering key documents as part
of a systematic plan to deny our existence. This state action separates
us from the other tribes in this country that were protected from this
blatant denial of Indian heritage and identity. The documentary
genocide the Virginia Indians suffered at the hands of Walter Ashby
Plecker, a rabid white separatist, who ruled over the Bureau of Vital
Statistics in Virginia for 34 years, from 1912 to 1946 was well
documented in an Article written by Peter Hardin of the Richmond Times
Dispatch in 2000. Although socially unacceptable to kill Indians
outright, Virginia Indians became fair game to Plecker as he led
efforts to eradicate all references to Indians on Vital Records. A
practice that was supported by the state's establishment when the
eugenics movement was endorsed by leading State Universities and was
further supported when the State's legislature enacted the Racial
Integrity Act in 1924. A law that stayed in effect until 1967 and
caused my parents to have to travel to Washington D.C. on February 20,
1935 in order to be married as Indians. This vile law forced all
segments of the population to be registered at birth in one of two
categories, white or colored. Our anthropologist says there is no other
state that attacked Indian identity as directly as the laws passed
during that period of time in Virginia. No other ethnic community's
heritage was denied in this way. Our state, by law, declared there were
no Indians in the State in 1924, and if you dared to say differently,
you went to jail or worse. That law stayed in effect half of my life.
I have been asked why I do not have a traditional Indian name.
Quite simply my parents, as did many other native parents, weighed the
risks and decided it was not worth the risk of going to jail.
Former Senator George Allen as Governor of the Commonwealth of
Virginia sponsored legislation in 1997 acknowledging the injustice of
the Racial Integrity Act. Unfortunately, while this legislation allows
those of the living generations to correct birth records, the
legislation or law has not and cannot undo the damage done by Plecker
and his associates to my ancestors who endured pain and humiliation in
venues disparate as trying to obtain marriage licenses to being
inducted into the Armed Forces as Indian, all because of these
distorted, altered, incorrect records.
We are seeking recognition through Congress because this history of
racism, in very recent times, intimidated the tribal people in Virginia
and prevented us from believing that we could fit into a petitioning
process that would understand or reconcile this state action with our
heritage. We feared the process would not be able to see beyond the
corrupted documentation that was designed to deny our Indian heritage.
Many of the elders in our community also feared, and for good reason,
racial backlash if they tried.
My father and his peers lived in the heart of the Plecker years and
carried those scars to their graves. When I approached my father and
his peers regarding our need for state or federal recognition they
pushed back very strongly. In unison they said. ``Let sleeping dogs lie
and do not rock the boat''. Their fears of reprisal against those folks
who had risked marrying in Virginia and whose birth records accurately
reflected their identity outweighed their desire to openly pursue any
form of recognition. Those fears were not unfounded because the threat
of fines or jail time was very real to modern Virginia Indians.
Chairman Rahall, the story I just recounted to you is very painful
and I do not like to tell that story. Many of my people will not
discuss what I have shared with you but I felt you needed to understand
recent history opposite the romanticized, inaccurate accounts of 17th
century history.
Let me tell you how we got here today. The six tribes on this bill
gained State Recognition in the Commonwealth of Virginia between 1983
and1989. The legislation of 1997 placed the burden of cost to correct
the inaccurate vital records on the Commonwealth of Virginia Governor,
but it couldn't fix the problem--the damage to our documented history
had been done. Although there were meager attempts to gain federal
acknowledgement by some of the tribes in the mid 20th century, our
current sovereignty movement began directly after the enactment of the
aforementioned legislation acknowledging the attack on our heritage. In
1999 we came to Congress when we were advised by the BAR (Bureau of
Acknowledgement and Research) now OFA (Office of Federal
Acknowledgement) that many of us would not live long enough to see our
petition go through the administrative process. A prophecy that has
come true. We have buried three of our chiefs since then.
Given the realities of the OFA and the historical slights suffered
by the Virginia Indian Tribes for the last 400 years, the six tribes
referenced in H.R. 1294 feel that our situation clearly distinguishes
us as candidates for Congressional Federal recognition.
As Chiefs of our tribes we have persevered in this process for one
reason. We do not want our families or our tribes to let the legacy of
Walter Plecker stand. We want the assistance of Congress to give the
Indian Communities in Virginia, their freedom from a history that
denied their Indian identity. Without acknowledgement of our identity,
the harm of racism is the dominant history. We want our children and
the next generation, to have their Indian Heritage honored and to move
past what we experienced and our parents experienced. We, the leaders
of the six Virginia Tribes, are asking Congress to help us make history
for the Indian people of Virginia, a history that honors our ancestors
who were there at the beginning of this great country. We want to
experience the honor and love that we felt was still alive in the
congregation at St. Georges. After our visit to England I truly believe
the Federal Recognition of the Virginia Indian Tribes during the year
of the 400th commemoration will make a significant difference. It will
reconcile history in this country between two cultures in a way that
honors our history of learning to live together in peace and in love.
That is what we want for our people and for our nation. The acceptance
of the invitation to visit England to share our culture and history to
describe our contemporary lifestyles as both contributors to the
American way of life and aspirants to the American Dream and our
decision to honor Pocahontas at her grave has strengthened our resolve
to obtain federal acknowledgement. It has made us understand that we
deserve to be on a level playing field with the other 562 odd tribes
who are federally acknowledged. It has made us unwilling to accept
being discriminated against because of both a historical oversight and
the concerted efforts of our Commonwealth to deny to us our rightful
heritage. The aforementioned invitation to visit England was not easy
for us to accept. We did not know what to expect, and we were
apprehensive. From an overall perspective this visit was destined to be
for it brought us into the history we commemorate at Jamestown in a
very positive palpable way.
The Commonwealth of Virginia has taken definitive actions to right
the wrongs inflicted upon its indigenous peoples and stands with us
today as we commemorate the founding of the first permanent English
Settlement 400 years ago on the banks of the James River at Jamestown,
Virginia. We believe it is time for the United States Congress to stand
alongside us and grant us the Recognition we deserve as we commemorate
the birth of the greatest Nation in the world. Yes, it essential for
Virginia's Indigenous Peoples to receive that honor in this significant
year in the history of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the history of the
United States of America, the history of the world and in the history
of Indigenous Peoples around the Globe.
Thank you for allowing me to address you on behalf of the six
tribes in H.R. 1294.
______
The Chairman. Mr. Branham.
STATEMENT OF KENNETH BRANHAM, CHIEF, MONACAN INDIAN NATION,
MADISON HEIGHTS, VIRGINIA
Mr. Branham. Chairman Rahall and Members of the Committee,
my name is Kenneth Branham. I am the Chief of the Monacan
people. And as Chief, Steve Adkins just mentioned we will be at
a lot of the Jamestown commemoration events this year in 2007.
We are not part of the Powhatan confederation, so we are a
little bit different than the Powhatans. The major difference
was the language. They spoke Algonquin, we spoke a Siouan
dialect. Our boundaries with the Powhatan Indians were the fall
lines of the James River, just above Richmond, and we were the
most western part of the state, the Piedmont area of Virginia.
We were the only tribe from that region of the state that is
state recognized today. And we were the last to be state
recognized in 1989.
The Monacan people lived off the land, hunting, fishing,
and gardening small crops like corn, beans, squash. Our
villages were located on flood plains of the rivers that ran
through our land. The villages ranged anywhere from 30 to 40
people, to maybe as many as three or 400, depending on the lay
of the land and the natural resources there.
The people in our tribe avoided the European contact. We
didn't come in contact with the first Englishmen until 1608.
And because we had people in our tribe that had prophesied that
there would come a people from beneath the world to take our
world away. If you think about it and look back, truer words
have never been spoken.
But the way that we lived, trading with each other, it
wasn't long before trade goods from the new people started
showing up in our villages. Although they made life a little
easier, tasks a little easier, they also brought along
different types of hardships: European diseases and things of
that sort.
The Powhatan Indians helped the European people to survive.
But once they learned how to survive, plant the crops that were
needed to grow in this area, their thinking toward the Indian
people changed. And of course, more and more kept coming; and
as they came, more and more land was needed. So the Indian
people were eventually put on reservations, where they could
not speak their language, practice their religion. And even
today, without Federal recognition, a lot of our religion
ceremonies can't be taught or used because we need special
things to do those that we cannot have because we are not
Federally recognized tribes.
The Monacan people did whatever they could to survive and
stay out of the onrush of the newcomers into our land. The next
400 years, the Monacans, like other Virginia Indians, suffered
many injustices. The Treaty of 1677 was signed by the Chief of
the Monacans, Chief Shuwanoff, and the other Chiefs of the
Powhatan Confederation, and things got better for a short
period, and again went back to the old ways of taking land,
treaties being broken, and those type things.
The most devastating thing to happen to the Virginia
Indians were the Racial Integrity Law of 1924. Walter Plecker,
who was in charge of vital statistics in Virginia for over 30
years, systematically went about changing records, death
records, birth records, and in some cases destroying these
records; anything that we had on there claiming to be Indian.
In Amherst County, Walter Plecker had what we called the
Walter Plecker hit list, with names like Branham, Johns,
Adcock, Hicks, Clarks, Red Cross. These were Indian names, and
he said that these people were claiming to be Indian, but were
not. And anybody that would give them documentation stating
that they were Indians could be fined or even lose their jobs.
So it was forced, with a great deal of strength.
Our mother and father and a lot of other Monacan people who
got married actually went out of state to get married, to get
away from the classification of being called colored. And that
was a common practice. In my family, I am the oldest of four
children, each one of us had a different race stated on our
birth certificate, from colored to black to mulatto, and to a
circle with a line drawn through it. We joked around with my
sister and said that must have been she was orange or something
or other.
Our people in Virginia were denied a high school education.
The Monacans, up until 1962, along with the other Virginia
tribes, were not allowed at public schools. I am the first in
my family to attend high school, and graduated in 1972.
In 1961, the year before myself and five other Monacan kids
were paraded in front of the school board--they wanted to see
what we looked like. I guess they were looking for two heads or
something or other. But anyway, the following year, 35 Monacan
kids were allowed in the public schools. The remaining 45
Monacan students were allowed in public schools the following
year, closing the Indian school there at our church for good.
In 1972 I became one of the first four to graduate from Amherst
High School.
I believe that Walter Plecker knew the sure way to
eliminate Indian people were to keep them uneducated. And that
is how you keep anybody down is to keep them uneducated.
Federal recognition would give our elders the benefits that
they need for proper healthcare. Our young people would be,
doors would be opened that we can only dream of now for
scholarships for education. Better healthcare, better housing,
retrieving our ancestral remains, which is often overlooked,
but the laws forbid us to retrieve our Federal ancestral
remains, which we feel very strongly about.
In June of 2006, eight Monacans went with the other 50-some
Indians to England to celebrate the commemoration of Jamestown.
We were very proud to be a part of this. It was difficult for
our people to participate in events that are significant dates
in American history, when our own heritage is denied. The
Monacan people hosted, was the host tribe at Monticello, the
home of Thomas Jefferson, for the kick-off of the Lewis and
Clark Expedition. In this role, we were the only tribe asked to
perform at the White House. Shortly before the occasion, our
heritage was questioned by the Park Service when they realized
we were not on the list of Federally recognized tribes.
As Virginia tribes, we have played a significant role in
the history of this nation, but we are constantly reminded of
the legacy of the Plecker era. The Racial Integrity Act denied
our identity.
I have lived through this period of Virginia history. I
want the next generation to be free from this legacy. Now is
the time for the Congress to give Virginia Indians Federal
recognition, which would restore that respect and dignity.
Indian people in Virginia are proud of our heritage and
culture, though some of it has been lost by the injustice
bestowed upon them.
My generation feels that it is our responsibility to teach
our young people to be strong in their culture, and to stand up
for their rights. And it is their rights to be proud of who
they are.
So I ask you and the other Members of the House to pass
this Federal recognition bill so we can go on with our lives in
a manner that we feel we should be able to do. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Branham follows:]
Statement of Chief Kenneth Branham, Monacan Indian Nation
Chairman Rahall and other distinguished members of this Committee:
My name is Kenneth Branham, the Chief of the Monacan people. I
would like to thank you for allowing me to speak today on behalf of the
six Virginia Tribes that are seeking Federal Recognition. The Monacan
people who live in the western part of the state have been living there
for thousands of years. The Monacans survived by living off the land,
hunting fishing, and raising gardens of corn, beans, and squashes. Our
villages were located on the flood plains of the rivers that ran
through our land. The villages ranged from as few as 30 to 40 people
but in some cases several hundred people would make up the villages or
towns. We had our own government and religion and we lived in peace
with the other Tribes around us.
In 1608 the Monacan people made contact with a new people from
across the water, the first Englishmen. We had people in our Tribe that
had prophesied of this strange group of people that would come to take
our world away. Therefore, we tried to avoid contact with the new
people. The Monacans like most Tribes traded with other groups of
people and some began to get trade goods from the Powhatan Indians that
came from the English. The new people were taught how to survive in
this new land by the Indian people. When they could survive, things
began to change. Increasingly people came and more and more land was
needed to raise their crops, therefore, the Indian people were removed
from their land for the new people. With the trade goods that made life
easier also came European diseases that killed a lot of the Native
people. Because of this, it was not too long before Virginia Indians
were outnumbered and at the mercy of the English. Our land was taken
and the people were put on reservations, and our religion and languages
were forbidden to be used.
The Monacans moved back into the mountains of Amherst County where
the Monacan headquarters are located to this day. The Monacans did
whatever they could to survive and stay out of the way of the rush of
the newcomers into our land. For the next 350 years, the Monacans like
the other Virginia Indians suffered many injustices. The Monacans as
did the Powhatan Indians had a treaty with England and is still to this
day recognized as a sovereign people by the English Government. The
main treaty was the Middle Plantation Treaty of 1677 where our Chief
signed along with Chiefs from the Powhatan Confederacy.
One of the most devastating things to happen to the Virginia
Indians was a law that was past in 1924 called the Racial Integrity
Law. Mr. Walter Plecker who was head of Vital Statistics in Virginia
From 1912 to 1948 was instrumental in getting this law passed. He went
about systematically changing records of certain people pertaining to
their race. His belief was that there were no Indians in Virginia and
this new law stated that you were either white or colored. In Amherst
Co. Mr. Plecker had a hit list, which stated names like Branham, Johns,
Adcocks, and Hicks were not Indian people. However, in reality these
were the major names of the Monacan Indian Tribe. He tampered with
birth certificates and my family is living proof of that. I have three
younger sisters who have the same mother and father and each one of us
had a different race classification on our birth certificates. This was
not uncommon for Virginia Indians.
Our people would go outside of Virginia in order to be married and
our people were not allowed in public schools until 1962. The Monacans
and some of the other Tribes in Va. did have Indian Schools. The
Monacans had a mission school that was operated by the local churches;
however, your educational status was limited to a maximum of the sixth
grade. I am 53 years old and I attended the mission school until I was
in the third grade at which time after being paraded in front of the
school board 35 Monacan children and I were allowed into public
schools. The following year 45 remaining Monacan students were also
allowed in public schools. However, the injustices and racial
prejudices did not stop there. In 1972 the first four students
graduated from Amherst High School. Many children did not graduate
because of the racial tensions that they endured each day. I believe
that Mr. Plecker knew that a sure way to annihilate Indian people was
to keep them uneducated.
We have fought hard to gain education for our children and Federal
Recognition would give our children opportunities that they have not
been afforded. Federal Recognition would also give our elders the
benefits they need for proper health care. Our elders have suffered the
hardships that Walter Plecker's actions burdened them with in order to
live and I feel it is our duty to right this wrong. Our people need
this federal recognition for education, health benefits, better
housing, and retrieving ancestral remains for reburial. In July 2006 54
Indian people from the Virginia Tribes traveled to England to be part
of the 400th year commemoration of Jamestown. The Virginia Indians were
treated with such respect and dignity and England recognized our
sovereignty and honor our Treaty of 1677. It is very difficult for our
people to participate in events commemorating significant dates in
American history when our own heritage is denied. The Monacan Tribe was
the host Tribe at Monticello the home of Thomas Jefferson for the kick
off of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. In this role we were the only
Tribe asked to perform at the White House. Shortly before that occasion
our heritage was questioned by the Park Service when they realized that
we were not on the list of Federally Recognized Tribes.
As Virginian Tribes, we have played a significant role in the
history of this Nation, but we are constantly reminded of the legacy of
the Plecker era. The Racial Integrity Act denied our identity. I have
lived through that period of Virginia history. I want the next
generation to be free from that legacy. Now is the time for you to give
Virginia Indians Federal Recognition which would restore their respect
and dignity. Indian people in Va. are proud of their heritage and
culture although some of it has been lost by the injustices bestowed
upon them. My generation feels that it is our responsibility to teach
our young people to be strong in their culture and to stand up for
their rights. And it is their right to be proud of whom they are.
______
The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Barton.
STATEMENT OF REV. JONATHAN M. BARTON, GENERAL MINISTER,
VIRGINIA COUNCIL OF CHURCHES, INC., RICHMOND, VIRGINIA
Mr. Barton. Good afternoon, Chairman Rahall. I, too, would
like to thank you for your comments at the opening. We in
Virginia appreciate the prayers and thoughts as we work through
Monday's events.
I would also like to thank the elders and leaders of the
Virginia tribes that are here for the opportunity to speak
today, and to provide another voice and witness on behalf of
the Virginia tribes.
My name is Jonathan Barton, and I do serve as the General
Minister for the Virginia Council for Churches. I would ask
your permission to include my previous testimonies from 2002
and 2006, and to revise and extend my comments.
I would like to express my deep appreciation to the members
of the six tribes present here today for inviting the council
to stand with them in their request for Federal
acknowledgement. And we do stand solidly with our tribes today
in support of H.R. 1294.
The Virginia Council of Churches is the combined witness of
37 governing bodies of 18 different Catholic, Orthodox, and
Protestant denominations within the Commonwealth. And during
our 63-year history, we have an established record for justice,
fairness, and dignity for all people. And we stand here today
grounded in our faith and in our history and our values.
Our faith means living not just by our feelings, but by our
commitments. The assurance of things hoped for is often less
about when a hoped-for dream becomes a reality than why that
dream must become a reality.
The conviction of things not seen isn't always even about
how it will come to pass, but rather, why it deserves our
energies and our efforts in the first place.
We hold fast in our faith that the Virginia tribes will be
recognized by our Congress, because we have the assurance in
the rightness of it, and we have the conviction necessary to
see it through.
Four hundred years ago this month, when Christopher Newport
sailed into the Chesapeake Bay, a relationship began between
the Church and Virginia's indigenous people. There is little
doubt in the historical record that one of the main purposes of
Jamestown was to establish the Church in Virginia. And this
relationship continues today.
In 1999, both our Chambers in the Virginia General Assembly
agreed to House Joint Resolution 754, urging Congress to grant
Federal recognition to Virginia's tribes. They further
admonished the delegation in Congress to take all necessary
steps forthwith to advance it.
Five years ago, I testified before this committee, and
before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. At that time,
Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell made the comment, ``You know,
Reverend Barton, the Indians and the Church have not always
gotten along very well.''
The Church has much to repent for in many of our early
missionary efforts, and my presence here today represents a
desire to repent for some of those past sins. The Reverend
Robert Hunt and others of the early 1600s failed to find the
image of God in these native people that they encountered.
These early settlers were blinded by a doctrine of discovery,
giving them the sense of divine calling and the right to do
whatever they wished. They believed that in order to be a
Christian, Indians needed to look, live, speak with an English
accent. And even though the missionaries were excessively
zealous, the scripture that they eventually brought provided
the strength to many of these tribes and these people to endure
over four centuries of oppression and discrimination. Thank
goodness we have come a long way since those days.
During that same hearing, I was also asked about concerns
the council might have regarding gaming. I would like to thank
and acknowledge Congressman Frank Wolf for his support of the
tribes and his desire to see them recognized. I also appreciate
his vigilance in gaming issue, because the Council of Churches,
as do these tribes, share his concern about gaming.
But we also, even though we stand in strong opposition and
have always stood against all forms of gaming as the Council of
Churches, believe that you cannot and should not deny
recognition that is long overdue today because somebody,
sometime, some part far off in the future may change their mind
and do something that cannot be held against our tribes today.
In Virginia, Council of Churches and my strong conviction
that if gaming comes to Virginia, it will not be the
responsibility of the Virginia tribes. This is still our
conviction; that was my testimony five years ago.
I have been blessed to know and to work with each of these
Chiefs in the Virginia tribes, and I know them to be persons of
great integrity and moral courage. Each brings a very strong
sense of leadership to their tribes, and each brings a unique
and special gift. They all share a common respect for their
past, and a vision for their future.
America's 400th anniversary is underway. The Queen will be
here in two weeks. International guests and visitors are
arriving every week. It is vital that we show the world that
Virginia's people, the people who have lived here for 1,000
generations, and who greeted the English as they landed in
1607, still exist today. We need to recognize them. As we
approach these public observances, we are called to review our
complete history, to reflect upon it and to act as a people of
faith, mindful of all of the significance of 1607. For what
represented newness and hope and opportunity for some was the
occasion of oppression, degradation, and genocide for others.
For the Church, this is not just a time of celebration but
a time of a committed plan of action ensuring that this kairos
moment in history not continue to cosmetically coat the painful
aspects of our American history of racism. These six tribes, as
they stand before you today, ask only that you honor their
being, honor their contributions to our shared history, honor
their ancestors by acknowledging that they exist. This simple
request is vital to healing the broken circle, broken when
cultures collided, forever changing the history of this world.
It is about the present, the recognition that despite the
journey they have traveled, they have survived and are still
here. It is about taking their proper place among the other
tribes that are recognized by this government. It is about a
hope that future generations may experience the fullness of
life intended by their forebears and their Creator. Let us mend
the circle so that we may move forward into that future.
Let me close with the words from one of the songs that was
created for our special anniversary celebrations, created and
recorded by the Anniversary Voices for the Jamestown
observance. Titled, ``Remember the Many.''
``We have been here for more than 10,000 years, and will be
here for 10,000 more. Stand where I am standing. Take a look at
my view. How should I feel? I was here before you. The time has
arrived, recognition is due. Remember the many who have become
the few.''
The member Communions of the Virginia Council of Churches
strongly encourage you to remember the few, and recognize our
tribes in Virginia with the passage of H.R. 1294.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Barton follows:]
Statement of The Reverend Jonathan M. Barton,
General Minister, Virginia Council of Churches
Chairman Rahall, members of the House Committee on Natural
Resources, Congressman Moran, Congressman Wolf, tribal leaders from the
Virginia Tribes, thank you for the opportunity to speak here today. My
name is Jonathan Barton and I serve as the General Minister for the
Virginia Council of Churches. I ask your permission to include my
previous testimony and to revise and extend my comments. I would like
to express my deep appreciation to the members of Virginia's six tribes
present here today for inviting the Council to stand with them in their
request for Federal Acknowledgement. We stand with the Virginia tribes
today in solid support of H.R. 1294, the ``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian
Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2007,''
The Virginia Council of Churches, established in 1944, is the
combined witness of 37 governing bodies of 18 different Catholic,
Orthodox, and Protestant denominations located within the Commonwealth
of Virginia. A list of our member denominations is appended to my
written comments. During our 63-year history, we have an established
record for fairness, justice, and the dignity of all peoples. We stand
here today in grounded faith, in our history and values. Faith means
living not by our feelings but by our commitments. The assurance of
things hoped for is often less about when a hoped-for dream becomes a
reality than why that dream must become reality. The conviction of
things not seen isn't always about when or even how it will come to
pass but rather why it deserves our energies in the first place. We
hold fast to our faith that our Virginia Tribes will be recognized by
Congress because we have assurance in the rightness of it and have the
conviction necessary to see it through.
Four hundred years ago this month when Captain Christopher Newport
sailed into the Chesapeake Bay, a relationship between the church and
Virginia's Indigenous People began. There is little doubt in the
historical record that one of the purposes of Jamestown was to
establish the church in Virginia, this relationship continues today.
In 1999 both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly agreed to
House Joint Resolution 754 urging Congress to grant Federal Recognition
to the Virginia Tribes. Our legislature asked the state's delegation in
Congress ``to take all necessary steps forthwith to advance it.'' Five
years ago when I testified before this Committee and the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator Ben ``Nighthorse'' Campbell made
the comment: ``You know Rev. Barton, the Indians and the church have
not always gotten along very well.'' The church has much to repent in
our early missionary efforts. My presence here today represents a
desire to repent for past sins. The Rev. Robert Hunt and others of the
early 1600s failed to find the Image of God in the native people they
encountered. They believed that in order to be a Christian, they needed
to look, live, and speak with an English accent. Even though the
missionaries were excessively zealous, the scriptures they brought with
them eventually provided the strength for these tribes to endure four
centuries of oppression and discrimination. We have come a long way
together since those early days. During that same hearing Senator Allen
asked me about concerns the Council may have regarding gaming. At that
time I stated the Council's opposition to all forms of gaming and our
conviction that if gaming comes to Virginia it will not be the Virginia
Tribes who are the ones to introduce it. This is still our strong
conviction today.
The cultural landscape is similar with each of the Virginia tribes.
As you enter their land, you find the church, the school and the Tribal
Circle. As you approach the Circle you can hear the sounds of the
Tribal Drum, you can feel the heartbeat of life move through your body,
declaring you are on sacred ground. It is here where the tribal
community is grounded. You must listen to the sound of the drum of the
past, so that you can sing in the present and dance into the future.
Here is where the faith and traditions of the Elders are passed to new
generations.
It has been a blessing for me to know and work with each of the
chiefs of our Virginia tribes. I know them to be persons of great
integrity and moral courage. Each brings strong leadership to their
tribes. Each brings unique and special gifts, and they all share a
common respect for their past and vision for the future.
America's 400th Anniversary Commemorations are now center stage
with special events drawing international guests and visitors every
week. It is vital that we show the world that Virginia's Indigenous
People, who have lived on this land for a thousand generations, and who
greeted the English as they landed in 1607, still exist today. We need
to recognize them, as we approach these public observances marking the
400th Commemoration of the first permanent English Settlement at
Jamestown. We are called to review our complete history, reflect upon
it, and act as a people of faith mindful of the significance of 1607.
The people in our churches and communities now look at the significance
of these events differently. What represented newness of hope and
opportunity for some was the occasion for oppression, degradation, and
genocide for others. For the church this is not just a time for
celebration but a time for a committed plan of action insuring that
this ``kairos'' moment in history not continue to cosmetically coat the
painful aspects of the American history of racism. These six Virginia
Tribes; the Chickahominy, the Chickahominy--Eastern Division, the Upper
Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, the Monacan, and the Nansemond, stand
before you today after a four hundred year journey asking only that you
honor their being, honor their contributions to our shared history, and
honor their ancestors by acknowledging they exist. This simple request
is vital to the healing of the broken circle, broken four centuries ago
when cultures collided and forever changed the history of the world. It
is about the present and the recognition that despite the journey these
tribes have survived and are still here. It is about taking their
proper place among the other 563 tribes recognized by the United
States. It is about the future that future generations may experience
the fullness of life intended by their forbearers and their Creator.
Let us mend the Circle so that we may move forward into the future. Let
me close with the words from one of the songs created and recorded for
this special Jamestown observance by ``Anniversary Voices''
Remember the Many
We are all part of the sacred earth, every deer, every stream, every
tree
We have learned to respect all living things, and to live in harmony.
We are riders on the sands, the sands of time,
the Creator's in the wave in the shore.
We have been here for more than ten thousand years.
We will be here for ten thousand more!
Stand where I'm standing; take a look at my view
How should I feel? I was here before you.
The time has arrived recognition is due.
Remember the many who've become the few!
The member Communions of the Virginia Council of Churches, strongly
encourage you to remember the few, recognize our tribes pass the
Thomasia E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of
2006.
______
The Rev. Jonathan M. Barton--General Minister
Virginia Council of Churches
Testimony before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
S. 480
Thomasina Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2005
June 21, 2006
Mr. Chairman, members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, my
name is
Jonathan Barton and I am the General Minister for the Virginia
Council of Churches. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
speak with you today. I ask your permission to revise and extend my
comments. I would also like to express my appreciation to Senator
George Allen for his sponsorship of S. 480 and Senator John Warner for
his cosponsorship. I would like to express my deep appreciation to the
members of Virginia's six tribes present here today for inviting the
Council to stand with them in their request for Federal
Acknowledgement. We stand with the Virginia tribes today in solid
support of the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal
Recognition Act of 2005.
The Virginia Council of Churches is the combined witness of 37
governing bodies of 18 different Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant
denominations located within the Commonwealth of Virginia. A list of
our member denominations is appended to my written comments. During our
62-year history, we have always stood for fairness, justice, and the
dignity of all peoples. The Council was one of the first integrated
bodies within the Commonwealth. We stand here today in faith, grounded
in our history and our value. In April of 1607, when Captain
Christopher Newport sailed into the Chesapeake Bay, a relationship
between the church and Virginia's Indigenous People began. This
relationship continues today. There is little doubt in the historical
record that one of the purposes of Jamestown was to establish the
church in Virginia.
Four years ago when I testified before this Committee, Senator Ben
``Nighthorse'' Campbell made the comment: ``You know Rev. Barton, the
Indians and the church have not always gotten along very well.'' The
church has much to repent in our early missionary efforts. My presence
here today represents our desire to repent for our past sins. The Rev.
Robert Hunt and others of the early 1600s failed to find the Image of
God in the native people they encountered. They believed that in order
to be a Christian, they needed to look, live, and speak with an English
accent. We have come a long way together since those early days.
A few weeks ago, Mr. Chairman, you had the opportunity to be in the
beautiful mountains of Virginia. You may not have realized as you gazed
out over the horizon, that for as far as your eyes could see was home
to the Monacan Indians for thousands of years. Just a short distance
away, up a narrow winding road and nestled in the mountainside are the
tribal grounds of this great Indian nation. On the same land there is a
small Episcopal Church with a stream that runs under it. On the other
side of the steam, there is the old one room schoolhouse where the
Monacan people attended school until the 1960s. The Tribal Circle is
just a little way up the path. It is here where the tribal community is
grounded. Here is where the faith and traditions of the Elders are
passed to new generations. The cultural landscape is the same with each
of the Virginia tribes. As you enter their land, you find the church,
the school and the Tribal Circle. Even though the missionaries were
clumsy in their approach, the scripture provided strength for these
tribes to endure four centuries of oppression and discrimination.
It has been a blessing for me to know and work with each of the
chiefs of our Virginia tribes. I know them to be persons of great
integrity and moral courage. Each brings strong leadership to their
tribes. Each brings unique and special gifts, and they all share a
common respect for their past and vision for the future.
As 2007 rapidly approaches, Jamestown will move onto the global
stage. It is vital that we demonstrate to the world that Virginia's
Indigenous People who have lived on this land for thousands of years,
and who greeted the English as they landed in 1607, still exist today
and that we recognize them. As we approach the public observances
marking the 400th Commemoration of the first English Settlement at
Jamestown, we are called to review our full history, reflect upon it,
and act as a people of faith mindful of the significance of 1607. The
people in our churches and communities now look at the significance of
the event in different ways. What represented newness of freedom, hope
and opportunity for some was the occasion for oppression, degradation,
and genocide for others. For the church this is not a time for
celebration but a time for a committed plan of action insuring that
this ``kairos'' moment in history not continue to cosmetically coat the
painful aspects of the American history of racism. These six Virginia
Tribes; the Chickahominy, the Chickahominy--Eastern Division, the Upper
Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, the Monacan, and the Nansemond, stand
before you today after a four hundred year journey asking only that you
honor their being, honor their contributions to our shared history, and
honor their ancestors by acknowledging that they exist. This simple
request is vital to the healing of the broken circle, broken four
centuries ago when cultures collided and forever changed the history of
the world. Let us mend the Circle so that we may move forward into the
future. On behalf of the member Communions of the Virginia Council of
Churches, I encourage you to recognize our tribes by passing the
Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act
of 2005.
______
The Rev. Jonathan M. Barton--General Minister
Virginia Council of Churches
Testimony before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
S. 2694
Thomasina Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2002
October 9, 2002
Mr. Chairman, members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, my
name is Jonathan Barton and I am the General Minister for the Virginia
Council of Churches. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
speak with you today. I ask your permission to revise and extend my
comments. I would also like to express my appreciation Senator George
Allen for his sponsorship of this bill and the Senator John Warner for
his cosponsorship and the other members of the Virginian Congressional
delegation for all their efforts. To the members of the six tribes
gathered here today, you continue to honor the Virginia Council of
Churches greatly by your invitation to walk with you as you seek
federal acknowledgement. We stand with you today in support of the
``Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act
of 2002'' (S. 2694). Two weeks ago before the House Committee on
Resources I made a public apology for any acts of injustice we may have
been complicit or complacent in during the past. This apology is
sincere and expresses a hope for our continued walk into the future.
The Virginia Council of Churches is the combined effort of 34
governing bodies of 16 different denominations in the Commonwealth of
Virginia. A list of our member denominations has been appended to my
written comments. I have also appended letters from various religious
leaders in Virginia urging support for this bill. Together we include
one out of every five Virginians. During our fifty-eight-year history
we have always stood for fairness, justice and the dignity of all
peoples. We were one of the first integrated bodies in the Commonwealth
and have been for our entire history. We stand here today in faith,
grounded in our history and our values. The churches have had a
relationship with these tribes ever since our first European ancestors
arrived and were welcomed by the ancestors of these men and women here
today. These tribes have developed close ties to the Episcopal Church,
the Baptist Church, the United Methodist Church and the Assembly of
God. Three of our leading religious executives are Native American: The
Rev. Dr. Wasena Wright, The Rt. Rev. Carol Joy Gallagher, and The Rev.
Dr. Cessar Scott.
Alexander Hamilton stated in 1775: ``The sacred rights of mankind
are not to be rummaged for among old parchments, or musty records. They
are written, as with a sunbeam in the whole volume of human nature, by
the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by
mortal power.'' What we are addressing today are the ``sacred rights''
of these six tribes. Our history has not always been marked by peace
and understanding. Treaties have been broken and land has been taken.
There is suspicion and mistrust on both sides. There is perhaps, no
deeper wound you can inflict on a person than to rob them of their
identity. To relegate them to a box marked other. To proclaim, as we
have done in Virginia during the time of Mr. Walter Plecker, that you
do not exist. Those who bear the legacy of their forefathers, the first
inhabitants of this great land, have suffered discrimination, bigotry
and injustice. In the past they have been prevented from employment and
attendance in public school. Churches sought to provide educational
opportunity during this period, which often meant having to go out of
state to attend Indian schools. Even as we prevented their attendance
in our classrooms, we proudly placed their names on our school
buildings. We took their names and we placed them on roads, towns and
rivers. The discrimination they suffered not only erased their identity
it also robbed them of their voice. These tribes have proudly served
this nation even as this nation has turned its back on them.
There has been much discussion regarding ``gaming'' during these
proceedings. I would like to state clearly that the Virginia Council of
Churches is on record opposing all forms of gaming and we are convinced
that this is not relevant to our testimony here today. These tribes
here today humbly ask nothing more than to have their identity
acknowledged, to be recognized for who they are. You can make this
possible so that the healing of these deep wounds might finally be
realized.
In 1983, the State of Virginia (Resolution No. 54) acknowledged the
Chickahominy, Eastern Division; the Upper Mattaponi; and the
Rappahannock and formally recognized them in a ceremony at the capital.
The Nansemond tribe was recognized in 1985 and the Monacan tribe in
1989 (House Joint Resolution No. 390). In 1999 both chambers of
Virginia's General Assembly agreed to House Joint Resolution 754 urging
Congress to grant federal recognition to the Virginian tribes. Our
legislature asked the state's delegation in Congress ``to take all
necessary steps forthwith to advance it.'' Senator George Allen in
introducing the companion bill in the Senate stated: ``It is important
that we give Federal recognition to these proud Virginia tribes so that
they cannot only be honored in the manner they deserve ``There is
absolutely no reason why American Indian Tribes in Virginia should not
share in the same benefits that so many Indian tribes around the
country enjoy.''
God has called these people by name and has blessed them. God will
recognize them as long as the sky is blue, even if it should turn gray.
God will be there as long as the grass is green and when it turns
brown. For as long as the water shall flow or on cold winter days
freezes over, God will be there. It is now time for the United States
Congress to do the same.
______
STATEMENT OF HELEN ROUNTREE, PH.D., PROFESSOR EMERITA OF
ANTHROPOLOGY, OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY, NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
Ms. Rountree. I am going to be less grand-eloquent, and
since I am coming off a chest cold, I shall probably croak at
you. Sorry.
Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the Committee, I am
Dr. Helen C. Rountree, Professor Emerita of Anthropology at Old
Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia. I originally worked
with Western Shoshone people in Nevada, but since 1969 I have
specialized in the Indian people of eastern Virginia,
historical and modern. My seventh University Press book about
them is due out in June.
I have done the work with very little grant money, and no
money from the tribes. I have never been hired by any of these
tribes. I have mostly supported my work out of my university
salary. So what you are going to hear is, in a very real sense,
an independent scholar's testimony.
It was not easy to find records about the people. Many
records in Virginia were burned during the Civil War, though
not in the 20th century.
But Virginia was reluctant all along to accord the people
an Indian label once they lost their reservations in the late
17th and early 18th centuries. Having Pocahontas in the state's
history actually made things worse. The public contrasted her
exotic legend with the reality of modern Indians and usually
turned up its nose.
During the Racial Integrity era that began in 1924, not
only Indian people who insisted on an Indian label in public
records, but any non-Indians who allowed them that label, could
be sent to jail. So records saying Indian were going to be
limited.
Instead, I had to work through personal names. And I agree
with Mr. Artman's answer to Mrs. Christensen: if you have to
turn to individual names and see how networks of people turn up
in the records.
Fortunately, several tribal rolls from the early 20th
century were available to me. I scoured the Federal, colonial,
state, and county records with the zeal of a collector for
information about these individuals and their ancestors, and
then I analyzed the whole collection to see what showed up.
What I found in the records were distinct ethnic isolates,
networks of kinsmen with Indian ancestry. One of the tribes is
traceable through personal names of Indian people back to 1638.
They have had formal institutions, like tribal churches, since
the mid 19th century. My written testimony includes a quick
reference chart that will point that sort of thing out.
By the way, early in the present recognition process I
wrote to the Office of Federal Acknowledgement offering to send
copies of any or all of the records that I had found. And I
mean photocopies. I invited scrutiny. I have never received a
response to that offer. They dropped the ball.
I have watched the tribes in the current era of self-
identification, when anybody can be what they want. They used
to be accused of saying they were Indian so that they could
eventually pass as white. They went on saying they were Indian.
When it became possible to be whatever you wanted, they still
went on saying they were Indian. And I hasten to point out that
they were doing it before the Indian Gaming Act of 1988 was
ever even discussed. That didn't make them say they were
Indian; it is their history that makes them say Indian.
So after nearly four decades of researching and working
with the tribes before you today, I can tell you this. They
really are what they say they are: Indian-descended tribes who
have held together in spite of land loss and persecution by
bigots. When they say they are not interested in gaming, they
mean precisely that. And when they say they feel it keenly,
having to go into Virginia's 400th anniversary year without
Federal acknowledgement, they really mean that, too.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rountree follows:]
Statement of Helen C. Rountree, Ph.D., Professor Emerita of
Anthropology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, and guests: I am Dr. Helen
Rountree, Professor Emerita of Anthropology at Old Dominion University
in Norfolk, Virginia. My training and publications are in
``ethnohistory,'' a combination of cultural anthropology and history.
Initially I worked with Shoshone Indian people in Nevada, but I began
researching the Native Americans of eastern Virginia, historical and
modern, in 1969. I am the only scholar, whether anthropologist or
historian, who has been active in the specialty that long. I spent
every free moment of the first eight years, when I was not teaching for
a living, scouring the published and unpublished records from 1607
onward. That included speed-reading the often unindexed county record
books. I have spent substantial periods since then hunting for more
records and studying other subjects, like ethnic identity, that are
relevant to learning about Indian tribes. Shoehorned into all that work
were face-to-face visits and occasional spells of living among the
modern Virginia people, the people whose Indianness, compared with the
Nevada Indians I knew, impressed me so much.
I am not the first social scientist to work with these six tribes
(see the attached quick-reference chart). My predecessors' work goes
back nearly 120 years, beginning with James Mooney of the Smithsonian
Institution and continuing with Frank Speck of the University of
Pennsylvania, among others. Like them, I have written up my findings
for others to read; unlike them, I have done it in no less than six
books (so far), the most germane of them for this hearing being
Pocahontas's People: The Powhatan Indians of Virginia Through Four
Centuries (University of Oklahoma Press, 1990; no. 196 in the
Civilization of the American Indian series). Roughly one-third of that
volume is devoted to endnotes and bibliography, to prove I didn't make
anything up. I have offered to send copies of the documents unearthed
in my research to the BAR in the Bureau of Indian Affairs; the BAR has
never yet seen fit to respond to my offer, not even when I talked to
their representative face-to-face at the Senate committee hearing last
summer.
The last thing to say about my work is that I have always supported
my research with funds saved back from my own salary and from small
university grants. Like the tribes I work with, I don't have backers: I
pay my own way. So the testimony you are about to hear is my own; the
Indian people are my colleagues, not my employers. And that testimony
is literally based upon decades of intensive research.
I have been able to trace the existence of Indian groups across 400
years in eastern Virginia. Many of today's tribes come from refugee
communities, meaning reduced Indian populations that merged in order to
keep going. But there were elements in them descended from the early
seventeenth century tribes that give them their names today.
It was not easy to find records about the tribes. In the 18th
century, if a group never had a reservation (the Monacans) or if
reservations were lost (the other five), the Commonwealth of Virginia
took no further interest in the people. Meanwhile, local governments'
records were mainly concerned with property and criminal behavior,
neither of which involved many Indians. (If you were poor and law-
abiding, you were invisible.) Several of the key courthouses were
burned in the 19th century. U.S. Census-takers did not record the names
of family members--only the heads of household--until 1850.
Aggravating the problem in finding Indian records was Virginia's
reluctance to let Indians appear in the records as ``Indians.'' One
relatively tolerant law of 1833 created a category they could fall
into: POMBNBFNOM (Persons of Mixed Blood Not Being Free Negroes or
Mulattoes). Needless to say, the people who got certified in that
category never subsequently appeared in the records under that jaw-
breaking name. Instead before the Civil Rights era, Virginia racial
policy became increasingly intolerant of anyone claiming an Indian
identity rather than the catch-all ``colored'' one.
In the first half of the 20th century, anybody claiming to be
Indian and any non-Indian cooperating with such persons came in for
humiliation that was severe and very public. That was possible because
an entire state bureau, the Vital Statistics Bureau, became a policing
agency on matters racial, issuing public announcements, sending a
circular to all county officials statewide, and mailing pamphlets to
thousands of private citizens--at taxpayers' expense. In both the
circular and the pamphlet, the Indian tribes were specifically
attacked. The effect upon the appearance of ``Indian'' entries in
state, local, and even federal records like the U.S. Census schedules
should be obvious. It didn't stop with humiliation. Thanks to the
Racial Integrity Law of 1923, anyone insisting upon the ``Indian''
label in Virginia could legally be sent to jail; several Indian people
did in fact go to jail for it.
Therefore like a fieldworking anthropologist, I not only collected
all documentary references to Indians, but I also acquired recent lists
of Indian personal names--several 20th century tribal rolls being
available--and then worked backward as far as I could in the records,
constructing genealogies and collecting the records about the people in
those genealogies to see how the communities shaped up.
Social scientists like me look for several things in determining
whether or not a group is a distinct ethnic group. I searched for the
same things that the Bureau of Indian Affairs, later on, expected to
see before acknowledging people as Indian tribes. I have found clear
evidence that the people before you today meet those criteria as far
back as the public records allow me to look: living in geographical
clusters, being predominantly in-marrying, and having most of their
associations with one another rather than with outsiders. After the
Civil War, when free non-whites could openly have them in Virginia,
those associations show up as tribal churches, followed by tribal
schools. On several occasions, beginning in 1892, the federal Office of
Indian Affairs (later the BIA) was contacted for financial help for
those schools. The answer was always ``no''--not because the people
were not Indians, but because the last treaty they signed (in 1677-80)
had far predated the existence of the federal government. Washington
was uncomfortable with that. The people of these six tribes had
possessed informal political organizations--like many ethnic groups
called ``tribes'' in the Third World--since the dying out of their
chiefs in the early 18th century. When they formalized things in the
20th century, the tribes took out charters with the State Corporation
Commission, something the white supremacists could not legally prevent
them from doing.
Virginia was most definitely an anti-Indian state in the 19th and
most of the 20th centuries, and ironically enough, some of the blame
can be laid on Pocahontas. No other state has as many or as socially
prominent descendants of that so-called ``princess.'' Her legend--for
that is exactly what it is, a legend--has long blinded most Virginians
to the existence of the modern Indian tribes in their midst. Even now,
when I say I work with Virginia Indians, people nearly always start in
asking me about Pocahontas. When Virginia wanted to make the ``one-
drop'' rule (i.e., one ``drop'' of non-white ``blood'' making a person
``colored'') into a law, legislators found that it couldn't be done
without making some of the state's aristocrats get into the Jim Crow
coach. The bill had to be rewritten, making an exception for ``the
Pocahontas Descendants.'' The tone of the defenders of the white race
in Virginia was even more strident than elsewhere, as a result, for
that exception was seen as a hole in the dyke by the die-hards, one of
whom characterized the ``Indian'' racial category as a ``way-station to
whiteness.''
I have always found it amusing, how wrong the white-supremacists
were in assuming that absolutely everybody would ``pass'' for white who
could. The tribes I work with were not and are not interested in doing
that. When Virginia repealed its racial definitions law in 1975, and
anybody could claim to be anything, these people went right on saying
they were Indian, as they had been doing all along. They had said it to
James Mooney in the 1890s, and to the social scientists who followed
him. Most of us social scientists have been North American Indian
specialists, and we have worked with these Virginia communities because
they are tribes of Indians. I submit to you that they deserve
acknowledgement as such now.
______
The Chairman. The Chair thanks the panel for their
testimony.
The Committee understands that the Virginia tribes have met
with the Office of Federal Acknowledgement within the
Department of Interior about the letter of intent that yours
and other tribes have filed. But my question is to the panel,
what was the Administration's reaction to Dr. Plecker's
actions? And how has the Administration expressed its
willingness to work with the tribes on meeting the consistent
and continuous records requirement?
Mr. Adkins. The Committee has offered technical assistance
with their neighbors. Folks have come down, I am sorry, and we
worked on some of those processes. However, our last visit as a
group to the BIA to talk about our Federal recognition process,
when we were so soundly apprised that many of us would not live
to see that process work itself through, it kind of bashed our
hopes against the rocks.
And we felt like the process that they had in place, while
we support those criteria, it wasn't a process that would
neatly fit over our set of circumstances that were promulgated
by action taken by the state beginning in the 20th century,
with the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. We don't think it is an
impossible process, but given those folks who have gone this
way, who have had records that were fairly well intact, and we
see decades before they get acknowledgement, we just say this
process isn't going to fit as neatly for us as it does for
people who have to wait decades for acknowledgement.
The Chairman. Anybody else wish to respond? OK. Every year
at least one of the Virginia tribes fulfill their duties under
the treaties enacted hundreds of years ago, and provide payment
to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Has anyone ever denied these
tribes or their descendants of the signators of the treaty?
And the second question is, has the Commonwealth of
Virginia ever questioned the tribe's annual actions?
Mr. Adkins. To my knowledge, it has never been questioned.
But again, it may have, but to my knowledge it hasn't. Maybe
someone else on the panel could speak to that, or even I would
ask our lawyer if she is aware of that.
Ms. Locklear. So far as I know, the Commonwealth has never
denied that treaty should come in, according to the treaty.
However, if you read some of the correspondence of Dr. Plecker
in the Racial Integrity era, he doubted everybody, and was
willing to say so far and wide.
He had a very widespread correspondence to other states, as
well. And that doubt is in his letters. Even about the
reservation people, yes.
The Chairman. The bill requires the Secretary of the
Interior to place land in certain counties into trust for the
various tribes if requested within 25 years after the date of
enactment of the Act. The bill does not specify that the land
will be considered each tribe's reservation.
Was this an oversight? And did you think it would be
automatic? Or is there a reason that the tribes do not want the
land to be identified as a reservation?
Mr. Adkins. Could I defer to Liz Walker?
The Chairman. Sure.
Ms. Walker. Chairman Rahall, we received some advice, and I
think the staff for Jim Moran probably knows that detail
better. But at that time we were advised that we didn't need to
designate it as a reservation for it to be taken as land in
trust. Because these are considered the landless tribes, and
what land that would come in, land that they hold in fee today,
would come in as their original reservation. That is what we
were told, that we didn't need to designate it.
If that is true, if that is different than what the legal
advice the Committee has given now, then we do need to look at
that. That may have been an oversight. But we were advised that
they didn't have to designate it that way; that since they are
what you call the landless tribes, that any land they take in
initially would be their original reservation.
The Chairman. OK. Just for the official record, would you
identify yourself and your position?
Ms. Walker. Yes. I am Elizabeth Walker. I am an attorney
for the tribes seeking recognition.
The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you. As we conclude, let me
state that the hearing record will remain open for 10 days to
accept any additional testimony. We may submit questions to the
witnesses for a written response, and there may be other of my
colleagues that are not physically present today that may have
questions for the record, as well. And we will submit those to
you and ask for written responses to them.
Mr. Adkins. Thank you, Chairman.
The Chairman. We thank each of you for your testimony.
Thank you for being with us today.
Mr. Adkins. The written testimony we submitted will be in
the record, right?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Adkins. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. In its entirety.
Mr. Adkins. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you for being with us. The Committee
will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:20 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]
[A statement submitted for the record on H.R. 1294 by The
Honorable Jo Ann Davis follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Jo Ann Davis, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Virginia, on H.R. 1294
Chairman Rahall, thank you for holding this hearing on H.R. 1294,
the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition
Act.
Several of the Virginia tribes are located within my congressional
district and I am proud to be one of the primary sponsors of this
historically significant legislation. The Indian communities have
worked hard over the years to maintain their heritage, and it is
appropriate as we approach the 400th anniversary of the settlement of
Jamestown that we would also recognize the Virginians who descended
from the Native Americans that were here at the founding.
As a former member of the Virginia Council on the Indians, it is
important to me that the Native Americans tribes who were here before
the English landing at Jamestown in 1607 receive all the rights
afforded other similarly situated Indian tribes. The Chickahominy, the
Eastern Chickahominy, the Rappahannock, the Monacan Indian Nation, and
the Nansemond Indian Tribes have been recognized by the state of
Virginia and should be officially recognized by the U.S. government.
The members of these tribes have worked tirelessly and desperately
to secure greater autonomy and control to deal with tribal housing,
health care and education. The tribes have begun the federal review
process, however significant hardships and systematic efforts aimed to
destroy the cultural and traditional history of Virginia's tribes have
made the Department of Interior's current recognition process difficult
for first contact tribes. I believe it is appropriate that Congress
take steps to recognize these tribes and allow Virginia's Indians to
pursue cultural preservation and local tribal issues.
Additionally, this legislation provides significant prohibitions
and protections to prohibit casino style gambling on tribal lands. In
fact, the tribes themselves are opposed to gaming. Instead the focus
should be on the long overdue recognition of these tribes who trace
their ancestry before our nation's founding.
Again, thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing and for your
attention to this issue important to Virginia.
______
[A statement submitted for the record on H.R. 65 by Arlinda
F. Locklear, Esquire, Attorney for the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina, follows:]
Statement of Arlinda F. Locklear, Esquire,
Attorney for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina
It is my privilege to make this statement as counsel for the Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina in support of H.R. 65, a bill to extend full
federal recognition to the Tribe. In the interest of full disclosure, I
should inform the committee that I am also an enrolled member of the
Tribe.
The hundred year legislative record on Lumbee recognition
In one form or another, Congress has deliberated on the status of
the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina for more than one hundred years. On
numerous occasions during that time, Congress has itself or directed
the Department of the Interior to investigate the Tribe's history and
conditions. On all such occasions, the Tribe's Indian identity and
strong community have been underscored.
Congress' first experience with the Tribe followed shortly upon the
heels of formal recognition of the Tribe by the State of North Carolina
in 1885. The 1885 state statute formally recognized the Tribe under the
name Croatan Indians of Robeson County, authorized the Tribe to
establish separate schools for its children, provided a pro rata share
of county school funds for the Tribe's schools, and authorized the
Tribe to control hiring for the schools and eligibility to attend the
schools. See North Carolina General Assembly 1885, chap. 51. Two years
later, tribal leaders sought and obtained state legislation
establishing an Indian normal school, one dedicated to training Indian
teachers for the Indian schools. See North Carolina General Assembly
1887, chap. 254. The Indian Normal School was badly underfunded,
though, leading to the Tribe's first petition to Congress for
recognition and assistance in 1888.
The 1888 petition to Congress was signed by fifty-four (54) tribal
leaders, including all members of the Indian Normal School Board of
Trustees. All the traditional Lumbee surnames are represented in the
list of signatories--Sampson, Chavis, Dial, Locklear, Oxendine, and
others--and descendants of these signatories are active today in the
tribal government. The petition sought federal assistance for the then
named Croatan Indians in general and funding for the Tribe's schools in
particular. Congress referred the petition to the Department of the
Interior, which investigated the Tribe's history and relations with the
state. The Commissioner of Indian Affairs ultimately denied the request
for funding, citing insufficient resources:
While I regret exceedingly that the provisions made by the
State of North Carolina seem to be entirely inadequate, I find
it quite impractical to render any assistance at this time. The
Government is responsible for the education of something like
36,000 Indian children and has provision for less than half
this number. So long as the immediate wards of the Government
are so insufficiently provided for, I do not see how I can
consistently render any assistance to the Croatans or any other
civilized tribes.
Thus began the Department's long-standing opposition to federal
recognition of the Lumbee Tribe, typically because of the cost of
providing services.
After the failure of the 1888 petition to Congress, the Tribe
sought recognition more directly through proposed federal bills. In
1899, the first bill was introduced in Congress to appropriate funds to
educate the Croatan Indian children. See H.R. 4009, 56th Cong., 1st
Sess. Similar bills were introduced in 1910 (See H.R. 19036, 61st
Cong., 2d Sess.) and 1911 (See S. 3258, 62nd Cong., 1st Sess.) In 1913,
the House of Representatives Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing
on S. 3258 where the Senate sponsor of the bill reviewed the history of
the Lumbees and concluded that the Lumbees, then called Croatans, had
``maintained their race integrity and their tribal characteristics;''
See Hearings before the Committee on Indian Affairs, House of
Representatives on S. 3258, Feb. 14, 1913. In response to the same
bill, the Department of the Interior dispatched C.F. Pierce, Supervisor
of Indian Schools, to conduct an investigation of the Croatan Indians.
Pierce reviewed the Tribe's history, acknowledged their Indian ancestry
and the strength of their community, but recommended against federal
assistance for the Tribe:
It is the avowed policy of the Government to require the states
having an Indian population to assume the burden &
responsibility for their education as soon as possible. North
Carolina, like the State of New York, has a well organized plan
for the education of Indians within her borders, and I can see
no justification for any interference or aid, on the part of
the Government in either case. Should an appropriation be made
for the Croatans, it would establish a precedent for the
Catawbas of S.C., the Alabamas of Texas, the Tuscaroras of
N.Y., as well as for other scattering tribes that are now cared
for by the various states.
Those other tribes mentioned by Pierce have since been recognized by
the United States.
In 1914, the Senate directed the Secretary of the Interior to
investigate the condition and tribal rights of the Lumbee Indians and
report to Congress thereon. See S.Res. 410, 63rd Cong., 2d Sess. The
Secretary assigned Special Indian Agent O.M. McPherson to conduct the
investigation. According to the Secretary's letter to the President of
the Senate transmitting the McPherson report, McPherson conducted ``a
careful investigation on the ground as well as extensive historical
research.'' The report covered all aspects of the Tribe's history and
condition, running 252 pages in length. See Indians of North Carolina,
63rd Cong., 3d Session, Doc. No. 677. McPherson's report again
confirmed the tribal characteristics of the Lumbee Indians, but
Congress took no action on the McPherson report.
In 1924, yet another bill was introduced in Congress to recognize
the Lumbee Indians as Cherokee Indians of Robeson County. See H.R.
8083, 68th Cong., 1st Sess. This bill failed and in 1932 a very nearly
identical bill was introduced in the Senate. See S. 4595, 72d Cong.,
1st Sess. This bill failed as well.
The next federal bill was introduced in 1933 and was nearly
identical to the prior two bills, except that it directed that the
Croatan Indians ``shall hereafter be designated Cheraw Indians and
shall be recognized and enrolled as such...'' H.R. 5365, 73d Cong., 1st
Sess. In his statement at the hearing on the bill, the Secretary of the
Interior attached an opinion of John Swanton, a well-respected
specialist on southeastern Indians with the Smithsonian Institution,
which concluded that the previously named Croatan Indians actually
descended from Cheraw and other related tribes. The Secretary
recommended that the United States recognize the Tribe as the Siouan
Indians of Lumber River, but also that the Congress include termination
language because of the expense of providing federal Indian services to
the Indians. Rep.No.1752, House of Representatives, 73d Cong., 2d Sess.
The committee adopted the change proposed by the Secretary and reported
the bill out favorably, but the bill was not enacted. The following
year, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs took the same action on
the identical bill in the Senate, S. 1632, but the Senate floor also
did not act on the bill. See Rep.No.204, Senate, 73d Cong., 2d Sess.
These numerous federal bills to recognize the Tribe under various
names have a common and clear legislative history--that is, state
statutes that modified the name by which the State of North Carolina
recognized the Tribe. The 1899 federal bill would have recognized the
Tribe as Croatan, just as the State had done in 1885. The 1911 federal
bill would have recognized the Tribe as the Indians of Robeson County,
just as the State had done in a 1911 amendment to state law. See North
Carolina General Assembly 1911, chap. 215. The 1913 federal bill would
have recognized the Tribe as Cherokee, just as the State had done in a
1913 amendment to state law. See North Carolina General Assembly 1913,
chap. 123. Indeed, a committee report on the 1913 federal bill
explicitly acknowledged that the federal bill was intended to extend
federal recognition on the same terms as the amended state law.
Rep.No.826, House of Representatives, 68th Cong., 1st Sess.; see also
S. 4595, 72d Cong., 1st Sess. [1932 bill which referred to the 1913
state statute as its antecedent.] Thus, Congress consistently followed
the lead of North Carolina in its deliberations on the Tribe's status
and did so in finally enacting a federal bill in 1956. 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In between the 1933 bill and the 1956 Lumbee Act, the Tribe
attempted to obtain federal recognition through an earlier
administrative process. Congress enacted the Indian Reorganization Act
in 1934, which authorized half-blood Indians not then recognized to
organize and adopt a tribal constitution, thereby becoming federally
recognized. The Lumbee leadership wrote to the Commissioner of Indian
Affairs, inquiring whether the act applied to the Lumbees. The inquiry
was referred to Associate Solicitor Felix Cohen, the famous author of
the foremost treatise on Indian law, the Handbook of Federal Indian
Law. Cohen concluded that the Lumbees could organize under the act, if
some members certified as one-half Indian blood or more and the
Department approved a tribal constitution. The Tribe immediately asked
the Department to make that inquiry and the Department dispatched Dr.
Carl Seltzer, a physical anthropologist, for that purpose.
Approximately 200 Lumbees agreed to submit to Dr. Seltzer's
examination; interviews of these individuals were conducted as well as
physical examinations. Dr. Seltzer certified 22 out of the 200 tribal
members as one-half or more Indian blood, eligible to organize under
the act. However, the Department refused to approve a tribal
constitution submitted by those individuals, once again thwarting the
Tribe's effort to become federally recognized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legislative history of the 1956 Lumbee Act
In light of the mounting historical evidence compiled in Congress'
deliberations on its recognition bills, including the McPherson Report
and the Swanton opinion, the Indians of Robeson County grew
dissatisfied with their designation under state law as Cherokee. Under
pressure from the Tribe and after a referendum among tribal members,
the State of North Carolina once again modified its recognition of the
Tribe in 1953, renaming it Lumbee. North Carolina General Assembly
1953, chap. 874. Two years later, a bill identical to that one enacted
by the state was introduced in Congress. See H.R. 4656, 84th` Cong., 2d
Sess.
The federal bill passed without amendment in the House of
Representatives and was sent to the Senate. The Department of the
Interior objected to the bill in the Senate, just as it had done in the
House, but with more success. The Secretary noted that the United
States had no treaty or other obligation to provide services to these
Indians and said:
We are therefore unable to recommend that the Congress take any
action which might ultimately result in the imposition of
additional obligations on the Federal Government or in placing
additional persons of Indian blood under the jurisdiction of
this Department. The persons who constitute this group of
Indians have been recognized and designated as Indians by the
State legislature. If they are not completely satisfied with
such recognition, they, as citizens of the State, may petition
the legislature to amend or otherwise to change that
recognition....If your committee should recommend the enactment
of the bill, it should be amended to indicate clearly that is
does not make these persons eligible for services provided
through the Bureau of Indian Affairs to other Indians.
The Senate committee adopted the Secretary's recommendation and, when
the bill was enacted into law, it contained classic termination
language: ``Nothing in this Act shall make such Indians eligible for
any services performed by the United States for Indians because of
their status as Indians, and none of the statutes of the United States
which affect Indians because of their status as Indian shall be
applicable to the Lumbee Indians.'' Pub.L.570, Act of June 7, 1956, 70
Stat. 254.
Clearly, the 1956 Lumbee Act was intended to achieve federal
recognition for the Tribe. The House sponsor for the bill wrote to
Senator Scott, seeking his support for the bill, and noted that the
bill was copied from the recent state law by which the State of North
Carolina recognized the Lumbee Tribe. Senator Scott, who agreed to
sponsor the bill in the Senate, issued a press release describing the
bill as one to give federal recognition to the Lumbee Indians of North
Carolina on the same terms that the State of North Carolina had
recognized the Tribe in 1953. Senator Scott testified before a Senate
committee that, ``The State of North Carolina has already by state law
recognized the Lumbee Indians under that tribal name. Giving official
recognition to the Lumbee Indians means a great deal to the 4,000
Indians involved.'' 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The tribal population figure given by Senator Scott in his
statement was repeated in the House and Senate reports on the bill. See
H.Rep.No.1654, 84th Cong., 2d sess; S.Rep.No.84-2012, 84th Cong., 2d
sess. The figure was erroneous. According to a correction to the figure
published in contemporaneous newspaper accounts of the statement, the
Senator intended to refer to 4,000 Indian families, not 4,000
individual Indians. The total tribal population in 1956 was set in this
account at 27,726. This account is consistent with 1950 federal census
data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are also excerpts from the legislative history of the 1956
act suggesting that Congress did not intend to make the Tribe eligible
for federal services, even without the amendment proposed by the
Secretary of the Interior. For example, in a colloquy on the House
floor, the House sponsor Mr. Carlyle was asked whether the bill would
commit the United States to furnishing tribal services. Mr. Carlyle
responded in the negative. Congressman Ford then stated that, ``[i]t
simply provides for the change of name,'' and Mr. Carlyle agreed. 102
Cong. Rec. 2900 (May 21, 1955). 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Because of the history of relations with the State, in which
the recognized tribal name was changed several times over the years,
the Tribe viewed the ``giving of a name'' as recognition. Even today,
tribal members who inquire about the status of the pending bill will
sometimes ask when Congress will give the Tribe its name.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The eligibility for federal services, though, is not determinative
of whether federal recognition has been bestowed. While federal
recognition and eligibility for federal services are often viewed as
interchangeable, they are not under federal law. The Department of the
Interior has itself made this clear in the context of Congress'
deliberations in 1977 on legislation to restore the previously
recognized Siletz Tribe. In its comments on the bill, the Department
recommended that the language in the bill restoring ``federal
recognition'' be replaced with language restoring ``the federal trust
relationship.'' The Department explained the reason for this proposed
change as follows:
Section 3(a) states: ``Federal recognition is hereby extended
to the tribe.'' This suggests that the Siletz Indians are not
now federal recognized. This is not the case; they are
recognized. The termination act simply dissolved the special
relationship between the Siletz Indians and the Federal
Government and terminated any federal services and supervision.
See 25 U.S.C. Sec. 691. Federal recognition and federal
services are often confused and erroneously used
interchangeably. Because of the close connection between
federal recognition and the provision of federal services,
etc., the error is understandable, but nonetheless federal
recognition and federal services are not synonymous and should
not be used interchangeably. In lieu of the above quoted
language, we would substitute the following: ``The trust
relationship between the Federal government and the Siletz
Indians is hereby restored.''
See 1977 U.S. Code Cong. And Admin. News, p. 3700. The 1956 Lumbee Act
should be similarly construed to recognize the Tribe, even though there
was no clear intent to provide federal Indian services. In effect,
Congress simultaneously recognized and terminated the Tribe.
Administrative and judicial interpretation of the 1956 Lumbee Act
Since 1956, federal agencies and courts have reached varying
conclusions regarding the effect of the 1956 Lumbee Act. In 1970, the
Joint Economic Committee of Congress described the Lumbee as having
been officially recognized by the act, although not granted federal
services. See ``American Indians: Facts and Future,'' Toward Economic
Development for Native American Communities, p. 34 (GPO 1970). Also in
1970, the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress
described the 1956 Lumbee Act as legislative recognition of an Indian
people. See Memorandum, April 10, 1970, on Extending Federal
Jurisdiction and Services to Hill 57 Indians, LRS, Library of Congress.
And in 1979, the Comptroller General ruled that the 1956 act left the
Lumbees' status unchanged, i.e., it neither recognized the Tribe nor
terminated the Tribe's eligibility for services it might otherwise
receive. The one court to construe the statute concluded it was
intended ``to designate this group of Indians as `Lumbee Indians' and
recognize them as a specific group..,'' but not to take away any rights
conferred on individuals by previous legislation. Maynor v. Morton, 510
F.2d 1254, 1257-1258 (D.C. Cir. 1975) [holding that the so-called half-
bloods certified under the Indian Reorganization act were eligible to
receive Bureau of Indian Affairs' services].
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) thoroughly reviewed the
history and various interpretations of the 1956 Lumbee Act in 1988. It
did so in response to a request from the Senate Select Committee on
Indian Affairs, which had under consideration at the time H.R. 1426, a
bill to provide federal recognition to the Lumbee Tribe. The CRS
concluded as follows:
The 1956 Lumbee legislation clearly did not establish
entitlement of the Lumbee Indians for federal services. It also
clearly named the group and denominated them as Indians.
Without a court decision squarely confronting the issue of
whether the 1956 statute confers federal recognition on the
Lumbee, there is insufficient documentation to determine if the
statute effects federal recognition of the Lumbees. It is,
however, a step toward recognition and would be a factor that
either the Department of the Interior or a court would have to
weigh along with others to determine whether the Lumbees are
entitled to federal recognition.
Memorandum dated September 28, 1988, reprinted in S.Rep.No.100-579,
100th Cong., 2d Sess.
Whatever its ambiguity otherwise, the 1956 Lumbee Act indisputably
makes the Lumbee Tribe ineligible for the administrative
acknowledgement process. See 25 C.F.R. Part 83. Under the
acknowledgement regulations, the Secretary of the Interior cannot
acknowledge tribes that are subject to legislation terminating or
forbidding the federal relationship. Id., Sec. 83.3(e). In a formal
opinion issued on October 23, 1989, the Solicitor for the Department of
the Interior concluded that the 1956 Lumbee Act is such federal
legislation and, as a result, the Department is precluded from
considering any application of the Lumbee Tribe for federal
acknowledgement.
Thus, the Tribe continued its efforts to obtain full federal
recognition from Congress. Companion bills were introduced in the 100th
Congress for this purpose, H.R. 5042 and S. 2672. Hearings were held on
the bills, once again establishing the Lumbee's tribal existence, and
the Senate bill was reported favorably out of committee. Neither bill
was enacted, however. Companion bills were introduced in the 101th
Congress to recognize the Tribe [H.R. 2335 and S. 901], but neither was
enacted. Once again in the 102d Congress, companion bills were
introduced [H.R. 1426 and S. 1036]. This time, the House of
Representatives passed the bill [with 240 yeas, 167 nays, and 25 not
voting], but the Senate failed to invoke cloture on debate [with 58
voting for and 39 voting against] and the bill failed. In the 103d
Congress, H.R. 334, a bill virtually identical to that passed in 1991,
was introduced; the bill passed the House again but was never acted on
in the Senate. Most recently, the 108th Congress considered similar
bills, S. 420 and H.R. 334 and the 109th Congress considered S. 660 and
H.R. 21.
Legislative precedent for the bill
Only one other tribe in the history of federal Indian affairs has
been placed by Congress in precisely the same position as the Lumbee
Tribe, that is, half in and half out of the federal relationship, by
special legislation. 4 In 1968, Congress enacted a special
act regarding the Tiwas of Texas, 82 Stat. 93, one that was modeled on
the 1956 Lumbee Act and left the Tiwas in the same legal limbo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ There is a third tribe that was subject to similar
legislation--the Pascua Yaquis of Arizona. In 1964, Congress passed a
statute conveying federal land to the Pascua Yaqui Association, Inc.,
an Arizona corporation. See 78 Stat. 1195, Pub. L. 89-14. The final
section of this statute, like the Lumbee and Tiwa acts, provided that
the Yaqui Indians would not be eligible for federal Indian services and
none of the federal Indian statutes would apply to them. Congress has
since extended full federal recognition to the Pascua Yaqui. See 25
U.S.C. Sec. 1300f. The position of the Pascua Yaqui was somewhat
different from that of the Lumbees and Tiwas, since the earlier federal
statute involved a state corporation and arguably would not have
recognized a tribe, even without the termination language. Also, the
Pascua Yaqui recognition legislation was enacted in 1978, before the
administrative acknowledgement process was in place. Nonetheless, the
Department proposed that Congress repeal the 1964 Pascua Yaqui bill and
require that the Yaquis go through the soon to be established
administrative acknowledgment process. See S.Rep.No. 95-719, 95th
Cong., 2d Sess. 7, reprinted in 1978 U.S. Code Cong & Admin. News 1761,
1766. Congress refused to do so and enacted the recognition
legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the Lumbee Tribe, the Tiwas of Texas had been long recognized
by the state. In the 1968 Tiwa Act, Congress designated and recognized
the Indians as Tiwas, expressly terminated any federal trust
relationship, and precluded the delivery of federal Indian services--
just as it had done in the 1956 Lumbee Act. In fact, the Senate
committee specifically noted in its report on the 1968 Tiwa Act that
the bill was ``modeled after the act of June 7, 1956 (70 Stat. 254),
which relates to the Lumbee Indians of North Carolina.'' S.Rep.No.1070,
99th Cong., 2d Sess. According to the Department of the Interior, this
1968 Tiwa Act made the tribe ineligible for administrative
acknowledgement, a decision that clearly presaged the Department's
construction of the 1956 Lumbee Act in 1989. Because of this unique
circumstance, the Department expressed no opposition to special
legislation extending full recognition to the Tiwas of Texas. In 1987,
Congress removed the Tiwas of Texas from the restrictions imposed upon
them in the 1968 Tiwa Act. Congress enacted the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo
Restoration Act, Pub.L. 100-89, Act of August 18, 1987, 101 Stat. 667,
to restore the federal trust relationship with the Ysleta del Sur
Pueblo of Texas, previously known as the Texas Tiwas. Just as the 1968
Tiwa Act created a special circumstance justifying special legislation
for that tribe, so does the 1956 Lumbee Act for the Lumbee Tribe.
Further, just as it did for the Tiwas of Texas, the Congress should
enact comprehensive legislation as proposed by the Lumbee Tribe,
legislation that resolves all related issues--status, service delivery
area, base roll, jurisdiction, etc. The Congress should not enact
another half measure, one that repeals the 1956 Lumbee act and requires
administrative action on the Tribe under the acknowledgement
regulations for numerous reasons.
First, as a matter of fundamental fairness, the Congress should
deal with the Lumbee Tribe just as it has every other tribe in the same
situation, that is, by enacting recognition legislation because the
tribe is ineligible for the administrative process. Congress has never
passed special legislation that would require administrative action on
a tribe that is under present law ineligible for the administrative
process. The Lumbee Tribe is the last tribe in the country left in that
position. There is no legitimate reason to depart now from Congress'
legislative tradition in such circumstances, particularly since to do
so would impose a tremendous burden on the Tribe--first, obtaining the
passage of special legislation amending the 1956 Lumbee act, and
second, subjecting the Tribe to the intrusive, time consuming, and
expensive administrative acknowledgement process.
Second, there is no good purpose to be served by sending the Lumbee
Tribe to the current administrative process. That process provides the
Department an opportunity to examine a group's history and community to
determine whether the group is, in fact, an Indian tribe. The
Department of the Interior and the Congress have already made that
inquiry with regard to the Lumbee Tribe on numerous occasions. In
response to the Tribe's repeated requests to Congress and the
Department for federal recognition, the Congress and the Department
have compiled a voluminous record on the Tribe's history and community.
Because that record plainly establishes the status of the Lumbee
Indians as an Indian tribe, further study of the Tribe would be a
considerable waste of time (indeterminate period before active
consideration and between five and ten years time before final agency
action) and substantial waste of tribal and federal resources (in the
hundreds of thousands of dollars.)
Third, despite some suggestion to the contrary by other witnesses,
there is simply no magic to the current administrative acknowledgement
process. That process is not the source of all knowledge or wisdom
regarding the status of Indian tribes. To the contrary, the
overwhelming majority of tribes now recognized by the United States
were recognized by Congress. According to a GAO report, there were 561
federally recognized Indian tribes as of November 2001. Of those, 530
were recognized by Congress and 31 were recognized by the Department of
the Interior. Out of the 31 recognized by the Department of the
Interior, 10 were recognized before the 1978 regulations were adopted,
14 were recognized after 1978 and under those regulations, and 7 were
recognized after 1978 but without regard to the regulations. In short,
there is no historical or other necessity for subjecting the Lumbee
Tribe to the current administrative process.
Finally, given the hundred year history summarized above, the
Lumbee Tribe has every reason to be skeptical of unbiased and even-
handed treatment by the Department of the Interior. The Department has
successfully blocked federal recognition of the Tribe for over one
hundred years, both before Congress and administratively. It is simply
not realistic to expect the Department now to do what it has never been
able to do in the past--base its judgment about the Lumbee Tribe purely
on the facts and not on fiscal or other considerations.
For more than one hundred years now, the Lumbee Tribe has been
studied and ``processed.'' The record produced by these studies, even
those by the Department, consistently shows an independent Indian
community descended from Cheraw and related Siouan speaking tribes that
has existed from white contact until the present as a separate
community with known and visible leaders. Under present law, the Lumbee
Tribe can only be recognized by an act of Congress. Legislative
precedent under these circumstances supports the enactment of H.R. 65,
comprehensive recognition legislation, not another half measure.
Major provisions of H.R. 65
Congressman McIntyre's bill is appropriately structured as an
amendment to the 1956 Lumbee Act, thus allowing Congress to complete
the task it began in 1956. Specifically, the bill provides for:
explicit federal acknowledgement of the Tribe, including
the application to the Tribe of all laws of the United States of
general applicability to Indians and Indian tribes; 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ One of the statutes generally applicable to Indian tribes is
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. Sec. 2701 et seq [IGRA.]
This statute was enacted in 1988, exactly one hundred years after the
Lumbee Tribe first sought federal recognition. Clearly, the Lumbee
Tribe's quest is not motivated by gaming; neither has the Tribe
expressed any current interest in gaming. However, the Tribe strongly
believes that Congress should not pick and choose among statutes that
apply to it and subject it, once again, to second class treatment as
compared to other recognized Indian tribes. It should be noted, though,
that Congressman McIntyre's bill imposes greater restrictions on the
Tribe's ability to game under IGRA than on those tribes that are
recognized through the administrative process. H.R. 65 does not create
an Indian reservation; as a result, even if the Lumbee membership
authorized tribal leadership to negotiate a gaming compact with the
State (the Lumbee tribal constitution explicitly requires a special
tribal referendum to authorize such), land for such uses could only be
taken into trust by the Secretary of the Interior with the consent of
the Governor of North Carolina. In contrast, tribes acknowledged
through the administrative process can by-pass gubernatorial consent
through the designation of an initial reservation by the Secretary of
the Interior. 25 U.S.C. Sec. 2719(b)(1)(B)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the eligibility of the Tribe and its members for all
programs, services, and benefits provided by the United States to
Indian tribes and their members, such services to be provided in the
Lumbees' traditional territory of Robeson, Cumberland, Hoke, and
Scotland Counties, North Carolina;
the determination of a service population, to be done by
the Secretary of the Interior's verification that all enrolled members
of the Tribe meet the Tribe's membership criteria; and
the granting of civil and criminal jurisdiction to the
State of North Carolina regarding the Lumbee Tribe, to insure
consistent and continuous administration of justice, until and unless
the State of North Carolina, the Tribe, and the United States, agree to
transfer any or all of that authority to the United States.
These are provisions typically found in recognition legislation and
reflect the federal policy of self-determination for Indian tribes.
Most importantly, it finally accomplishes the goal long sought by the
Lumbee people--treatment like every other recognized tribe in the
United States.
Conclusion
Congress and the Department of the Interior have over the last
century repeatedly examined the Tribe's identity and history and have
consistently found the Tribe to be an Indian community dating back to
the time of first white contact. There is no need for further study of
the Tribe's history. There is no need for another half measure by
Congress. There is need for an act of Congress that comprehensively and
once and for all addresses the status of the Lumbee Tribe and all
related issues. On the Tribe's behalf, I urge the committee's favorable
action on H.R. 65.
______
[A statement submitted for the record on H.R. 1294 by
Michael J. O'Connor, President, Virginia Petroleum, Convenience
and Grocery Association, follows:]
Statement of Michael J. O'Connor, President, Virginia Petroleum,
Convenience and Grocery Association
Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is
Michael J. O'Connor, and I am the President of the Virginia Petroleum,
Convenience and Grocery Association (VPCGA). The VPCGA is a non-profit,
statewide trade association, founded in 1948, to represent the
petroleum and food industries. Our membership includes approximately
450 independent businesses operating over 4,000 convenience and grocery
stores from Pennington Gap to Chincoteague. These members employ more
than 10,000 Virginians. Membership includes petroleum marketers, travel
centers, convenience stores, and chain and independent supermarkets.
All of our members stand to be affected by H.R. 1294, the Thomasina
E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2007,
should it be enacted. While honorable in its intentions, H.R. 1294
poses a serious threat to small businesses across our state. If passed,
HR1294 will create an anticompetitive marketplace for goods such as
tobacco and gasoline and will strain the state budget by reducing
excise tax revenues on these goods.
I would like to address a misconception many have when they
consider tribal recognition issues. Many people believe the only
concern we should have when recognizing tribes is the potential for
more gaming activity. That is not the reason for VPCGA's concerns.
There is another issue that, if ignored, can be a major problem for
states with new tribes--that problem is tribes opening retail
operations that do not collect and remit state taxes.
In fact, if passed, the impact of H.R. 1294 will be multifaceted.
The United States Government and the government of the Commonwealth of
Virginia would recognize as sovereign the Chickahominy, the
Chickahominy--Eastern Division, the Upper Mattaponi, the Rappahannock,
the Monacan, and the Nansemond groups. As sovereign entities, these
groups would no longer be subject to the police power or taxing power
of the Commonwealth.
Pursuant to H.R. 1294, these groups would be permitted to purchase
and take into trust land in some of the most populous counties in
Virginia. In fact, it appears that one of the groups could acquire land
anywhere in Virginia and turn it into a reservation. This will create
havoc for state laws and law enforcement. For our members, the single
greatest concern is that these tribes will have the ability to
establish retail businesses outside of the jurisdiction of traditional
state powers to collect taxes. This means that any convenience store,
travel center, or smoke shop established by one of the recognized
tribes could sell gasoline and tobacco to the public free of state
taxes.
Virginia small businesses would suffer the consequences of this
statutorily bestowed competitive advantage. Businesses would be hurt,
some would likely go under, and the Commonwealth of Virginia would lose
revenue
The type of tax evasion I am speaking about is not conceptual. It
is occurring today in many states and has led to high-profile disputes
in New York, Oklahoma, Kansas and New Mexico, among others. In these
states, Native American tribes have used recognition to open
convenience stores and truck stops that sell gasoline and tobacco
products tax-free to non-Native Americans in spite of U.S. Supreme
Court rulings saying that such sales can be subject to state taxes. For
instance, In New York it is estimated that $360 to $400 million of
revenue is not recouped due to cigarette excise tax evasion alone by
tribes. 1 Some estimate that New York State has failed to
recoup nearly $4 billion in cigarette excise taxes on sales to non-
reservation residents since 1995. 2 In Oklahoma it is
estimated that the tobacco excise tax there is ``under-collected by
about $4 million a month.'' 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Representatives Alexander Grannis and William Magee, New York
State Assembly, Uphold Tax Law on Indian Reservations, Letter to the
Editors, The Times Union, Albany, New York (April 26, 2006).
\2\ Id.
\3\ Tom Droege, Henry: Tobacco Tax Loser is Likely, Tulsa World,
(April 15, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing can erase the hideous racism or the marginalization of our
fellow citizens of the Commonwealth that occurred for decades, but
perhaps recognition can help heal some of those wounds.
Let me be clear about our position, we are NOT opposed to the
recognition of any Virginia tribes.
However, the people whom I represent do not deserve to have their
life's investment threatened by a marketer selling gasoline to non
tribal members at a 37 cent price advantage--an advantage that is
achieved solely thru tax evasion. We have just emerged from a four year
long debate in Richmond with a plan that will produce the first new
road building program in a generation. Just imagine the impact to the
Virginia Transpiration Trust fund if this legislation becomes law.
Because this legislation is not just recognizing existing reservations
but is pulling other areas of the state into new reservations, the
incidence of excise tax evasion may be far reaching and competitively
disadvantage large numbers of convenience store and motor fuels
retailers.
Mr. Chairman, any legislation of this kind must ensure that non-
tribal members are required to pay all excise taxes on gasoline,
tobacco and other products. Accordingly, unless strong protections
against excise and sales tax evasion are included the H.R. 1294, VPCGA
must strongly oppose the bill in its current form.
However, we would welcome the opportunity to work with the
Congressman Moran, and other proponents to address these concerns as
this legislation evolves Thank you for the opportunity to present our
views.