[House Hearing, 112 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2013 ======================================================================= HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ________ SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho, Chairman JERRY LEWIS, California JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia KEN CALVERT, California BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York TOM COLE, Oklahoma JOSE E. SERRANO, New York JEFF FLAKE, Arizona CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Rogers, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Dicks, as Ranking Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. David LesStrang, Darren Benjamin, Jason Gray, Erica Rhoad, and Colin Vickery, Staff Assistants ________ PART 8 Page Public Witnesses, March 21, 2012................................. 1 Public Witnesses, March 22, 2012................................. 169 American Indian and Native Alaskan Testimony, March 27, 2012..... 329 American Indian and Native Alaskan Testimony, March 28, 2012..... 567 Written Testimony from Individuals and Organizations............. 749 ________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations PART 8--INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2013 INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2013 ======================================================================= HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ________ SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho, Chairman JERRY LEWIS, California JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia KEN CALVERT, California BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York TOM COLE, Oklahoma JOSE E. SERRANO, New York JEFF FLAKE, Arizona CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Rogers, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Dicks, as Ranking Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. David LesStrang, Darren Benjamin, Jason Gray, Erica Rhoad, and Colin Vickery, Staff Assistants ________ PART 8 Page Public Witnesses, March 21, 2012................................. 1 Public Witnesses, March 22, 2012................................. 169 American Indian and Native Alaskan Testimony, March 27, 2012..... 329 American Indian and Native Alaskan Testimony, March 28, 2012..... 567 Written Testimony from Individuals and Organizations............. 749 S ________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 74-609 WASHINGTON : 2012 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky, Chairman C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida \1\ NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington JERRY LEWIS, California \1\ MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana JACK KINGSTON, Georgia NITA M. LOWEY, New York RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New Jersey JOSE E. SERRANO, New York TOM LATHAM, Iowa ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia JO ANN EMERSON, Missouri JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts KAY GRANGER, Texas ED PASTOR, Arizona MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California DENNY REHBERG, Montana SAM FARR, California JOHN R. CARTER, Texas JESSE L. JACKSON, Jr., Illinois RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania KEN CALVERT, California STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey JO BONNER, Alabama SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio BARBARA LEE, California TOM COLE, Oklahoma ADAM B. SCHIFF, California JEFF FLAKE, Arizona MICHAEL M. HONDA, California MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania STEVE AUSTRIA, Ohio CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming TOM GRAVES, Georgia KEVIN YODER, Kansas STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas ALAN NUNNELEE, Mississippi ---------- 1}}Chairman Emeritus William B. Inglee, Clerk and Staff Director (ii) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2013 ---------- TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. PUBLIC WITNESSES Mr. Simpson. We will call this meeting to order. The ranking member will be here shortly, and then we are going to have votes at 2:00 that are going to last for about 40 minutes. So our schedule will be thrown off, but we knew that. Good afternoon, and welcome to the first of two public witness hearings this afternoon and again tomorrow morning. The Subcommittee will be hearing from a cross section of individuals representing a wide variety of issues addressed by this subcommittee. The Chair will call each panel of witnesses to the table, one panel at a time. Each witness will be provided with 5 minutes to present their testimony. We will be using a timer to track the progress of each witness. When the button turns yellow, the witnesses will have 1 minute remaining to conclude his or her remarks. The members will be provided an opportunity to ask questions of our witnesses, but in the interest of time, the chair requests that we keep things moving in order to conclude this afternoon's testimony at a reasonable hour. And I am not going to yield to my ranking member from Virginia, because he is not here yet, unless you would like to make his opening statement. Do you have a quote for us? Jim always gives us a quote that we wait for. I thought we were going to miss the quote. So now I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Virginia for an opening statement, so that we can get the quote of the day. Mr. Moran. We will facilitate things. The only thing you ever listen to is the quote. You have no idea what the context is. All right. This is a line from John Muir, who I know you are all familiar with. Mr. Simpson. The Ghost and Mrs. Muir. Was he an actor in that film? Mr. Moran. No. John actually, as you know, was one of the real founding fathers of the environmental movement internationally, but he said, ``Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow unto you as sunshine flow unto trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms, their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves.'' And so since that just kind of a moment of zen, Rick Healy has provided us another quote as well. Do you want to hear the second quote? Mr. Simpson. Sure. Let's do the other one. Mr. Moran. Since I am going to forego my opening statement---- Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mr. Moran [continuing]. In favor of these quotes that are much more articulate than I will ever be. ``The spring came but once a century instead of once a year, a burst forth with the sound of an earthquake and not in silence. What wonder and expectation there would be in all the hearts to behold the miraculous change.'' That is appropriate to the fact that springtime has bloomed here in Washington and makes us very conscious of how blessed we are with all the Japanese cherry trees and the landscaping around the Capitol. So it is a good time to be hearing from our public witnesses, and with that, Mr. Chairman, let's go ahead and get on with the agenda. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I will call our first panel up to the table. Greg Conrad, the Executive Director of the Interstate Mining Compact Commission; Gregory--yes. Sit from right to left, I guess. Gregory DiLoreto. Is that close? Mr. DiLoreto. That is perfect. Mr. Simpson. Okay. The President Elect of the American Society of Civil Engineers; Dr. Robert Gropp, the Chairman of the USGS Coalition; Kasey White, the Director of the Geoscience Policy, the Geological Society of America, William Becker, the Executive Director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, and Jeffrey Hales, a Member of the American Thoracic Society. Mr. Conrad, go ahead. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. INTERSTATE MINING COMPACT COMMISSION WITNESS GREG CONRAD Mr. Conrad. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is Gregory Conrad. I serve as Executive Director of the Interstate Mining Compact Commission, an organization representing 24 States that regulate coal and hard rock mining operations and restore abandoned mine lands pursuant to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. I am here today to present the views of the Compact's member States concerning the fiscal year 2013 budget request for the Office of Surface Mining. I am also appearing on behalf of the National Association of Abandoned Mine Land Programs, which represents 30 States and Indian tribes that operate in our reclamation programs. In its proposed budget OSM is requesting $57.3 million to fund Title V grants to states and Indian tribes for the implementation of their regulatory programs, a reduction of $11 million or 15 percent below the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. OSM is also requesting $307 million for state and tribal AML grants, a reduction of $180 million. Mr. Chairman, these are admittedly tough times for state and federal budgets. As a result, some hard choices need to be made about how we spend limited dollars in an efficient and effective way, and environmental protection associated with coalmining operations is no exception. One of the critical decisions with respect to programs under the Surface Mining Act is who will take the lead in implementing the Act's requirements. Once we agree upon that, it is incumbent upon both state and Federal Governments to prioritize funding decisions to support the lead agencies. Congress crafted a state lead approach under SMCRA whereby state governments were vested with exclusive regulatory authority to implement programs for both active mining operations and AML reclamation. The Act also provides for grants to states that meet 50 percent of their program operating costs under Title V and 100 percent for AML projects under Title IV. Once again in 2013, we are faced with a decision about the extent to which the Federal Government will support these funding commitments under SMCRA and the State Lead Concept Program implementation. OSM's budget proposes to move us away from those commitments and concepts. States are struggling to match federal dollars for these programs and signals from Federal Government that it is wavering in its support concerning both dollars and confidence in the state's ability to run effective regulatory and AML programs will do little to build confidence. This is not the time to reverse the course that Congress has set for its support of State programs over the last several years. In this regard it should be kept in mind that a 15 percent cut in federal funding translates to an additional 15 percent cut for overall program funding for many states. We, therefore, urge the Subcommittee to reject OSM's proposed cut of $11 million for State Title V Grants and restore the grant level to $70 million as supported by state funding requests. It is important to note that OSM does not disagree with the states' demonstrated need for the requested amount of funding for these grants. Instead, OSM's solution to the cuts comes in the way of an unrealistic assumption that the states can simply increase user fees. IMCC's polling of its member states confirmed that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for most states to accomplish this feat at all, let alone in less than 1 year. Turning now to the AML Program, based on SMCRA fee collections the fiscal year 2013, mandatory appropriation for state and tribal AML grants should be a $488 million. Instead, OSM has only budgeted $307 million, a reduction of 180 million. This would be accomplished by eliminating payments to those states and tribes that has successfully certified completion of their highest priority reclamation sites. From the beginning of SMCRA in 1977, to the latest amendments in 2006, Congress promised that at least half of the money generated from fees collected within the boundaries of the state or tribe would be returned for use as described in the Act. Breaking the promise of state and tribal share funding will upset 10 years of negotiation that resulted in the balance and compromise achieved in the 2006, amendments to SMCRA. We, therefore, respectfully ask the Committee to continue funding for certified States and tribes at the statutorily- authorized levels and to turn back any efforts to amend SMCRA in this regard. Finally, we oppose OSM's proposal to drastically reform the distribution process for AML funds to non-certified States through a competitive grant program. This proposal will completely undermine the balance of interest and objectives achieved by the 2006 amendments. Among other things, the proposal would seat authority for both emergency and non- emergency funding decisions to an advisory council. Aside from the time delays associated with this approach, it leaves many unanswered questions regarding the continued viability of state and tribal AML programs where they do not win in the bidding process. It also upsets the predictability of AML funding for long-term project planning. We urge the Subcommittee to reject this unjustified proposal, delete it from the budget, and restore the full mandatory funding amount of $488 million. We would request that resolutions to this effect adopted by both the AML Association and IMCC, along with a comprehensive list of questions regarding the legislative proposal be included in the record of this hearing. Thank you very much. [The statement of Greg Conrad follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. DiLoreto. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS WITNESS GREGORY E. DILORETO, P.E. Mr. DiLoreto. Thank you. Well, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, again, my name is Gregory E. DiLoreto, and I am the President Elect of the 141,000 members of the American Society of Civil Engineers. I am also the Chief Executive Officer for the publicly-owned Tualatin Valley Water District, which serves over 200,000 customers in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area, and I am a licensed professional engineer in Oregon in both civil and environmental engineering. So I am pleased to be before you today to talk about EPA's proposed budget for 2013. Unfortunately, the President's proposed budget continues an underfunding trend for our critical infrastructure in water and wastewater. The proposal is to reduce spending for fiscal year 2013 from 2012, from 2.3 billion to 2 billion, which is a cut back of nearly 15 percent in federal funding for our aging water and wastewater systems. Now, most of you may have seen the ASCE's 2009 report card on America's infrastructure in which we gave the grade to water and wastewater a D minus. Since then we have undertaken a series of four economic studies to talk about what happens to this investment or lack of investment in our water and wastewater systems. In 2011, our report, ``Failure to Act,'' under investment in water and wastewater, we talked about what does that D minus mean for our water and wastewater systems, and the answer is sobering. Our water infrastructure in the U.S. is clearly aging, our wastewater systems are aging. Our fundings indicate that investment needs will continue to escalate. In fact, if we continue to invest at the rate we have been for the last several years, we will face an $84 billion shortfall by 2020, and even if we increase the way we do our projects through sustainability, more effective means, the gap continues to grow as we need to maintain our drinking water systems, wastewater systems, and comply with ever-increasing regulations for our drinking water quality and wastewater. So this 84 billion gap, just some other numbers to help, leads to 147 billion in increased costs for businesses, a further 59 billion for households, but in the worst case we estimate that the U.S. could lose nearly 700,000 jobs by 2020. The U.S. economy is expected to decrease by $416 billion from the GDP. But I like to put it in terms that we can all understand. The cost of under-investing could cost each American family $900 per year in increased water rates and in lost wages. The most recent Clean Water Needs Survey from EPA put the total wastewater needs at some $300 billion as of January 1, 2008, which included nearly 200 billion in wastewater treatment, another 64 combined sewer, and 42 storm water management, and even our small communities at $23 billion. And those numbers are not likely to have improved in the 4 years since we did that study. EPA reports, though, that 335 billion and 82 billion of needs are potentially eligible for the State Revolving Fund Program and the Nonpoint Source Fund. Although America spends billions on infrastructure each year, drinking water systems face an annual shortfall of $11 billion in needed funds. I was at a recent meeting here this past week with the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies in Washington, DC, and as I talked with my fellow chief executives that run the largest water utilities in the United States, we all had the same common concern, and that is as we get regulations, we also have to spend the money on those, and that does divert some money from the operations of maintenance and repair and expansion of our water systems and our wastewater systems. So but nevertheless, the agency's drinking water budget for 2013 represents a 4 percent decrease of 965 million. Now, we know as well as everyone else that you are dealing with a number of deficits, the growing federal debt, but the remedies for these problems should not come at the expense of our critical public health systems, drinking water and wastewater systems. And I would also like to note that the program that we use the most, the State Revolving Fund, is a loan program. Money is loaned out to those of us in the water and wastewater business and is repaid back for re-loaning out to other folks and other agencies that can be used. Therefore, ASCE recommends an appropriation of 2 billion of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, and an appropriation of 1.5 billion for the Safe Drinking Water Fund for 2013. Thank you. [The statement of Gregory DiLoreto follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. You bring up a very important issue. Several of us have been trying to figure out how we are going to fund these systems. I have heard that the backlog maintenance of wastewater and water systems in this country is about $700 billion. At $1.5 billion a year, it is going to take us 300 years to address just the backlog. We have got to find a different way to fund these systems, frankly, and I do not have the answer to it, but there are several of us that are looking at it. Mr. DiLoreto. Very good, and we would like to help. ASCE has thrown out some ideas about the 700 billion, and clearly, it is a partnership between the Federal Government and those in local government. Mr. Simpson. Dr. Gropp. Is that right? Mr. Gropp. Gropp. Mr. Simpson. Gropp. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. USGS COALITION WITNESS DR. ROBERT GROPP Mr. Gropp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Moran, members of the Committee. I have prepared my official remarks for the record, and my glasses broke this morning, so I am going to paraphrase a little bit if you do not mind. So I will do my best to try to hit the high points and watch the clock. So I can see that. My name is Robert Gropp. I am Director of Policy for the American Institute of Biological Sciences and also the Chairman of the USGS Coalition. The GS Coalition is an alliance of more than 70 organizations committed by a unified commitment to supporting the efforts of the USGS and the continued vitality of its scientific research and data programs for the Nation. The USGS Coalition has requested and encourages Congress to do all you can to provide the USGS with a fiscal year budget of 1.2 billion. That is slightly more than what the President has requested. We know that would restore $49 million in proposed cuts, as well as provide about 50 million that would help fully fund fixed costs, bolster some new scientific initiatives, as well as help account for what are identified in the budget as facility costs essentially that by the GS's own admission will, there is a cut in there, 4.4 million, that will result in increased costs as they struggle to maintain and have increased maintenance on facilities and equipment. In short, as you all know and the USGS is the Nation's science agency, land-based science agency. Its mission goes beyond the public lands every day to impact and affect positively the lives of every American, whether it is through risk mitigation for natural or humanist hazards, earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfire mitigation, forecasting, or providing the science needed by our resource managers to inform wise natural resources management, assess, monitor water or mineral or energy resources. It is a vital resource that no other agency provides, and its track record of providing unbiased data is quite impressive. Again, the USGS provides a unique blend of scientific information, and its reorganization has helped it dramatically improve its ability to respond to timely questions and issues. And so through its new organization it is able to bring to bear a unique blend of scientific expertise to solve and inform our most challenging questions, whether it is in, again, biology, ecosystem science, water, or minerals and energy. A couple of our concerns in the President's budget request include the number of cuts to the Water and Minerals Programs. We support the proposed increases. We think they are all very timely and very useful investments, and we encourage you to do all you can to support those and provide that funding. There is a great concern that some of the cuts could hinder long-term data continuity. The USGS through stream gages or water monitoring ground water assessments has a unique capacity to provide data that informs everything form civil engineering and local municipal water programs on up, and there is a real concern that the agency needs, and I think they are working to do it, but really needs the resources to ensure the continuity of that data collection. Again, we want to, on behalf of the USGS Coalition, thank the members of this committee particularly for your longstanding and bipartisan efforts to restore and make important investments in the USGS. Your efforts, particularly last year to help manage how Landsat VII may or may not be funded. We deeply appreciate that. There is a great concern that if that were to come over, that devastates a lot of core science programs. So we, again, want to thank you all for your efforts, and we stand ready to help you to the extent we can to identify priorities or what have you, and, again, our hope is that recognizing the constraints you are in, that at least the President's request, but if you can restore a little, that would be outstanding and greatly appreciated. [The statement of Robert Gropp follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I appreciate that. Yes. We tried to make sure that NASA did not send over the Landsat Satellite without the money, which, unfortunately, the budget was proposing to do. Kasey White. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA WITNESS KASEY WHITE Ms. White. Good afternoon. Mr. Simpson. Good afternoon. Ms. White. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today and testify in the 2013 budget request for the USGS. My name is Kasey White, and I am the Director for Geoscience Policy at the Geological Society of America. Founded in 1888, GSA is the oldest professional Geoscience Society in North America. We have over 25,000 members representing academia, government, and industry in all 50 states and 90 countries. On behalf of GSA I would like to request that Congress fully fund the 2013 request to the USGS and restore the cuts in the request to key programs. The USGS plays a vital role in understanding and documenting mineral and energy resources, researching and monitoring potential natural hazards, monitoring the effects of climate change, and determining and assessing water quality and availability. These truly are some of the greatest issues facing society. Despite the critical role played by the USGS, funding for the survey has been stagnant in real dollars for about a decade now. Although we believe that the USGS could effectively and efficiently use a lot more money, it could really help increase the pace and scope of research on a number of policy-relevant areas, we recognize the physical restrains and feel that the request plus restoring some of these cuts would allow them to continue to conduct quality science in a number of these issues. As Rob said, the USGS is one of the Nation's premiere science agencies. About 70 percent of its budget is for research and development, and this research and development underpins all of the activities of the Department of the Interior but also communities across the Nation. They use it for land use planning, emergency response, natural resource management, engineering, and education. So I would like to highlight just a few areas in which USGS research contributes to some of these important issues. Natural hazards remains a major cause of fatalities and economic losses worldwide. We saw this just last night or today with the earthquake in Mexico, and the combined historical and recent geological records show that many areas in the U.S. are susceptible to volcanoes and to earthquakes, and we will continue to have those here, and a better scientific understanding of hazards will reduce future losses and better forecasts of their occurrence and magnitude and allow for better planning and mitigation in these areas. We would urge Congress to increase funding to the USGS to modernize and upgrade its natural hazards monitoring and warning systems and support the proposed increases for early warning systems in the budget request. Another area USGS contributes to is energy and mineral resources. They are critical to national security and economic growth. The USGS is the sole federal information source on minerals production and potential end consumption. That is why we are really concerned about the proposed $5 million cut in mineral resources and the Nation's ability to develop safely these new resources. In addition, many emerging energy technologies such as wind turbines and solar cells depend on rare earth elements and critical materials that do not have really diversified sources. China produces virtually all of them, and increases in research at USGS can help our Nation ease our dependence on these foreign sources. The devastating droughts last year pretty much across the Nation remind us of our dependence on water, and greater scientific understanding is necessary to better understand surface water and ground water to have safe water resources in the future, and USGS's proposal to establish national ground water monitoring will really help give us some of that baseline information to allow us to plan. As Rob mentioned, we are concerned about cuts in some of the water programs, the water research, Water Resources Research Act Program, water quality assessments, and Cooperative Water Program Interpretative Studies really provide some key information to local communities to help them plan their water. And, again, we are grateful to this committee for their support. The leadership on USGS agree that we are very grateful for your comments on Landsat. Yes, to plan and to allow the USGS to continue to do a lot of this research that I have mentioned and have the budget to do those things and not have Landsat take over, even though Landsat is very important and has contributed a lot for natural resource exploration. Thank you very much. [The statement of Kasey White follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Moran. We appreciate both of you speaking up on behalf of the USGS. Thank you. It means a lot that you could come here. Obviously, we are aware of the water infrastructures. It's important that ASCE weigh in on them and give us the data that we need. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. William Becker. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN AIR AGENCIES WITNESS S. WILLIAM BECKER Mr. Becker. Thank you, Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Moran, Congressman LaTourette. My name is Bill Becker. I am the Executive Director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. We are known as NACAA. We are an association of air pollution control agencies in 45 States and over 165 metropolitan areas across the country. The Federal Clean Air Act gives our members the primary responsibility for implementing our Nation's clean air programs. Our message today, we support the President's request for a $65.8 million increase in federal grants for State and local air pollution control agencies under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act. So you are probably wondering why with all the competing funding requests you are receiving these difficult economic times air pollution control agencies should receive any bump in federal funding, much less an increase of $65.8 million, and there are at least three very important reasons. First and most importantly, while we have made significant progress in cleaning up our Nation's air, much more needs to be done. The sad fact is that there are literally tens of thousands of people dying in this country every year from air pollution, and over 100 million people live in areas still violating one or more of the health-based air quality standards. This has led to a series of air pollution problems ranging from respiratory and cardiovascular disease, damage to lung tissue, impaired breathing, heart attacks, IQ loss, cancer, and even death. And it is probably fair to say that more people die or get sick from air pollution in this country than from almost any other problem that this subcommittee is facing today. The second reason we are asking for an increase in federal grants is because the Federal Government has fallen, we believe, woefully behind in meeting its financial commitment under the Clean Air Act to fund state and local air pollution control programs. Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act authorize the Federal Government to provide grants up to 60 percent of the cost of State and local air quality programs, while state and local agencies must provide a 40 percent match. In reality, the Federal Government has not provided 60 percent. They provided less than 25 percent of our budgets while state and local governments supplied the remainder, over three-quarters. A study we conducted a couple of years ago documented a $550 million shortfall between the amount the Federal Government should provide in federal grants for our programs and the amount it currently provides. Clearly the President's budget request for a $65.8 million increase, while modest in scope, will be extremely helpful in trying to fill this gap. These funds are the lifeblood of our programs. We use them to carry out most of our core responsibilities under the Clean Air Act, including the development of strategies to attain and maintain health-based air quality standards, the compilation of emission inventories, the installation of air pollution monitors, the development of programs to ensure that facilities are complying with our Nation's clean air rules, and the establishment of innovative and flexible strategies for industries to find a more cost- effective way of meeting their obligations and many others. However, in light of these funding gaps, most state and local agencies are finding it difficult to keep their essential programs operating. These agencies have had to scale down programs that protect public health and have had to reduce their staffs. As a result states and localities are now more dependent than ever on receiving their fair share in federal grants. And the final reason we are seeking additional federal grants is that our responsibilities under the Clean Air Act are increasing substantially this coming year, well beyond our core program tasks. This year alone we have to adopt new programs based upon a revised health-based standard for lead, for nitrogen dioxide, and for sulfur dioxide, as well as to continue implementing new responsibilities for particulate matter and ozone. Each of these activities requires a whole set of additional responsibilities. As I mentioned, inventories, strategies, monitoring, and so forth. So in conclusion, the members of NACAA urge you to support the President's budget request of a much-needed $65.8 million increase over last year's level. These funds will go a long way toward protecting the public health from serious adverse affects, and we hope that you will respond favorably. Thank you very much. [The statement of S. William Becker follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette [presiding]. Thank you very much. Dr. Hales. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY WITNESS DR. JEFFREY B. HALES Dr. Hales. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Moran. I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. I am testifying on behalf of the American Thoracic Society, which is a large society of clinicians and researchers dedicated to respiratory health of which I am a member. I am a pulmonary physician. I practice long-term and critical care medicine at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, Virginia, and I have got three important messages I want to make today. First is air pollution is a serious health problem; second, EPA funding for clean air programs should be increased, and third, we should let the EPA do its job. As a pulmonary physician I spend my days treating patients with serious lung conditions such as asthma, COPD, emphysema. Through a combination of medicines, procedures, and lifestyle modifications I work together with these patients to help control their chronic disease, but there is one thing that neither I nor my patients can control, and that is the air that they breathe. Air pollution plays a major role in causing and exacerbating underlying respiratory illness, and from my years of clinical experience I know that Arlington and the Washington, DC, area has more than its fair share of code orange and code red air pollution days. When those happen, my office is inundated with phone calls from patients suffering from respiratory illness; the hospital is filled with patients suffering severe respiratory disease and respiratory failure. In most of these cases the patients did nothing wrong other than happen to be unlucky enough to breathe polluted air. I am personally not a researcher, but I am a clinician, and my clinical observations on the impact of air pollution are confirmed by a large number of reviewed, peer reviewed clinical studies both here in the United States and abroad. The science that documents the adverse effects of air pollution on human health is comprehensive, consistent, and compelling, and despite the significant advances the U.S. has made in controlling air pollution over the past years, people still get sick and die because of air pollution. The American Lung Association notes that over 50 percent of Americans, 154 million people, live in communities that have experienced at least one bad air quality day in the recent past. Air pollution is widespread, it makes people sick, and can kill. It remains a serious health problem in the United States. Fortunately, the EPA can and does make a difference in air quality, and I urge continued funding and support for the EPA Air Quality Programs. I agree with the previous speakers' support for the Administration's proposed $65 million increase in grants to state and local air agencies. The increased support for community level of air pollution programs is well justified, but what is not justified is the Administration's proposed cut to the Diesel and Retrofit Program. This Retrofit Program provides support to local communities to replace old diesel engines in school buses, transit buses, and commuter trains with newer and more efficient engines. This Retrofit Program yields immediate and long-term improvements in air quality. The funding should be restored. The EPA also has a small but scientifically-rigorous program on the health effects of air pollution. By supporting researchers who have published research on the health effects, the results of EPA Clean Air Research Program provides policymakers scientific understanding needed to make policy judgments with confidence. I believe the EPA has good science and has led to good decisions. However, research programs have been flat funded for several years. I urge Congress to provide a substantial increase in the fiscal year 2013 budget to begin to address these important research issues. The EPA is also charged with developing and maintaining an air pollution monitoring network. Unfortunately, we know that the current monitoring network is weak and inadequate. There are not enough monitors to adequately gauge, accurately gauge air pollution associated with highways and other high traffic areas. This means that we are effectively underestimating the pollution that we are exposed to, and hence, under-appreciating the risk that air pollution poses to our Nation's health. The EPA needs to incorporate more recent technology into our monitoring programs. These upgrades will give us more accurate information. I urge the committee to provide additional funds to expand and update the Air Quality Programs. The last point I would like to make is that we need to let the EPA do its job. In the last 2 years the House has repeatedly passed legislation that would block, weaken, or even delay the authority to improve the Nation's air quality. When implemented, air quality standards such as the Cross State Air Pollution Rule, the Mercury and Air Toxicants Rule, and the Boiler Rule would save thousands of lives, prevent heart attacks and asthma attacks. The health savings from these rules will far exceed the compliance costs and yet the House has repeatedly blocked these measures. I strongly urge the Committee and all members of the House of Representatives to restrain from extraneous policy writers, to let the EPA do its job in protecting America's health by improving our air quality. Thank you. [The statement of Jeffrey B. Hales follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you, Dr. Hales, and thank all of you for your testimony. We appreciate your appearance here. There has been a bloodless coup if you had not noticed. Mr. Simpson left, and he has to go and take care of the budget resolution. He is one of our members on the Budget Committee. Just a couple of comments. Mr. DiLoreto, being from Oregon I am sure you are aware of Mr. Blumenauer's work, and it all comes down to money, and I have been happy to join him on his quest to start a water infrastructure trust fund that somebody has got to pay for. They will not even let me into the Coke and Pepsi plants in my districts anymore because we suggested that, there should be some kind of fee on that. To our friends from the USGS, I had the director in my office, and I asked her specifically about the President's budget, and she seemed happy. So maybe double back and make her unhappy. I understand she has to be a team player, but she did not express the concerns that you have expressed today. So I appreciate you being here. Mr. Moran, do you have anything? Mr. Moran. Thank you, Steve. Let me just reiterate my appreciation for the two folks who spoke so eloquently on behalf of the USGS and for underscoring the need for water infrastructure. As Mike has said, we have got to figure out a way to pay for it, and I do not see where we are going to get the money in discretionary spending to pay for the safe drinking water, waste water treatment systems, and the like, that we are in desperate need of funding. And I want to thank our two witnesses, one of whom I know, we have spoken before on the importance of clean air. So clean air, safe drinking water, and the critical role that USGS plays, are all important to the work of this Subcommittee. In terms of mining, again, we are going to have to have some form of fee. It does not seem to be an outrageously large fee, and I understand that your role is to oppose the fee on behalf of the association, but somehow we have got to figure out how to pay for abandoned mine constructions and the like. I want to thank all of you. Good testimony. Thanks very much for taking your time. Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much, and the first panel goes with our thanks, and we will now hear from the second panel. We will be joined in the second panel by Edward Hallock, who is the President of the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators from the State of Delaware; Elias Longoria Jr., who is a Councilmember from the City of Edinburg, Texas; Nsedu Witherspoon, who is the Executive Director of the Children's Environmental Health Network; Elizabeth Hoffman, the President of the Cancer Survivors' Against Radon; and Dusty Donaldson, the Executive Director of the Dusty Joy Foundation. Thank you all for coming, you observed the first panel, and we will follow the same sort of rules. The lights will flash, and we appreciate your coming here. We appreciate your testimony, Mr. Hallock, we will start with you. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. ASSOCIATION OF STATE DRINKING WATER ADMINISTRATORS/STATE OF DELAWARE WITNESS EDWARD HALLOCK Mr. Hallock. Okay. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Ed Hallock. I am the President of the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, and I am also the Administrator of the Drinking Water Program for Delaware. ASDWA represents the State Drinking Water Programs and their efforts to provide safe drinking water to more than 275 million Americans. We respectfully request that for fiscal year 2013, the Subcommittee appropriate funds for three programs at levels to help ensure appropriate public health protection for Americans. The Public Water Supply and Supervision Program. States are responsible for ensuring compliance with federal regulations for over 90 contaminants and for overseeing approximately 155,000 public water systems, but state activities go well beyond simply ensuring compliance at the tap. They administer very challenging multi-faceted programs. The number of federal regulations continues to grow while at the same time the federal funding support has been basically flat. State Drinking Water Programs are under critical phases of implementing a series of new risk-based drinking water rules, and this challenge is playing out in the context of the current economic crisis. States have often been expected to do more with less and have always responded with commitment and ingenuity, but State Drinking Water Programs are now in crisis. Insufficient funding increases the likelihood of contamination that puts public health at risk. The fiscal year 2012 appropriated levels for the PWSS Program was $105 million or a bit less than $2 million per state, and the President has asked for an increase in fiscal year 2013 of only $4 million over the fiscal year 2012 budget. This amount is simply inadequate. We respectfully request that Congress appropriate $200 million for the PWSS Program to more appropriately account for the federal mandates and the enormity of the task facing states. The Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund. The primary purpose of the DWSRF is to improve public health protection by providing loans to improving drinking water infrastructure, thus facilitating water system compliance with the regulations. The payback on the investment in the program has been exceptional, $12.4 billion in grants and $2 billion in ARRA funds since 1997, have been leveraged by states into nearly $24 billion in infrastructure loans for projects that improve public health protection for millions of Americans. The DWSRF Program request in the President's budget for the past several years has exhibited a disappointing downward trend, $850 million requested for fiscal year 2013, versus $1.4 billion appropriated by Congress in fiscal year 2010. At the same time EPA's most Recent Needs Survey in 2007, indicated that drinking water system needs total $335 billion over the next 20 years. So ASDWA respectfully requests $1.287 billion for fiscal year 2013 funding for the DWSRF Program. This was the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2011, and ASDWA believes this is an appropriate funding level on an ongoing basis. Finally, the State Drinking Water Security Responsibilities. Since the events of September, 2001, as well as more recent experience in natural disasters, states have taken extraordinary measures to meet the security and emergency response-related needs of the drinking water community. States have provided assistance, training, information, and financial support to their systems. After 7 years of supporting State Security Programs through a small grant of approximately $5 million in EPA's appropriation, no funds have been provided for this purpose since fiscal year 2009, and none are requested for fiscal year 2013. ASDWA respectfully requests $10 million in fiscal year 2013 funding for the State Security Initiatives. So a number of incidents in the U.S. over the past several years having led to illnesses or deaths from unsafe drinking water serve as a stark reminder of the critical nature of the work the Safe Drinking Water Programs do every day and the danger of inadequately-funded programs. Vibrant and sustainable communities are dependent on a safe and adequate supply of drinking water. A strong drinking water program supported by the federal and state partnership will ensure that the quality of drinking water in this country will not deteriorate and in fact, will continue to improve so that Americans can be assured that a glass of water is safe to drink no matter where they travel or live. I know the Subcommittee will be considering many worthy funding requests for a lot of different programs, but it would be hard to argue that anything is more important than safe drinking water. So an increase, even a relatively modest increase in the PWSS Grant would help a great deal in allowing state security on this important work, and I would respectfully request to have submitted into the record a copy of, ``The Public Health Protection Threatened by Inadequate Resources,'' a study that we did in 2003, by the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators. Okay. Thank you. [The statement of Edward Hallock follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much. Mr. Longoria. Welcome. Thank you. Where is Edinburg, Texas? ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. CITY OF EDINBURG, TEXAS WITNESS ELIAS LONGORIA JR. Mr. Longoria. I am going to give you a little handout here, if you do not mind. Mr. LaTourette. Sure. Mr. Longoria. It is deep south Texas, about 15 miles from the Texas/Mexican border. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. Great. Well, welcome. Mr. Longoria. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Moran. I am Elias Longoria, and I am an elected City Councilmember from the City of Edinburg, Texas, located in the 15th Congressional District of Texas, and my testimony today is related to the Wastewater Sewer System Programs that fall under our jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency. Today I appear before you to share with you some very important economic statistics from the City of Edinburg, about some important jobs coming to the city, creating even as we speak. We are seeking counsel regarding the dilemma the city is facing on how to improve infrastructure upgrades needed to keep up with the city's booming economy and services to seven colonias just outside the city that depend on our facilities. Edinburg, as I mentioned, is located 15 miles from the Texas/Mexican border. It is a city of 77,000 people, a city that has grown to this population from less than 20,000 in 1960. It is now one of the fastest growing areas in south Texas. Soon we will have two new major manufacturing companies, one for produce and one for denim, which will be opening in the area, offering 1,600 new jobs to the community. There is a new plant called Santana Textiles, which through the help of Governor Rick Perry and the State of Texas Enterprise Zone Program, as well as some tax incentives by the city, is expanding and opening their plant in August. They will offer 800 new jobs. The other new 800 jobs will be brought by a company called Don Hugo Produce, which was formerly located in the City of Chicago. They find that the city offers everything that they need to be moving produce from Mexico into the eastern part of the United States. Also our airport which previously was used as a military defense airport has been converted now to general aviation after World War II and is slowly but surely becoming a commercial airport, which we will need to adequately service the community of Edinburg. In fact, FedEx Ground has just opened a new ground station, 100,000 square-foot building, and all their ground station will be based out of the City of Edinburg. Edinburg also assists seven nearby rural areas known as colonias in south Texas. As described by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, colonias date back to the early 1950's. They were using marginally agricultural land, lands that lay in floodplains and other rural properties to develop and created unincorporated subdivisions. They divided the land into small lots, put little or no infrastructure, and then sold it to low- income individuals seeking affordable housing. Colonia residents generally have very low incomes. Per capita annual income for the Texas counties bordering Mexico where most of the colonias are located tend to be much lower than state average. These communities clearly are overburdened, but they also provide many of the workers that fuel the growth of the Rio Grande Valley's economy. Like it or not, many of these city's services end up being provided to these residents of the seven nearby colonias. The city government provides to the city's residents and the colonias sewer and water treatment, fire fighting assistance, police assistance, emergency management assistance, and airport services in case of an emergency or natural disasters. The Rio Grande Valley of Texas seeks a port of entry or egress, such as this airport, located along the Texas/ Mexican border, and in short, during this period of growth, the city is working hard to make certain that its citizens and the businesses that have located in our community continue to have the necessary services for a good quality of life as well as being able to attract even more jobs. I fully understand that Congress is out of the earmark business. However, I am here today to share with you a major dilemma the city faces regarding its sewer plant and water plants, airport, and law enforcement funding. The city's population continues to grow because the city is working hard to add jobs, fight off the devastating economic effects of the recession, and do our part to stimulate economic growth. My job today on behalf of the citizens of Edinburg is to ask you, the Federal Government, to do an assistance with the City and federal dollars to help us address the cost of building a much-needed $11 million sewer plant and an $8 million water plant. We are here for suggestions of any way that that could happen. Unfortunately, for the citizens of Edinburg they cannot afford both to pay for more necessary improvements to the city's utilities and also assist the other surrounding unincorporated communities as well as the seven colonias. The City has been faced with fines from the federal EPA because its burgeoning population is pushing the water and sewer facilities to their limits. This current state of affairs does not do us any good, and certainly, does nothing for the city. Either we have to work together to find federal dollars to help the citizens of Edinburg get through these rough spots or the city will have to turn away businesses who are eager to invest brick and mortar and jobs to the City of Edinburg. The same goes for our airport. When FAA tells us that we need more volume in order to access money from the Airport Improvement Act to expand our runway, the city responds it cannot get more volume with a runway that is too short for planes. It is the proverbial question of which comes first, the chicken or the egg. This is a good example of a government program that is not serving the communities it was designed to serve. Finally, because of our proximity to the Texas/Mexican border, we also need federal dollars to spend on border security due to the horrible problems that Mexico is allowing to spill over the Texas side of the border from Mexico. This is a national problem, but part of that battle is being fought on the local level by our city law enforcement officers. Today, I invite this committee to hold a hearing in Edinburg, tour the airport, the seven local colonias that Edinburg services, and let us show you exactly why we need help from the Federal Government. These dollars we need from the Federal Government will be used carefully to help the city continue to be able to support its population growth as well as prove to you that the city is doing its part to stimulate the economy. Our area is one of the fastest growing areas in the United States, and we need help from the Federal Government to make certain we continue to grow, add jobs, and allow the people of Edinburg and South Texas to prosper. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I am open to any questions you may have. [The statement of Elias Longoria Jr. follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much. Could you just tell us who is the member of Congress that represents Edinburg? Mr. Longoria. I believe it is Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Mr. LaTourette. Well, she is a Senator. Mr. Longoria. Senator. Oh, Congress. Ruben Hinojosa. I am sorry. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. Good. Thank you. Ms. Witherspoon, welcome. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH NETWORK WITNESS NSEDU OBOT WITHERSPOON Ms. Witherspoon. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Moran, thank you very much for the opportunity to have this hearing and to testify before you today. My name is Nsedu Witherspoon, and I am the Executive Director for the Children's Environmental Health Network, and this year the Network is celebrating our 20th anniversary. I will briefly summarize my written testimony which has been submitted for the record. The Network is a national non-profit organization focused on children's health, and like parents and grandparents, I am sure that you all want children to have the best chance possible to grow up healthy and productive, and we certainly want the same thing. Thus, I am here today to highlight the important role that the EPA plays in our Nation's health, especially the health of our children and provide a look at how the EPA does this. The environments in which our children live and grow, learn and play shape certainly their health and their future. For example, researchers are understanding more and more about the fetal origins of disease and the health in later years. Research has found that children who are exposed in the womb to higher levels of a common pesticide at age eight had lower IQs and poorer working memory. We know that children can be more susceptible and more vulnerable than adults when exposed to toxic chemicals. We have much more to learn about how to protect children from harmful exposures in their environments. For example, synthetic chemicals that mimic or block hormone function known as endocrine disruptors affect a developing body's vital activities and normal functioning. We have much to learn about how to identify those hormone mimics and how to protect human health from this category of chemicals. Epidemiologists are seeing increasing rates of asthma. They have approximately doubled between 1980, and 1995, and they are on the rise again. Childhood cancers which have increased 20 percent since 1975, and autism, the diagnosis has increased more than ten times in the last 15 years. I am not saying that environmental exposures are the sole reason for these increases; however, it is clear that such exposures do play some role in the modern pediatric epidemics. That is why EPA's activities have a great impact on children's health and development. EPA's Office of Child Health Protection leads and coordinates the agency's efforts to protect children from environmental hazards. The Children's Health Research Centers of Excellence are conducting phenomenal research to help protect children from environmental hazards. EPA's Office of Research and Development oversees research to improve toxicity testing and to better understand children's exposures as its many activities that will impact children's health. The Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units are a unique resource network for the Nation's pediatricians and parents doing valuable work with very small budgets. The National Children's Study is looking at environmental influences on the health and development of more than 100,000 children across the United States, following them from before birth until age 21. EPA has specific expertise to offer the National Children's Study if the Congress provides the agency with the resources to contribute. A variety of EPA programs and activities are vital to support community and State efforts to protect children's health in environments that are unique to children such as the school and the childcare settings. Unsafe environmental conditions harm children's health and undermine attendance, achievement, and productivity. We urge you to support EPA's activities for health school and childcare settings such as the Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools Program. EPA and its partners in public health such as the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and local and state agencies, they are faced with tough budgetary times and ever-increasing needs. We recognize the fact and the challenges that you are facing. While you are deciding on appropriations for fiscal year 2013, please do not compromise the mission of a vital guardian of our health, the EPA. Your investment in programs and initiatives that protect children's health will be repaid by a healthier generation with brighter futures. We also urge you to direct the EPA to assure that all of its activities and programs, including regulations, guidelines, assessments, and research specifically consider children. Thank you, again, for the opportunity to testify, and thank you for your concern about the environmental health of our children. I am certainly happy to answer any questions you may have. Thanks, again. [The statement of Nsedu Obot Witherspoon follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, we thank you very much for being here and sharing your observations. Ms. Hoffman. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. CANCER SURVIVORS AGAINST RADON WITNESS ELIZABETH HOFFMAN Ms. Hoffman. I am Elizabeth Hoffman. I am President of CanSAR, Cancer Survivors Against Radon, a non-profit organization. The dangers of radon are real. I have never smoked, nor have I have been around second-hand smoke, and I have lung cancer. I first tested our home after my half of my left lung was removed, along with the 5 centimeter mass, malignant mass. My home tested at over twice the action level for radon. My journey began in '03, when I went to my G.P. because I had a persistent dry cough and an intermittent pain below my left shoulder blade. He ordered a chest X-ray, which showed the mass. I underwent surgery, daily chest radiation, and my series of chemo. '06, the cancer came back as fluid in my chest. A chest catheter was inserted so fluid could be drained at home, and I underwent my second series of chemo. '08, the cancer spread to my brain and my right lung. I had Cyberknife brain radiation and third series of chemo. 2011, there were 12 new lesions on my brain, and I underwent whole brain radiation. Later that year a CT showed new growth in my left lung. I am currently undergoing my fourth series of chemo. After I came home from my lung surgery, I researched radon. I wanted my challenges, my life to count for something, so a group of us came together to put a face on the dangers of radon. We began CanSAR. Some of my colleagues from CanSAR are here with me today. Barb is a lung cancer survivor like myself. Gloria and Marlene behind me both lost their husbands to radon-induced lung cancer. We are counting on you to right the wrong that has been allowed to go on for far too long. It is unacceptable that more than 21,000 American lives are lost each year due to this preventable disease. From my perspective cutting our Nation's Radon Program is the exact opposite of what is needed. According to EPA's own Inspector General's 2008 report nearly 2 decades after passage of the 1988 Indoor Radon Abatement Act, exposure to indoor radon continues to grow. Today an American dies every 28 minutes from radon-induced lung cancer. According to the Today Show report, an estimated 70,000 classrooms contain toxic radon levels. One of every 15 homes in our country contain toxic levels of radioactive radon gas. The hard reality is that this program's voluntary nature has proven to be ineffective. A simple, inexpensive test is all that is required during the real estate transaction to know if a problem exists. According to the American Association of Radon Scientists, the 2013, proposed budget cuts will zero-line EPA's State Indoor Radon Grant Program and eliminate EPA regional office support. The overall impact will be the systematic elimination of our country's outreach and education efforts as they pertain to radon. Fewer of our buildings will be tested and more will not be fixed. Consumers will no longer have a state or tribal program to protect their interests in dealing with unregulated contractors. Classrooms in our country with toxic levels of radon will never be identified and fixed so our children can learn in a safe environment. Our soldiers and their families living in military housing containing toxic levels of radon will continue to be put at risk. This is not acceptable. Last year EPA announced a new initiative, the Federal Radon Action Plan, which does not have funding or accountability. This does not make sense. The time for a real commitment from our elected officials in requiring radon risk reduction is required. This requires your support in mandating a fully-funded national regulatory program, and the return on your commitment is potentially great, more than $2 trillion of healthcare savings, as well as saving lives. To date the cost of my treatment has exceeded $800,000. Every radon-induced lung cancer survivor or family member of those who have lost their battle has a story to share with you. This is why on behalf of CanSAR I specifically ask for the following. Number one. Properly fund the EPA radon budget to the 2011, levels for a minimum period of 5 years. A fully-funded national radon budget of 24 to $26 million per year will yield a positive investment on your return. Using EPA's own numbers, the overall value of a life saved is $7.9 million. According to EPA, 687 lives were saved through testing and mitigation in 2011. This means you invested $24 million to recoup 5.4 billion. Number two. Require EPA to regulate radon under the authority provided by your colleagues in 1988. If EPA is not the right agency to get the job done, then please require the right agency to take over the program. A properly-regulated national radon program will also provide a positive return on your commitment by saving thousands of lives every year. Please accept my request. I have no interest in blaming anyone for my condition. Blame does not have a place in the lives of cancer members. Instead, a fresh focus on addressing the radon problem in our country must begin today. You can make that happen. You can save more than 21,000 American lives each year. Thank you. [The statement of Elizabeth Hoffman follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. I thank you very much for your testimony, and since the hearing is recorded and written down, I noticed that you have displayed a number of photographs on the table. I wonder if you could just for the record describe who is depicted in those photographs. Ms. Linnertz. These are all members of CanSAR, Cancer Survivors Against Radon. These are people that did not know they were living with high levels of radon until they were diagnosed with lung cancer. You may be interested here especially in this young lady who is from Ohio. She passed away about 3 weeks ago. This is my husband in Illinois. We were living with high levels of radon. Illinois has 40 percent of the homes, almost 40 percent of the homes, as does Ohio, with over 4.0 Pico-curies per liter of air. Linda is from Pennsylvania, Gail is from Iowa. I have known all of these people since '06, the ones that were alive. Unfortunately, we lost several of them in 2010, and 2008, and they are not alive now. Here is Debbie, who is a third grade teacher in Washington. California is represented here with two people, Glenn and Leona, and Leona passed in '09, and Glenn is in very serious condition. Denny also was in Ohio. He was a real estate person who said to his clients, previously I did not say too much about radon, but now having been diagnosed with lung cancer and living with high levels of radon, I insist everyone get their homes tested before taking occupancy. This is Marlene's husband, Bob. These people are all over the country. Almost every state is represented here. Mr. LaTourette. That is why I asked you. Thank you very much. Ms. Donaldson, thank you for being here. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. DUSTY JOY FOUNDATION WITNESS DUSTY DONALDSON Ms. Donaldson. Thank you. As a patient advocate, lung cancer survivor, and founder of a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to advancing lung cancer education, early detection, and compassion for those impacted by the disease, I am here to testify on behalf of more than 20,000 Americans who will die from radon-induced lung cancer this year. Thank you for granting me the opportunity to respond to the announcement that EPA funding for radon programs may be reduced. I was diagnosed with lung cancer 6 years ago. Only 15 percent of lung cancer patients survive 5 years, so I believe I have a responsibility to speak out for those unable to speak. I am grateful for your time and attention. According to the EPA more than 20,000 Americans will die from radon-induced lung cancer this year. Radon kills more Americans each year than AIDS, drunk driving, drowning, or home fires. Approximately 17,000 Americans will die from AIDS this year, 10,839 will die as a result of drunk driving, 3,650 will drown this year, and 3,500 will die in home fires. These other risks are well known, but the American public knows so little about the risks of radon. Dorothy Blosser from Virginia's Shenandoah Valley is one person who never smoked but died from lung cancer. Dorothy was a Mennonite pastor's wife. After her diagnosis her family discovered the radon level in the home was nearly ten times the EPA action level. Lung cancer is the number one cancer killer. It kills nearly twice as many women as breast cancer, three times as many men as prostate cancer. In fact, lung cancer kills more people than breast, prostate, colon, and pancreatic cancers combined. While lung cancer is the number one cancer killer, it is the least funded in terms of federal research dollars. One reason lung cancer research is underfunded is because of the stigma associated with this disease. Maybe it is subconscious but people assume anyone with lung cancer brought it upon themselves, like the early days of AIDS. Consider that approximately 79,000 U.S. smokers will be diagnosed with lung cancer this year, yet nearly twice that number, 147,000 who are former or never smokers, will also be told you have lung cancer. Although the EPA estimates that more than 20,000 lung cancer deaths are due to radon, considering that approximately 34,000 Americans who never smoked will be diagnosed with lung cancer this year, the number of radon- induce lung cancer deaths could be even higher. Radon is the number one cause of lung cancer in people who never smoked, and for those with a history of smoking, radon exposure greatly increases their risk for developing lung cancer. According to the American Cancer Society each year approximately 3,400 Americans die from lung cancer caused by second-hand smoke. Radon-induced lung cancer claims six times as many lives. Across the country restaurants, office buildings, and schools have become smoke free. Although the air in these buildings may be smoke free, radon in these buildings is killing 55 Americans each and every day. Many never smokers are battling lung cancer. Abby, a 14- year-old girl from Macon, Georgia, has been fighting stage four lung cancer since she was nine, and there is Taylor Bell, a former college athlete who interned for Senator Richard Burr. She was diagnosed with lung cancer at the age of 21. In Texas there is Gerald Dash, a former college football player who had a double lung transplant. Gerald fights for every day he gets to spend with his wife and two daughters. I would love to tell you about Daveed, Lila, Julie, Marian, Brittney, Katherine, Bo, Melissa, and many more, but time constrains me. The Dusty Joy Foundation supports the EPA's work of warning the public about radon. One easy way to reduce lung cancer deaths is to fund radon awareness. While radon is a serious and potentially deadly problem, the test is inexpensive and easy, and if there is a problem, fixing it is quick and less expensive than most home improvement projects. Our non-profit organization distributes free radon test kits to targeted residents in North Carolina and Virginia, along with EPA-radon awareness materials. If funds for radon programs are reduced, a message would be sent that radon awareness is unimportant, that more than 20,000 Americans do not matter. Our organization's good work would also be hindered. Please do not perpetuate the cruel and false assumption that people with lung cancer deserve it. In light of these facts we actually request an increase in funding for the EPA's Radon Awareness Program. Thank you, again, for your time and attention to this life- saving matter. [The statement of Dusty Donaldson follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. I thank you, and I want to thank all of you for sharing your testimony and your stories. We appreciate it very much. Just a couple of quick comments before I ask Mr. Moran if he has some observations. Mr. Hallock, one of the problems that we continually face, I am a child of the '60s and '70s, and in those days there was a lot of free money for wastewater improvement, what people described as free money. Today the rules have continued but the money has not, and, it is why when we had the fellow from the Civil Engineers, we have got to figure it out. You cannot in my part of the world, where the pipes have been in the ground since the Great Depression, expect these communities to come up with the necessary resources to meet all the rules that are being forced on them. People can only afford so much in a water and sewer bill, and so we are going to have to be creative, and it is going to have to be both parties that are going to have to be creative and figure out the mess. So I appreciate it. Mr. Longoria, how long is your runway that you talked about? Mr. Longoria. I do not have the detail of the runway right now. Fifty-six hundred feet. Mr. LaTourette. Well, that is pretty short, and I think that Mr. Moran and I and others will be happy to work with your member to talk about it. I mean, the AIP Program is not the subject or the jurisdiction of this subcommittee, but I am more than familiar with it, and in order to qualify you have to be what is called a reliever airport, that would relieve, if there is a problem in another airport, the planes could land there. Not very many planes can land in a 5,600 foot runway, but we will work with you folks. Mr. Longoria. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. And we appreciate it very much. Mr. Longoria. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. Relative to radon, just so I am clear, when I purchased a home here in Mr. Moran's district, he is actually my Congressman when I live here. That is why I go back to Ohio on a regular basis. That is not true. He is a great Congressman. But there was a requirement that we have the home tested as part of Virginia law, and so my question would be, and I know that that is not the answer because there has to be the real estate transaction, but if there were a universal legislation similar to what apparently is in Virginia, where at the time of transfer you had to have the radon testing, what sort of impact do you think that that would make on the problem? Ms. Hoffman. Huge. Right now no one is talking about it for some of the reasons that you heard today, but also people do not think that it is major concern. The news is not talking about it enough and then with the cuts, that would send the wrong message. So if there is regulation out there that would mandate testing of homes, schools, be it with a real estate transaction or with mandatory testing and that it has to be mitigated with licensed contractors as another aspect of it, that would be huge. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. Ms. Hoffman. That would be absolutely huge. Mr. LaTourette. Go ahead. Ms. Linnertz. Presently there is no State in our Nation that demands radon testing at the point of sale. There are some municipalities and there may be some real estate agents that mandate it, but no state has that as a law. Mr. LaTourette. And I am glad you brought that up, because do you know, Jim? Is it Fairfax County, or what is it? Mr. Moran. It must be local because we require it upon transfer of residential property. So if it is not State law, then it must be a local law. Mr. LaTourette. Yes. Ms. Linnertz. Right. Mr. LaTourette. You know, just my sense is that so many things are already attached to point of sale, transactions that in my opinion are not worthwhile, but this seems to be something---- Ms. Linnertz. Certainly. Mr. LaTourette [continuing]. That is worthwhile. Ms. Hoffman. Absolutely. Ms. Linnertz. Certainly. Mr. LaTourette. If we, for instance, at point of sale required you to update your electrical system so your family does not burn to death in an electrical fire, this seems to be a reasonable extension of that, and, again, I will talk to Chairman Simpson, but I know that we would be happy to work on some, you know, around here it is the carrot and the stick approach. So if the state does something good, sometimes we reward them, and if they do not, sometimes you smack them around. I think that we can talk about this, and I really appreciate, I did not know the statistics on the difference between tobacco-related lung cancer and radon. So I have learned something today, and I appreciate it. Ms. Donaldson. Thank you, and if I might just add one more comment to what Gloria and Liz were saying about, you were talking about real estate transactions, Gloria had enlightened me about, Gloria, where was that? Was that in your home state where it is mandatory that the buyer at least receive information. Could you explain that a little bit? Ms. Linnertz. When my husband died and the oncologist told us that radon was a known cause of lung cancer, my husband only lived 6 weeks after his diagnosis, I heard it on TV again, and I researched, and I tested our house. I went to my state legislator, and I said, there has to be a law so people do not have homes with high levels of radon. We were living with over four times the EPA action level. We did get passed in Illinois a very, very firm Radon Awareness Act, which is a notification act so everybody that buys a home is notified of the fact that radon is present and that it is a class A carcinogen, and they must have this sign- off sheet saying that the seller has tested the level as such and such. They have never tested or they tested and mitigated and the level is such and such. Previous to that law only 8 percent of the people were testing their home for radon at the point of sale. That number has gone up to toward 40 percent since '08, when it was passed. Mr. LaTourette. I think that it is a great step forward, but my experience is people are so anxious to get into their homes, nobody would ever lose a home to termites if everybody did what they were supposed to do. So I am not a big government guy, but it seems to me that like lead paint, like so many other things that you can find in a real estate transaction, that is a reasonable point. Ms. Donaldson. This is the radon test kit. It is as simple as this. Mr. LaTourette. Well, the one I had in my house was a little bigger. It looked like---- Ms. Donaldson. Yes. Mr. LaTourette [continuing]. A dehumidifier. Ms. Donaldson. It can be fancier. Mr. Moran. Thank you, Steve. Mr. LaTourette. Sure. Mr. Moran. I understand from our excellent staff that one idea would be to have school children, perhaps in science classes, take it home with them and check their own home. The discussion would then probably spread to include other homes. It would not take much tweaking to suggest that that might be an initiative that the Administration would implement with the money that is now available. Ms. Donaldson. Excellent idea. Excellent. Mr. Moran. Far-reaching affects. Mr. LaTourette. How much does that---- Ms. Donaldson. Well, you can buy it at Lowe's for about 20 bucks, and it is a self mailer. Both ways it is no postage, and you can buy it, well, we buy it at a discount because we are a non-profit, and we buy wholesale, but our organization spends $4.50 on a radon test kit. Mr. Moran. So a school system, for example, could buy them in quantity at wholesale prices---- Ms. Donaldson. Absolutely. Mr. Moran [continuing]. So it might be affordable. Well, it is something we should talk about. Mr. LaTourette. Again, my thanks to all of you, both listed and unlisted, who shared your stories with us and you go with our thanks. Ms. Donaldson. Thank you. Ms. Hoffman. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. Let me just ask Mr. Moran's opinion. I have been told that at 2:15, which is about now, we are going to have four votes. I am reluctant to just have a couple of the witnesses from the next panel and then---- Mr. Moran. Well, I mean, it is going to be a good 15 minutes. Mr. LaTourette. Do you want to get started? Mr. Moran. Let's see if we could get the first couple of witnesses in because otherwise they are going to have to hang around for quite awhile. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. With that we are going to call up our next panel with the understanding that we will probably be interrupted before you are able to complete the entire panel. First if we could ask Nancy Perry to come forward, who is with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; Nancy Blaney, the Animal Welfare Institute; Mary Beth Beetham, the Defenders of Wildlife; Brad Brooks from the Wilderness Society; and Greg Knadle from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. So we have about 12 minutes before Mr. Moran and I have to go catch a series of votes, and there are four votes, and included in there will be a motion to recommit, so we are probably looking at an hour plus or minus. So with that---- Ms. Perry. No pressure. Mr. LaTourette. Yes. Basically anybody that can summarize their statement in a minute or less will get full funding. The rest of you are going to have to move on. I appreciate you being here, and Ms. Perry, let's start with you. Thank you for coming. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS WITNESS NANCY PERRY Ms. Perry. Thank you so much. It is a great opportunity for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to be here today. We are the very first humane organization to be formed in the Western Hemisphere back in 1866, and we have more than 2.5 million supporters that we are representing here today. Our birthright is in the prevention, the effective prevention of cruelty to animals, and in particular when we started equine protection was one of the primary issues that Henry Bergh focused on. So it is all too appropriate that we are here today to speak to you about the Bureau of Land Management's efforts to manage wild horses and to offer some suggestions for change. We certainly know that these horses were to be treated humanly under Congress's demands when they passed the Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act in 1971, an act that passed due largely to the pressure of many school children, millions of them around the country, that really believe that these horses should be preserved for future generations. Those school children are adults now and in society. Many of them are our members. They remember that as one of their most important civic acts that they ever conducted, and so they continue to feel very strongly about making sure that these horses are preserved as historical icons, protected, treated humanly, never, never the subject of abuse. In the 40 years BLM has been managing these horses, we have seen a real deterioration in the way the herds have been treated and in a non-stop cycle of roundup and removal, which has been disruptive for the herds and the horses, harsh treatment for the horses in the process, and very tough on taxpayers as a result of taking too many horses off the ranch. So there has been an acknowledgement by BLM that there is a need for change. They recognize that. We applaud the agency for recognizing that, and we want to work with them. We have a couple suggestions for the committee in how they can help institute some positive change. We have four ideas in particular, and they are articulated in our written testimony, so I will be very brief. We think that first we need to abide by the ``Do No Harm Principle,'' and we need to make sure that language is in the Interior Appropriations Bill this year that has been in past bills that ensures that wild horses are never killed by mass euthanasia and never commercially sold. We also hold that there will be an equilibrium instituted between the number of removed horses and the adoption program so that we are abiding by the principle that we ask the American people to abide by right now in tough economic times. We need to live within our means, and the agency has not been doing that, and that is why they keep coming to the committee asking for more money. We think that on-range management should be prioritized, and finally, we think that humane and transparent methods need to be instituted for all the roundups so that we do not have anymore tragedies. Let me first mention on the mass euthanasia and commercial sale issue. This stems from a problem back in 2004, when a backroom deal was instituted called the Burns rider, former Senator Burns made amendments to the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act on a massive omnibus appropriations bill, and in doing so he made sure that horses would be available for commercial sale, which is the equivalent of slaughter, and our recent polling in January of 2012, showed that still very strong, in fact, growing public support against horse slaughter. Eighty percent of Americans and 72 percent of rural Americans feel very strongly on this issue. That needs to be protected against. So the ASPCA requests that the committee include language provided in our testimony that repeats what has been in past approps bills that would ensure that no horses are sold commercially and that the BLM never reconsiders as it did in 2008, a mass depopulation approach to solving a messy problem that they had created. We also think this idea of equilibrium is very important. We know that a certain number of horses can be adopted every year, three to 4,000. No more than that should ever be taken off the range without a clear plan for how we are going to pay for that cost that we are accruing. It just makes common sense. So I think that is fairly obvious. I will not belabor it. But we should not delay the inevitable need for the third point, which is on-range management, and there are a couple ways to accomplish that. Wild horses under the Act were to always be left on the range, and on-range management was supposed to be the priority method of management. There are two things that the committee can encourage the agency to do more of, and that is more fertility control. This is very effective, tested over decades, and right now BLM is taking the step to control or contracept 2,000 mares, and that is an excellent step but not nearly enough. They should be contracepting as many horses as they plan to remove and removing the smaller number. So that needs to be reversed, and the Committee can certainly encourage the agency to do that. There also have been more than 19 million acres that were originally habitat for wild horses that have been utterly zeroed out, and so the 47,000 horses we have in holding that taxpayers are paying for right now could be rereleased on that land. BLM needs to use some of the money that you provide them to study that land for proper habitat, and as soon as possible rerelease those horses. Finally, there have been all too many very unfortunate incidents in recent roundups that have demonstrated the need for standard operating procedures to be instituted by the agency to ensure no horses endure outright cruelty during these roundups. We have seen and documented foals being run such extreme distances that their hooves literally soften and slow off and the horses have to be destroyed. Horses have been driven to physical exhaustion. Horses and burros have literally been physically assaulted with helicopter skids, and this has been captured and documented over and over again. We have seen excessive and inappropriate use of electric prongs, beating horses with whips, kicking horses, and slamming metal gates and metal panels against horses' legs and bodies, and the twisting and pulling of horses' tails. There are better ways to conduct roundups, and there is never an excuse for one of these incidents. BLM does acknowledge this, and they want to work on protocols. The Committee could encourage them to expedite that procedure. One thing we would also ask is that video cameras be installed on the helicopters for public transparency. This would assure the public who currently probably spends a lot of BLM's time with their worries, they would be able to be assured that those roundups are conducted without harming horses. So I want to thank you for this opportunity to mention these important points and thank the committee for its investment in this issue and for helping us bring to being the original vision of the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act and protect these horses. Thank you so much. [The statement of Nancy Perry follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you for coming. Thank you for your testimony. Ms. Blaney, you are up, and to our other witnesses I think that will be it until we vote, so I apologize for that. Thank you for being here. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE WITNESS NANCY BLANEY Ms. Blaney. My name is Nancy Blaney. I am here testifying on behalf of the Animal Welfare Institute. I will be addressing White-Nose Syndrome activities of the Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Service, Forest Service, and BLM, and also touching briefly on the horse and burro issue as well. This Subcommittee is well aware of the destruction being wrought by White-Nose Syndrome. When I submitted my testimony on March 12 it was in 19 States and four Canadian Provinces. It is now in 20 States. Since then it has been confirmed in Alabama, as well as in the Great Smokey Mountains National Park. In January new estimates from Fish and Wildlife put the death toll of that at at least 5.7 million, and you are well aware of the significant agricultural and public health impacts of the deaths of so many bats. The money that has been spent so far on addressing this problem has yielded crucial results, mapping of the Geomyces destructans, the fungus' genome, and identifying its origin, scientifically concluding that Geomyces destructans does, indeed, cause White-Nose Syndrome, because that question was open for a little while, and that is important to the development of management strategies. Ongoing projects that are untaken by these agencies include detailed studies of the transmission of the fungus, possible means of mitigation, improving detection, and developing a better understanding of bats' resistance and susceptibility to the fungus and of the persistence of the fungus in the environment. We appreciate the attention this subcommittee has given to the problem. We are requesting a modest increase in funding for the four main agencies involved in these activities in order to build upon the progress that we have seen so far and so that we can continue to try to get a handle on this. For the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is the lead government agency in this and supports all of the working groups under the White-Nose Syndrome National Plan, we ask that the Committee maintain the President's fiscal year 2013, recovery fund request, which includes 1.897 million within that amount for White-Nose Syndrome, and we request that that be supplemented by an additional $500,000 in the General Program Activities Account for Fish and Wildlife. These funds would support the following. Interagency coordination. You can imagine Fish and Wildlife is coordinating the wildlife or the White-Nose plan over all the federal agencies, state agencies, tribal agencies, and private organizations. Identifying priorities for applied research. Some of the research that has gone on so far has involved tracking how the fungus affects the chemical processes in bat systems because they are so delicate. Support the state wildlife agencies and conservation action for bat species already in decline due to White-Nose Syndrome. We are asking the Subcommittee also to maintain the $1 million increase requested in the President's budget for the U.S. Geological Survey, whose Wildlife Health Center is one of the key agencies in identifying the fungus, doing necropsies on bats to identify where it has appeared. This money would allow enhancements to USGS's surveillance and diagnostic capabilities and support research on such topics as immunology and pathogenesis, vaccine development, which is very crucial, the prevalent and survival of the fungus in cave environments, and modeling disease processes. In fact, it was the USGS study that provided the first direct evidence that Geomyces destructans, in fact, causes White-Nose Syndrome. So that was a very important research project on their part. Mr. LaTourette. We were just told we have 2 minutes. Ms. Blaney. Two minutes. Okay. Mr. LaTourette. For us to vote. Ms. Blaney. Oh, you have only got 2 minutes left? Mr. Moran. What do you want to do? Do you have much longer? Ms. Blaney. The only other thing we are asking for is additional funding for National Park Service, BLM, and U.S. Forest Service. As a matter of fact, BLM and the U.S. Forest Service, which are trying to comply with the subcommittee's directive of last year, are actually working on a plan now to try to already protect northwest bat species because they are already worried about the influx of Geomyces destructans and White-Nose into the northwest. And we also endorse the ASPCA's testimony on wild horses and burros and ask for the inclusion of the No Kill Language in the Subcommittee's report. [The statement of Nancy Blaney follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Moran. Very good. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much, and to our witnesses, we will be back as quickly as we can, and Ms. Perry and Ms. Blaney, if you want to stay, you are more than welcome to, but if you have had enough of this, you can be on your way with our thanks, and if you felt rushed, we will call on you first just for any closing observations you want to make if you feel you need to do that when we get back. Ms. Blaney. Thank you, Congressman. [Recess] Mr. LaTourette. With permission from Mr. Moran's staff, we will take copious notes until he arrives. We are going to proceed, and I see Ms. Perry and Ms. Blaney accepted our invitation to leave even though they were having a great time. So Ms. Beetham--is it Beetham? Ms. Beetham. Yes. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. Thank you for being here and the floor is yours. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE WITNESS MARY BETH BEETHAM Ms. Beetham. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the Subcommittee, thanks for the opportunity to testify. I am Mary Beth Beetham, Legislative Director with Defenders of Wildlife. Founded in 1947, Defenders has more than 1 million members and supporters, and we are dedicated to the conservation of wild animals and plants in their natural communities. Wildlife and its habitat are valuable national assets. Even in the face of dire fiscal realities, investments in the protection of wildlife and habitat are a wise choice for our Nation. Wildlife-related recreation is a $122 billion-per-year industry. Defenders opposes any further cuts to programs that conserve wildlife and habitat, and we were very pleased to see some modest but crucial increases in the President's budget, and we are hoping the Subcommittee will do its best to fund them. We support the following increases in their quest for the Fish and Wildlife Service budget: $4 million that will help to ensure siting of renewable energy projects in a way that prevents harm to species such as golden eagles, seabirds, bats, and desert tortoise; 5.4 million for a praiseworthy new cooperative recovery initiative to support more efficient efforts across landscapes to recover listed species on National Wildlife Refuges and surrounding lands. We also support the additional increases for the National Wildlife Refuge system that will go to baseline inventory and monitoring, challenge cost-share projects with partners and volunteers, and law enforcement. In addition, for endangered species we support the $1 million increase for consultations on pesticides that includes the development of protocols to determine safe levels of exposure, the $1.6 million increase to support progress in listing more than 250 candidate species, many of which have awaited protection for years, and a $12.3 million increase for the Cooperative Endangered Species fund to provide assistance to States to protect listed species. The Environmental Contaminants Program has been flat since 2001. We support the $1.3 million increase to help expedite and complete more restoration for natural resource damage cases. Defenders, however, was disappointed to see the elimination of the important Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Program. It helps livestock owners coexisting with wolves. We urge restoration of this funding. In the Forest Service request, we were concerned to see that the Administration has again proposed merging a number of accounts, including Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat Management into the Integrated Resource Restoration Account. Defenders supports continuing IRR as a 3-year pilot as directed by Congress in the final fiscal year 2012 bill, but the Agency must first demonstrate its ability to adequately protect fish and wildlife habitat in a consolidated program under the smaller pilot. In the Bureau of Land Management budget, we were extremely pleased with the $15 million increase that will go for comprehensive sage grouse conservation in 10 western States. And I have heard Chairman Simpson speak on several occasions about his concern about the sage grouse decline and a potential ESA listing, so we are hoping the Subcommittee will be able to fund this. In the BLM budget, we also support the $7.1 million increase for renewable energy that will help fund regional land use planning studies and environmental reviews that will help avoid areas with potential natural resource conflicts. Also in the BLM budget, we support the resource management planning increase, $4.7 million that is needed to help address 47 plans under revision and another 45 that need revision. This program has been cut by nearly 25 percent since fiscal year 2010. For the USGS, we support the $16.6 million increase for ecosystems that includes $1 million for research on white nose syndrome that is devastating bat populations and climate. And in climate and land use change, we support the $500,000 increase for Climate Science Centers and the $6.5 million increase in science support for DOI Bureaus. Finally, Defenders supports the increase of $104.7 million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. A portion of the LWCF total is for an Interior-Forest Service Collaborative Land Acquisition Program to protect strategic landscape-scale projects that at the same time meet core agency acquisition priorities. This innovative initiative will help to bring larger conservation benefits and build resilience across landscapes with scarce dollars. Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify. [The statement of Mary Beth Beetham follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much for your patience and your testimony. Mr. Brooks. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY WITNESS BRAD BROOKS Mr. Brooks. Thank you. My name is Brad Brooks and I work for the Wilderness Society in Boise, Idaho. I am here today to provide comments on behalf of my organization on the importance of investing in public lands, and I appreciate the opportunity to be here. So thank you and members of the committee. Even though he is not here, I also want to thank Congressman Simpson from my home state. This past year, I harvested a mule deer buck, as well as a bull elk in proposed Boulder-White Clouds Wilderness, which I believe I also see featured on the wall behind you. It is a place that is near and dear to both of us and it will hopefully someday get the protections it deserves. On that note, I appreciate the Congressman has done to protect Idaho's way of life. Investments in recreation in our public lands are important not only to me but to many of the people that live and work in the West. Nationally, over $1 trillion and 9.4 million jobs are contributed to the U.S. economy every year from outdoor recreation, resource conservation, and historic preservation. The funding programs that facilitate this economic engine are what I want to highlight for you today. The past 4 years I have worked in Idaho's Clear Water Basin as a member of the Clear Water Basin Collaborative, whose goal is to protect the economic and ecological health of the land, water, and communities within the basin. This is a group comprised of conservationists, timber companies, outdoor vehicle enthusiasts, travel representatives, and a wide array of public interests. In the past, the Clear Water Basin was ground zero for conflict over public lands management, but I am here to tell you those days are largely gone. We have been working together to meet our mutual interests and the federal funding for restoration as part of the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program has been a cornerstone of our collaborative work. Our 1.4 million acre Selway-Middle Fork project is project to cut up to 150 million more feet of timber, create 370 jobs--which is significant in rural Idaho--treat thousands of acres of noxious weeds, decommission unneeded roads, improve salmon spawning habitat, and improve big game winter range. This project will do a lot of good work and it would not be possible if the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program were not fully funded, as it was this past year and as it is proposed in the President's budget this year at $40 million. I ask you to please continue fully funding this program that is simultaneously helping us in Idaho to both create jobs and restore the landscape. More importantly, it is helping us to move beyond the conflict that has defined public lands management for the past several decades. The Land and Water Conservation Fund has had an equally important role in preserving our recreation economy and way of life in Idaho. Outdoor recreation is a vital part of Idaho's economy with active outdoor recreation alone supporting over 37,000 jobs and bringing in $154 million in tax revenue, which is significant to Idaho. Idaho's recreation economy is largely based in the natural amenities provided by our public lands and waters whether it is hunting for a bugling bull in the Boulder- White Cloud Mountains, fly-fishing in the world-famous waters of the Henry's Fork of the Snake River, or mountain-biking in the world-class singletrack outside of Boise. People come to Idaho to experience these world-class recreation resources and LWCF has helped sustain and invest by providing access and protecting them for our children and our grandchildren to enjoy. We urge the Subcommittee to provide $450 million for the program in fiscal year 2013, which is half of the authorized amount deposited into LWCF each year. We also continue to support funding for the National Landscape Conservation System, such as Idaho's own Morley Nelson Snake River Birds of Prey area, which has the highest raptor nesting density in the United States. Lastly, Legacy Roads and Trails is a program that has contributed significantly to improving infrastructure, creating jobs, and providing clean drinking water in Idaho. This program has helped to repair or construct 40 bridges, as well as improving trail conditions on over 1,100 miles of trail and decommissioned several hundred miles of unneeded roads. Legacy Roads and Trails provides real dollars that are spent in physical, on-the-ground work. The money provides jobs for rural Idaho homes and heavy machine operators, jobs that are important in counties where unemployment hovers well above the national average. We ask that you fund Legacy Roads and Trails at $75 million. I have given you a snapshot of how several federal programs benefit my home State of Idaho, but you would hear the same story from anyone living in the West. The bottom line is that these programs serve as an investment in our public lands and our way of life that has a rate of return that can be measured for generations to come. These federal programs support jobs, communities, and the environment. Thank you for your time and appreciate you for being here today. [The statement of Brad Brooks follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, thank you. And I will make certain I convey to Mr. Simpson your observations. Mr. Moran. He is quite an athlete, too. Did you read his bio? Mr. LaTourette. No. What does he do? Mr. Moran. Oh, he is a mountain climber. Were you not at the Olympic level or something? Tell us a little, just real quickly---- Mr. Brooks. I do not want to kill any rumors that are circulating but I was not an Olympic athlete. I do serve on the Board of the American Alpine Club and have traveled the world climbing. Mr. LaTourette. What the heck are you reading? Mr. Moran. It was pretty impressive. Maybe it was just saying that he might have been up there, but it was pretty good. Mr. Brooks. And I also went to school on a soccer scholarship as well. Mr. LaTourette. Well, there you go. That must be it. I said your name was Knadle. Is that right or is that---- Mr. Knadle. That is correct. Mr. LaTourette. All right. Well, then, Mr. Knadle. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION WITNESS GREG KNADLE Mr. Knadle. I am Greg Knadle, Vice President for Government Affairs, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. It is very nice to be sitting on this side of the table as opposed to that side of the table where I used to sit. First of all, I want to say thank you to both you, Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Moran and your staff, on 2012, not just the Foundation's number but that bill in the end was very good considering where it started. And it took a lot of hard work on you guys' behalf and I appreciate that. And I think the community appreciates that more than you know. Mr. Moran. And especially Mike Simpson---- Mr. Knadle. Absolutely. Mr. Moran [continuing]. You would not be the first man to say that but---- Mr. Knadle. Absolutely. Mr. Moran [continuing]. Mike was terrific and, you know, we should thank him. Mr. Knadle. Absolutely. And Brad here mentioned some numbers from an economic study. That actually was a study that the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation commissioned. We took a very conservative look at the existing data on how outdoor recreation, conservation, and historic preservation, what their impact on the economy is. Very conservatively, the roughly $23 billion of federal investments in those programs--most of which are in the Interior bill--produce a $1 trillion economy, 9.4 million jobs, and more than $100 billion in federal, state, and local tax revenue of which 55 billion is federal revenue. Twenty-three billion investment, 55 billion return. That was the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation study. We are actually doing phase two of that study right now to fill in the gaps and have it be a more accurate, complete number. It is accurate; it just does not include everything. The Foundation hit a milestone this year. Over 27 years, we took $576 million in federal funds and we now hit $2 billion in on-the-ground conservation. We did it with less than 5 percent overhead to the government and fewer than 100 staff. So we consider that quite a milestone. We are here to request the President's request for our appropriation. That is $7.5 million in Fish and Wildlife Service, $3 million in Forest Service, and $3 million in BLM. That money is the seed money that allows us to go out and get corporate money, get private money, get additional state money and federal money, pull those together, get all the partners around the table, and put it on the ground for conservation. Last year, that appropriation of $13.5 million, we actually generated $130 million in conservation that we put out on the ground. That includes grantee match; that is everything. So I think that is quite a substantial return on investment. Now, I am glad both of you are here because we also enter into cooperative agreements with agencies, one of which is the EPA. One of our biggest partners is the Environmental Protection Agency, and two of the programs we run for them--one is in the Chesapeake Bay and it is the Nutrient Sediment Reduction Grants and Small Watershed Grants, $8 million and $2 million respectively. At least that was last year's level. And then we run about $10 million in Great Lakes money to reduce invasive species, to improve water quality, et cetera. So we are really happy to be working with the EPA on those programs and we will continue to keep your staff up to date on the details and how that is going. Lastly, I just want to mention that our reauthorization bill has been introduced in the Senate. It is a bipartisan bill widely supported, noncontroversial. The only reason it has not been marked up yet is because it got bumped by the transportation bill in the Senate. We hope to be marked up in the near future, and when it gets over here to the House side, we hope for your support. Again, thank you for all you have done and we look forward to working with you. [The statement of Greg Knadle follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, thank you very much to all of you for your testimony. And were you an Olympic athlete? Mr. Knadle. As you can tell, I am a world-class athlete. Mr. LaTourette. Just checking. And Mr. Brooks, you could do a lot to defend wildlife if you just got Boise State to change the color of their football fields so the birds did not---- Mr. Brooks. I am working on it, Congressman. Mr. LaTourette. Thank you. I appreciate that very much. I did have just one thing for Ms. Beetham, the pesticide piece that you were talking about. Ms. Beetham. Um-hum. Mr. LaTourette. We had Administrator Jackson in here maybe a month ago and we got a big problem--thankfully, not in Cleveland--but in Ohio with bedbugs. We talked about where they are going to go with their pesticide rules and so forth and so on, but the anomaly to me is they have discretionary authority, if they choose, to regulate things that do not fall within the pesticide category. What we are finding is that all of these snake oil salesmen are popping up on the radio and they are saying if you buy this for 35 bucks, it is going to solve your bedbug problem and it does not do anything. I think it is a rip-off to the consumers. Down in Cincinnati, it was isopropyl alcohol and the apartment burned down, a whole family is out of--so anything you can do in your pesticide work with the Administrator and have her exercise her discretionary authority to protect consumers by the same time she is dealing with the protocols for pesticides would be greatly appreciated. Ms. Beetham. Okay. Mr. LaTourette. Thanks. Ms. Beetham. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. Well, thank you very much. And Jim? Mr. Moran. I am all set for witnesses. Nice to see you again, Greg. Mr. LaTourette. Well, thanks for coming. Appreciate it. Our fourth panel this afternoon will be John Calvelli, who is with the Wildlife Conservation Society; Christy Plumer, who is with the Nature Conservancy; Reid---- Mr. Haughey. Haughey. Mr. LaTourette [continuing]. Haughey. Thank you, Reid. Reid Haughey, the Wilderness Land Trust; Terra Rentz from the Wildlife Society; and Kevin Boling from the Land and Water Conservation Fund Coalition. Well, again, thank all of you for coming. The rules are the same, the lights are the same, and, again, we appreciate your patience while we went off and voted. But welcome, and we look forward to hearing from you. Mr. Calvelli, you are first. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY WITNESS JOHN F. CALVELLI Mr. Calvelli. Good afternoon, Mr. LaTourette and Ranking Member Moran. Thank you for the opportunity to testify again. My name is John Calvelli. I am the executive vice president of Public Affairs at the Wildlife Conservation Society. WCS was founded in 1895 through the efforts of Teddy Roosevelt with the mission of saving wildlife and wild places across the globe. Today, WCS manages the largest network of urban wildlife parks in the United States led by our flagship, the Bronx Zoo. And our fieldwork helps address threats to over 25 percent of the Earth's biodiversity in more than 60 countries around the world. WCS requests maintain fiscal year 2012 levels for the Forest Service International Program and supports the President's fiscal year 2013 request for Fish and Wildlife Service's Multinational Species Conservation Fund. Today, I would like to share stories about the U.S. investment in global conservation through these programs, specifically, help improve governance and conserve our planet's natural wealth. We are experiencing a crisis. The illegal trade in wildlife and timber is booming across Africa and Asia. Criminalized syndicates often also trading in narcotics and weapons are systematically capturing and killing wildlife to sell on the black market. CRS estimates that illegal wildlife trade is valued at approximately $20 billion a year, making it the third-largest illegal trade globally. This industry is fueled by demand from countries like China and the United States for exotic pets and goods such as bushmeat, ivory, pelts, and traditional medicines. And now with the internet, the illegal trade in wildlife and plant products can reach more buyers than ever before. Two U.S. agencies are combating these illicit activities: the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest Service International Program. In Sumatra, about 50 tigers were killed each year between 1998 and 2002 to benefit illegal trade in East Asia. The number is significant as around 400 Sumatran tigers remain in the wild. In Chad, elephants of Zakouma National Park went from 3,800 to 542. This 86 percent reduction was due to killing at the hands of organized poaching groups of Chadian origin. That killing trend has been halted by the creation of African parks and WCS' work over the past 2 years. Unfortunately, there is a similar crisis underway currently in Cameroon. This is not just the case with wildlife. Illegal timber trade is directly impacting American economic interests. For example, industry reports estimate that U.S. roundwood, sawn wood, and panel exports could increase by approximately $460 million each year if illegal logging was eliminated. Despite these alarming examples, all hope is not lost. With support from the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest Service International Programs, WCS' work with local governments to build capacity and to improve governance in order to combat the illegal wildlife trade. I will give one example. In 2010, I visited Zambia's Luangwa Valley where WCS helped establish community markets for conservation, or COMACO, to combat extreme impacts of poaching and food insecurity. The purpose of COMACO is simple. By providing families with alternative sustainable livelihoods, poaching will be significantly reduced and wildlife will be preserved. COMACO now supports 47,000 farming families, many of whom have seen their annual income more than double. The sale of COMACO, its wild organic brand of food products developed with the assistance of General Mills, has injected more than $1.3 million into the rural economy, and surveys indicate that 30 percent of wildlife species have significantly increased the number with others stable or showing a positive trend. This effort began with a small grant from the African Elephant Conservation Fund, one of the Multinational Species Conservation Funds. More than 100 years ago, President Teddy Roosevelt understood the importance of preserving and protecting our natural heritage for future generations. He also realized this required the United States to lead this effort globally to ensure success. We look forward to working with you and all of our partners in government to ensure that our Nation continues to be a global leader in conservation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. [The statement of John Calvelli follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much for your testimony. We appreciate it. And Plummer or Plumer? Ms. Plumer. Plumer. Mr. LaTourette. Plumer, okay. Got it. Thank you for being here. You are up. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. THE NATURE CONSERVANCY FISCAL WITNESS CHRISTY PLUMER Ms. Plumer. Thank you. My name is Christy Plumer. I am the director of Federal Land Programs for the Nature Conservancy. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on the Nature Conservancy's recommendations for the fiscal year 2013 House Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. The Nature Conservancy is an international nonprofit conservation organization working around the world to protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people. As we enter the fiscal year 2013 budget cycle and another year of this challenging physical environment, the Conservancy continues to recognize the need for fiscal austerity. The Conservancy wishes to thank the Subcommittee for the final fiscal year 2012 Consolidated Appropriations Act funding levels for the Department of Interior and U.S. Forest Service conservation programs. As the Subcommittee begins to tackle another difficult budget cycle, the Conservancy stresses our concerns that wildlife and land conservation programs should not shoulder a disproportionate share of cuts in this budget. Our budget recommendations this year do not exceed the President's budget request except for a few instances where we recommend fiscal year 2012 funding levels. Additionally, as a science-based and business-oriented organization, we believe strongly that the budget levels we support represent a prudent investment in our country's future based upon the tangible economic and society benefits natural resources provide to the American people. The Conservancy supports the President's fiscal year 2013 budget request of $450 million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund with the aim of continuing to work toward full funding for this program. The President's America's Great Outdoors Initiative is the prominent focus in this annual LWCF budget and it includes several top-priority landscapes, including the Rocky Mountain Front/Crown of the Continent Conservation Area in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, as well as the Longleaf Pine Conservation Area in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. This year, the Conservancy is specifically supporting 18 biologically rich LWCF project areas at a total of $94 million. The Conservancy is supporting $60 million for the Forest Legacy Program and the important partnership this program represents with the States to support public recreational access for hunting and fishing, to protect wildlife habitat for working forests, and to enhance outdoor experiences. The Conservancy enthusiastically supports $60 million for the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. The Conservancy and its partners have used the Habitat Conservation Plan and Recovery Land Acquisition Programs to conserve key habitats for numerous threatened, endangered, and at-risk species to help avoid conflicts of ESA issues. The Conservancy appreciates the Subcommittee's ongoing commitment to both the USGS-led Climate Science Centers, as well as the Department of Interior's Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, and efforts to ensure integration and coordination of these initiatives with existing efforts such as the Joint Ventures and the National Fish Habitat Partnerships. The Conservancy supports the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement Coalition's request of $495 million for the Refuge System O&M. We also appreciate the Subcommittee's support for Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program and demonstration of collaboratively developed forest restoration plans at a large scale. We recommend fiscal year 2012 funding be sustained for this program with $40 million to restore large forest landscapes. We also appreciate the Subcommittee's ongoing support for the Hazardous Fuels Reduction Program to remove overgrown brush and trees through a variety of methods leaving the forest in a more natural condition that is resilient to wildfires. We believe it is essential to keep at least level funding for this program. The Conservancy also strongly endorses sustainable funding levels for cooperative programs such as the State and Tribal Wildlife Assistance Program, NAWCA, Joint Ventures, Multinational Species, and other programs such as Partners for Fish and Wildlife and the National Fish Habitat Initiative. We look forward to working with you, Mr. LaTourette, Mr. Moran, and members of the subcommittee and full committee as you address the ongoing needs for conservation investments to sustain our Nation's heritage of natural resources. Thank you. [The statement of Christy Plumer follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much for your time and testimony. Mr. Haughey, we are ready for you. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. WILDERNESS LAND TRUST WITNESS REID HAUGHEY Mr. Haughey. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette, Mr. Moran, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Reid Haughey. I have the privilege of serving as the president of the Wilderness Land Trust. We are a small, focused non- profit. We work cooperatively with landowners who have property within designated and proposed wilderness areas to acquire their lands and make them part of the wilderness that surrounds them. I am here in front of you today to thank you for your longstanding support for the in-holding accounts within the Land and Water Conservation Fund and specifically for the support last year in 2012 for those accounts and then to ask for that support yet again in this upcoming year. We believe that an appropriation of between 3 and 5 million to each of the land management agencies within the Land and Water Conservation Fund will enable them to acquire the high priority wilderness in-holdings that are within the system from willing sellers when they become available. We are not asking Congress to undertake a new program, but we are asking that the support be there to continue to complete the wildernesses that have already been designated. The fiscal year 2013 President's budget request does not include in-holding funding for the Forest Service. There is a new recreational access program that has been proposed. We are not here to comment on the merits of that program. It should be considered and funded as is appropriate, but we do not believe that it should be an either-or situation where in-holding accounts are cut in favor of that program. The in-holding accounts have a 50-year track record of success of completing projects that Congress has already undertaken through designation, treating landowners fairly and appropriately and furthering the mission of the wildernesses that have been preserved. The consistent funding for the in-holding accounts is vital. Our experience has been over our 20-year history of work is that these properties become available about once a generation. So a large program is not called for but a small program that is consistently there is very important to be able to accomplish the mission that it was trying to do. Since last year, when we came and spoke to the Committee, we have transferred a total of nine properties into federal ownership, and of those properties that were paid for out of the in-holding accounts, the average price of those properties was just under $77,000 a piece. These are small properties but they are vital to the lands that surround them. They are so vital to the lands that surround them that many of the constituents who support these properties in that same year donated $3,500,000 worth of property in support of the program. There is much more work to be done. There are roughly 400,000 acres of in-holdings within the designated wilderness across the United States. We need to keep this small program in place so that we can continue to work on that, continue to treat the landowners who own land within wilderness areas respectfully and meet their wishes and the promises that they were made that the Federal Government would be willing to buy the property when the time came for them to sell. So in this upcoming year, the number of in-holders in a number of different States have approached us about acquiring their lands, and we hope to be back before you next year with stories of what funding was able to accomplish. I appreciate your support and time. [The statement of Reid Haughey follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Listen, we appreciate your testimony and your patience. And Ms. Rentz, we are with you. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. THE WILDLIFE SOCIETY WITNESS TERRA RENTZ Ms. Rentz. Excellent, thank you. Well, good afternoon. I really appreciate the opportunity to testify here before you today. My name is Terra Rentz. I am the assistant director of Government Affairs for the Wildlife Society. The Wildlife Society represents 11,000 professional wildlife biologists and managers across the U.S. and Canada who are dedicated to an excellence in wildlife stewardship through science and education, and I just want to talk to you briefly today about the Society's priorities for fiscal year 2013 and then refer you to my written testimony for a more detailed discussion. While the Wildlife Society fully understands the limits of the current fiscal situation, I am sure as you all also agree, we feel that Congress has the responsibility to serve as stewards of our Nation's wildlife and natural resources and to ensure that the investments of our previous generation's for wildlife conservation are not squandered. Our land and natural resource management agencies have built a strong foundation of responsible science-based wildlife management and conservation over the past century, and they need the resources necessary to sustain this work, particularly with increasing threats for invasive species, urban sprawl, and a changing climate. Within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program, which I know you are all very familiar with, is one of these key programs. It is the only federal program that supports States in preventing wildlife from becoming endangered, and it is also one of the primary programs supporting the implementation of the comprehensive wildlife conservation strategies or, as you know them, State Wildlife Action Plans. The Society recommends that Congress appropriate $70 million for the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program for 2013 and also support the continuation of a reduction in the nonfederal match requirements from 50 percent to 35 percent. The National Wildlife Refuge System provides an invaluable network of lands for wildlife conservation, and many years of stagnant budgets have increased the operations and maintenance backlog for the system. Refuge visitors often show up and find visitor centers closed, hiking trails in disrepair, and habitat restoration programs eliminated. The need for the Wildlife Refuge System is well over $900 million, but as a member of CARE this year, the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement, we recommend that Congress provide $495 million for the operations and maintenance of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Bureau of Land Management lands support over 3,000 wildlife species and more than 300 listed and proposed listed species and more than 1,300 sensitive plant species. However, the BLM currently only has one biologist for every 591,000 acres of land, and with rising costs for threatened and endangered species management continue to rise, this is an increasing concern. In addition, the Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species Management Programs have been forced to pay for the compliance activities of BLM's grazing, energy, and non-wildlife-related programs, eroding the ability to conduct proactive conservation activities on their lands. Given the underfunding of BLM's wildlife programs combined with the tremendous expansion of energy development across their lands, we recommend an appropriation of $55 million for BLM's Wildlife Management Program. The Society appreciates the commitment of the BLM for addressing the problems associated with wild horse and burro management, and it is on this point that we would actually have to disagree with our colleagues at SPCA and AWI earlier today. This year, the President requested an increase of $2 million for research and development of contraception and population control. However, we at the Society are concerned about the BLM's emphasis on fertility control and do not support the addition of no-kill language in that bill. Horse are already above appropriate management levels, which is a term set by the BLM in most areas and have been that way for many, many years. And we believe that additional funding should be requested to correct the habitat damage that has occurred due to overpopulation of these animals. The requested $77 million for BLM should be provided if they continue removing excess horses from the range at a reasonable rate and if they focus additional resources on habitat restoration. Within the U.S. Geological Survey, the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units provide technical assistance and consultation on natural resource issues, participate in education of graduate students, and provide continuing education for natural resource professionals. In fiscal year 2001, Congress fully funded these units allowing productivity to rise to record levels. Since then, though, budgetary shortfalls have resulted in current staffing vacancies of nearly one-quarter the professional workforce. To fill these vacancies and restore seriously eroded operational funds and enhance national program coordination, $22 million should be appropriated for the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units. The Society appreciates the funding of $25.5 million fiscal year 2012 for the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Centers. As these centers play a pivotal role in addressing the impacts of climate change on fish and wildlife by providing essential scientific support, and we recommend that Congress fund the centers at the requested $26.2 million. And finally, in fiscal year 2011, the Forest Service combined several programs and budgets, including vegetation and watershed management, wildlife and fisheries habitat management, and forest products into a single integrated resource restoration activity budget. Our national forest and grasslands are essential to the conservation of our Nation's wildlife and habitat and as such, much like our colleagues at Defenders, we are concerned with this merger because it makes accountability to stakeholders and to Congress more difficult. However, with these reservations noted, we urge Congress to support the request of $793 million for the Integrated Research Restoration Program. And with that, I want to thank you for considering the recommendations of wildlife professionals and we at the Society are happy to provide you with any assistance. [The statement of Terra Rentz follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, thank you very much for your testimony. And I know we would eventually get conflict between---- Ms. Rentz. It is interesting. Mr. LaTourette. Yeah, it was the Wild Horse and Burro issue. Mr. Boling, Land and Water Conservation Coalition, thank you for being here. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. LWCF COALITION WITNESS KEVIN BOLING Mr. Boling. Thank you, Mr. LaTourette and Ranking Member Moran. I am Kevin Boling. I am a resident of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, and I am pleased to appear here today on behalf of the Land and Water Conservation Fund in support of the $450 million Land and Water Conservation Fund budget proposed by the Administration for fiscal year 2013. The Coalition represents a broad array of groups across the Nation from the Trust for Public Land to the Nature Conservancy, ones you are familiar with to ones you may not be so familiar with like the Alaska Dirt Divas. But in all seriousness, the Coalition is large and diverse and it brings together people from all walks of life committed to conserving the Nation's natural resource heritage. I want to spend my time today talking to you about my personal experiences with the Forest Legacy Program and the acquisition of public access and in-holdings for the national monuments. Just a little bit of background about me. I spent summers with my grandfather on his Cat logging, decided that would be a good way for me to make a living, got a degree in forestry from the University of Idaho in 1974, spent the next three-and-a- half decades managing major landowner properties in Idaho from logging manufacturing, saw wood manufacturing and public affairs, and in the last 5 years, closed approximately $90 million worth of land sales and conservation easements. So I come here from a private sector perspective. And I have seen how Land and Water Conservation funding works to maintain privately owned working forests in these important small, rural communities. And I have worked with funds that this Committee has provided to create several conservation easements in North Idaho advantaged to put grizzly bears and working forest together and managed to preserve travel corridors between important ecosystems. And I have seen how important it is for the acquisition of properties that have been in effect captured by the creation of the national monument. McArthur Lake is located about halfway between Bonners Ferry and Sandpoint. It happens to be a critical link between two major ecosystems--one, the Bitterroot ecosystem from Montana with the Idaho Selkirk ecosystem on the west. This corridor has been subjected to a phenomenal amount of residential development over the last 20 to 25 years, except for the private forestland that remains in the center of this corridor. And the Forest Legacy Program Land and Water Conservation Fund allows the working forest in that corridor to in effect extinguish their development rights and continue to focus on managing those forests going forward for the taxes they provide, for the logs and jobs they provide, and managed by a private--not a public--agency, which we think is a good thing. The reason why these funds are important to continue this work is that a private owner sitting across the table from a public agency in terms of the negotiations takes several years and a phenomenal amount of human capital and company capital to make it happen, and it is important that if you enter into those negotiations, at the end of it you are dealing with a partner that can close the deal. And in the event that that funding disappears or is diminished, these opportunities are going to diminish and go away as well, because even in these tough economic times, many of these properties are still worth more with a home on them or a subdivision development than a forest investor can see their way to manage over the long term for that same property. So I personally believe it is an important expenditure of federal funds that in effect extinguishes the development rights and allows these lands to continue to be managed for forestry, working farms, working ranches. In other cases, outright fee purchase is the only option, and I understand that you, Mr. LaTourette and Ranking Member Moran, have had experience in the Cuyahoga National Forest and the Rappahannock National Refuge where that kind of opportunity was used where you have private lands captured within a national purpose. Frequently, the private lands and the national purpose lands are at odds with one another in terms of their eventual goals and it only seems right that a willing seller/private owner would have the opportunity to take that value of that property and invest it somewhere else. Finally, the Coalition understands the severe financial constraints under which you are operating. They also believe that America simply cannot afford to lose the private sector activity this program helps inject into the economy and the recreational opportunities it provides. And in closing, I would like to thank you for your dedication and service and ask that you support the $450 million appropriation. [The statement of Kevin Boling follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much. I will make sure that I mention to Chairman Simpson your observations. Just on Land and Water Conservation, I know that all of you know and the Senate marking the transportation bill they actually do $700 million, which is nice. If we ever do a transportation bill in the House, I have an amendment to double it to $600 million and it just sort of makes sense that the royalties and fees from drilling and exploration be utilized. It is already authorized to the tune of $900 million, and we should get it as high as we can. I would say, you know, a couple of you mentioned willing seller. And one of the hurdles that I and others have faced as we approach this is that it is not a Republican-Democrat thing; it is an East-West thing. The chairman of the Natural Resources Committee in particular, I mean he sees it as, the government is just out there looking around to snatch land from unwilling sellers. My biggest experience has been with the Trust for Public Land on the Cuyahoga Valley National Park and I would encourage you all to work with everybody to come up with the best willing seller language that eliminates that argument. And so anyway, that will help us move forward. And lastly, I am going to bite. What are the Alaskan Dirt Devils? Divas, excuse me. What might those be? Mr. Boling. It is a small group of folks near Anchorage, Alaska, who enjoy using outdoors for mountain biking, I believe. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. Great. I will Google them when we are done with the hearing. And Mr. Moran, have you got anything? Okay. Well, thank you all very much for your testimony. I appreciate it. Our last panel on this public witness day is going to be comprised of Ms. Sorenson-Groves of the National Wildlife Refuge Association, Mr. Chandler of the Marine Conservation Institute, Mr. Christensen of the Friends of Deer Flat Wildlife Refuge, Ms. Patterson from the Friends of the Potomac River Refuge, and Mr. Paddock from the Friends of Refuge Headwaters. Okay, same rules, same lights apply. And Ms. Sorenson- Groves, welcome and we are anxious to hear from you. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION WITNESS DESIREE SORENSON-GROVES Ms. Sorenson-Groves. Thank you. And just for the record, we like the LWCF request but we are a little happier with the transportation, you know, number, too. But my name is Desiree Sorenson-Groves. I am with the National Wildlife Refuge Association, and I am speaking on behalf of our organization and over 190 refuge affiliate groups just like the other ones here on this fantastic refuge panel. Thank you so much for having this and having these friends appear. I mean I can talk about national issues and I can give you a big picture, but these folks who came here on their own dime can talk about what is happening on the ground in ways that I just cannot. I visit refuges but they know firsthand what is going on on the ground. So the Refuge Association, Friends Group, and the CARE group--you heard from a few of our partner organizations in the CARE group--sportsmen and conservation groups, we all agree that the refuge system--we hope that you will fund it at $495 million for fiscal year 2013. And that represents just what is needed to maintain management capabilities, which is what we call it, simply what they are doing right now. And that is the minimum needed because we take into account the salary freeze. And to get these groups to all agree on something, as you might imagine, can be a little daunting, but we do. But we are all particularly concerned about what might happen to the refuge system should sequestration happen or a very large funding cut. So I am going to talk a little bit about what a 9 to 10 percent cut would do to the refuge system. We estimate a loss of about 500 positions, and of those, 300 would be visitors' services staff. This is particularly concerning because these are the people who oversee friends and volunteers. And without the staff to oversee the volunteers, then you lose all that work and effort. And that is really important because friends and volunteers do 20 percent of the work on National Wildlife Refuges. To lose that is enormous, but that is one of the things that is on the table. We have talked to Fish and Wildlife Service and that is something that would be a realistic impact from a 10 percent cut. They would have to look at something like that. We also estimate that many refuges would have to simply close. That means no staff, no access, only an occasional visit by a law enforcement officer. Those would be probably small refuges, those with three to four staff, something like Mason Neck, perhaps. And then it would be refuges that use a lot of money to run them, so something like Midway out in the Pacific which costs an enormous amount to run. We are also concerned that the system could at least have some impacts to law enforcement officers, but, you know, even a loss of one officer could have a huge impact. An independent review in 2005 recommended a force of 845 full-time law enforcement officers, but the system has only about a quarter of that right now. And since that report, the system has grown by 50 million acres with the addition of the Pacific monuments by President Bush and visitation has grown by 15 percent. Another crucial program that could be severely impacted by cuts is the refuge system's fire budget. Over 50 percent of the lands in the system are actually fire-adapted ecosystems, which means that prescribed fire as a management tool is not just important; it is essential, so essential in fact that if funds from the Department of Interior's Hazardous Fuel Reduction Program are reduced as proposed in the President's budget, it would have dire consequences. Prescribed fire is one of the most effective habitat management tools for game species like elk and deer in the West, but also for endangered species like the Florida panther in the East. And prescribed fires reduce catastrophic wildfires which threaten people's lives and property. And last, I would like to talk briefly about an aspect of the refuge system's budget, which they actually have no control over but has severe impacts to their operations. From fiscal year 2005 to 2011, the refuge system sustained about a little under $700 million worth of damages from natural disasters. So tornados, fires, hurricane, flooding, a tsunami, you know, the earthquake here on the East Coast last year--damages just last year were $200 million but they have only received about $250 million to address those so the rest has gone to the backlog. As you heard from Mr. Knadle earlier, refuges are economic engines and they are a good investment. According to a recent report by the Southwick Associates, refuges annually generate more than $32 billion in ecosystem services and $4.2 billion in economic activity. That means for every $1 that you appropriate to run the refuge system, $8 is returned in economic activity, $65 for ecosystems services. So it is a very good value. I hope that you will think about our request and do the best you can. I hope that you all visit a National Wildlife Refuge soon and, well, I guess none of us were invited to go down with James Cameron to the Marianas Trench, which is where he is, National Wildlife Refuge right now, but maybe we will all get to see the fruits of his labor in a new movie, perhaps the Abyss II. [The statement of Desiree Sorenson-Groves follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Maybe. Well, thank you very much. And that necklace is beautiful by the way. Ms. Sorenson-Groves. Thank you. You know, I was hoping that Ms. Lummis might be here---- Mr. LaTourette. Yeah, sure. Sure. Ms. Sorenson-Groves. Yes, because we have jewelry. Mr. LaTourette. I am actually glad my wife is not here because it would set me back a little bit. Thank you very much. Mr. Chandler, thank you. Welcome. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. MARINE CONSERVATION INSTITUTE WITNESS WILLIAM CHANDLER Mr. Chandler. Thank you, sir. Members of the committee, my name is Bill Chandler; I am vice president for Government Relations with Marine Conservation Institute, a nonprofit organization based in Bellevue, Washington. We are also a member of the CARE Alliance. I think this is sort of a CARE party today. We do support the President's request for $495 million for the refuges operations and maintenance and we are especially interested in the marine monuments that President George W. Bush created in 2006 and 2009. These monuments included 12 National Wildlife Refuges, more than 20 coral islands and atolls and large areas of the oceans scattered across the Pacific. Together, they protect some of the most pristine coral reef ecosystems in the world and they are truly treasures that merit their status in the National Wildlife Refuge system. If I might, Mr. Chairman, I would like to share a map with you all to give you a little orientation about the vast area where the Fish and Wildlife Service must operate. This map indicates why managing the monuments is both challenging and expensive. The only way to move people and goods in this region is via ship or plane, and as you know, those are not cheap. But nevertheless, the Fish and Wildlife Service has to manage these places. Furthermore, although the monuments make up one-third of the refuge system in terms of area, they receive approximately $6 million a year right now out of the refuge budget. That is roughly 1.5 percent. Now, in the best of all possible worlds, we would love to see the budget for the monuments enhanced. In fact, we think it could use another $3.5 million allocated out of the request. And I know that there is probably going to be lots of requests from other people to try to squeeze that $495 million in various ways. But I would like to point out that if we could bring the spending of the monuments to about $9.5 million, there is a good rationale to do this. First of all, they get about $5.5 million now that is allocated to managing Papahanaumokuakea, which was the first monument established by Bush in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Most of that covers the Fish and Wildlife Service's share of operating the Midway Airfield, which they are required by statute to do. The remainder pays for fuel, salaries, transportation of people and supplies, and so forth. In talking with the Fish and Wildlife Service, the estimate to maintain current capabilities at Midway and deal with the increased fuel costs, contract costs, staff salaries, and so forth that the Fish and Wildlife Service is facing, they really need a total of $7.4 million just to manage the Midway situation. We believe this $1.9 million gap should be closed. I should point out that the Midway Airport, of course, is the only safe harbor for a plane crossing the Pacific and that is why it is required to be maintained in an open situation. They could also use another $600,000 for a couple of staff people out there to actually do natural resource management work. Moving now to the three latest monuments established by the President, these in my opinion are severely underfunded and we think they could use an additional million dollars above their current budget. I should point out that the Fish and Wildlife Service has already missed its deadline for having these monument plans finished. They were supposed to have that done in 2011. They are not even close to getting those done, and one of the reasons is they just do not have the staff. So that million dollars would cover things like a manager for the Marianas Trench National Monument--they have never had one as yet--and also one for the remote Pacific islands. A manager has been put at Rose Atoll, but the other two have been vacant since the monuments were created. They also need a public planner to help get those plans done. They have got the usual costs of administration and travel. They have got a serious problem with eradicating endangered species to trespassers introduced to some of these islands without the Fish and Wildlife Service knowing it because there are no people on some of these places. So we have a law enforcement issue here that we are working with the Service, the Coast Guard, and NOAA to try to solve. That money would also pay for a cost assessment of the two wrecked vessels that we have mentioned to the Subcommittee before. They are lying on two of the islands. And it would help issue more scientific permits such as that requested by Mr. Cameron to do his dive. Right now, they only have enough time, money, and staff to put out about three research permits a year for each monument. They would like to increase that significantly because they are getting a lot of requests for scientific research and they have to vet those very carefully. So in summary, without additional funds, the Fish and Wildlife Service will not be able to meet its full operational requirements at Midway and that could cause some of the visitation out there to stop. Biological surveys and dealing with invasive species would be cut back significantly. The scientific exploration mandate would not be met. And the law enforcement efforts out there are going to remain spotty and nonexistent at some of the islands. So I thank you for your time, gentlemen, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have, and we look forward to working with the Subcommittee. I go out to Hawaii quite a bit to find out what is going on at these places and I might have some information that would be useful to you. [The statement of William Chandler follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. That would be great. Mr. Chandler. Thank you. Mr. Moran. I am supposed to meet somebody at my office Mr. LaTourette. Sure. Mr. Moran [continuing]. At 4:00. I wonder if we could hear from John next if you do not mind. Mr. LaTourette. Do whatever you want. I just want to ask Mr. Christensen, is Deer Flat either in Idaho, Washington, or Virginia? I am developing a theme here. But with your understanding, Mr. Christensen, we will skip over you for a second and we will get to Joan Patterson to accommodate Mr. Moran's schedule. So welcome. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. FRIENDS OF THE POTOMAC RIVER REFUGES WITNESS JOAN PATTERSON Ms. Patterson. Good afternoon, Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Moran. My name is Joan Patterson and I am speaking on behalf of the Friends of the Potomac River Refuges and its 136 members. But perhaps more importantly, I am here speaking to you as a mother. I would like to share with you how important the National Wildlife Refuge System is to communities, families, and individuals, and how involvement in our Nation's effort to conserve our wildlife heritage can change lives and foster citizenship. I have been a volunteer and a Friends member on National Wildlife Refuges since 1995. Back then, my husband and I were living near Portland, Oregon, in a small community where a refuge had recently been established. At the time, we were anxiously awaiting an adoption assignment and I got involved in the Friends of the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge to keep from going crazy. My involvement in the refuge system began in Oregon but my commitment to it began in China. A few months after joining the Friends, we finally got approval from the U.S. and Chinese Government to adopt. Shortly thereafter, I stood along the Pearl River in Guangzhou with my baby girl in my arms and I was wondering if it was fair to take her away from this rich cultural heritage. What would life in America offer her? Standing there I could feel the smog in the city and I saw the river polluted and it was bubbling. And it struck me that what we could offer her was a culture rich in wildlife with incredible landscapes, clean air and water. Since that moment, Maggie and her younger sister have explored the wonders of refuges in Oregon and Northern Virginia. They have had the chance to observe and investigate many ecological concepts that most urban youth only read about. They have learned how their daily decisions impact habitats and their communities. They have come to Capitol Hill to advocate for refuge system needs. They are becoming good citizens. Maggie was in this building just last month speaking up for online education. Every child should have these same opportunities. We need to tap into resources at refuges to educate the next generation and foster civic responsibility. The Potomac River Refuges in Northern Virginia lack the resources to provide a robust education and volunteer program. In 2006, budget cuts suspended most of the biological programs and curtailed maintenance. The one full-time staff member who is responsible for visitor programs now must dedicate most of his time to managing the resources. We are that subsequent funding increases stopped the bleeding. However, if sequestration occurs, we expect all visitor services programs to be eliminated. And two of the three refuges in this complex could be closed. If this happens, the over a quarter of a million public school students in our area might never have the chance to connect with nature and further their development of civic skills. While volunteers can supplement some of these losses, they cannot do it all. Refuges need staffing and facilities to recruit and train volunteers. Friends groups and volunteers contribute nearly 20 percent of all the work hours on refuges. At Potomac, volunteers are picking up trash--we are doing it Saturday and you are welcome to join us--mowing, conducting outreach programs, and other things. Can we do more? Yes. But without staff to oversee and interact with volunteers, projects go undone. Volunteer retention is also difficult. Keeping these refuges open and functioning is important to your constituents. Last fall, on a bitterly cold, rainy day, we hosted a festival at Occoquan Bay National Wildlife Refuge. A young mother and her four children came and all were unprepared for the weather. Mom was wearing flip-flops and she and one of the little girls were wrapped in black garbage bags. The oldest boy came up to me and gave me a dollar saying my mother wants you to have this. His mother loves plants and was glad to have this place to take her children. This family was living in the homeless shelter. But that did not stop this wonderful woman from showing her appreciation for the natural heritage we all share and demonstrated to her children how important it is to support it. I hope all of us will follow her example. While we realize that our country is facing difficult economic times and we must all share in the challenges of the recovery, we respectfully ask you to support a budget of $495 million for the National Wildlife Refuge System. I thank the Subcommittee for giving us the opportunity to provide this testimony. [The statement of Joan Patterson follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. I thank you very much. Mr. Moran, do you want a moment with Joan before you depart us? Do you have any questions of anybody? Mr. Moran. No, I am all set. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Moran. Thank you very much. Mr. LaTourette. Thank you. And Mr. Christensen, thank you for your accommodation. Now we will hear from the Friends of Deer Flat. Welcome. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. FRIENDS OF DEER FLAT WILDLIFE REFUGE WITNESS ROBERT C. CHRISTENSEN Mr. Christensen. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. At first, when I was selected, I am not sure I appreciated it but I do now. My name is Bob Christensen, and I am a retired wildlife biologist. I worked 30 years with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. I am here today on behalf of the Friends of Deer Flat Wildlife Refuge and its 80 members, also its 500 or more volunteers. My first experience with a wildlife refuge was at Fish Springs National Wildlife Refuge, which is on the south end of the Great Salt Lake Desert, one of the most remote wildlife refuges in the 48 States. I worked there a summer as a biological aide and I gained an appreciation for all of the planning and the work and the sweat that goes into creating, maintaining, and enhancing these icons of wild America. While I was there at Fish Springs, I met a man we call him Trapper Jim and he lived there at the refuge. He was granted lifelong, well, opportunity to live there and he lived in a dugout next to one of the desert springs. And most of the time he spent trapping muskrats and in the summertime he spent in his underground hole there just trying to keep cool. But he claimed that if you drank from the alkaline waters of the desert springs there and then walked to the refuge every day, it would keep you clean both inside and out. Anyway, my coworkers and I one time, we were listening to Jim in his little hut there; we like to listen to some of his stories he told. He told a lot of yarns. But we were listening to him. He had just skinned out a muskrat and he had put the glands up on a little shelf above his counter and he was drinking his coffee and talking to us and spinning his yarns, and meanwhile, these glands rolled off his dusty shelf and plopped into his coffee cup and we kind of looked at each other and snickered and wondered what was going to happen. And he eventually picked up the coffee cup and tasted it and his eyes kind of a puzzled look in his eyes and he took another sip and he kind of sloshed it around in his mouth and smacked his lip and gulped it down and he said, you know, that is the best cup of coffee I have ever had. Now, I tell you that because each refuge has its own history and heritage, each has its own story to tell, and each has its own intrinsic value on the American landscape. They are all different. They are all different characters. And this is true of Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge where I have been a volunteer for many years. And it is one of the oldest refuges in the National Wildlife Refuge System. Last month, we celebrated its 103rd birthday. Deer Flat serves as a refuge and a breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife with emphasis on wintering water fowl. The refuge received about 225,000 visitors last year, and that is pretty significant for a pretty small refuge. And it is up from--we had about 100,000 in '96 and so now we are at 225. Interpretive and educational outreach programs provided by the refuge having in recent years reached over 6,000 young people with different ethnic backgrounds and have also influenced another 9 to 11,000 people in our Environmental Education Programs. And much of this has been due to volunteers as well as to interns that we have been able to keep on staff. The Friends of Deer Flat realize the economic times that we are in and that funding increases are not necessarily feasible, but we know that at current budget levels, as Desiree explained, we can barely keep things moving along. And there will be actually some losses, particularly if we lose these Challenge Cost-Share Grants. We will have to reduce our volunteer outreach and environmental programs by 20 to 30 percent. If we go to the 10 percent reduction, then that will kind of double that. If we lost all of our grant monies for Challenge Cost-Share, then our outreach programs would be reduced by 40 to 60 percent. And another thing that we are concerned about is fire suppression and invasive weed control programs, they will be seriously diminished also. And we have had public input on that. The people would like to see us do a better job on the refuge. The refuge currently has no law enforcement officer and, of course, maintaining the status quo or reducing the budget would not help us there at all. We would not be able to provide any law enforcement. We hope that you will support the Deer Flat Refuge and the other 556 refuges across the country by maintaining at least the status quo funding for the refuge system and the funding, particularly the Challenge Cost-Share Program at $3.6 million level. On behalf of the Friends of the Refuge, we thank you for the opportunity to come and testify today. [The statement of Robert Christensen follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, I thank you very much for your testimony. And Mr. Paddock, we have come down to you. You are our last witness today. Welcome. ---------- Wednesday, March 21, 2012. FRIENDS OF THE REFUGE HEADWATERS WITNESS TODD PADDOCK Mr. Paddock. Thank you. And I guess I am the last and you are the last. Mr. LaTourette. That is right. Mr. Paddock. All the others have worn out the members of the Subcommittee. So I will try to be brief. The Upper Mississippi National Wildlife and Fish Refuge begins in Minnesota and it stretches 260 miles down through Wisconsin and Iowa and Illinois. So it is a very large refuge. And it is an important one. We get 3.7 million visitors a year and that is more than Yellowstone, for example. The reason is this is not a refuge that has fences. It is not distant from where people live. It is our backyard. You often can be in the refuge and not know it. And that does not mean, though, that it is not a vital refuge. For me, it is easy for me to talk about this because I am there probably a couple hundred hours a year. I fish, I hunt, I kayak, I canoe, I picnic, I swim with my wife, with friends. I am there a lot and I know how many other people use it as well. I am not that unusual to be honest. I have never been in a place in that refuge, no matter how far I would walk or canoe, gone over the ice where there was not another person nearby who might come around the corner. Over and over I thought I got away from everyone and I was wrong. And that is, again, because this is a place that is used. It is a wildlife refuge, it is for wildlife, but it is a paradise for people. I am sure you know that Minnesota is known as the land of 10,000 lakes, but not where I live. We are the land of the upper Mississippi River. That is just the truth. I guess you could call it the land of 10,000 backwaters of the river and islands. It is 240,000 acres of marshes and wooded islands and bottomland forests and upland prairies and more. And we have 300 species of birds, 100 species of fish, 150 species of mammals. We have 250 eagle nests, 5,000 nests of herons and egrets. We also are one of the four major flyways for the United States for migrating birds, and they need the water, the food, the protection that is there when they are migrating. And that is one of the things that a refuge provides. It is one of the reasons it began. If there was a 10 percent cut, the reason it would have a big impact for us is because we are already operating on an austere budget. For example, we have four law enforcement officers for four States and 3.7 million visitors. That is really an impossibility. We have no fisheries biologists. This is a refuge that is based entirely on the efforts--and no fisheries biologists when, like, Asian carp are coming and we know they are coming, there is not a lot we can do. Certainly, we cannot have an expert there to plan for how to address it because there is no such position. Similarly, we have no forester. Fifty thousand acres of bottomland forest and no forester. These positions exist, that part of our plan, but they are vacant. We do not have the money to hire them. If you were to visit the city I am from, Winona, and this is not unusual for river towns that are next to this refuge, you would see boats on the street and the side yards and the front yards and the backyards. They are kayaks, they are canoes, they are pleasure boats, they are fishing boats, they are hunting boats, they are airboats, which are what trappers use, and it is just another example of how important this refuge is. And people really do care. They truly care and they will pay for it. Minnesota, we passed a constitutional amendment to provide through sales tax on everything that is bought and sold that provides hundreds of millions of dollars a year to be spent on land purchases, water quality, and more. We care about environment to the point of saying we will spend more on it. They passed a similar law--although now they are waiting on their legislature to actually put it in effect. So I just want to let you know that if there was a cut of 10 percent, there would be further reductions. I asked the staff, what would you do? They said, well, no weekend visitor hours, no weekend visitor services. Special services like hunting for the disabled will be eliminated. We will also reduce law enforcement. We will reduce school programs. These are things that I do not think anyone wants to happen and that is what I am asking you to help stop, to not let this happen. Thank you. [The statement of Todd Paddock follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, listen, thank you and thank all of you. All of you touched upon sequestration. The good news is I do not think sequestration is going to occur because it was just too horrible. Nobody ever thought we would find ourselves with sequestration because we are supposed to have done our jobs, which we did not do. The budget that will be debated next week and some alternatives I think will accommodate sequestration without the 10 percent cuts that you are talking about. So that is the good news. The bad news is that people in your line of activity and others are going to have to get involved in this budget debate because all the pressure of last year's budget and this year's budget is on non-defense discretionary spending. Now, how does it get there? You have one party, my party that does not want to talk about revenues. You have the other party that wants to use the middle-class entitlement programs of Medicare and Social Security to beat the snot out of my party. You cannot get there unless you address both of these things. So the chicken way out of it is to continue to ratchet down this small percentage of the budget that is non-defense discretionary that has the disastrous effects that you are describing. If you all and people like you let us get away with it, well, then bad things are going to continue to happen. I have no problem saying to some of my wealthy friends, look, you got to be part of the solution, and, you know, you cannot pay 14 percent. You need to pay what I pay. And I have no problem saying to a retired person that Social Security was not designed to sustain you for as many years in retirement as you worked. But we got to get there. If we do not get there, again, you know, the average life expectancy of a Member of Congress is 8 years, and so the tendency is to just wait it out, and not have to make a tough decision, and nobody is ever going to be mad at us. But we are really at the point where we cannot do it. It is like the Asian carp. The clock is ticking. So as you go out and talk to all your members and your visitors and everybody else, America needs to get involved in this budget discussion because it is ordering priorities but it is also recognizing that there is a finite set of resources. Even if you tax the richest one percent, it does not fix the problem. So anyway, good news is no sequestration; bad news is we are in a lot of trouble. I want to thank you all for being here. I appreciate your testimony. And if you have anything come up as we begin our markup on some of the other things that occur, stay in touch with Mr. Simpson or Mr. Moran's staff and I am sure that we can accommodate you. So thanks so much for being here. Thursday, March 22, 2012. TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS PUBLIC WITNESSES Mr. Simpson. The Committee will come to order. Good morning, and welcome to the second day of our public witness hearing. This morning, the Subcommittee will be hearing from a cross-section of individuals representing a wide variety of issues addressed by this subcommittee. The Chair will call each panel of witnesses to the table, one panel at a time. Each witness will be provided with 5 minutes to present their testimony. We will be using a timer to track the progress of each witness, and when the button turns yellow, the witness will have 1 minute remaining to conclude his or her remarks. Members will be provided an opportunity to ask questions of our witnesses, but in the interest of time, the Chair would request that we keep things moving in order to conclude this morning's testimony at a reasonable hour. Mr. Simpson. I am happy to yield to my friend, Mr. Moran, for any remarks that he might have. Mr. Moran. No, I am fine. Mr. Simpson. No quote of the day? Mr. Moran. Well, I do, but I think it is a little ponderous for this hearing. I am going to save it for another time. Mr. Simpson. I have a really---- Mr. Moran. You really want it? Mr. Simpson. Yeah, yeah. Mr. Moran. Okay. Well, this one is from Margaret Mead. Mr. Simpson. Margaret Mead? Mr. Moran. Yeah, and since we have--representatives of the public here, and this is a day to hear from them, the quote is that ``Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.'' So this is kind of a push for more civic advocacy on behalf of their priorities, and---- Mr. Simpson. Are you going to put together a book of all these quotes? Mr. Moran. I do not know. Mr. Simpson. Because I like them. Mr. Moran. Do you really? Well, I appreciate that. I probably would not have sustained this if you had not shown some interest. It is getting to be a little bit of a burden for the staff. Mr. Simpson. I am going to have to go get a Bartlett's quotation book. Our first panel is Robert Lynch, President and CEO of Americans for the Arts, and Stanley Tucci, the award-winning actor, writer, producer and director, for Americans for the Arts. Welcome to our hearing this morning. Who is first? Okay. Go ahead, Bob. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. AMERICANS FOR THE ARTS WITNESSES ROBERT LYNCH STANLEY TUCCI Mr. Lynch. Well, first of all, thank you so much for having us here for this testimony, and I have submitted written testimony to you, so I am not going to go through that written testimony but I wanted to make a few comments about the value of your support for the National Endowment for the Arts and for the appropriation level of $155 million that we have this year, and that figure, $155 million, aligns closely this year with President Obama's fiscal 2013 request, which is what we are supporting. For context, I will just point out that that gets us to the 1980 level for the National Endowment for the Arts. Five years actually before I got here to Washington, it was at $155 million, and some day the hope is to get back to the 1992 level of $176 million. But $155 million is the support level in these troubled times that we hope can occur. Mr. Moran. What would it be adjusted for inflation? Do you have that number? Mr. Lynch. It would be over $300 million adjusted for inflation from that high of 176. But I want to point out also that I want to thank both Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Moran and fellow Subcommittee members for the work last year that you did in fighting off two amendments at least that were brought to the House Floor and would have greatly reduced or eliminated the National Endowment for the Arts, and that was noticed by the arts community and we thank you so much for that. This week is St. Patrick's Week, the week of celebration for Irish-Americans. It used to be St. Patrick's Day but now it is the entire week. Mr. Simpson. Some of us think it is St. Patrick's Year. Mr. Lynch. And I actually had the opportunity to take some time and Google every district of every member of the Committee and noticed in every district there were art and music and theater and dance and literature celebrations honoring St. Patrick's Day, some nonprofit organizations and many of them supported by the National Endowment for the Arts. And then I had the opportunity to go to an event on Tuesday night where the leader of the Republic of Ireland, the taoiseach, Enda Kenny, was speaking, and interestingly, he got up there and what he said is, come to Ireland this year, come to Ireland next year, and why should you come? He said hear our music, see our theater, enjoy our dance, visit our museums, bring your credit cards. And so I think it is interesting that I see nations have the opportunity to work with the French government last year and the Netherlands government and the Chinese government, all of them looking to have our American citizens come there to enjoy the arts that they support in those countries in order to create tourism abroad and also to be able to benefit the people from those countries. And so it is another example of what your support through the National Endowment for the Arts does. It creates the kind of opportunity here through the arts for people to come, and one of the things that is interesting that the Department of Tourism talks about is that cultural tourists, when they come here, they spend more money than any other kind of tourist and they stay longer, and they like to go to places that are not necessarily New York City but might be Boise, Idaho, or other parts of the country. They want an authentic experience. So I am excited about some of the things that we are seeing there that can attract people to our country. Now, the arts today, there is some tough news for the arts as there is for every other industry in America. We have seen that many nonprofit organizations are struggling to maintain their bottom lines. In fact, 45 percent of nonprofit arts organizations ended the year with a deficit in 2009, 45 percent. Now, 2 years ago I came to the Committee and I talked about the fact that we at Americans for the Arts thought that nonprofit arts organizations were going to take a financial hit and that they might lose as much as 20 percent of their budgets across the board, and we were right about that. Nonprofit arts organizations have taken a hit. But I was wrong about a second thing that I brought to the attention of the committee. I thought that from the data we saw that some 10 percent of them were going to go out of business, but they proved very resilient. They proved very, very strong and far fewer than that went out of business. That is what you read about in the papers. But in fact, they are mission driven. They are not bottom line driven. They are looking to make better communities and they will do whatever it takes to stay in business and the kind of help that they get, the little tiny bits of help that they get from something like the National Endowment for the Arts makes all the difference in the world. Now, that is the tough news. The good news is, they continue to have, these nonprofit arts organizations, a wonderful reputation for being economic drivers in America, revitalizing communities, creating jobs. I have mentioned figures in the past from our arts and economic prosperity study but $166 billion economic impact for the arts in America from the nonprofit arts community, 5.7 million jobs created and sustained across America, and $30 billion of tax monies coming to federal, state and local coffers. That I think is a great contributor and a consistent and steady contributor. In the year of the founding of the National Endowment for the Arts, 1965, there were 7,000 of these nonprofit organizations. Today, we know that there is 113,000 of them in smaller places all across the country. Four state arts agencies have become 50 state arts agencies because of the investment of the National Endowment for the Arts and the matching money that you create, and the 200 local arts agencies that our organization served back in 1965 are now 5,000 local arts agencies funding, serving and sustaining those 113,000 other organizations, and that is only the nonprofit. There are 800,000 other organizations that are for-profit businesses--a local music store, a dance school, Broadway Hollywood. And so with that, we are seeing that 4.25 percent of all businesses in America are arts businesses, small as they may be. I would point out that in Idaho's 2nd Congressional District, Reno, that there is 2,133 arts-related businesses that employ 6,539 people. Congratulations. And in Virginia's 8th District, we know that there are 2,842 arts-related businesses employing 12,700 people. That is, I think, exciting and powerful at the local level, and nationally, we know that there is 904,000 of these businesses. What I see when I look at the National Endowment for the Arts is that through programs that they have, they are continuing to track on providing access to all Americans to the arts and at the same time fostering economic development, economic growth. And I looked at some of the Committee members and I saw that in Representative Cole's district in Oklahoma a $10,000 Challenge Grant supported Global Oklahoma, which fostered interest in and celebration of all the different diverse cultures that were there in that particular district. In Representative Calvert's district in Riverside---- Mr. Moran. Would you just repeat--I did not hear that, Bob. Would you just repeat the last point that you made just once more? Mr. Lynch. I actually would like to say for a great example of arts activity in America something that happened in Representative Cole's district in Oklahoma a $10,000 Challenge Grant supported Global Oklahoma, a festival featuring different cultural traditions, and the festival brings together cultures of the world to promote appreciation and understanding of peoples that are in that district are from throughout the world through art and food, a terrific example. And in Representative Calvert's district, a $15,000 Access Grant supporting creation and presentation of a multidisciplinary work that celebrated the local Native American culture. On the placemaking side, the investments through things like Our Town and other programs are supporting livable, sustainable neighborhoods and enhanced quality of life through the arts, and I noticed that in Representative Lummis's district a $50,000 Our Town grant supports a pilot program in which public art is integrated into a low-income housing community in Casper. In Representative Simpson's district, Chairman Simpson's district, a $100,000 Our Town grant will support community engagement by the Trey McIntyre Company, allowing the Trey McIntyre Dance Company to stay home as opposed to touring and work with the people there. So with all of this, I think that we are seeing a valuable and a forward-thinking approach by Chairman Landesman at the National Endowment of the Arts, and the NEA seems to constantly be evolving with the times but still ensuring quality programming reaching all of our communities. I would like to take a moment simply to say a word of thanks to someone who is not here but I know that Congressman Norm Dicks, who has been a great member of this Committee for so long, is retiring and the arts are losing a friend with Congressman Dicks. He has worked with both of you very strongly and alongside Ranking Member Mike Simpson created increases in the National Endowment for the Arts and so I just wanted to say a word honoring him. So in conclusion, I respectfully request that the Subcommittee fund the National Endowment for the Arts at the President's request of $155 million. It is my profound hope, whether this time or in the future, that the Subcommittee can do even more for the citizen participation in the arts, and continue to demonstrate the wonderful leadership, the belief in the nonprofit arts sector and the support for the NEA that you have done. To me, if we continue to do that, we get what you are actually helping to create: a better citizenry, better towns, a better Nation, and even perhaps a better world. The cultural community is ready to assist you, and I thank you for the honor of testifying. [The statement of Robert Lynch follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, and thanks for bringing up Norm. We are all losing a great friend, and unfortunately, the country is losing a great representative in having Norm retire. I called him a chicken the other day, a quitter. And I have to admit, when I think of Oklahoma, I think of football, not art. Stanley, go ahead. Mr. Tucci. Thank you. I am very honored to be here today before the House of Representatives Appropriations Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies testifying on behalf of an increase to $155 million for the National Endowment for the Arts for fiscal year 2013. You asked me to speak extemporaneously, but I said I would not because if I did, all of the funding would be cut. So I am going to read what I wrote. I have always felt that the arts are a necessity and not a luxury. That is a bold statement, I know, but here is why. Both sets of my grandparents emigrated from Italy at the turn of the century. None were educated beyond the 8th grade. My father went to Buffalo State Teachers College, now part of the SUNY system. The SUNY system is also what I went through as well, the conservatory at SUNY Purchase. He studied fine art and then he went on to Columbia graduate school receiving his masters in fine art. He taught high school art for 40 years, everything from printmaking, sculpture, silkscreen, pottery, jewelry making, calligraphy, painting and drawing. He was given a sabbatical in 1972 to study figurative sculpture in Florence for a year, and we all followed. The exposure to the art, architecture and the food of Italy was life changing for me and it very strongly influenced my aesthetic as an actor, as a writer and a director, but this aesthetic was already being formed unbeknownst to me by my exposure to art on a regular basis since the day I was born. Besides his teaching job, my father sketched, painted and sculpted at home in the evenings after dinner, and he taught art on Saturdays and summers locally to make extra money, for as we know teachers' salaries are nothing to brag about. I will be back next year to talk about that. But along the way, I was very often by his side learning to work in all the mediums he was exploring himself and teaching his students. I spent many summers in the very well-equipped art room in the posh suburb of Chappaqua, New York, near where we lived and where he taught. The summer school class was filled with students, some of whom had come from poorer sections of New York City to stay with families in Westchester and take art courses, a sort of like fresh air program. All of them adored and respected my father because he treated them with respect by recognizing and bringing to the fore their individual artistic talents and abilities. These guys, these kids, had never before been given the time, the materials, the environment and the opportunity to create something of themselves, for themselves that ultimately ended up pleasing so many others around them. Now, why do I bring that up? I bring it up because art, not unlike athletics, is a sure way to find and make use of the best in all of us, and I do not mean just fine art, but music, dance and film. And so for this reason, I feel that we must not look at the arts as an adjunct to society, but as a vital and integral part of society. Sometimes the arts make us think, sometimes they make us see things as we have never before, sometimes they simply entertain and sometimes, if we are lucky, they do both. A society that nourishes art will always benefit not only culturally but economically, as Bob just pointed out. If we look at the number of jobs that are created by the arts alone and their positive fiscal impact on any given community, city, state or country, the numbers speak for themselves. You cannot really argue with it in the end. It is a great--it is a bargain, really. This is too often overlooked by so many who consider the arts a drain on the finances of any social entity. But an increase in funding, even during financially tough times, will only reap benefits in the long run. I have followed and know only too well the strained relationship that the NEA has had with Capitol Hill over the years, and I can understand the reticence on the part of legislators to increase or even continue its funding, but I urge that the focus not be on those few works that might offend a certain group or individual, but rather on all the extraordinary visual art, theatre, music and film that sprang from programs, schools, museums, theatre and dance companies funded and sustained by the NEA. But unfortunately, art is not a thing that is easily defined. It is amorphous, it is interpretive, it is subjective. If it were not, it would be mathematics. Now, imagine us all going to the theatre on a Saturday night and watching someone solve mathematical equations for two and a half hours. No, thank you. I will just meet you at the party afterward. But this inability to define art is what causes us great strife. Are we all to like the same music, painting or film? No. It is impossible. Why, even caring husbands and wives argue about such things. Except for my films, of course, which everyone loves. So art is elusive. Is it all good? No. Is it all bad? No. Is all dance beautiful? No. Some of it is just indulgent and annoying. Do we wish that some conceptual art would remain just that? Yes. Can art be elitist? Yes. Need it be? No. In fact the arts are a great leveler. They bring people of all walks of life together by giving them common experiences through so many mediums and in so many venues. They are an apparatus, a vehicle for healthy social interaction of people of all ages. Like sports programs, arts programs give all children and teens, but particularly those at risk, a place to go and create something positive during those rather ambiguous hours between the end of the school day and when a parent comes home from work. They teach the intellect. They grow the imagination. They strengthen the spirit. They encourage competition. They instill a work ethic. They inspire the soul. And they make us proud as individuals, as a culture and as a nation. The examining and reflective nature of all artistic disciplines helps us to better understand who we are as a people, for our generation and for other generations to come. It is true that art cannot always be good, but it can be and is good for us. As history shows us, the arts not only help define who we are as a people but they are one of the deciding factors that clarify the distinction between a society and a great nation. I respectfully ask the Subcommittee to increase the NEA budget for fiscal year 2013 to $355 million--oh, I am sorry. I said $155 million. And thank you for the opportunity to present witness testimony. I want to also take this time to publicly recognize and thank the Subcommittee for supporting the NEA and so many New York area nonprofit arts organizations and institutions that have specifically touched my life since its inception in 1965. They have helped shape my childhood, my career and now, as a father, my children's appreciation of the arts. Some of those that I have had direct contact with are the Katonah Art Museum, which is a Blue Star Museum in the town that I grew up in, that provides free admission to active military-duty families from Memorial Day to Labor Day; the Classic Stage Company where I worked, and the Classic Stage Company has received multiple NEA grants throughout the years including Shakespeare in American Communities grant, which supports performances and educational activities that introduce middle and high school students to the power of live theater. SUNY Purchase, which is my alma mater, has been repeatedly recognized by the NEA for its excellence in theater. There is no other school quite like it in the country, I think. The Ensemble Studio Theater where I worked when I was very young and had hair, they have received several NEA grants throughout their storied history including a Challenge America grant, a grant program for projects that extend the reach of the arts to underserved populations. The Jacob Burns Film Center, which is in Pleasantville, New York, not far from where I live, is a prime example of the access facilitated by NEA grants. This is an extraordinary center, a film center, that has received a grant every year since 2007, enabling it to bring big names to a small town and to present film series such as the International Understanding Through Film series. Sarasota Film Festival that I have participated in quite a few years in a row, they have received NEA recognition in 2007, in part for its commitment to community involvement. This is becoming a very important film festival that I also think brings, not that Sarasota needs a lot of money but, you know, it helps. And of course, the Tribeca Film Institute, which recently won two NEA Access to Artistic grants for their professional development program. The SUNY Purchase Neuberger Museum of Art, which is an extraordinary museum gallery on the campus of SUNY Purchase. And I think for me, one of the most important ones is, I would like to express my appreciation for the support the NEA has given to the Sundance Institute. The Sundance Institute began with a grant from the NEA and they have been repeatedly recognized for their commitment to the discovery and development of independent artists and audiences, and I serve on the board of trustees and as a creative advisor for the screenwriters and directors labs. Multiple Access to Artistic Excellence grants have provided critical support for the institute's Film Forward program, which offers emerging screenwriters, directors, producers and composers the opportunity to support and resources needed to successfully create work. This really is an extraordinary thing that has completely changed the landscape of filmmaking as we know it. Without Sundance and without the NEA's support for Sundance, independent film would have all but disappeared in this country. So thank you so much. [The statement of Stanley Tucci follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. And I was just reading an article on Delta's magazine on the flight back this time and it was talking about the film festivals around the country, around the world actually. Cannes was number one. But if you looked at it, Sundance had the highest attendance of just about any of them. Mr. Tucci. Yes. Mr. Simpson. I appreciate your testimony and thanks to both of you for being here today. This Committee, as you noted, has been very supportive of the arts and will continue to be, and we will do what we can in this budget. I suspect this year we will also have to again fight off some amendments from some people that would like to do away with a lot of the arts. And it is very interesting when you talk about what the arts are, it is different for everybody. We had a gentleman from Idaho out here not too long ago who actually made saddles, an old cowboy, and he did the leather work. I mean, they were world class. He is as much an artist as anybody that sits down with a palette of paint and paints a picture. So they are different for everybody, and oftentimes, as you said, they are controversial and, you know, that is okay. That is what it is supposed to be. So I appreciate you both being here today and testifying, and we will do what we can. Jim? Mr. Moran. Thank you, Mike. I think we agree on the importance of the arts. Certainly, we have a pragmatic rationale that it is such an economic driver within communities, both urban and rural, but beyond that, it is a reflection of our values as a society. It is just so integrally important in defining who we are as a Nation. It helps us empathize with others, people who are different. More than any other vehicle for enabling us to do that, are the arts and humanities. So we appreciate your taking the time to testify, but most importantly thank you for what you do all year long on behalf of the betterment of our society. Mr. Simpson. Representative Cole. Mr. Cole. I was delighted to arrive in time to play my customary role as a foil for the Chairman. You remind me, however indirectly, of the 2005 Boise State-O.U. game. It has been going on a lot of years. It never stops. I do have one--and I was disappointed to see of all the grants you mentioned, mine was the smallest in the testimony. But seriously---- Mr. Moran. But it had the highest impact. That was the point he was making. It was worldwide, yours. It was global. Mr. Cole. Well, we always do the most with the least, you know. But seriously, Chairman Simpson and I have the duty to sit on the Budget Committee, which frankly sets the overall targets for spending. It does not get down to programmatic levels. And we and others on that committee spend a lot of time defending the appropriated part of the budget, which this is a very small part of but a very important part. I could not agree more with what you had to say. But I would just ask you, as you advocate for the specific things, all these types of programs are under pressure because we have not been able to come to grips with our entitlement problem. We spend a lot of time talking about it. There is going to be a lot of different ways to do that and we are going to fight over them, hash over them, but sometime, probably next year, we are going to sit down, I think, as a Congress once we know what the distribution of positions are and hopefully come to grips with this because the biggest threat you face is not somebody crafting a piece of art that somebody did not like, and again, this is a miniscule part of an enormous budget, so it is pretty hard to argue that this would make any substantial contribution to the deficit problem. But if we do not have more people engaged in really working through how we deal with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, these things, they will disappear. Because people go after ``the easy things'' first. They do not want to deal with the real problems. The real problems are big. So I know that is not on your topic and not your responsibility but I would just ask, as you do have the opportunity to interact with a lot of members and influence a lot of people, just get them to think about the big problems and have the courage to put solutions on the table. And right now we are not seeing enough people in elected office willing to put solutions on the table and then split the different or divide, and I think that you could help your cause by trying to focus attention on that as well. And again, thank you for what you do. It is a wonderful organization. It has done enormously wonderful things and impacted lives, and thank you for taking your time to be here to testify. Mr. Tucci. It is a pleasure. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. And Tom brings up a very important point, that the biggest threat really is the deficit that we are facing. Unfortunately, there are people who are trying to focus more and more of the debt problem on a smaller and smaller part of the budget, and frankly, you cannot address the debt problem by focusing on small amounts of discretionary spending. So I appreciate you being here. Betty, did you have anything? Ms. McCollum. Good morning. I was with people in my district who are very passionate about supporting the arts, and I said I need to get down to show my public support for the arts. So all politics is local, but I really appreciate you being here. This is how we express ourselves in a democracy, so the arts are important to our democracy. Thank you for being here. Mr. Simpson. Thank you both. Mr. Tucci. Thank you. Mr. Lynch. I just wanted to point out one thing for Congresswoman McCollum, and that is that we had the opportunity to bring our conference to Minnesota and the economic impact of that, but my members wanted you to know that there is 2,037 businesses that are arts-centered businesses in your district with 8,867 jobs, which you know of, but I think it is good to be in the record as well. And with Congressman Cole, the same thing. One of the things that I think the arts can do is to contribute back dollars to that budget process, even in a district in Oklahoma where the chairman of my board, Ken Ferguson, comes from and says to say hello, 1,389 businesses and 3,658 jobs. So we are trying to do our part to help you with the budget process. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. And for your annual conference, Boise is a beautiful place. I will just throw that out. Thank you for being here today. Next we have Hunter Rawlings, III, and Deborah Frances Tannen, Professor of Linguistics at Georgetown University, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and Mr. Rawlings, President of the Association of American Universities for the National Endowment for the Humanities. ---------- -- -------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES WITNESSES HUNTER RAWLINGS, III DEBORAH FRANCES TANNEN Mr. Rawlings. Good morning. Thank you very much for inviting me to speak. I appreciate the opportunity. I am from the State of Virginia, and Ranking Member Moran, it is a pleasure to see you and other members of the Subcommittee. I want to take us back to August of 1769. In August of 1769, the 18-year-old James Madison left his home in Orange, Virginia, and went up to the College of New Jersey. There, he took the exams that were given to the freshmen who had finished their first year at the college of New Jersey and he passed those exams, so he became a sophomore. And the reason he passed those exams was that his Latin and his Greek were very strong and that was the test of a student in those days. He was, in other words, a humanities student. At the College of New Jersey, he took the curriculum that all students took in those days, and that was primarily Latin and Greek and natural philosophy and philosophy of the Scottish Enlightenment, thinkers like Adam Smith and David Hume, and he did very well. He also learned how to debate, to discuss issues, to make an argument. He took the full curriculum for 2 years, and by working very hard he graduated after 2 years. He, in other words, took advantage of advanced placement credit and he worked especially hard and skipped the senior year and he graduated. At the end of that period of 2 years of study, like most humanities majors, he had no idea what to do with himself. He did not get a job. He did not know what job to get, and so he did what most humanities majors do in these days. He went to the president of a college and he said could I stay and spend another year, I would like to study Hebrew and theology with you, and the president being a good president, said you may certainly do that, and James Madison thereby became Princeton's first graduate student. A year later, he had finished that course of study, and he still did not know what to do. So like many a humanities major, having now graduated twice, so to speak, he went home and lived with his parents. Now, we would consider this today a failed education. He had taken a bunch of useless courses, ancient stuff like Latin and Greek, and he had prepared himself for absolutely nothing in the way of a job and so he spent the next 4 years living at home with his parents tutoring his younger siblings and writing nostalgic letters to his friends from the old days at the College of New Jersey. James Madison never did find a job. Instead, a job of course found him. The revolution occurred, and James Madison became the founder of our republic. How did he do that? He did that because he had had a really strong humanities education, and so at the end of this period of time in 1776, he became one of those people that the Americans began to look up to, and within short order he had been elected from his own district in Virginia to the state assembly in Virginia. He was then the principal architect of the Constitution. Why was that? Because his friend, Thomas Jefferson, sent him two trunk loads of books from Paris where Jefferson was living and Madison began what became known as the most important piece of scholarship in American history. He studied what federations had been in history in order to prepare himself to go to Philadelphia to work on the federal convention. In Philadelphia, even though he was only 35 years old, he became the best known of all the advocates for the new Constitution. Why? Because he was trained well in the humanities. He was an oracle of information on European history, on ancient Greek and Roman history, on confederacies. He was the author of the Virginia Plan, which was eventually adopted as the basis for the Constitution. Once the Constitution was completed, it had to be ratified in the states. What did Madison do? He went to New York and joined Alexander Hamilton writing the Federalist Papers in order to promote ratification in New York. When he finished there, he rushed back to Virginia and led the fight for ratification in Virginia. During all of this time, he used his humanities education to make the case. The Constitution was ratified and you know what happened next. Madison went to become a member of the House of Representatives. There, he wrote the Bill of Rights and then became Secretary of State and then President for two terms. Now, the point I want to make in this story is, this was a person who finished college with a humanities major and had no idea what to do with himself, but his humanities education had prepared him for what would become a lifetime of service to the United States, and he died at the age of 85 having continued to work constantly in public service all his life. So the story of James Madison is a good story of a humanities major who, like me when I finished college, had no idea what to do with himself, and I remember very well when I decided I wanted to go into academia, all my uncles said what in the world are you going to do with an education in Latin and Greek; you cannot get a job. And even after I got a job teaching, they said when are you going to get a real job. Because the humanities are somehow seen as beneath the real world but I am here to tell you this morning they are not. They are in fact essential to an educated citizenry. And the reason the humanities are important is that we want to be training and educating citizens who can make complicated decisions in a complicated world. We spend in this country billions of dollars on science, and I am glad we do because we need good science, but many countries spend billions of dollars on science. Even autocratic, dictatorial countries spend money on science because they see it as a way forward. In the Soviet Union, science was prized. It was put up on a pedestal. It was important. It was critical. And today, China is spending billions of dollars on science in order to catch up with us. But those countries do not do the humanities well at all. Why not? Because the humanities require freedom. You cannot do the humanities without freedom. Why is that? Because the humanities are about values, and dictators do not like having values on the table for debate and discussion. One of the things that makes us a very great country and it is one of the reasons that Madison created us the way he did is that we are free to debate ideas, to take them wherever they will go, so in teaching and in scholarship, we can talk freely about our ideas, bad ideas, good ideas, and they all have to be put on the table and fought over, and that is the way James Madison foresaw the country, a place where you can have free debates about ideas so the humanities can only exist in a strong way in free countries, and that is why the humanities are weak in places like China because you cannot express yourself freely. In this country, we can. So to me, the humanities endowment is our way of saying as a Nation, we believe in freedom. We believe in the opportunity to discuss ideas wherever they will take us. Bad ideas, good ideas, they have to go into the public forum and they have to win debates. Otherwise they lose and they are discredited. At least we get to discuss them. So I am proud of being a humanist and I eventually did get a job in spite of my uncle's belief that I never would, and I am pleased to be able to come to you this morning and talk about the humanities because I am a really strong believer in them. I am not going to spend a lot of time on the budget. Clearly, I support Chairman Leach's request for $154 million. That seems to me to be a minimal commitment to something as important as the humanities. I hope that you will be able to support Chairman Leach's priorities. The Bridging Cultures project, which he has brought forward as chairman of NEH, is an important statement, I think, about what the country wants to do and to say to the world, and it seems to me that is one of the most important functions of the NEH, to say publicly to the world, we support freedom, we support free ideas, we support free debate. That is the only way, it seems to me, we are going to make James Madison proud of the product that he created. Thank you very much. [The statement of Hunter Rawlings, III, follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole [presiding]. Dr. Tannen. Ms. Tannen. I do thank you for the honor and privilege of addressing you today, and I am a resident of Virginia as well. I guess I am best known as the author of a book called You Just Don't Understand that was on the New York Times bestseller list for nearly 4 years. It was number one for 8 months. It has been translated into 31 languages, the 31st just added last week, Romanian. I have written 22 books, half of them for scholarly audiences, half for general audiences, and because of that book as well as two others that were New York Times bestsellers and others as well, I am often asked to comment on radio and television and image reviewed by newspapers. But what I want to talk about today is the early support that I got from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the role that that played in laying the foundation for the work that later led to this wide audience, so I guess I would say that the ways the NEH helped me helped so many other people, a wide range of people in their daily lives. I came to Georgetown in 1979. My salary was $17,000. It was not enough to live on in Washington. And I would have had to teach that first summer just to pay the rent. It was a little tiny place over a garage in Georgetown, but even that I would have needed to supplement it to pay the rent, but I got a summer stipend from NEH that was $2,000, but it made the difference between teaching that summer and actually having a summer to do my research, and maybe most important, it was an early sign of confidence that the work I was doing was worth something. In 1985, I organized a huge summer institute at Georgetown, self-supporting. Students paid. Six hundred people came from all over the United States as well as abroad to study the kind of linguistics I was doing. It was a summer institute. I got a grant from NEH to have a concurrent institute that brought 25 college and university teachers from across the country and people came from New Hampshire to Hawaii, 25 college teachers who were able to take advantage of what the institute was doing and then take that back to their students, all the students that they would be teaching over the years. And that again was a very small grant, something like $25,000, that paid summer stipends for the 25 people as well as faculty to teach them. That same summer, I got a very small grant, $3,500 from the D.C. Humanities Council, and that is funded by the NEH's Division of State Programs, and what I did was put on a little program, a public program about conversations between women and men. So we hired actors from a little theater group and they acted out these scenarios. We got some free publicity because I and a couple of other faculty members went on the Donahue show, which at the time was a very small, just starting out local show, so because of that, people came from all over Washington, attended this, and it was one of the first signs that I had that this work on how communication between women and men could be understood as linguistic differences had a broad appeal, and so all of this was laying the seeds, planting seeds for what I later was able to write about. One more grant I got from NEH, a basic research grant that gave me a year off from teaching in order to develop in more detail my work which if you looked at it at the time would seem very technical, very academic, very limited, poetic features in every conversation, comparing the language of everyday conversation with the language of literature. But it is that scholarly work that may seem to be a very limited audience that really laid the foundation for the work that I was later able to build on in writing books that just about anybody could read and take advantage of. After the book You Just Don't Understand was published and the reaction that it got, I did not seek any more funding because I did not need it anymore. But I did try to repay my debt to NEH by serving on panels and by reading proposals, and I think this is--I want to mention that because it is another way that the work of NEH is enhanced by a lot of volunteer work by academics. Yeah, you get these proposals, nobody pays you. You read the proposals and rate them. If you are on a panel, you get hundreds of grants that you have to take your time that you do not get paid for reading them and rating them and then coming and spending days on those panels. It is maybe a little bit surprising to hear from a linguist at a panel like this because they get support from NSF, and that is true. There is a formal branch of the field that gets support from NSF. The work I do has something to do with human relationships and psychologists get a lot of support from NIMH for that. The kind of research that I do and linguists like me do that is the role of language in everyday life really does not have any other source of support. In fact, that institute that I ran was called Humanistic Approaches to Linguist Analysis, and that has kind of been my goal in all of this. But the amounts of money that are required for this kind of research are really very small compared to what is required for scientific laboratories or large psychological studies, and I will echo what my colleague said about we all know the importance of science. In the current issue of New York Review of Books, there is an essay by Freeman Dyson, the great Princeton physicist, and he said science is a creative interaction of observation with imagination, and he was talking about the importance of the arts for the sciences, and again echoing some of what you just heard, the United States has been the source of global innovation not because we are a nation of technicians. What informs our technology is our imagination and creativity and these are the domains of the humanities. So that is the gist of what I wanted to say, just to give you a personal account of the huge difference that can be made by these small grants in the humanities. Before I close, I want to thank you for one more thing. It is the hugest gift that anyone could be given, and I suspect I am not the only one to have gotten this gift from an NEH grant, but I do not think it could ever be guaranteed by a funding institution, but at that 1985 linguistic institute that I ran that was supported by the NEH institute, one of those college and university professors who came to take part in that became my husband. So for that very special gift, I want to thank you. [The statement of Deborah Frances Tannen follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Moran. We will give NEH a tip. Ms. Tannen. And he was born on St. Patrick's Day, by the way. Mr. Cole. Let me just say as an old Victorian historian, as the father of a son who is writing, I hope to God, finally his dissertation in philosophy, both of you give me enormous hope. Mr. Moran. Mr. Moran. I know that you share my love of the humanities, Tom, and this is one of the nice things about this Committee, that we have some tangential input into promoting them. Tom is always reading every time I go on a trip. He is always deep into a book. And I do not know what we would do without the humanities. The little push that this program provides to people who otherwise would have to give up is useful. Some potential authors would say, you know, that there is no way I can spend the summer writing a book or the ideas that are in my head, because I am just going to have to go and do something else to put food on the table. NEH helps and oftentimes is there for them. So I thank you for your comments, Deborah. And Mr. Rawlings, how wonderful it would have been to be an undergraduate in your classics course at Cornell. Here you are the President of the university and you went back and you taught a classics course to undergraduates. Cornell is such an outstanding institution, and I know they were having some trouble and they brought you back after you had been president for many years. To pull that sprawling campus together and give it some meaning, some focus, some purposefulness in terms of what students and graduate students do when they get out, and your impact on so many thousands, countless lives, is just priceless. I appreciate you for all that you have done throughout your life on behalf of the humanities and others' ability to appreciate them. So thank you. Mr. Rawlings. Well, thank you very much. I just thought if James Madison could go up and help Alexander Hamilton with the ratification process in New York, it was the least that I as a Virginian could do for New Yorkers. Mr. Moran. Well, I appreciate that perspective too. But, you know, your whole statement was extemporaneous. I wish it had been written down, but it was just from the mind and heart, and we thank you. Mr. Rawlings. Thank you. Mr. Cole. Mrs. Lummis. Mrs. Lummis. No questions, but I deeply appreciate you being here today and your advocacy for the humanities. Mr. Rawlings. Thanks. Mr. Cole. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Well, I wish I would have studied Latin harder. That is all I can say. Mr. Rawlings. It is not too late. Ms. McCollum. Talk to my Latin teacher. And tell my son there are other careers for linguists besides living abroad in Japan, teaching at Japanese universities. Maybe you can help me bring him home with us. I think the story that you tell is impactful. If we are to be creative, if we are to be successful as human beings and if we are to be successful as a country, we have to take the time to sit, reflect, read and have an open mind. The humanities, the arts, the environment, the sciences, religion, they all come together, and you are the home of all that. Thank you for being here today, and sharing stories both past and present that remind us of how interconnected the humanities are to everything that we do. We all are, after all, human, so thank you. Ms. Tannen. In the spirit of there is hope, I started out just moving to Greece and teaching English there for several years, and I came back. Mr. Moran. That is so true about China and Russia. No matter how much they invest in science, no matter how many people they put into ``productivity'', they are never going to have the innovative and creative capacity that we have, and it is because of the humanities. Thanks for coming. Mrs. Lummis [presiding]. Thank you both so much. Mr. Rawlings. Thank you for the opportunity. Mrs. Lummis. We would now like to call up our next panel. It consists of Mr. Ulrich, Dr. Grossman, Mr. Hein, Mr. Cassidy and Ms. Pierpont, and so if you would all join us at the table? So Ulrich on the end. Next to Mr. Ulrich, Dr. Grossman, please. Next to Dr. Grossman, Mr. Hein. Next to Mr. Hein, Mr. Cassidy. And certainly last but not least, Ms. Pierpont. Ms. McCollum. And I think for the first time in history, two women are sitting at the head of this table. Mrs. Lummis. It is my pleasure and honor actually to welcome you to the table, and especially my dear friend Paul Ulrich, who is from Wyoming. Now, let me tell you a little bit about Paul before we all began. Paul Ulrich and his family are the perfect marriage between what our previous speaker spoke of, and that is the intersection of science and art. Paul's grandparents, Carl and Shirley Ulrich, are world-class fossil preparers, and for people who are artists in the preparation of artistic fossils for display, people who know them can walk in a room and across the room they can tell that a fossil was prepared by Carl Ulrich. He is a world-class fossil artist, preparer. These people have for three generations been an intersection of art and geology, and Paul is here in his capacity as a member of the board of directors of the Wyoming Humanities Council. But it shows you how the geologist in him, and he is an oil and gas company executive by professor, but he is by avocation and first love someone who works in that intersection between art and geology and science and the humanities, and he is also just a wonderful, dear individual. So I am delighted, Paul, that you are here today and delighted to welcome you. Would you begin? ---------- -- -------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. WYOMING HUMANITIES COUNCIL, REPRESENTING THE FEDERATION OF STATE HUMANITIES COUNCILS WITNESS PAUL ULRICH Mr. Ulrich. Madam Chair, Representative, thank you very, very much. It is a significant honor for me to be here testifying, and testifying in front of you, my dear friend. Thank you for the kind words for the family. I will carry that message on. First and foremost, though, I need to carry a message about the Wyoming Humanities Council and the state-federal partnership, and I will walk through that and then I would love to take some questions. I have got a bit of written testimony here that I will try to walk through, but I will probably talk a little bit off the cuff as well. As mentioned, my name is Paul Ulrich. I am from Wyoming. And given some of the previous speakers, I think it is important to cover a little bit of background. First and foremost, several years ago, if you would have asked me to describe what the humanities was, I would have had a very, very difficult time doing that. Today is a different story. I had the opportunity to enter the board of directors of the Wyoming Humanities Council and I have learned over the past several years truly what humanities is, and bottom line is, it is the experiences, it is the stories, it is the ideas and the words that we share every day amongst ourselves, whether it is around a beer or a water cooler or through a music festival or an arts festival or a reading discussion. It is all those wonderful things that make us, us, and all those wonderful things that we share. So I wrote down a few notes, stories and ideas and words that connect us. They allow us to address challenges. Most importantly for me, they have allowed me and others in Wyoming to listen and learn from each other, and not only from my neighbor but from somebody from back East or somebody from across the world that I may have not or others may have not ever had experience before. When you grow up in a small town in Wyoming, Matetsi, Wyoming, where I went to elementary school, we had a population of a little over 500. We are at about 300 today. So my 10 classmates and I did not have much of a chance to explore the world except for the library and the programs that the Wyoming Humanities Council bring to small libraries like that across our great state. It allows us to explore and to learn. Most importantly, when you come from a science background, as the chairman mentioned, my family are all scientists, geologists, paleontologists, you lean that direction during the day. In the evenings when you are reading and discussing what you have read and discussing what you have learned, that is the human experience. That is what humanities is all about. And that is why I and I suspect all of us have a passion for it, whether or not we identify it as humanities. Our lives are meant to be shared, and the humanities is a perfect vehicle for that. It brings us together. It allows us to listen and learn from each other. And the reason I am here to testify today, down to the brass tacks, I am here to request $154.255 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities, and out of that, $44 million for the state humanities councils for fiscal year 2013. Last year, councils reached 5,700 communities across the Nation. Hundreds of programs in each Congressional district serve hundreds of thousands of students, teachers, health care professionals, veterans and more. And in 2011, on average, these local councils, these state councils, 56 of them, are leveraging $5 for every dollar that the NEH provides us. That is a heck of a return on your investment. And these are leveraged in the small communities across the Nation. We receive our core funding through the state-federal partnership as a line of the NEA budget, and we have received throughout the past through special initiatives such as We the People funding as well, and that has been awfully important to these state humanities council budgets. Real-world needs--dozens of councils offer family literacy programs which in the past year alone have benefited hundreds of families in rural and urban communities. Dear to my heart, I am a veteran. Councils serve veterans. The Missouri council offers creative writing workshops and mentoring for veterans, literature and medicine in Maine now offered by 26 other councils, provides invaluable resources for caregivers of returning veterans. After Hurricanes Irene and Lee hit last year, the New York council swiftly distributed funds from the NEH chairman's discretionary grant to provide relief to 31 small cultural organizations. Most importantly from my standpoint in Wyoming, these councils reach small communities that do not get reached. Idaho, Let's Talk About It, a reading and discussion program, has been very successful. In Wyoming, we are doing things this year regarding Giving Voice, which is an outcome of Civility Matters, and that program in itself is going to give us an opportunity to listen and learn from under-heard individuals, most importantly, as I mentioned, veterans, to some extent also youth, individuals and families below the poverty line and those struggling with mental health issues. We work with about 9,800 organizations across the Nation including Minnesota's council traveling exhibit, Why Treaties Matter, and many other organizations. We touch a lot of small museums, small populations that otherwise would not be reached by the humanities and would not understand what these dollars are leveraged for. In sum, we serve the citizens' real-world needs. We nurture their communities' cultural institutions and we preserve our Nation's cultural heritage. By partnering with over 9,800 local organizations, our councils achieve a fivefold return on your federal funding, the funding you provide us. The councils ensure that this federal investment benefits the public as a whole, citizens in every Congressional district and 5,700 communities in ways both intangible and concrete. The humanities programs made possible by the federal funding to the councils simply make our communities a better place to live. Mr. Chairman, thank you. [The statement of Paul Ulrich follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mrs. Lummis. Thank you so much, Paul. I deeply appreciate your testimony and your presence here today and your friendship. Rather than take questions now, we will go through the panel and take questions then. So I now would like to welcome Dr. Grossman. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION WITNESS DR. JAMES GROSSMAN Mr. Grossman. Thank you, and I want to thank the members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity and the honor of testifying in support of funding for the National Endowment for the Humanities. Congresswoman McCollum, I can share your sensibilities, having one daughter who has spent the last 2 years teaching English in a Spanish public school and another one who is about to head off to Tbilisi to learn Georgian and Chechen. So we can discuss this issue of parenting at some other point long distance. Thank God for Skype. I am testifying on behalf of both the American Historical Association, which I serve as the Executive Director, and the National Humanities Alliance, a coalition on which I serve as a member of the board of directors. For fiscal year 2013, we strongly urge the Subcommittee to provide no less than $154.3 million in funding--I have rounded a little bit. Outside of the sciences, we tend to be somewhat less exact sometimes. This is what we humanists do. We trade in uncertainty, and that is what we contribute to our national culture--which is the same amount requested by the Administration. This represents a modest $8.2 million increase over the final 2012 appropriation of $146 million. The NEH budget has suffered a significant reduction over the last 2 years, more than $21 million, which is 13.2 percent, in the last two fiscal years. I have had the privilege and the good fortune to co-direct an NEH summer seminar for college teachers, similar to the one that Professor Tannen referred to earlier, on how historians use biography in our teaching and research. The participants were faculty members from teaching-oriented colleges and universities. We read biographies of individuals who shaped American history. We talked about how historians reach broad audiences by writing biography and how we use biographical materials in our classrooms to bring history alive to students interested in individual stories. We exchanged ideas about how we integrate our reaching and research and how we create new knowledge through the study of individuals in historical context. This is what the NEH does, supports programs like this. And this work is important beyond our campuses. The research and teaching supported by the NEH are central to understanding not only our own heritage but also foreign cultures and languages. We can neither formulate informed foreign policy or even military strategy nor compete in the global marketplace without continuing to support research and teaching in these areas. That support is currently inadequate, especially given the limits of other sources of funding. Our inability to support the work of young scholars through the fellowships program that I benefited from early in my career and that Professor Tannen referred to is akin to plowing under our seed corn. Young scholars need the kind of opportunity that I had in 1985 to write books that launch careers. Currently, NEH funds only one- sixth of its applicants. I have served on enough peer review panels to know that many more proposals merit support. I have also worked with NEH staff for more than two decades and have been consistently impressed by the efficiency and fairness with which they have dealt with a budget that has precipitously declined in real dollars. I have also seen the damage that has taken place because the endowment can no longer support humanities infrastructure and projects in the way that it should. We do our humanities work well in the United States. American higher education remains the best in the world, a beacon for students across the liberal arts disciplines and an inspiration for the teaching and modeling of creative and critical thinking. I was at a conference in Beijing in October and had the opportunity through a translator--I do not have those sorts of linguistic skills--to speak with many of my colleagues. What was interesting was that the younger Chinese scholars are planning to send their children to the United States for liberal arts education. They know where one gets a good education. The research and education programs funded by the NEH are essential to maintaining the quality that enables American universities to attract these students from across the world. This brings money into our economy and it builds ongoing networks as graduates return home as leaders in business and government. The work of the NEH benefits all Americans in other ways as well. The humanities are a lifelong enterprise and a public resource. Think about the educational role of our museums and libraries for Americans of all ages and backgrounds. Perhaps some of you might have seen the exhibition a few blocks away at the Folger Shakespeare Library last year on the history of the King James Bible. NEH support enables a version of that exhibition and others on Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln to travel to Laramie, Wyoming, and other towns and cities across the Nation. NEH grants enable institutions like the Idaho State Historical Society--sorry the chairman has left--and the Mountain Home Public Library to preserve the thousands of photographs, maps and oral histories that document our heritage. The NEH has also moved aggressively in developing digital resources that have transformed how people discover and experience the past. To this generation of students, if it is not online, it does not exist. From a first grader doing a school report on Abraham Lincoln to high school seniors trying to understand the complexities and historical context of the American experience in Central Asia, their first destination is the Internet. Digital humanities programs supported by the NEH help ensure that students have ready access to the best scholarship. Through its EDSITEment website, the NEH makes it easy for high school teachers to find high-quality materials specifically oriented towards teaching and learning. In light of what Congressman Cole said earlier, I recognize that the subcommittee confronts difficult and complex choices in allocating priorities. My colleagues and I remain grateful for the strong support that the Subcommittee has demonstrated for the NEH in the past, and we hope that you will continue to consider the endowment as a vital investment in the Nation's global competitiveness, the strength and vitality of our civic institutions, the preservation and understanding of our diverse cultural heritage and the lives of our citizens. Thank you. [The statement of James Grossman follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, Dr. Grossman. If I were a basketball referee, I would be fired because I have been pretty liberal with the clock. So I will ask Mr. Hein to pay note to the little device in front of you, and when you see it go red, start to wrap up, and we gratefully welcome your attendance today. Welcome. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. PRESERVATION ACTION WITNESS ERIK M. HEIN Mr. Hein. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here today, and I will try very hard to keep my remarks to the 5-minute limit. The pressure is on. I would like to shift gears slightly and talk about historic preservation. I am Erik Hein. I am the President of Preservation Action, which is the only national grassroots advocacy organization dedicated only to federal preservation policy, and I am also a graduate of the humanities program at Penn State University, so I am very sympathetic to the remarks of those who preceded me. The National Historic Preservation Act is an amazing document. It establishes core principles for the preservation of our heritage and a collaborative process that lets people help determine what is worth saving, and it rejects the notion that the only way to preserve something is for the government to own it. It is designed to encourage partnerships and to give every American community the opportunity to access our collective heritage, and at the same time helping them to find their own sense of place. Key to this process was the creation of the State Historic Preservation Offices. To help fund the SHPO offices, as we often refer to them, in 1976 Congress established the Historic Preservation Fund. Modeled after the Land and Water Conservation Fund, it is authorized to receive $150 million per year, although it has never actually received that, and it is derived from lease revenues from the Outer Continental Shelf. A portion of this funding on a matching basis is given to SHPOs to help them complete federal reviews, National Register nominations and to administer the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit program, which in 2011 leveraged over $4 billion in investment and created over 55,000 jobs. And to keep these programs moving, we would like to request level funding, which is in line with the Administration's request, of $46.925 million, to be precise, for fiscal year 2013. Also key to this process are Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, or THPOs, who carry out many of the same functions as SHPOs but on tribal lands. Each year, as we recognize more tribes, new THPOs are added. In 1996 when the program began, there were only 12. Today, there are over 130. Unfortunately, funding has not kept pace so each new THPO means less money to go around. Therefore, we would like to see a small increase in THPO funding to $9.7 million from the Administration's request for level funding at $8.9 million. The National Historic Preservation Act also recognizes the funding need for the restoration of nationally significant places. With this in mind, we would also like to request $10 million from the Historic Preservation Fund for a fully competitive grant program administered by the SHPOs. This represents only one-third of the total previously funded through the Save America's Treasures and Preserve America programs that used to serve this purpose. Last year, rather than reducing funding for these programs, the Administration requested the elimination of all $30 million in funding by saying it would allow the Park Service to focus available resources on managing national parks and other primary responsibilities. As a steward of more than 27,000 historic structures and 66,000 archaeological sites and the department managing components of the National Historic Preservation Act, we would argue that preservation is our primary responsibility. Unfortunately, the Administration also proposes a $1.4 million reduction in cultural resource stewardship, a reduction in construction and major maintenance, and a 50 percent cut for National Heritage Areas which for the record we would like to see level funded. At the same time, there is $215 million proposed for natural resource stewardship programs, which is twice the amount of cultural stewardship programs, and a more than 50 percent increase to the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is used primarily for land acquisition. But why does there have to be this tension between natural and cultural resources or between park and non-park programs? Why does it have to be feast versus famine? Last year, Preservation Action convened a task force that included 11 national historic preservation organizations and we issued a report that analyzes this problem and concludes there needs to be increased levels of leadership, partnership, innovation and, above all, visibility. To achieve this, we have issued a set of no-nonsense solutions that do not require a great deal of funding, and they attempt to maximize return on investment. You will find those recommendations in our written testimony. We would welcome the opportunity to work with members of this committee to find a way to help facilitate these changes. Our Nation's cultural resources and natural resources are both important. We believe that they are not an either/or proposition. During this time of widespread discussion on jobs and investment in infrastructure, we respectfully ask that you consider investment in our cultural resources, the preservation of our great American heritage and the jobs that go along with historic preservation as a vital part of the equation. [The statement of Erik Hein follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Hein, and we deeply appreciate your testimony too. As someone who is married to a guy who has never seen an old building he did not want to fix up, and who has probably taken more buildings to the National Trust for Historic Preservation process in Wyoming than anybody else and who was on the board of advisors of the National Trust for Historic Preservation for many years, loved it, and I have done many, many historic preservation trips and tours in my role as a spouse, so I have a certain affinity for what you are trying to accomplish, and if I did not, I could never go home. I would like to welcome now Mr. Cassidy, who is the Vice President of the National Trust. ---------- -- -------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION WITNESS TOM CASSIDY Mr. Cassidy. Thank you, Madam Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. I appreciate this opportunity to present the National Trust for Historic Preservation's fiscal year 2013 budget recommendations. My name is Tom Cassidy and I am the Vice President of Government Relations. The Nation faces a challenging fiscal environment. We recognize the need for fiscal restraint and cost-effective federal investments. However, we do not believe that preservation, conservation and recreation programs should suffer from disproportionate funding reductions. We look forward to working with the Committee as it addresses the challenge of sustaining our Nation's rich heritage of cultural and historical resources but also generates the economic vitality of communities throughout the Nation. The Historic Preservation Fund, as Erik described, is the principal source of funding to implement the Nation's historic preservation programs. The President proposes level funding. While we appreciate that is not a cut, we recommend the Committee provide a modest increase for the HPF, reflecting both the ongoing demands of preservation services from SHPOs and the increasing number of tribes who qualify for HPF funding. We would also like to work with the Committee to restore a program of competitive matching grant funding such as was formerly provided by Save America's Treasures to restore and preserve significant historic resources. I would also like to address the cultural resources stewardship account within the Park Service operations budget. Two-thirds of our national parks were created to protect our most important cultural and historic resources yet there is a longstanding disparity between funding for cultural and natural resource programs. This problem continues in the fiscal year 2013 budget, which proposes an increase in natural resources stewardship but a reduction for cultural resources. We urge the Committee to at least restore the cultural resources account to its fiscal year 2012 enacted level. Of the nearly $11 billion of deferred maintenance needs for NPS, $3 billion is for the 27,000 properties in park units listed on the National Register. More than 40 percent of historic buildings in our parks are in fair or poor condition. Without funding, the condition of these properties will continue to deteriorate and become more expensive to repair and preserve in the future. Therefore, we recommend the Committee restore the proposed $15 million cut from the repair, rehabilitation and maintenance accounts and provide funding at the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. The National Trust is conducting fundraising efforts to address this gap, most recently and successfully in Wyoming at the White Grass Dude Ranch in Grand Teton National Park but private money must be matched by federal funds. We also very much appreciate the Committee's inclusion of language in the fiscal year 2012 conference report recognizing that historic leases can provide a cost-effective and innovative solution to mitigate the maintenance backlog of historic properties. We are working with the Park Service and private partners to successfully implement such leases and bring investment to rehabilitation expenses. We also are disappointed the Administration has proposed a 50 percent decrease in funding for the National Heritage Areas. The proposed reduction would severely impair the sustainability of individual NHAs. A recent actually 2012 study of the Park Service found that without funding to replace the NPS investment, few NHAs are expected to survive longer than a few years. During these challenging times, every program that receives federal funding needs to justify its worth and deliver substantial benefits to the American public. NHAs more than meet this test. They are community-driven partnerships that advance conservation and economic development and where each federal dollar is leveraged by $5\1/2\ of non-federal investments. We urge the Committee to maintain funding at the enacted level. Finally, the Bureau of Land Management oversees the largest and most diverse body of cultural resources of any federal land management agency yet BLM receives the least amount of cultural resources money per acre of any agency. We strongly support the president's fiscal year 2013 request of a modest and well- justified increase for the cultural resources management account. I feel that I have to talk about the Land and Water Conservation Fund since I still have 18 seconds left to go, and we would support robust funding for the LWCF. Many of the Nation's most significant and cultural landscapes have been permanently protected through LWCF investments including the Flight 93 National Memorial, Minidoka National Historical Park, Gettysburg National Military Park, and we support the Administration's request for the Park Service Civil War Sesquicentennial Units and the American Battlefield Protection program grant. Thank you very much. [The statement of Tom Cassidy follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Cassidy, and you are right about White Grass. It is fantastic and I highly recommend anybody who has a chance to get out to Grand Teton National Park, go see the efforts they are making to preserve those historic structures. Ms. Pierpont is with the preservation officers, and we welcome you. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICERS WITNESS RUTH PIERPONT Ms. Pierpont. Thank you very much. I am Ruth Pierpont, President of the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, and I am also the New York Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, or SHPO for short, as Erik said. On behalf of Jan Gallimore, the Idaho SHPO, Mary Hopkins, the Wyoming SHPO, Kathleen Kilpatrick, who is the Virginia SHPO, and all the SHPOs across the country, I would like to thank the chairman, Ranking Member Moran and all the members of the subcommittee for your support of SHPOs and for the opportunity to testify before you today. I also want to take one second to thank Mr. Hinchey and Mr. Serrano as a New Yorker for all their support, and Mr. Hinchey should not be allowed to retire but nobody asked me, so anyway. The National Historic Preservation Program is an outstanding example of federalism with the National Historic Preservation Act setting the policy and the states through the SHPOs administering the program which has flourished for the past 46 years. This year, our theme is Preservation Equals Return on Investment. This return on investment takes many forms including economic development, job creation, community livability and sustainment of America's heritage. Even in an economic downturn, investment in preservation has been sustained and continues to be a driving force. The Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit program, which is administered by the SHPOs in partnership with the National Park Service, is a shining example of how this program works. As Erik mentioned, in 2011 these rehabilitation task credits stimulated over $4 billion in private investment and created over 55,000 jobs in a wide range of both general and specialized skills. Preservation's return on investment also equals heritage tourism. In 2010, the Department of Commerce conducted a survey of international visitors' activities. This survey found that visiting America's national parks ranked tenth but visiting America's non-national park historic sites ranked third. And, by the way, number one and two were shopping and dining, so I cannot complain about that. As you know, it is the SHPOs who assist these non-federal historic sites and work with the communities to help maintain, rehabilitate and use their historic assets and resources. These are the places that international and domestic tourists alike come to visit, places like Chesterfield, Idaho, Alexandria, Virginia, Summit Avenue in St. Paul, Minnesota, and closer to my home, Ithaca, New York, and of course Jackson Hole, Wyoming, which I had the pleasure to visit a couple of years ago. And we do this on a shoestring budget of less than 50 million federal dollars which is a small fraction of the National Park Service's $2.6 billion budget. As they say in infomercials, but that is not all. For less than that $50 million, in 2011 the return on investment for American taxpayers also included reviews of over 140,000 federal undertakings, over 100,000 National Register eligibility opinions, over 1,000 new listings on the National Register, surveys of over 20 million acres to determine the presence or absence of cultural resources, and this is all in addition to the $4 billion in private investment and 55,000 jobs through the tax credit program. In a brief aside, while these statistics are I think very impressive, I do need to underscore what has been mentioned previously, the continued need for a historic preservation grant program. In the states, we certainly understand the need for fiscal austerity but it is disappointing to see job- creating grant programs such as Save America's Treasures and Preserve America go unfunded. And while these were successful programs, Congress also has the option of running a grant program through the SHPOs as authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act. While a much greater need exists, there is no question that a $5 million to $10 million capital grant program would create jobs, spur economic development and help communities preserve their historic heritage, catalyzing even greater economic opportunities. I want to emphasize that SHPOs are very grateful to have experienced modest operating funding increases over the past couple of years. This is why our fiscal year 2013 operational funding request is level funding from fiscal year 2012 at $46.925 million. We also support $9.7 million for the Tribal Historic Preservation Offices. And here is a quick trivia question. You do not really have to get this but I will ask it anyway. Aside from fiscal year 2012, which other year did SHPOs receive around $27 million, the highest year? It was 1979. So inflation aside, you can see that SHPOs are very efficient with their resources although we are reduced to maintaining very basic and minimal services and unable to take on other activities that are called for under the National Historic Preservation Act. So in conclusion, thanks to this very efficient federal- state partnership, people across the Nation from rural communities to large metropolitan cities can walk down the streets and realize that the historic structures that make up the places that they live in are more than just bricks and mortar. Rather, they are building blocks from our past fulfilling the needs of today. Thank you. [The statement of Ruth Pierpont follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mrs. Lummis. Thank you very much, and I want to thank the whole panel for their testimony. Before I yield to my colleagues, I have a quick question for Mr. Ulrich. The We the People program was something that NEH funded through the councils but the reduction of about $7 million in funding has caused to the councils specifically over time has caused the elimination of such programs as We the People from being funded at the council level. Have you been able to make up for those funds through other sources? Mr. Ulrich. Chairman Lummis, most of the councils are struggling to make up those significant reductions in funds. A lot of that is through obviously working towards increasing private donations and et cetera but the short answer is no. We are hopeful, however, that through NEH's line item on Bridging Cultures that the majority of those funds can flow to the state humanities councils. We are certainly strong believers that the closer you can get those tax dollars to the communities and the small and rural communities we certainly deal with in Wyoming, the better off you are going to be and the more effective those dollars are going to be spent, but the short answer, not yet. Mrs. Lummis. Thank you. And once again, I want to thank the panel and yield to my colleague, Mr. Moran. Mr. Moran. Thanks, Ms. Lummis. We have votes, we are told, between 11:00 and 11:30 so I think in consideration of our subsequent panelists, I am going to pass on asking questions and we will try to get as many in because it is probably going to be almost an hour of votes that we have ahead of us. Mrs. Lummis. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Well, I would just like to say that this committee took a strong bipartisan stance, with the chairman's leadership with Saving America's Treasures; I was glad to see the President did not zero out in his budget but was disappointed at the funding level. So we thank you for your testimony. Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, panel. You are dismissed, and we are very grateful for your being here today. The next panel includes Mr. Kiernan, Mr. Werner, Mr. Lightizer--did I get that right? What is the correct pronunciation? Mr. Lightizer. Lightizer. Mrs. Lummis. Lighthizer, of course. Ms. Tulipane. Ms. Tulipane. I am right here. Mrs. Lummis. And did I pronounce that correctly? Okay. And Ms. DeCoster, um-hum. It would help if I had my reading glasses on. And Mr. Doyle, please. Okay. So do we have you in order? Kiernan---- Mr. Kiernan. Right here. Mrs. Lummis [continuing]. Werner, Lighthizer, Tulipane, DeCoster, Doyle. Thank you and welcome. We will begin with Mr. Kiernan with our apologies if we have to interrupt you for votes. But please do begin. Welcome. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION WITNESS THOMAS C. KIERNAN Mr. Kiernan. Great, thank you very much. Madam Chairman, thank you very much, and members of the committee, thank you. Tom Kiernan with NPCA. And Mr. Chairman, it is wonderful that you joined us this morning. Since 1919, NPCA has been the leading voice of the American public to protect and enhance our National Parks. And on behalf of our over 600,000 members and supporters throughout the country and in every State, we are pleased to be here to testify before you. Mr. Chairman, we do recognize the extraordinary challenging times that you and the Committee have in this budget climate to identify spending priorities. First, we do want to thank you for your work over the last couple years. This committee has been doing its absolute best to protect the funding for the National Parks. And we want to recognize that, thank you for that. We also want to acknowledge the work of this committee to keep the Appropriations Bill free from policy riders and we very much appreciate that. And last thanks to you, personally, Mr. Chairman. You spearheaded a letter back to the Super Committee for commonsense approach to dealing with the deficit and we want to particularly thank you very much for that letter this past fall. I am here to argue on behalf of healthy funding for the National Parks. We believe that they very much need to be, in these challenging times, a high priority for funding. Investing in our National Parks is something that is investing in our future as a country and very much in the economic vitality throughout the country. And my written testimony includes a number of new studies but to summarize it by saying that National Parks create American jobs. In particular, they generate $31 billion of economic activity and support 258,000 jobs throughout the country. The Obama Administration acknowledges quite recently with the President's announcement in the executive order to increase tourism throughout the country, which we wholly support. Unfortunately, the budget that they proposed is not fully consistent with that because they are putting forward a budget with a $22 million reduction in base operations to the Park Service. And that does clearly concern us. It could lead to approximately 200 FTEs in the Park Service being eliminated, could potentially be--depending upon how they do it--600 seasonal employees. And it is, as this committee knows well, the seasonal employees that are the frontlines in meeting, greeting, ensuring the safety of the visitors throughout the National Parks. We cannot realistically hope to encourage tourism to the National Parks at the same time that we are cutting the budget. And we are duly concerned we may be sliding back into that era of endangered rangers and of shuttered visitors' centers and of dirty or closed bathrooms through the country and unsafe roads and buildings and visitors' centers in the National Parks. That is not what we want to go back to, especially at a time that we are trying to increase tourist activity through the National Parks throughout the country. So a concern on the park funding side, also want to talk about the construction budget for the National Parks. Over the last two years, that budget has been cut by 35 percent, an $84 million reduction in the construction budget. And we can empathize with the viewpoint that delaying some of those construction projects may need to be needed to deal with the budget challenges, but in reality what we are doing is increasing the backlog, the maintenance backlog, which is currently $11 billion in total, $3 billion for critical systems in the park system. And at the current funding level, that backlog is growing. The Park Service estimates it is increasing by $300 million per year. So we believe we need to increase the construction budget; otherwise, we are just making that backlog larger and more of a problem for future years. The third main program that I want to speak about is the LWCF program. We do understand that it can be an easy target from a budget perspective, but LWCF is not a luxury program from our viewpoint. Funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund is about improving the management efficiency, at least in the Parks domain in our National Parks. It enables the Park Service to more efficiently deal with the fire risks; it helps them more efficiently deal with invasive species, removing some of the obstacles to recreation and wildlife movement in the Parks and it helps facilitate the conservation of historic resources. So LWCF we strongly support and very much want to thank you, Congresswoman Lummis, for your and other members of the committee's support for the Wyoming State School lands purchase. That is a very high priority for us to help protect Grand Teton National Park. From the American public's perspective, the polling and support for the National Parks could not be stronger. Even during the very significant economic recession over the last many years, 85 percent of the American public is still calling for funding increases in our National Parks so that they are ready to serve the American public for a second hundred years. With that mentioned of the coming Centennial in 2016, let me just say that NPCA, the National Park Foundation, the National Park Hospitality Association in collaboration with the Park Service held America's Summit on National Parks this past January. The parks community is coming together to craft a common agenda for the parks as we approach the 100th anniversary. And that community is very much looking forward to working with this Committee and supporting this committee in giving the parks the right budget so that the parks can be prepared for a second hundred years of extraordinary service to the American public. So thank you very much again for your past support for parks. We have got the Centennial out there and we have got the community organized to support you in well funding the parks. [The statement of Tom Kiernan follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Kiernan. Thank you very much. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Werner. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. PARTNERSHIP FOR THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM WITNESS GARY WERNER Mr. Werner. Mr. Chair, members of the Committee, I am Gary Werner. I am here from Wisconsin representing the 35 organizations that are partners with the Park Service, the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and indeed with you in the stewardship of an important portion of our public land heritage. And I want to thank you and your predecessors on this Committee for the strong support over the last two decades that you have given for the 30 congressionally authorized National Scenic and Historic Trails--and actually I should pass a map down this way--which, as you can see, Mr. Chairman, they extend for over 50,000 miles through 49 of the States, through 80 National Parks, 70 National Wildlife Refuges, over 100 wilderness areas, and just as importantly, through 465 state parks. And also, just as importantly, they extend the values of these public lands but they also go through 100 of the metropolitan areas of over 50,000 population in the country, so providing opportunities to connect people close to home with our natural, historic, and cultural heritage. And Wyoming, of course, has the distinction of having the most trails, five national historic trails and one scenic trail. Idaho of course has a crossroads of Continental Divide, Nez Perce, Oregon, California trails. Minnesota has the distinction of having some of the more spectacular portions of the longest national scenic trail, the North Country Trail. And Virginia here, you have Potomac Heritage, you have Appalachian, you have the Overmountain Victory, and you have the Captain John Smith Chesapeake, so a real treasure house of these resources. You know that you authorized these trails as public-private partnerships, and we are proud to say that our commitment as your partners remains strong. We are proud to report to you that for the second year in a row in 2011 we conservatively recorded over 1,150,000 volunteer hours among our organizations. That amounted to over $24 million of labor value plus another $8 million of financial value, about 33 million that we are directly contributing to the 26 million or so that you are providing to the three agencies that administer and manage these trails. That amount of volunteer labor amounts to 556 full-time employees, so we are extending the federal workforce, your workforce by that amount. But we are also, more importantly, engaging thousands of citizens all across the country in stewardship of our American public heritage. And we think that is one of the geniuses of the National Trail System to have this public-private involvement. For 2013, we have a couple of requests. In the operations for the three agencies for the trails, we are asking for 16.2 million for the Park Service for the 23 trails that it administers; for the Bureau of Land Management, about 8.9 million for the three trails it administers and the 10 trails it manages on the public lands in the west; for the Forest Service, 9.1 million for six trails it administers and 16 trails that it manages. We also support very strongly the Administration's request of 69.5 million to fund the overall 26 million acres of the National Landscape Conservation System in the Bureau of Land Management. We also, like the National Parks Conservation Association and others, strongly support the Administration's $49 million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund and including about $40 million for acquisitions along 17 of the trails. There are two quick things I want to say that we need some specific help from the committee. You have tried in the past and it did not quite work. The Bureau of Land Management budget does not recognize funding directly for the National Scenic and Historic Trails, nor the wild and scenic rivers. Rather, they draw funding from about 15 to 20 sub-activity accounts to fund the trails. We are asking that you provide direction to the Agency to set up sub-activity accounts for these components of the National Landscape Conservation System. You did that two years ago in your report language, but the Office of Management and Budget told the Agency to disregard your guidance. And the Agency would love to comply if they were given the right nudge I think. The second thing is the agency budgets are putting travel ceilings on the ability of their staff to go out and meet with the partners that are essential for making these trails work. And we would hope that you could give some guidance to perhaps revisit the understanding that being able to meet with your partners is essential to doing the work of particularly projects that are as extensive as the National Trail System. So once again, I want to thank you for your strong support. [The statement of Gary Werner follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. We are going to have votes. In fact they started right now, but I would like to get through this panel if we could please. So if everybody could summarize their remarks because the next panel is going to have to wait until 12:30 when votes will be over. And I figured you would rather be here than wait until 12:30. So go ahead, Jim. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. CIVIL WAR TRUST WITNESS O. JAMES LIGHTHIZER Mr. Lighthizer. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, my name is Jim Lighthizer. I am president of the Civil War Trust. I would like to echo what the two previous figures say and thank you all for your support and the staff I might add over the past two years. I know it has been a very, very difficult time economically but you all have been tremendously supportive and I thank you. The Civil War Trust is a membership-based organization with 55,000 members around the country, and I come here to speak in support of the American Battlefield Protection Program and the funding that goes with it. I think the members of this committee are very much aware of how it works. Suffice it to say it is the sesquicentennial and it is a one-to-one match program, and since I got to come up with the one, it is helpful when you have a heightened public awareness like we have got during the sesquicentennial. It is kind of get while the getting is good. So I come before you to thank you for your past support to ask that you do the best job you can consistent with reality and funding going forward and to tell the Congresswoman from Wyoming that my wife and I are going to be spending a large sum of money for us in your state at a dude ranch this summer. So just remember the door swings both ways, okay? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [The statement of O. James Lighthizer follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. And, you know, you can come over the pass, into Idaho, too. Mr. Lighthizer. That is where all the rich people are. Mr. Simpson. Go ahead. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION WITNESS BARBARA TULIPANE Ms. Tulipane. Hi, I am Barbara Tulipane with the National Recreation and Park Association. Thank you for this opportunity. NRPA represents local parks so although we like parks, we really focus on the community parks and the state parks. I am here today to talk about funding for LWCF, specifically, the State Assistance Program. I am trying to be very fast so I am going to cut right to the chase. First, we ask that you provide ample funding for LWCF, especially for the State Assistance Program. Second, we ask that you choose to direct the LWCF investment to state and local communities by allocating 40 percent of total LWCF appropriations to the State Assistance Program. It is important to note that over the last 25 years, the State Assistance Program has received only 11 percent of total LWCF funding, but the reality is that local parks are where the Americans are. We do not have to worry about attracting visitors. Our parks are being overrun and yet we only receive 11 percent. Third, we ask that you specify that no state assistance dollars are to be used for the DOI's proposed Competitive Grant Program, which will diminish the current ability of this program to serve more people in more communities. Funding LWCF in 2013 is a sound fiscal policy and good for national health and the economy for all the reasons you know, investment in local economies, jobs, et cetera, et cetera. We strongly oppose changing the funding formula to allow a new Competitive Grant Program. The distribution formula to the States is tried and true and it does not need fixing. One hundred percent of the funding is equitably distributed among States based on a formula approach which does not favor one Congressional District or partisan affiliation over another. We urge the Committee to prohibit any diversion of LWCF State Assistance Funds from their original intended purpose. We ask that you adopt three simple recommendations: provide ample funding for LWCF, allocate a minimum of 40 percent of total LWCF funding to the State Assistance Program, prohibit any diversion of formula funds to a DOI Competitive Grant Program. Local parks and recreation agencies are not merely amenities; they are essential for the health and the vitality of the American public. As the authors of this Act clearly understood nearly 50 years ago when they mandated that 60 percent of LWCF funding should go to the State Assistance Program, the benefits of this program have been invaluable and every member of this subcommittee can point to what it has done to his or her community. Please continue to strengthen this legacy of conservation for all Americans. Thank you. [The statement of Barbara Tulipane follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Barbara. Katherine. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND WITNESS KATHERINE DECOSTER Ms. DeCoster. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Kathy DeCoster and I am representing the Trust for Public Lands today. And I did want to thank the members of the Subcommittee for the time you spend listening to the public over these two days and every year. I think it is unrecognized how much time you spend doing this. I wanted to say that. Quickly, we are here to reiterate what many on this panel have already said, which is support for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which in this budget we see it as a balance between the needs at the federal level and through the State Grants Programs for parks as Barbara mentioned and also for the Forest Legacy Program, the Civil War Grants that Jim mentioned, and the Section 6 Program. All of that money goes to States and localities to do community-based conservation at that level. Often people ask why there needs to still be an investment on the federal level, and I think, you know, we are very appreciative of the understanding you have of the needs in Idaho and other members in their own States. I wanted to raise one example that we are experiencing with the challenges of the funding level right now at Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park right outside of Atlanta. We have been working with a landowner for two years on a property. It was in the budget last year. It did not get funded. The landowner informed us last week that they would not be renewing their option and they are putting it on the market on a short sale. We hope that does not occur but that is the stress and the strain that is occurring. They were a very willing landowner, very patient landowner, and we are afraid that sesquicentennial is 2014 that we will actually be seeing houses built rather than a great park celebration. So we hope we can work that out but I just wanted to point that out. And then on the issue of the Competitive Grants, you know, we are in a slightly different place than Barbara is in that our work at the state and local level creating parks in cities, we see a need missing. There is not a program directed at urban parks or parks in cities. When those come up, advocates have to figure out which program they can go to but there is not one just for parks and cities. So we see this Competitive Grants Program as meeting that need, how we balance out, you know, where it comes from and all that kind of stuff. We look forward to working with you on trying to figure that out, but there is an urgent need at the very local level that we see continuing to be unmet. And lastly, just wanted to mention quickly the Community Forest Program. You have appropriated three years increasing amounts each year so they can finally get the first grant round-out. There is a huge demand for that. It allows local communities and tribes to buy forests locally and control them and generate revenue through sustainable timber harvesting or outdoor recreation and benefit that local community. So it is kind of a new program but we appreciate your past support and hope you will continue to do that. Thank you. [The statement of Katherine DeCoster follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thanks, Katherine. Go ahead, Robert. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT WITNESS ROBERT E. DOYLE Mr. Doyle. Thank you very much, Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Moran and members of the Committee. My name is Robert Doyle. I am the general manager of the East Bay Regional Park District in Oakland, California. We are the largest and oldest regional park agency in the Nation. I guess that would mean that we were the first created. Another way of saying it, we were created in the Depression and we are mindful of the Depression and what my parents went through and probably what your parents went through and what people did to get through that. So people in the Depression in East Bay decided to create a park system, a small miracle at that time. And we take that very seriously. We operate 65 parks, 100,000 acres, but we also now are operating state parks, the unprecedented closing of 70 of the state parks in California because of the budget. So what falls to the locals is to pick up the slack. So as was mentioned earlier, our agency and other agencies are trying to step up and operate state parks. We also operate federal lands, Bureau of Reclamation lands, Water District lands, things like that. So we have a long history of competing for money because we are not a state agency. We are often not even recognized in some of the grant programs, so we have to really compete. We also employ 200 young people every year in summer seasonal jobs. Those young people are getting their college education goals met by having jobs in parks. Many of them come back to the institution; many of them go on to better things. And so we are very happy and that is very important. Kids are really having a hard time funding their education, and parks help do that. We are here today to support funding for stateside LWCF and LWCF in general and we think it is critical at this time that stateside funding be increased because of the impact on urban parks, because of the impact on state park closures, because of the impact on urban communities. Both rural and urban communities have felt this recession really tremendously. They are not traveling as much. They are going to those local parks. And those local parks, therefore, are really crowded and I think what I really want to leave you with today is we have a national crisis on obesity and health for kids. Mr. Simpson. Oh, thanks for bringing that up. Mr. Doyle. You are very welcome. But our parks make life better for families dealing with health. Our parks make life healthier for kids. And our urban parks create the opportunity for people to learn about these beautiful lands you have up here behind you, but they come from cities more and more now and so stateside LWCF really helps with that. We do think that a competitive program through Land and Water Conservation Fund is healthy; competition is healthy. We know that from what we do and we hope there is a way that we can find to do that. We thank you for the time to do that and hope that specifically that local and regional parks could qualify for any Competitive grant Program. Thank you very much for your time. [The statement of Robert E. Doyle follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. And thank all of you for being here today. And I am sorry that we have to rush off. We have got about one minute left in this vote, which means I have to make it over to the Capitol by then. And by the way, Jim, all of these pictures are from Idaho. We will start our next panel at about 12:30 when we anticipate being done with these votes. Thank you all. [Recess.] Mr. Simpson. I apologize for keeping you around for however the heck long we were over there voting, but unfortunately, they make us do that every now and then. We appreciate you all staying and I guess I do not have to call up this panel because this panel is now up. We appreciate it. It is sometimes hard getting hearings completed here, especially on the last day of voting. Normally they do not have votes until one o'clock and so you can do things in the morning and get them done without the interruption of votes. But on the last day, they vote whenever they can because after last votes, people are headed home for the weekend. So I appreciate you all waiting around. First of all, Ken Pimlott, Director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for the National Association of State Foresters. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE FORESTERS WITNESS KEN PIMLOTT Mr. Pimlott. Yes, that is me, thank you. Mr. Simpson. Yes. Mr. Pimlott. And we know you all are busy so we very much appreciate the time in allowing us to speak, great opportunity to represent NASF today. As State Foresters, we are stewards of over two-thirds of America's forests in state and private ownership. We deliver outreach, technical, financial assistance, as well as wildfire protection--that is a particular issue in the West and California--in partnership with the Forest Service state and private forestry programs. Difficult, difficult fiscal times around the country and State Foresters fully appreciate the difficult decisions that need to be made relative to spending. Our fiscal year 2013 funding recommendations are tied to the priority Forest Action Plans that were approved as part of last year's Farm Bill. My written statements include a complete set of our priority recommendations from NASF and include that as part of our program today and particularly the Forest Stewardship and Urban and Community Forestry Programs. However, this afternoon, I just wish to highlight a few of the key areas that are important to us. State Forest Action Plans like this one provide an assessment of forest conditions and trends in each State and identify the priority rural and urban forest landscape areas within those States. These plans depend on a robust forest inventory and analysis program. They are managed by the USDA Forest Service Research Forest Inventory and Analysis Program and it provides unbiased data for assessing wildlife risk, insect and disease threats, and other resource questions which often span across forest ownerships. And certainly in California like the West we have multiple small landowners that make up the bulk of our forest land, and so it is important that we have the ability to reach out and work with each of those small and non-industrial as well as industrial landowners. NASF recommends an FIA funding level of $69 million for fiscal year 2013 and supports the proposal to consolidate the program under the Forest Service Research and Development Program. We ask that direction be provided to the Forest Service to look for the most efficient ways to deliver the program, including contracting with partners such as the State Foresters who can accomplish necessary fieldwork, oftentimes at lower costs. These Forest Action Plans provide long-term strategies for investing state, federal, and other resources to where they can make the most impact on the ground. Among the issues that the Forest Action Plans have identified as priorities include wildlife preparedness and response. Over 74,000 wild land fires burned and over 5,200 structures were destroyed in fiscal year 2011 alone. State fire assistance funding helps communities prepare for, mitigate, and respond to wildlife threats. And this is certainly important and critical to California as well as the West. We have invested numerous state fire assistance dollars both in urban interface vegetation treatments to help those communities in the Sierra Foothills that are plagued by wildfire, as well as in Southern California we have focused equipping and training firefighters in a regional training facility that help not only Cal fire but our local and federal partners in the region. NASF supports funding for the program at no less than current enacted levels of $86 million and endorses the proposal to consolidate the program into one line item under wild land fire management. This recommended funding level was also endorsed by a broad coalition of stakeholders, and we ask that the March 19 letter be entered into the record. Mr. Simpson. It will be. [The information follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Pimlott. Thank you. The State Forest Action Plans also identify forest health threats as a major priority around the country. Hundreds of invasive pests and diseases damage our Nation's forests every year. The Forest Action Plans utilize funding from the Cooperative Forest Health Management Program to maintain healthy and productive forest ecosystems. Again, California like the West is facing a number of forest pest, insect, and disease issues. As an example, the gold-spotted oak borer is attacking thousands of native oak trees in the San Diego area and there is the potential for that to spread throughout many of the native oaks in California creating significant fire hazard and, you know, devastation to the ecosystem and wildlife habitats. So just one of many issues that the Forest Health Program is focusing on and assisting us with in California. NASF supports the proposed consolidation of that program, Forest Health Program, under State and private forestry and urges the program to be at the fiscal year 2012 enacted levels. The program at current levels is also supported by many diverse organizations, and we also ask that our letter of March 19 on that be entered into the record. Mr. Simpson. It will be. [The information follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Pimlott. Thank you. NASF supports the proposed landscapes scale restoration line item with the understanding expressed in the fiscal year 2013 budget. One, that the current competitive process would be formalized; and two, that options for providing flexibility for the State Foresters to apply cooperative forestry funding to respond to priorities in their Forest Action Plans are not eliminated. It is critical that we have that ability to utilize that funding in those plans. NASF greatly appreciates and requests the continued support from the Subcommittee to further explore options for States to apply federal funds in the highest-priority areas. We believe this can be accomplished through the new landscape scale restoration line item, as well as other flexible spending options under the Cooperative Forestry Program. In conclusion, we recognize again the difficult budget climate and are not recommending any funding increases in our priority programs. The Cooperative Forest Programs we deliver are matched dollar for dollar at the state and local level, really leveraging those funds in significant return on the federal investment. Again, I thank you for the opportunity to testify today and happy to answer any questions or further information if you would like. [The statement of Ken Pimlott follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. You get your funding from both State government and Federal Government, right? Mr. Pimlott. Correct. Mr. Simpson. What has happened to the State government funding over the last several years? Mr. Pimlott. California, like many other States, are facing significant fiscal crisis. Our department alone in the last 2 years has faced about an $80 million reduction primarily to our fire protection program but we have also had to close the last of our forest nurseries and we have had to scale back some of our Forestry Assistance Programs again as we try to be more efficient and consolidate. But we are facing some difficult times with our budget. And the funding from these programs are critical to help offset some of those cuts. We are able to again leverage these dollars with what we have to really make it go further and continue to support some of the programs that we may not be able to do otherwise. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Next, we have Tom Martin, President and CEO of the American Forest Foundation. ---------- -- -------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. AMERICAN FOREST FOUNDATION WITNESS TOM MARTIN Mr. Martin. Thank you, sir. Good to see you again. Mr. Simpson. Good to see you. Mr. Martin. Thanks for having us here and I appreciate your taking time out of such a busy schedule. I know it is tough, these things---- Mr. Simpson. No problem, this is what we do. Mr. Martin. And we are darn glad you are doing it. The American Forest Foundation, as you probably remember, works on the ground with educators, with policymakers, and with landowners to make them better stewards. Our American Tree Farm System has 90,000 members across the country, 27 million acres, and all of them produce sustainably managed timber, certified to international standards. In addition, our Project Learning Tree Program work provides professional development for 30,000 educators a year in environmental education. So that is what we do, who we are. You have got my testimony so I do not really want to reiterate that but maybe a couple of stories. I was out in Idaho earlier this week; I was in Moscow at the Idaho Forest Owners Association meeting and gave the keynote out there. But what was cool is I got a chance to talk to Steve and Janet Funk. Now, they are the national outstanding tree farmers of the year that steal sponsors. Terrific stuff. And why do they get it? Why is their forestry better than anybody else's? Well, a big part of it is they see their land being absolutely interdependent with that of their neighbors', including the Forest Service, the state-owned lands, as well as other private lands. And a few years ago--they have this beautiful creek, Wolf Lodge Creek, big blowout because there had been a massive clear-cut up on the public forest land. The runoff came in, blew everything out. And they were able to use stewardship dollars to begin to get together a plan to restore the creek. They put in most of the money to make it work. There is a little bit of EQIP dollars in it but almost all of it was theirs. And then using stewardship dollars, they were able to get the State Service Foresters to work with the other neighbors and come up with a restoration plan for the entire creek. The Stewardship Program is one we think is terrific because in so many ways it is the glue that holds together the forestry that happens on the ground, its connection to clean water, its connection to clean air, good habitat and, yeah, good-paying jobs. So for us, it is that kind of investment that brings together States, private folks, and the Federal Government in a way that really allows us to address problems. The other kind of help that it gives is in areas of interdependency, and Idaho, what, 80 percent of the forest land is publicly owned? But there is this interdependency. If you are going to fight the tussock moth, if you are going to fight the emerald ash borer, you have got to figure out how to get everybody to play in the game. The help that folks get there is enormous through the Service Foresters that are supported by the Stewardship Program. So we hope that you guys will give due consideration to that program. As well, I would like echo Ken's support for the research portion of the Forest Service budget. All of us depend on that to make good long-term decisions. So with that, thank you. I am happy to answer any questions. [The statement of Tom Martin follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I appreciate you being here today, Tom. Robert Malmsheimer---- Mr. Malmsheimer. Yes. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. Ph.D., J.D., Chairman, Committee of Forest Policy, the Society of American Foresters. ---------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS WITNESS ROBERT MALMSHEIMER Mr. Malmsheimer. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Good afternoon. Mr. Malmsheimer. How are you today? Mr. Simpson. Good. Mr. Malmsheimer. My name is Bob Malmsheimer. I am a professor at the State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry in Syracuse. I am here today to testify on behalf of the Society of American Foresters, SAF. My testimony will focus on three key areas that directly affect programs within the Department of Interior and Forest Service budgets, forest health on public and private lands, barriers to active forest management, and specific budget recommendations. I will start with forest health. Annual growth on U.S. forests is 32 percent higher than annual removals and greater than harvest immortality combined. This in part has led to the need for restoration on 65 to 82 million acres of national forest. We are encouraged by the Forest Service's goal to complete 4 million acres of restoration in 2012. But this is not enough to address the threats to forest ecosystems and the surrounding rural communities. Constraints on forests and forest management have led to a steady decline in the forestry-related jobs sector. From 2005 to 2010, the U.S. lost 920,000 primary and secondary forest jobs. U.S. annual timber harvests are at their lowest level since 1960s. The lack of production has led to more than 1,000 mill closures from 2005 to 2009 and lowered production levels below the 50 percent capacity at the remaining mills. Congress took steps to increase restoration and forest treatments last year by requiring the Forest Service to increase National Forest System timber harvest from 2.4 billion board feet to 3 billion board feet. SAF supports this effort. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Um-hum. Mr. Malmsheimer. I would like to next speak about one of the perceived barriers to active forest management--the Equal Access to Justice Act, also known as EAJA. Last year, the Committee included report language in its budget recommendation that addressed the complexity and conflicts often associated with EAJA. A recent study that examined Forest Service EAJA payments by Dr. Michael Mortimer and myself demonstrates the need for this language. Our results documented that EAJA fee records differ considerably among agencies. Given these inconsistencies and the controversy surrounding EAJA payments, SAF supports the inclusion of reporting requirements in this year's budget. I would like to finish today with SAF budget recommendations on several of our top priorities. SAF recommends that Congress support FIA at no less than $69 million for fiscal year 2013. SAF supports the Forest Service's state and private forestry funding, including Forest Health Management for both federal and cooperative lands. We recommend funding at fiscal year 2012 enacted levels of $112 million. SAF supports the Administration's request to permanently reauthorize stewardship contracting within the Forest Service budget. SAF also commends the Administration for its request to fully fund the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program at $40 million. Hazardous Fuels funding is a critical component to Forest Service and DOI fuels reduction efforts. SAF recommends maintaining the fiscal year 2012 funding levels of $318 million for the Forest Service and $184 million for DOI. Forest product funding is important to SAF and its members also. If Congress does not fund the proposed Integrated Resource Restoration line item, SAF recommends funding the budget line item at enacted 2012 fiscal year levels. I would like to close by noting that the 41 percent decrease in the BLM's Public Domain Program would reduce from 80 to approximately 50 employees, the employees that are managing 60 million forested acres. SAF recommends funding this program at enacted fiscal year 2012 levels. We also have two additional documents supporting elements of my testimony that we would like to submit for the record. Mr. Simpson. You bet. Mr. Malmsheimer. And I would like to thank you for the opportunity and I would welcome any questions that you have. [The statement of Robert Malmsheimer follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. You bring up a couple of really good points about the EAJA funding. The reason we got on that is because nobody could really tell us who was paying out these funds. One time I asked the former chief of the Forest Service, when they go out and make any given decision--whether to, you know, do a timber sale or whatever--how much of the money is spent on making what they believe to be a good, sound scientific decision and how much trying to make it bulletproof from lawsuits? And he said between 25 and 50 percent is making a decision; between 50 and 75 percent is probably made in trying to make it bulletproof. Would we all not be better off if those resources--or at least a majority of those resources-- were used in managing public lands rather than in courts? We are trying to get a handle on that but first we have to find out where the money is going which is why we put the EAJA language in there. Stewardship contracting is something that I think everybody on this committee supports. We ran into a budgetary problem last year with the Budget Committee and how it scored and all that kind of just gobbledygook nonsense. But we are going to still push forward with that and try to get it done. Mr. Malmsheimer. Great. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Bill--hi, Bill. The executive director of the Federal Forest Resources Coalition--do you want to say your last name for me? Mr. Imbergamo. Sure. It is Imbergamo. Mr. Simpson. Imbergamo. I would have screwed it up totally; that is why I did not say it. Mr. Imbergamo. There are debates within my family about the pronunciation so I do not take offense. ---------- -- -------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. FEDERAL FOREST RESOURCE COALITION WITNESS WILLIAM IMBERGAMO Mr. Imbergamo. Appreciate the opportunity to be here on behalf of the Federal Forest Resource Coalition. Our members are mostly family-owned sawmills, mostly independent sawmills around the country. We have over 650 member companies with 350,000 workers and $19 billion in payroll, including Idaho Forest Group. Bob Bay from Idaho Forest Group is on my board. And we appreciate the support you and this Subcommittee have shown for sustainable management on these lands. Obviously, these are the lands that we need to be sustainably managed. Our mills are the ones that have to do business with the Forest Service and we have survived this downturn and we would like to persist into the future and be there for the Forest Service so they can actually manage their lands. Sustainably managing these lands produces a lot of benefits. I do not need to tell you. You are from Idaho; it produces habitat, it produces clean water, and it produces jobs in our rural communities. And they can do more and the chiefs acknowledge this with the announcement in February about increasing the pace of management. And while we appreciate that announcement that would involve both the chief and the secretary, we do not think it goes either far or fast enough. At the current pace that they proposed in February for treatment, it will take them 59 years to treat the 12.5 million acres that they identified as needing mechanical treatment. And as I have talked with staff about there are several Forest Service studies out there that show the actual acreage that needs treatment is considerably higher than that. To do this, they have got to reduce their unit costs. They spend--I think Region 1, which includes north Idaho--I was just in a meeting with the deputy regional forester and they spend $35 million on NEPA compliance and they do about 7,500 acres in mechanical treatment a year. That is not tenable. So we have been trying to work with them to find ways of reducing these unit costs and they are making as many administrative steps as they can that we think some new authorities, quite designation by description, which they are currently using on stewardship contracts, using those in normal timber sales would be a way of reducing unit costs. They are frequently spending an awful lot of money marking trees that are very low value. In essence, they are still running the program as if it was a 12 billion board-foot program with very valuable timber when the reality is it is much smaller than that. We are very thankful for your efforts in directing the Agency to increase outputs to 3.0 billion board feet in 2012 and we urge you to continue raising the bar for them in the fiscal year 2013 budget and set a goal of 3.5 billion board feet to be right now less than 10 percent of growth and less than half of the ASQs on the existing forest plans. You know, this activity takes place in counties that frequently have 20 percent or more unemployment and where poverty averages well above state averages, even in some States where some of the poverty rates are pretty stunning. We do urge the Committee to make some new investments in National Forest Timber Management. The program has not received an increase since about 2008 and overhead, including cost pools, is eating up 124 million or 37 percent of the program. To help them keep moving in the right direction, we urge you to move that up by 36 million to 371 million and set that target of 3.5 billion board feet. Our other two key priorities are restoring if possible the cuts in Capital Improvement and Maintenance roads budget and in the wild land Hazardous Fuels Reduction Program. We have millions of acres throughout the mountain west that did not improve in condition dramatically since 2011 and there is a real backlog and they need to keep making that investment. And we also oppose the Administration's blanket prohibition on new roads. This would prevent the Agency from doing even prudent steps like relocating poorly designed or poorly located roads. So combined with more efforts to reduce NEPA compliance costs--and by the way, the Natural Resources Committee asked the Forest Service what they were spending on NEPA compliance, and nationwide I think the number that I got was $356 million, which is more than they are spending on state and private forestry and more than they are spending on Forest Service research---- Mr. Simpson. Yeah. Mr. Imbergamo [continuing]. Right now. So, you know, a more focused effort to reduce NEPA compliance cost, collaboration that involves timber sales and hazardous fuel reduction will help improve the health of all the National Forests. We recognize that you are in a tough fiscal situation. Obviously, that has kind of been a refrain today. It has not been in the headlines this week either. But we think that a big part of that solution would be stopping the investments in land acquisition. We understand the priority that some place on this but right now it does not make sense to be cutting the management and infrastructure that you need to be acquiring new lands. Last year was a demonstration of the relationship between forest health and all users of the forests, not just my members, the recreationists. The fires in Arizona destroyed hundreds of recreation cabins and caused the cancellation of 4th of July celebrations. There are still lots of campgrounds and roads that are closed. There is a campground owner in the Black Hills who is spending $100,000 a year to try to keep pine beetles out of his campground. And then the Pagami Creek fire in Minnesota closed the Boundary Waters Canoe Area for the majority of August and September last year. So hikers, hunters, skiers all want healthy, green and growing forests and that is what my members need as well. And investing in managing those forests does not just yield timber to the mills I work for; it yields healthier forests for all those users. So I appreciate the chance to be here and I appreciate the chance to be with some of my colleagues. Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Bill. Mr. Imbergamo. And thank you for letting us come out. [The statement of William Imbergamo follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Appreciate your testimony. Thank you. Elena Daly. Ms. Daly. Daly. Mr. Simpson. Daly, you are up. Ms. Daly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. You bet. Ms. Daly. How do I turn this on? Mr. Simpson. There you go. Ms. Daly. There I go. Okay. ---------- -- -------- Thursday, March 22, 2012. PUBLIC LANDS FOUNDATION WITNESS ELENA DALY Ms. Daly. I really do appreciate the opportunity to address you and the Committee, present the views from the Public Lands Foundation. And as you may know, we are a nonprofit organization with more than 700 members, primarily BLM employees who remain engaged and interested in public lands issues. We are independent of the Bureau, although we support it. Sometimes we are a little too independent. That is okay and really want to help make the Bureau's job better. Some of the most significant management challenges facing the Bureau, as you are well aware, is urban development and the increased demand for access and use of public lands by a growing population, particularly in the West. And the BLM's customers are as diverse as the natural resources it manages. The public lands provide the Nation with opportunities for expanding the development of renewable energy, as well as traditional needs for oil, natural gas, coal, non-energy minerals, grazing land, and timber. Recreation, wildlife, wild horses, cultural resources, and special places are also significant attributes. And I know you are aware of that with what Idaho has particularly. Management activities contribute to the vitality of state and local economies generating an expected $4.5 billion in 2012, primarily from energy development. PLF, like everybody else, recognizes the reality of the funding constraints and the need to reduce the federal budget deficit. In general, we feel the Administration is seeking a very constrained budget in consideration of the fiscal issues being faced, and in that light, we are pleased with several aspects of the overall budget. The America's Great Outdoors Initiative would provide funding for some of BLM's most underfunded programs-- Recreation, Cultural Resources, and the National Landscape Conservation System. The NLCS is a unique compilation of incredible landscapes within the BLM's National System of Public Lands, which have been designated for their outstanding cultural, ecological, and scientific values. We feel that the management of NLCS has long been under-funded. We believe that BLM's energy programs need to be fully funded as well. These programs generate the bulk of receipts from the public lands, can have significant impacts on the ground, and should be primarily funded from appropriations or the receipts generated by the leases. Increased oil and gas inspections are important and must be funded, but we are very concerned that some of the new fees being proposed are coming ahead of the actual legislative proposals where the program changes could be fully vetted. Of particular concern is production accountability to ensure that all producers of energy or minerals under the Mineral Leasing Act and Federal Land Policy and Management Act are accurately reporting their production to the United States. More funding for this purpose would mean improved oversight and ultimately more money for the U.S. Treasury. The potential listing of the sage grouse as an endangered species has major implications for energy development and other uses of BLM public lands. It is essential that the BLM's funding increase be supported so that it can continue to make progress in preventing the need to list the sage grouse. We believe the Abandoned Mine Lands fees combined with a proposed budget increase will provide a process to begin reclaiming both the safety and environmental hazards that remain after 150 years of hard rock mining on millions of acres in the West and are also pleased to see increases in several other programs which are listed in my testimony for you. We are really pleased that in recent testimony before Congress, the Secretary announced a scaled-back proposal for the realignment of functions of the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement, and the BLM. There was simply too much opposition to this effort. However, we do have some concerns. We are very concerned about Rangeland Management Program. We know that administrative costs are being driven up by numerous factors, not the least of which is the cost of litigation. And while we support BLM's proposed pilot grazing administrative processing fee of $1 per animal unit month to assist the BLM in processing permits, we are very concerned with the proposed reduction in the Rangeland Management Program for administration of livestock grazing. The reduction far exceeds the increased revenue from the pilot program and will deeply impair the BLM's ability to meet its legal requirements on the ground. We believe funding for this program should be restored. We are also concerned about the reduction of $12.4 million from the Alaska Conveyance Program and we consider it to be devastating to the BLM in Alaska and the U.S. Government's commitment to the State of Alaska, the Native Corporations and individual native allottees to transfer lands that have been promised to them for over 40 years. This would be roughly a 20 percent reduction in land transfer capability and will result not only in reductions in force but the loss of many of the Survey Contracts that go to individual villages in Alaska. And last but certainly not least, while we are pleased that the Administration has requested sufficient funds to support efforts for the Wild Horse program, we remain dismayed at the seemingly unsolvable issues that continue to haunt efforts to maintain healthy horses on healthy ranges. We would like to see Congress step in at some point and write more effective legislation and provide specific guidance, particularly to resolve the issue of spending many millions of dollars maintaining unadoptable horses. The current situation is simply not sustainable. Mr. Chairman, we hope these comments and concerns assist you in your deliberations for the budget for BLM and we remain sincere in our efforts to assure proper management of for the National System of Public Lands. Thank you. [The statement of Elena Daly follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. And thank you for your testimony. We, too, are dismayed by the proposed reductions in Rangeland Management. We have been trying to put resources in there so that the BLM can adequately manage range. The proposed reductions are unacceptable as far as I am concerned, but we will see how the Committee reacts when we start putting this budget together once we find out what our allocation is going to be. Ms. Daly. Um-hum. Mr. Simpson. If you can find a solution for these sources, let me know. Ms. Daly. I have several but none would be popular. Mr. Simpson. That is exactly the problem. I thought maybe we ought to just give them over to--what is her name? Madeleine Pickens---- Ms. Daly. Ms. Pickens. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. Who wants to take them over. Ms. Daly. At one point we offered them to the Forest Service but they were not interested. Mr. Simpson. You mentioned in your testimony how much of the forest land in this country is private and state versus how much is the Federal Government's. What was that percentage? Mr. Pimlott. Two-thirds. And I would probably have to defer to staff or the other panel members to get you exact numbers. Maybe Tom knows the---- Mr. Martin. Yeah, it is about almost 60 percent of the land is privately owned forested landscape, and most of that is owned not by the Plum Creeks or the warehouses or the IFTs. It is owned by family forest owners. Mr. Simpson. It is really surprising. I had never really thought about it before and one day I saw a map that showed all the forested lands in the country and listed how much of them were privately owned and state-owned and how much of them were owned by the Forest Service. In the West it is primarily Forest Service and in the East, it is almost all privately owned. Mr. Pimlott. And California is kind of a mix. It is about one-third federal land, one-third private ownership, which is predominantly what we as the State Forester in California protect and the remaining third are in local government and incorporated cities. And so it is true everybody thinks of forest land, big companies; well, certainly in California and other parts of the West it is the small landowner that makes up again in California probably two-thirds of the ownership of forest land is the small landowner. Mr. Simpson. Did you put these plans together? Mr. Pimlott. Yes. And every State under this Farm Bill has one. Mr. Simpson. Do they then use that to determine where fuels reductions would be---- Mr. Pimlott. Yes. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. Most effective and so forth? Mr. Pimlott. Correct. We identify our priorities as required under this and that is where we focus--we actually take this as our parent document and then build a state fire plan to mirror these priorities so that we can implement it across the State. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Jim, welcome. Do you have any questions or anything? Mr. Moran. No, I am fine, Mike. Mr. Simpson. We thank you for being here today. It is, as each of you mentioned, a tight budget year and I do not see anything in the foreseeable future but tight budget years until we get our deficit under control, but there are certainly some important programs in our bill and we appreciate your input. And as we work through our budget, we will certainly keep those issues and your testimony in mind. Thank you. Tuesday, March 27, 2012. TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS PUBLIC WITNESSES--AMERICAN INDIANS AND ALASKA NATIVES Mr. Simpson. The Committee will come to order. Mr. Moran is apparently on his way and will be here in a few minutes, but good morning and welcome to the first of three public witness hearings specifically for American Indians and Alaska Native programs. Despite a somewhat abbreviated hearing schedule this year, I am proud that the Subcommittee is able to hold hearings on these very important programs. They have been and will continue to be a funding priority for this Subcommittee in a bipartisan way. The chair will call each panel of witnesses to the table one panel at a time. Each witness will be provided with 5 minutes to present their testimony. We will be using a timer to track the progress of each witness. When the button turns yellow, the witnesses will have 1 minute remaining to conclude his or her remarks. Members will be provided an opportunity to ask questions of our witnesses, but in the interest of time, the chair requests that we keep things moving in order to conclude this morning's testimony at a reasonable hour. I am happy now to yield to my good friend from Virginia, Mr. Moran, for any remarks he may have. Mr. Moran. Amen. Let's get on with the hearing. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Let me tell you, I am going to screw up so many names today. Do not be offended by it. The first panel will be Jefferson Keel, President of the National Congress of American Indians; Stacy Bohlen, National Indian Health Board; D'Shane Barnett, the National Council of Urban Indian Health; Brooklyn Baptiste, the Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee, Tino Batt, Council Member and Treasurer of the Fort Hall Business Council; and Affie Ellis and Tom Gede, Commissioners of the Tribal Law and Order Commission. Did I get those all somewhat correct? Everybody pretty much knew who they were? Mr. Moran. Thank you all for making the effort to come here. You know, we are here every day, but I know it takes a lot of logistics and cost and disruptions in your schedules to get here, but Chairman Simpson and I very much appreciate this opportunity to hear from you. It is very important to us and we do appreciate the effort. Mr. Simpson. It is not easy to get here from Idaho. You have to take a boat down the Missouri and then--no, I am just kidding. Tom, do you have any opening statement? Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mr. Keel, you are up first. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS WITNESS JEFFERSON KEEL Mr. Keel. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Representative Moran, Representative Cole. Thank you for the opportunity to allow us to testify this morning. This is an important matter, and we certainly appreciate all that you do on behalf of Indian Country. My name is Jefferson Keel. I am the President of the National Congress of American Indians, and I am the Lieutenant Governor of the Chickasaw Nation, and I am honored to be here on behalf of Indian Country. In my role as the National Congress of American Indians' President, I have an opportunity to visit with tribal leaders across the country, and I know that you will hear significant testimony from many of those tribal leaders today, so I will abbreviate my time here and summarize mine as quickly as possible. Mr. Simpson. Your written remarks will be included in the record. Mr. Keel. Thank you, sir. Recommendations from Indian Country that were included in the President's fiscal year 2013 proposal include increases for contract support costs, some natural resources and environmental protection programs, public safety initiatives, and Contract Health Services. While the Administration's budget proposal maintains support for many critical programs, some cuts proposed represent significant setbacks to progress in Indian Country such as for education construction. NCAI looks forward to working with this Subcommittee to ensure that federal programs that fulfill the trust responsibilities to tribes continue to receive bipartisan support in the appropriations process. Indian Country recognizes the state of the economy, the pressures on government at all levels, and the related challenges for job seekers. Tribes take the responsibility to manage federal funds as seriously as we do the federal trust responsibility to provide them, and we propose the following general recommendations for the fiscal year 2013 budget. Continue to promote successful efficient initiatives in Indian Country that work such as self-determination programs. Critical to implementing these policies are the Bureau of Indian Affairs' funding streams for tribal priority allocations, contract support costs at the BIA and the Indian Health Service, and tribal grant support costs for tribal schools. NCAI also urges Congress to support legislation that will fully restore the Secretary of Interior's authority to take land into trust for tribes, particularly regarding the Carcieri decision. We urge Congress to retain the language included in the President's budget addressing the Carcieri decision. I would like to discuss public safety and justice at the BIA. NCAI supports Interior's Protecting Indian Country Initiative and the Priority Goal to reduce violent crime in Indian communities. Since its inception, there has been a 35 percent overall decrease in violent crime across the four tribal communities, far exceeding the 5 percent goal. The successful program is now being expanded to two additional Recovery Act. We would like to see it expanded even further to reach even more tribes. In the Indian Health Service, we commend the Administration for including targeted funding increases that have long been a priority for the Tribal Budget Workgroup such as for Contract Health Services, staffing and contract support costs. While all these increases are much needed, the IHS budget remains woefully short of providing full funding to the IHS system. A very concerning cut is in Indian school construction. The fiscal year 2013 budget request for construction programs is $17.7 million below fiscal year 2012, eliminating new school construction. NCAI urges this funding to be restored. All students in America deserve a safe, secure and culturally appropriate environment in which to attend school. A reduction affecting economic development is the proposed reduction to the Indian Guaranteed Loan Program, which would be reduced by $2.1 million. This program is the most appropriate and urgently needed source of financing for business and energy and other economic development in Indian Country. NCAI encourages Congress to restore funding for the Indian Guaranteed Loan Program. We would also like to note that the President's budget includes a rather large reduction due to streamlining measures in the BIA, $19.7 million in streamlining measures and $13.8 million in administrative savings. We would urge respectfully that caution be taken when cutting so deeply into the BIA functions. We look forward to working with the Members of Congress to continue to build upon our successes. Tribal leaders urge Congress to uphold its solemn promises to tribes, even as policymakers seek to reduce the deficit through spending reductions and revenue generation, and we look forward to again working with this Committee and any other of your staff to continue that progress. Thank you again. [The statement of Jefferson Keel follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Thank you for being here. Stacy. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NATIONAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD WITNESS STACY A. BOHLEN Ms. Bohlen. Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Moran, who is my long-time Congressman, and Congressman Cole, thank you so much for allowing me to be here today on behalf of the National Indian Health Board. Our organization serves all 566 federally recognized tribes solely on the provision of health care for American Indians and Alaska Natives and improving that health care. My name is Stacy Bohlen. I am the Executive Director of the National Indian Health Board. I am a Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa from Michigan, and today my remarks will only be about the Indian Health Service 2013 budget. The National Indian Health Board is very grateful to this Congress and to this Administration for the 6 percent increase in funding to the Indian Health Service in 2012. The recent increases over the past year have made but small real gains in health for our people, and together we must protect and advance the progress that we have made. For fiscal year 2013, for the IHS budget, we were pleased to learn that the Administration recommends a $116 million increase over fiscal year 2012. Under the new discretionary limits with 3 percent increases, that is significant, and it represents the continued commitment of the United States to honor its legal obligations and the sacred trust responsibility to American Indians and Alaska Natives. However, the increase only allows for the continuation of IHS's current services. While we recognize the budget realities we face as a Nation, we urge this Congress to adopt funding levels for the Indian Health Service that are closer to the fiscal year 2013 National Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup's recommendations, which President Keel mentioned in his testimony as well. This workgroup recommends preserving the basic health care programs currently being funded and that would require an increase. The funding levels that are needed to enable the Indian health system to simply continue operating at its current level of service. Also contained in this category are the binding obligations that represent financial commitments previously made by the Indian Health Service. Without these increases, IHS's system would experience a decrease in its ability to care for its current service population. Inflation, both medical and non-medical, and population growth, we urge you also to please consider this. Funding for IHS programs has not kept pace with inflation. Medicare and Medicaid accrue 5 to 10 percent increases. Not true for IHS. NIHB urges this Congress to consider inflation during the appropriations process, and we recommend a $59.9 million increase just to address those costs. The Indian Health Service currently serves 2 million American Indian and Alaska Natives, and the service population increases at an average of 2 percent per year. In accordance with the Tribal Workgroup's recommendations, we propose a $52.4 million increase to the current services to account for population growth. Another majority priority under current services is funding for contract support costs, as the president mentioned. Native nations in all areas operate one or more such contracts, and the ability of tribes to successfully operate their own health care systems, whether they be substance abuse or entire medical systems and hospitals, depends on this contract support cost funding. The workgroup recommends addressing the CHS shortfalls with full funding. A current major service priority is funding for health care facilities construction for the 5-year plan. The workgroup's recommendations include $343 million for previously approved health facility construction projects in accordance with the Indian Health Service health care facilities fiscal year 2012 plan construction budget. Unfortunately, the Administration's request does not reflect this binding obligation. NIHB along with the tribes supports a $343 million increase for this purpose. Significant program increases are required to address the overwhelming health needs in Indian Country. The recommended increases are targeted and very realistic. The workgroup recommends $688 million be added to identified programs and facilities accounts. Under that increase is the Contract Health Service program, and it is a major priority. Unfortunately, this program is so grossly underfunded that Indian Country cannot purchase the quantity and types of care needed for our people, and many of our patients are left untreated and often with very painful conditions that if addressed in a timely way would both improve the quality of life and do so at a lower cost, and the workgroup proposes, and we support, a $200 million increase for Contract Health Services. Behavioral health was identified uniformly as a top national priority. We propose an $80 million increase. I think the Committee is aware that suicide is the number two cause of death of our children. It is an untenable statistic that needs to be addressed. This would go a long way toward helping with that goal. We also respectfully request that the Subcommittee work to exempt the Indian Health Service from budget cuts, freezes or sequestration. Should sequestration occur, there is some protection for the Indian Health Service under the Budget Control Act but the consequences of these reductions will be tangible in terms of loss of life when it comes to American Indian and Alaska Native health. So we urge you to work and commit to protecting the Indian Health Service and our people from budget cuts and sequestration. Finally, we ask Congress to work toward full funding of IHS and make a long-term commitment to that goal. IHS is currently funded at about 56 percent of its true need. In 2010, IHS spending for medical care was about $2,700 per person, and the average federal health care expenditure was about $7,200 per person. And on behalf of all the 566 federally recognized tribes, we ask the federal government to design and implement true funding that will fully fund the Indian Health Service. Thank you very much for your time today and for allowing me to make these remarks on behalf of our people. [The statement of Stacy Bohlen follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Stacy. We appreciate it. D'Shane. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NATIONAL COUNCIL OF URBAN INDIAN HEALTH WITNESS D'SHANE BARNETT Mr. Barnett. Good morning. My name is D'Shane Barnett. I currently serve as the Executive Director of the National Council of Urban Indian Health, also known as NCUIH. On behalf of our 36 member organizations and the more than 160,000 urban Indians that our programs serve annually, I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony today for the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. This year, NCUIH would like to make two recommendations regarding the critical challenges facing our health programs. First, we are requesting additional funding for the Urban Indian Health Program line item. Funding for the Title V line item currently stands at $42.9 million. This number is estimated to represent approximately one-quarter of the total health care need faced by Native American and Alaska Native people who are living in urban areas. While NCUIH respectfully and strenuously advocates for full funding of the entire Indian health system, we find it necessary to point out that for the past two fiscal years, the breakdown of the Congressional appropriations process and relentless pressure to cut spending has resulted in two consecutive years of reductions to the Urban Indian Health Program line item. These reductions threaten our base funding and limit our ability to provide services to American Indians and Alaska Natives living in America's cities. In addition, the fiscal year 2012 IHS budget eliminated nearly $1 million in grant funding that our urban communities relied upon for health promotion, disease prevention, sexual assault and domestic violence prevention, health care services for our elders, long-term care, and health services for women, children and youth, the most vulnerable members of our communities. These cuts have forced our programs to discontinue services to our patients and to lay off staff at a time when employment and job creation are more important than ever. In addition, the challenges posed by health care reform will require that all of our programs acquire the staff and resources necessary to bill private insurance offered through state exchanges and public insurance like Medicaid, Medicare and CHIP. Cuts to state budgets and dwindling grant opportunities make our Title V base funding even more important during these difficult times. In light of the imminent challenges facing the urban Indian health programs from health care reform, the bleak budget environment on both state and federal levels, and emerging census data that is showing that more than two-thirds of American Indians and Alaska Natives are living in urban areas, NCUIH respectfully requests an increase to the Urban Indian Health Program line item of $15 million, bringing total funding to $58 million. This increase is needed to offset the loss of both public and private funding opportunities to compensate for the loss of State funding, given relentless state budget cuts, to enable all of our programs to access third-party insurance dollars as health care reform is implemented and to remedy the longstanding underfunding of the urban Indian health line item. Second, NCUIH would like to call attention to the precarious situation faced by our residential treatment centers, or RTCs. RTCs promote healing and wellness in the American Indian community by providing a continuum of substance abuse prevention, treatment and recovery services that integrate traditional American Indian healing practices with state-of-the-art clinical substance abuse treatment methodology. RTCs offer a variety of culturally competent services such as talking circles, sweat lodges and other ceremonies that have thousands of years of proven success for our people. Traditional medicine and traditional healers are made available to our patients, and many of these patients do not reside in urban areas but travel from their reservation to our programs because of the quality of the services that we are able to provide and the holistic and traditional medical care we can offer. Our RTCs create an environment of culturally appropriate support for patients that are seeking to recover from drug and alcohol addictions. By integrating patient medical care into a structured social support network, RTCs assist patients in recovering from their illness and rehabilitating their lives. RTCs reduce overall health care costs, help people recover from their addictions, return to their jobs, stay off public assistance and form positive relationships with their communities. In the past, most of our RTCs have relied on state funding to augment modest funding from the Indian Health Service. As states are forced to make cuts in services due to their budget shortfalls, residential treatment programs have been frequently targeted for elimination. One example, in Portland, they have reduced $1.25 million to a single RTC. In Seattle, cuts took place in November of 2011 that resulted in a 50 percent loss of long-term funding, which equaled a reduction of 10 beds and a layoff of residential treatment staff who have now had to seek other employment or rely on public assistance. In conclusion, I would just like to express my gratitude for the opportunity to testify here today. Funding for our line item has fallen far short of the parity required to keep up with medical inflation, and it falls even short of the full funding required to address the health care needs of native people living in urban areas. Even if the $58 million figure suggested by NCUIH were appropriated by Congress, this would still amount to only $362 per patient served. We are respectfully requesting your support for long-delayed funding increases in order for our programs to carry out their mission of serving the American Indian and Alaska Native people in this country regardless of where they reside. Thank you. [The statement of D'Shane Barnett follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. We appreciate it. Brooklyn. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NEZ PERCE TRIBAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE WITNESS BROOKLYN D. BAPTISTE Mr. Baptiste. Good morning, everyone. I appreciate your time this morning. My name is Brooklyn Baptiste. I serve as the Chairman for the Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee. I would like to give you guys a huge thank you for allowing us to come here this morning, especially the chairman, who is from the beautiful State of Idaho as well. We would like to say thank you to the Committee as it evaluates and prioritizes the spending needs of the United States regarding IHS, BIA, EPA, the Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as it pertains to the Nez Perce Tribe. The Nez Perce Tribe clinic on the reservation has two facilities which last year served close to 4,000 patients, and not all tribal members but descendents as well and other tribes as well. These patients represent close to 80,000 visits, which included pharmacy and laboratory visits in addition to medical provider visits as well. You have heard testimony from the last three about the contract support costs and how vital it is and how underfunded it is and what it does actually to kind of hamstring the clinic itself as it tries to provide the best quality service. Contract support cost is huge and continually underfunded. In addition, the tribe shortfall for fiscal year 2011 for contract support costs was close to $9 million, and this is what we are looking at for the next year as well. The Committee's work on maintaining and increasing funding is vital for the Nez Perce tribe and for our membership as they try to serve the best quality health for the members and the patients that visit the clinic as well. The Nez Perce tribe also seeks restoration of past contract support cost claims where the tribe was not fully funded. H.R. 4031 would help provide an avenue for the affected tribes from the shortfall to find their day in court and try to explain the claims that we have, and like I said, it is trying to play catch-up on a lot of those things, but as years go on and those annual shortfalls seem to add up, it really weighs on the burden of the clinics and the health care on each reservation, even in the urban areas as well. So we would hope that you will do your best. I know you guys do a lot of hard work for the tribes and the people out there in the Nation for their health care, and we would appreciate any help that you can give us. The Nez Perce Tribe entered an agreement with the United States in 2005 known as the Snake River Basin Water Rights Act of 2004. A component of the agreement was to transfer approximately 11,000 acres from the Bureau of Land Management to the tribe. The lands were supposed to be surveyed in that agreement and to this day that funding has not been met, so those surveys have not occurred. Full funding for those surveys in fiscal year 2011 budget request called for $695,000 for that fiscal year to begin that process. The tribes support a renewal of that appropriation request in the fiscal year 2013 budget. I know, Mr. Simpson, you are very familiar with the SRB and the process and how hard that was to get to that point, so we are just trying to make sure that we can follow to the letter of the agreement itself. The Nez Perce Tribe is a founding member of the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission, our policy and technical coordinating agency for treaty fisheries, management for Columbia River and international fisheries. We support the testimony you will hear tomorrow Chairman Gerald Lewis. While we support the funding increase for rights protection implementation, we are concerned with the way allocations to that account have been made since 2009. Individual accounts have been reduced by as much as 40 percent and raised as much as 60 percent without explanation or rationale. We ask the Committee here that you direct the bureau to return to the 2008 allocation formula, which is consistent and effective, and we see it as the best methodology. The Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund is an example of the projects that we use under that fund. The Nez Perce Tribe utilizes the Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund to stock coho smolts hatcheries in the Clearwater River Basin. We also add additional smolts from Columbia River hatchery, Eagle Creek and up to the Clearwater River for relief. Based on the PIT tag information, 15,000 coho adults from our Clearwater releases provided fishing for tribal and non-tribal members as well. Chairman Simpson is very well aware of the impact that the fisheries have on the local economy and subsistence for the tribe as well. Continued appropriation for this fund will allow this successful work to continue, and we appreciate any work that you could help us on restoring this endangered species. Finally, the Big Horn sheep. The Nez Perce Tribe respectfully requests that the Committee not renew 2012 appropriations language contained in section 431 that prohibits federal agencies from implementing existing federal management decisions that protect struggling Big Horn sheep populations on public lands. Big Horn sheep are an important resource for the Nez Perce tribe economy but also the history and culture. We are trying to save the last pure stock of Big Horn sheep in Idaho. It is vital for the United States to honor the tribes' treaty reserve rights to continue to hunt this culturally important species on federal public land off the reservation but within the ceded territory and protected by our treaty. On behalf of the Nez Perce Tribe, I would like to say thank you for your hard work and your due diligence on all the budgets in Indian Country. I know it is not easy defending these, and when we have such a budget crisis, it is always hard for us to move forward. So thank you very much. [The statement of Brooklyn D. Baptiste follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. We appreciate it. Tino. Mr. Batt. Good morning. Mr. Simpson. Good morning. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. SHOSHONE-BANNOCK TRIBES OF THE FORT HALL INDIAN RESERVATION WITNESS TINO BATT Mr. Batt. Good morning, Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Moran and other members of the Committee. My name is Tino Batt. I serve as the Treasurer of the Fort Hall Business Council, the governing body of the Shoshone and Bannock tribes of Idaho. First, on behalf of the tribes, I would like to thank you, Congressman Simpson, for your friendship and commitment to make sure the federal government fulfills its trust responsibility. My testimony will focus on the following areas: one, juvenile detention center as a regional facility; two, funding for educational and mental health services for our juvenile detention center; three, funding for 6th grade expansion for the Shoshone-Bannock Junior and Senior High School; and four, EPA support to clean up the Eastern Michaud Flats Superfund Site on the reservation; and five, funding increase for road maintenance on BIA Indian reservation roads. Juvenile justice system in Indian Country, like the broader tribal justice system, has been crippled by federal laws and court decisions more than a century. The tribe has many of the same public safety concerns that other tribes have. However, we face the added pressure of dealing with Public Law 280. In 1963, the State of Idaho, without consent, assumed responsibility over juvenile crimes on our reservation. For almost 50 years, the state has ignored its responsibility under Public Law 280 and our youth has suffered as a result. With no help at the state level and little help at the federal level, we took matters into our own hands and built a new justice center, which houses our police department, our courts, adult and juvenile detention center. We built a juvenile center for the vision of having it serve as a regional facility. Congress through the enactment of the Tribal Law and Order Act approved of this regional detention center aspect. We must also provide education, substance abuse and mental health services to juveniles in our custody. The detention center is often the final opportunity for rehabilitation. Our hope is that the facility can help our juveniles turn their lives around instead of becoming career criminals. Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2013 BIA budget requests zero funding for juvenile education, and BIA refuses to let us use correctional dollars for education for our juveniles. There are 24 juvenile facilities in the BIA system, and none are receiving funding for education. We urge you to include funding for juvenile education in fiscal year 2013. Also, to assist us in improving our juvenile program, we respectfully make two requests that would help us stretch existing dollars. First, we seek designation of our juvenile center as a regional facility. Second, we seek authorization to use detention funding for educational and mental health services for juveniles. I would like to turn to the needs of the Shoshone-Bannock High School, a tribally controlled BIE school, which relies on Tribal Grant Support Costs (TGSC) to pay for administrative costs. The fiscal year 2013 budget request only meets 65 percent of our needs. We ask that we receive funding to meet 100 percent of our needs. Two years ago, the tribe added a 6th- grade program to the high school. Given that the elementary school on the reservation ends at 5th grade and the high school starts at the 7th grade, this left a big gap where our children had to go to different schools off the reservation for one year and then come back to the reservation. However, the BIE has refused our request to use TGSC funding for our new 6th grade by pointing to riders in the fiscal year 1995 and 1996 Interior appropriation bill as a moratorium on grade expansion. To overcome this barrier, we request report language clarifying that BIE funding can be used for costs of our 6th grade. I have two last items. We request support in our efforts as we work with EPA to clean up the Eastern Michaud Flats Superfund Site located on the reservation due to phosphate mining. The hazardous waste from the mining is stored in unlined holding ponds causing serious contamination to the earth and groundwater. This contamination has affected our sacred hunting grounds. The EPA wants to just cover it, but southeast Idaho wants to clean it up. Lastly, we request consideration of a one-time appropriation of $50 million to address the growing deferred road maintenance needed in Indian Country. At this time I would like to thank you for your time and your efforts to ensure the needs of Indian people are met. Thank you. [The statement of Tino Batt follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Tino. Affie. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. TRIBAL LAW AND ORDER COMMISSION WITNESSES AFFIE ELLIS TOM GEDE Ms. Ellis. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Moran, other members of the Committee, including my neighbor, Representative Lummis from Cheyenne, Wyoming. My name is Affie Ellis, and I appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the Indian Law and Order Commission. I serve as a member of the commission along with the Tom Gede, who will address a few other matters in just a moment. Our commission was created by the Tribal Law and Order Act, which was signed into law in July 2010. The President and leaders of Congress appointed nine commissioners, who are all volunteers, during the winter of 2010 through 2011. The commission has received funding from the U.S. Departments of Justice and Interior in the late summer of 2011 to carry out its statutory responsibilities. The commission is charged with conducting a comprehensive study of law enforcement and criminal justice in tribal communities and will recommend to the President and to Congress modifications and improvements to justice systems at the tribal, federal and state levels. The Tribal Law and Order Act made clear, however, that the commission's report would be due within 2 years of enactment. Thus, our report is due in July of this year. Commissioner Tom Gede and I are here today to urge Congress to extend the life of the commission to allow us to complete our study, our field hearings and our analysis in order to develop a meaningful and comprehensive report. I was appointed to the commission to serve by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell at the recommendation of U.S. Senator John Barrasso. By way of background, I am a member of the Navajo Nation and I currently operate a public and government affairs firm based out of Cheyenne, Wyoming. Prior to that, I served as an Assistant Attorney General in the Wyoming Attorney General's Office. I have also spent some time working on Capitol Hill working for the late U.S. Senator Craig Thomas of Wyoming, and I also worked at the National Gaming Commission. I currently serve as an Adjunct Professor at the University of Wyoming where I teach a class on Indian law and policy. It was an honor to be selected to serve on this commission, and it is an honor to appear before you today. The commission did not receive its funding until August of 2011, more than a year after the enactment of the Tribal Law and Order Act, and thus one of the two years that Congress anticipated for our review and study was lost. The commission organized itself throughout 2011 and it held its first public hearing in September 2011 at the Tulalip Indian Reservation in Washington State. The commission has thus far traveled to or near Indian Country for hearings on a monthly basis since then and has met with tribal, state and federal officials with deep experience and knowledge of the problems in Indian Country. We currently have eight upcoming hearings throughout Indian Country scheduled to occur through October 2012. This active and high-paced work is essential for the commission to accomplish its task but our work is not complete and cannot be reasonably be completed by July 2012. The commission respectfully requests that you consider legislation that extends the life of our commission for an additional year at no cost and with no additional appropriation so that we can complete our work. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. Commissioner Gede will now testify as to some of the key duties assigned to the commission. [The statement of Affie Ellis follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Tom. Mr. Gede. Thank you, and good morning, Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Moran and members of the Committee. My name is Tom Gede, and I was appointed to the Indian Law and Order Commission in December 2010 by then-House Minority Leader John Boehner. I am an attorney in Sacramento, California, and previously served as a Special Assistant and Deputy Attorney General in the California Attorney General's Office under former Congressman, then Attorney General, then again Congressman Dan Lundgren, and also teach federal Indian law at University of Pacific-McGeorge School of Law. In my written testimony, I provided an introduction to all the members of the Committee of our nine-member commission, one of whom is our distinguished President Keel here today with us as well of the nine members of the commission, and as Affie pointed out, we are facing a very short deadline to complete this comprehensive study of improvements to public safety for American Indian and Alaska Native communities at all levels of the government. The charge Congress gave us was to examine law enforcement and public safety in Indian Country including the complex issues of jurisdiction over crimes committed in Indian Country, tribal jail and federal prison systems, rehabilitation of offenders, tribal juvenile justice systems, the prevention of juvenile crime, rehabilitation of Indian youth in custody and reducing recidivism among Indian youth. The commission is to provide the President and this Congress with a report of our recommendations for improvements to the justice system at all levels. This may include consideration of simplifying jurisdiction in Indian Country, improving services and programs focused on preventing juvenile crime on Indian lands, adjustment to the penal authority of tribal courts, and changes to the tribal jails and federal prison systems. I join Commissioner Ellis in respectfully requesting the support of the Committee and Congress for an extension of one year for the commission to complete its work. As you may know, Congress provided that $2 million in unallocated funds from the Department of Interior and Department of Justice be used to support the commission, and so we seek no appropriation but we do need an additional year of life to the commission in order to get this comprehensive completed and our report to the Congress and the President finished. Thank you. [The statement of Tom Gede follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. I thank all of you for testifying. If you can simplify the jurisdictional issues in Indian Country over crimes committed on reservations or by tribal members or against tribal members and whether it is by tribal members or non-tribal members, I have been trying to understand it now for about a year. I got a book on it, and I am confused, to tell you the truth, so I suspect everyone else is too. Simplifying that would be a huge step forward. But it was a year before you got funding to start this actual commission work, so we will look at seeing what we can do to extend it. I apologize for calling you Alfie instead of Affie, but I do not have my glasses on and I grew up in a time when the song was ``What's It All About, Alfie.'' Ms. Ellis. No problem, Mr. Chairman. Thanks. Mr. Simpson. You bring up many other important issues that this Committee will address in this budget. Obviously we have been somewhat focused on health care and trying to address the health care needs in Indian Country. It is an important subject to this Committee, and we will do what is necessary to get that done. We have both a treaty responsibility plus a moral responsibility to make sure of that. And I have had Members of Congress say to me, we spend so much money on health care in Indian Country, way more than we do on veterans, and that is just not the case. In fact, it is just the opposite. We need a good educational program within Congress to educate Members to the amount of money we spent on health care in Indian Country versus the rest of whatever government does. I am concerned, as you are, that the President's budget for educational services would actually build no new schools, and the need in Indian Country for new schools is truly out there. We went through some of schools that frankly you should not send children to, and we have to do something about that. So this Committee will continue to focus on those issues. Jim. Mr. Moran. Just a word on the Tribal Law and Order Commission. One of the concerns that I am very much hoping can be addressed by the Commission are crimes committed particularly against Indian women off reservation that are committed with basic impunity. Too many of them have been brought to my attention that have not been prosecuted, and I would hope that there is a section of your report that addresses that. Maybe these were atypical incidents. I do not think so, though, because the statistics were troubling. It was almost culturally accepted in some areas of the country that you could commit crimes against Indian women with impunity as long as it was kind of around the margins of the reservation. Among many issues that need to be addressed, that is one of the ones I do hope that you focus on. Mr. Gede. If I may, Mr. Moran, that is one of the highest priorities of the commission to examine and grapple with. It is a very difficult issue and we know that the Congress is looking at some of the issues in the VAWA reauthorization but we definitely are making that one of the highest priorities. Mr. Moran. Good for you. Thank you. Ms. Ellis. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. I agree with what the ranking member says. When you look at the rate of crimes against women on reservations, it is appalling, and I have talked with Secretary Echo Hawk about how they have made a concentrated effort to try to put more officers on some reservations to try to reduce the crime rate, and I understand it has been fairly successful. I talked with him about doing an oversight hearing, having him come in and testify about what is going on with these programs and how successful they have been and trying to bring in some of the other individuals that are involved. We will continue to pursue that. Representative Cole. Mr. Cole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank all of you for being here, and again, I would be remiss not to thank the chairman and thank him for the great work he has done in this area and building on the work Chairman Moran and before him Chairman Dicks did. We really do have a bipartisan and frankly unanimous commitment on this committee to try and do better than historically we have done. I think we have made a difference in the last few years. I want to focus most of my questions on health care, although I share the chairman's concern on education and law enforcement too. I think we all do. But on contract support services, and Stacy, if I can use your first name? Ms. Bohlen. Yes. Mr. Cole. If I can maybe start with you, but anybody else that wants to can chime in. This Committee tried to make a lot of progress last year on that front, and we appropriated a lot of money and were able to hold on to a lot of it through the conference process, and at that point--I am not being critical of the Administration, I am trying to get at what our problem is--we had the Administration come back and say gosh, you guys are giving us too much money in this area, contract support. You need to take some of it back, we are going to redirect it other places. In the course of that, I know the Chairman has this concern as I did. I said, once you start redirecting this money, there is no assurance we are going to get to redirect it. They wanted to redirect it toward dealing with our non- tribal providers and contract services so that there was a legitimate point but, again, they had one set of numbers as to what contract support was, we had a very different view, and they have since told us what the disparity us and why in their view, and are trying to work with us on it. But from your standpoint, you have considerable expertise here. What is the problem? How do we get at what the right amount to appropriate is in this particular area? And if you have any kind of idea what that would be beyond what we have been doing, that would be very helpful. Ms. Bohlen. Well, there is a great deal of work that is done in that area, and if I can comment just briefly on what you said previously, it is not--Indian health care is not a place where you can sort of pick a line item over another line item and have an aggregate outcome. The work that has been done on contract support costs has been absolutely critical and necessary, and while Contract Health Services is an absolutely critical area of need as well, the two cannot really be in competition with each other as I think you recognize. But there is an individual at the table who I think can answer this question better than I because he is the former chair of the Tribal Self Governance Advisory Committee, and I would like to defer to President Keel if I may. Mr. Cole. Sure. Mr. Keel. I will try. Contract Health Services, if you look at the Indian Health Service across the board, 331 tribes are self-governing tribes, and more than that, there are a number of tribes who have contracts with the federal government. The tribes in this country are the only government contractors that do not get their full contract support costs up front. If you look at Halliburton and all the other government contractors, they get their administrative costs and contract support costs up front. It is built into the contract, and they get those in order to operate those contracts right off the bat. Tribes are not in that same pool. So the bottom line, tribes are not able to fulfill those contracts because of a lack of resources, and they are simply not able to hire the right people, the right amount and the number of people to fulfill those contracts and those services to the people that they serve. And so that is the real problem. But if you look at the difference in Contract Health, many of our tribes, many of the clinics and hospitals simply do not have the staff or the equipment to provide the services to specialized medicine that is needed and so they simply have to hire that out and they hire and send that out to other resources to provide their services. And so there is the difference. But actually, Lloyd Miller is here. I might ask him if it is okay with you, Mr. Chairman, that he might provide just a 30-second overview of that. He will probably charge me for this. Mr. Cole. That is why you are limiting him to 30 seconds. Mr. Simpson. Identify yourself for the record. Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Cole, members of the Committee. My name is Lloyd Miller. I am an attorney. I represent the National Tribal Contract Support Cost Coalition. Mr. Moran, good morning, and Ms. McCollum, Ms. Lummis. The problem last year was that the Indian Health Service did not disclose its data and this year once again is not disclosing any data it uses to make the projections it gives to the Committee. Last year in the supplemental information the Service provided this Committee, there was a fundamental error in the numbers. They compared a requirement from one year with the funding amount of another year. We called that error to the attention of the Service. The Service did not correct the numbers to the Committee. The Committee was told there would be an over-appropriation at the levels you were proposing. The number was dropped. Now the Service acknowledges there will be a $50 million to $60 million shortfall because they agree they made an error. The Committee was misled by the Administration and it is compounded by the fact that now in the President's budget, the President no longer--the Indian Health Service is no longer telling this Committee how much the contract support requirement is projected to be in 2013. In 25 years, we have never seen a President's budget that excluded a projection of the need. So you are shooting in the dark. I will testify tomorrow on behalf of the coalition with the data we have produced from the expertise of a former Indian Health Service contract support cost expert who left the Service 2 years ago but we project that the 2013 budget will be about $99 million short. Mr. Cole. First of all, thank you, and I would invite you to work with us because we really did try last year to get the number. If I can just make one other point, Mr. Chairman, you have been very generous with your time. I just wanted to focus on the urban Indian just a second, Mr. Barnett. Number one, I did not realize, to tell you the truth, that we had for 2 years not increased--because the aim has been to try and do more in this area, and we certainly have two clinics in Oklahoma that do unbelievably important service for us, particularly in areas outside tribal jurisdiction. We have a lot of citizens with a lot of needs but they are in the middle of Oklahoma City where no tribe has any jurisdiction and very little in the way of--I know the Chickasaws maintain a presence now in that community. You put a minimum dollar figure but I would like you just for a moment to make a statement about what happens to the people you cannot serve, because the reality is, they flood the institutions around them anyway. We are going to pay for this one way or the other. They almost always get better care and they would prefer to be at an urban facility, but it is not like these patients if we cannot take care of them in Oklahoma City or in Tulsa or wherever else in the country are not going to another hospital, and quite often it is indigent, uncompensated care. Mr. Barnett. Thank you very much, Representative Cole. That is a question that has been proposed in the past when the prior Administration actually targeted the urban Indian line item for elimination completely and they asked that same question, why are the services needed, what happens, you know, when these clinics are not there. And you steered toward the answer, which is when these clinics are not there, the patients do not receive services, and that is for several reasons. First, you know, the safety net is stretched to its capacity in almost every state that I know of. The community health centers came together and supported the urban Indian health programs because they could not serve the patients if those clinics were not present. They do not have the resources or the capacity and they do not have the ability to provide the culturally competent care that is needed as well as the individuals living in those areas often come to our programs because they do not qualify for other programs, either private or public. So when you remove the Indian Health Service out of the equation, even though they are in an urban area, they are left with no care whatsoever or they are left with county care that does not meet their needs either medically or culturally. That leads them oftentimes without services, and there is an inherent distrust between American Indians and government-run services for obvious reasons, and that does actually trickle over into county and public health services. So Indian people will at times flat out refuse to go to a county or state-run health program, and if there is not an urban Indian health program in the area, they simply will go without care until they are in the emergency room and the care becomes much more expensive, life threatening and, you know, much more difficult to address. Mr. Cole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I apologize for not hearing all the testimony this morning. I have been looking through it. All politics is local, and I was with MAST this morning. So, based on some of the discussion that I had with them and some of the things that you have said and the questioning, I am just going to build on this a little more. URBAN INDIAN HEALTH I represent the St. Paul area. We have a large urban population in Minneapolis and a significant one in St. Paul, but they are really invisible. That is because a lot of the services are not there for them. So it does put a lot of pressure onto some of our health clinics. I think we do have a good relationship in the Twin Cities between the Native American community and Ramsey and Hennepin County. But they are not being compensated properly for the care that they are giving. We have 11 Ojibwe nations and Sioux nations plus people who travel from Wisconsin in for parts of the winter or parts of the summer, back and forth, and mixed marriages where children are of both tribes. We really need to figure this out in a way that is friendly to families for a whole host of reasons. So I am planning on delving more in depth just in the Twin Cities to understand what is going on, and anything you can do to help me in my journey would be appreciated. INDIAN YOUTH HEALTH We talked about a lot of things, including schools. You know, I am a high school teacher. Sixth grade is important, so we need to fix that for you somehow. Another thing that is becoming a reoccurring theme that I have heard a lot, including when I was just in Wisconsin visiting with three tribes there and then again at MAST, is alcohol and prescription drug abuse. We are seeing cocaine, heroin and meth on the rise, and that was a concern in our conversation was with MAST today. It boils down to what you are working on with law and order, what health care works on with diagnosis and treatment, and what ultimately makes successful students because they have parents who are engaged. Those students are not becoming involved in gateway drugs, suicidal behavior, domestic violence, on and on. One of the things that we saw when I was with the chairman--and it was a fabulous, enlightening trip he put together--was talking about that juvenile treatment center there and how far kids come from there? I met tribal members in Green Bay, Wisconsin, and that is the closest juvenile facility that they have. That does not support health and it does not support good outcomes and it does not support families, because the whole family has to be treated. Where are we in talking about this? I am a child of an alcoholic. It is a dirty little family secret, folks, and it needs to come out in the public if we are going to work on this. So is anybody going to talk about it here? Mr. Barnett. If I can just jump in briefly--oh, I am sorry, President Keel. Mr. Keel. Go ahead. Mr. Barnett. I wanted to say two quick things. One of the really sad things in your testimony is that the Green Bay Urban Indian Health Program actually closed. The resources were not there to support it. Our programs get some base funding from Indian Health Service that they are expected to leverage with other resources, and unfortunately, when other resources go away, the base funding is not enough to sustain the program. So the Green Bay program closed. As far as the substance abuse treatment programs, what we are seeing, you know, our programs can offer culturally competent care that impacts our community, that makes a difference, that when you look at the completion rate and the recidivism rate for our programs, it is phenomenal. They have done things that, you know, are justifiable and have a long- lasting impact, but what we are seeing is that because it is residential treatment and because it is, you know, considered a high cost of care, the funding is dwindling. Well, that care if culturally competent. That care supports the entire holistic health of that person including their education, including their employment, including their primary care, including their dental care, including all of the things that we know these people need to be healthy members of our communities, and those programs are the ones that are being targeted. You know, our Portland program lost over a million. Our Seattle program has lost millions of dollars, has turned people away and is now laying staff off. That is not going to address the problem that you are bringing to the forefront. It is actually going to do the opposite. It is going to make it worse. Ms. Ellis. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add, the Tribal Law and Order Commission is also looking at juvenile justice systems in depth. You know, throughout travels so far, I think we have seen some real bright spots and places that are trying to tackle the issues head on. I mentioned the Tulalip Reservation. We looked at some of their juvenile justice facilities, and you know, they are really taking some steps forward, but we are also looking at other places where the system is not quite there and it is really not being helpful to young Indian kids. So it is a huge focus of our commission and something that we will discuss, I am guessing, at length in our report. Mr. Keel. Thank you for the question. When you talk about the health and welfare of our children, our youth, education systems within--you know, treatment facilities within Indian Country are lacking because of the lack of resources. Even in our school systems, the BIE schools, there is not enough staff because of the lack of resources. There is not staff available. And oftentimes many of these children come from broken homes. They come from backgrounds of abuse, whether it be alcohol, drugs, other types of abuse, and they struggle to find a place to fit in, and many times, and Representative Cole touched on it, when they cannot get the services in the urban areas, they do come to our facilities and they show up. The problem is, by the time they come to our facilities, they are in an acute situation so that treatment--you know, long-term treatment is not available to them so we simply put a band-aid on them and send them home. The problem with that treatment is that we send them back to the same old environment. They go back home, and in a few years they are then the problem. And so it is a cycle that we simply need to break. We simply do not have the resources to break that right now. Mr. Simpson. Ms. Lummis. Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you all for being here, and in light of the lengthy day ahead, I want to first of all thank the commissioners for their volunteer work. I was once on a commission similar, and I know that it is a lot of personal out-of-pocket expense as well as tremendous commitment of time, and I know Mrs. Ellis is well aware of the issues on the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming, and I am sure you are seeing similar problems elsewhere that local reservations are grappling with, so thank you both for your service there. Mr. Chairman, I will follow up with you on Mr. Baptiste's discussion about the 11,000 acres and the survey and first of all why so much money for a survey, and secondly, why has it not been done already, and then also I share Mrs. McCollum's concern about the 6th grade. That does seem to be a strange lapse in continuity in youth education. So I will just follow up with you all on that. And again, I want to thank you all for your testimony this morning and acknowledge gratefully the attendance of my friend Affie Ellis from Wyoming. Mr. Simpson. When I was in the 6th grade, I figured I needed a year off. You get a different answer if you talk to those kids, huh? Thank you all for being here today. We appreciate it very much. The information you have given to us will help us in crafting the next bill. Our next panel: Stoney Anketell, Tracy ``Ching'' King, John Yellow Bird Steele and Troy Weston, Richard Greenwald, Tex Hall and David Gipp. If you would kind of sit in order? Stoney down here, Tracy next. John, you are third. Good to see you again. Richard Greenwald, Tex Hall and then David Gipp. I have to run upstairs for just a second. Mr. Cole [presiding]. All right. Thank you for very much. Stoney, we will start with you, if we may, and we are going to try to follow the order that we have on the panel. It makes it a lot easier on the court reporter. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. THE ASSINIBOINE AND SIOUX TRIBES OF THE FORT PECK RESERVATION WITNESS STONEY ANKETELL Mr. Anketell. I was going to say good morning, Chairman Simpson and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Thomas ``Stoney'' Anketell. I am a member of the Executive Board of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation. Thank you for inviting me to testify. The Fort Peck Reservation is a large land-based reservation in northeastern Montana that encompasses approximately 2.1 million acres. About 8,000 of our 12,000 tribal members reside on the reservation. Our greatest need is for economic development, infrastructure, public safety and health care. I will address my comments in that order. In economic development, our unemployment rate on our reservation is nearly 60 percent. Four in ten families live below poverty level. In order to generate more economic development, I ask this Subcommittee to take two specific steps to help us increase energy exploration on our reservation which, like the Fort Berthold Reservation, lies within the Bakken Formation. First, direct the Department of the Interior to set drilling permits on Indian reservations at state permit levels or exempt them altogether. A BLM drilling permit on Indian land costs $6,500. That is too high. It makes us less competitive. For the same permit, a Montana drilling permit on fee lands, $75. So $75 versus $6,500. Second, increase funding for the BIA's Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development above the $8.5 million the Administration requests so that the Department can increase full-time hires to process mineral leases and other energy development leases on Indian reservations. BIA regional and agency staffs do not have adequate expertise in energy development to issue lease and drilling permits in a timely manner so our tribe can take advantage of this unique opportunity. More staffing with better training could help clear up this backlog. Infrastructure--the health of our community is tied to the quality of our drinking water. Since enactment of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act of 2000, we are developing a rural water system to serve our reservation and surrounding communities with safe drinking water. EPA has determined that well water in the area is contaminated by brine plume. This project is a $200 million project. Through our Indian Self- Determination Act contracts, we have completed construction of the raw water intake facility, the water treatment plant and laid miles of pipeline. Under the federal law, operation and maintenance funding is the responsibility of the BIA. The BIA is not doing its job correctly. The BIA is behind schedule in requesting adequate operation and maintenance funding to ensure that we have adequate funds to safely operate and maintain the project. Please see that the BIA has the $1 million in operation and maintenance funding that we need for fiscal year 2013 operations of our rural water system. The BIA has only requested $750,000 for fiscal year 2013. We currently receive $200,000 in recurring operation and maintenance dollars. Another infrastructure need is adequate funding for the BIA Road Maintenance Program. Funding for the BIA Road Maintenance Program has been flat at around $25 million for the last 30 years. It has not gone up. And it has actually been dropping over the last 5 years. This is wrongheaded. Native Americans die in motor vehicle crashes at rates two to three times the national average each year, partly because our roads were not safely designed and are not adequately maintained. Please find at least an additional $10 million from the Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, or other non-BIA programs at Interior to help keep reservation public roads and bridges safe. Public safety--we greatly appreciate the increases Congress has recently provided for public safety programs but given the large shortfall in law enforcement and correction officers, these increases do not fulfill the United States' basic trust responsibility in the area of public safety. We support the Administration's $6.5 million increase requested to fund the operations of the newly constructed detention facilities. The Fort Peck tribes received a grant from the Department of Justice to rebuild our detention facilities, which will be operational in fiscal year 2013. Please ensure that the BIA and the Interior Department's Office of Facilities Management and Construction have the resources needed to maintain detention facilities after they are built by increasing funding in fiscal year 2013. I will end on health care. Our tribes desperately need to extend our Fort Peck Tribal Dialysis Unit from 10 to 18 stations or to construct a new dialysis on the reservation. We are at capacity, serving 33 patients six days a week. We have an additional 73 to 100 pre-renal patients, and this is a tribal program. We built this thing, we run it ourselves and we need help. We are not asking for much because we have done it all on our own, but we need help, because as you know, diabetes is such a severe problem in Indian Country, and this is the final phase of diabetes, dialysis. So if we cannot serve them, they will have to travel great distances for dialysis treatment. We ask the Subcommittee to direct the IHS to report to Congress on its efforts to address the need for dialysis treatment in Indian Country as required under the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, especially in rural regions such as the Rocky Mountain region. Finally, we support and ask the Subcommittee to increase the Administration's $54 million increase to the Contract Health Services budget. These funds pay private health providers for services that tribes nor the IHS can perform in IHS-funded clinics and hospitals. The IHS is failing our members by not advocating for adequate health care funding, and for not promptly referring our members to private providers because they--IHS--lacks the funds to cover members' copay requirement. Only when it is life or limb does IHS authorize the use of CHS funds, oftentimes too late for the patient. I ask that this Subcommittee direct a study be conducted to examine how Contract Health Services dollars are expended by the IHS with an eye towards making recommendations to help save Native American lives and use CHS dollars more effectively. Thank you. [The statement of Stoney Anketell follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole. Thank you very much. Now Tracy King, Fort Belknap Indian Community. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. FORT BELKNAP INDIAN COMMUNITY WITNESS TRACY ``CHING'' KING Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is Tracy King. I serve as the President of the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre nations. I apologize for being late, Mr. Chairman. Just like everybody else, our needs, especially in law enforcement, I believe that one meeting with the Fort Peck Nation we are looking at the oil boom in the State of Montana as well as North Dakota where law enforcement is critical because of a lot of crimes that are happening in that area with a big increase of people coming to make some dollars. Also, with our roads department, we have concerns about road maintenance because one of the things we are seeing is the folks will be coming in during the oil boom and our maintenance budget as short as it is, it is going to be more so once the movement of machinery. So it is critical that law enforcement and roads--the State of Montana collects taxes in the name of our roads so, you know, we have been trying for 20 years to make an agreement so that we could--it is probably close to a million dollars that they use us for inventory but at the same time they cannot agree to give us any money, so it puts a burden on our budget system. We look at the roads. On December 7, 2011, I was in a car wreck, and it took, like, probably over an hour for someone to--the ambulance crew to pick me up because of a snowstorm, and so firsthand I know the system not only the roads but the IHS system where, you know, sitting on a road for an hour waiting for an ambulance, you know, I totaled my car. A cow was in the wrong lane and came over on top of me, and I broke my neck and was severely injured. According to the statistics, I should have been buried. And so those kind of things we look at is our roads are in need of repair as well as looking at the gentleman to my right, looking at health care is something that is needed. My CEO was with me but his younger brother, who is probably in his 50s, died yesterday of diabetes, and so we have an epidemic of diabetes and cancer on Fort Belknap, so we are in a crisis with our health. And so we are in desperate need of services, especially looking--the people that were before me, any kind of a medical, you know, if there is a heart attack out south, you know, it is often two or three hours. And so I was very fortunate that I was able to walk away from a wreck, and some of the people that had heart attacks or whatnot, the cops end up being the EMTs and the ambulance because of lack of services out south. So with all the issues we have, you know, we are wanting to build the economy within our reservations, and if we could have a little dollars into our--I believe that we could economically survive. Too many times, non-Indians come and become millionaires off the backs of our people. And so everything is against us but hopefully, I mean, I do not believe it is--I am not against the millionaires. I respect what they make. But, you know, we as Indian people need that chance as well to become self-sufficient instead of roadblocks that are put in front of us all the time. So thank you, Mr. Chairman. [The statement of Tracy King follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole. Thank you very much. John Yellow Bird Steele, Troy Weston, good to see you again. Thanks for your hospitality. Just for the record, Chairman Simpson, Ms. McCollum and I had the opportunity to visit with you last summer, and thanks again. It was helpful and your hospitality was just unbelievably generous. Thank you. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE WITNESSES JOHN YELLOW BIRD STEELE TROY WESTON Mr. Steele. Congressman Cole, I thank you and Congresswoman McCollum for coming down to Pine Ridge and seeing the conditions firsthand. I am here once again like last year before your Committee. I got my council person here to address yourselves, but I would like to address something, Congressmen, to yourselves. We got an 1868 treaty, and in 1871, your Committee in their appropriations bill put language in there that said no more treaties would be made with Indian tribes hereafter. Our relationship would be by statutes. But nothing in the prior treaties could be changed by these statutes. Now, we followed that, yourselves and ourselves, to today, that language that was put into your Appropriations Committee. I would request, Honorable Congressmen, that possibly you consider a request from myself to put some additional language into your appropriations bill, and I have got a very big concern. I can work with your staff in the very near future on this. But preserving the rights that are going to be taken from Indians across America in a settlement that Congress approved in the Cobell litigation, and I have got language here, and you can develop your own language. This is just an example of what I would request, and it is nothing in the Cobell litigation settlement shall waive any Indian tribe's right to self- government, tribal government rights under treaty or agreement, special trust relationship with the United States, property rights or land rights or the rights of any individual Indian class member which are unrelated to the claims in the litigation. That is very important. Nothing in said settlement shall affect the political relationship between the Indian tribes and its tribal citizens or members. That settlement, Honorable Congressmen, has the Indian give up all future claims, not just the claims in the historic accounting error. We understand that. That is common in lawsuits. But to give up all claims? Please. We have got a special relationship with yourselves. We are not a special-interest group. We are not a minority. Our relationship goes back to when you first came to our country, and we want to keep that. Because of the poverty situation, four of the poorest counties in the whole United States, one, two, three and seven, are in South Dakota. I would like my councilman, Mr. Westonon, to continue, please. [The statement of John Yellow Bird Steele follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole. Mr. Weston, you are recognized. Mr. Weston. Thank you very much. Good morning to each and every one of you, and thank you for giving me this time. I had this big speech planned out, but our president took all of our time. Mr. Cole. You can take the 5 minutes the president had. Mr. Weston. Let me begin by reiterating what the other councilman and the president have said. Our health care needs are to the point where our people die every day because of the lack of money within Contract Health, because of the priority systems that do not work at all. The priority system is that you have to--it is a life, limb and property deal. We have become a property now. We only get referred out if it is a priority one, and it does not work because we have to go travel. The nearest hospital is an hour and a half away by car driving 65 mile an hour. We bring helicopters and airplanes in there for life flight services at $22,000 a pop for the helicopter and then $9,000 on the airplane. And they are spending how much money to send them out and we take them to Rapid City and we give them Tylenol, we give them Motrin and send them home. That is the mode of our health care today. We do not get--it costs--I have got a figure here real quick. We have--it costs our Native American people, our tribal membership, the IHS spends $2,700 per Indian patient. The U.S. average is $7,200. Now, where is the catch there? We talk about alcoholism. The Congresswoman alluded to that earlier. We have White Clay, Nebraska, that sits 2\1/2\ miles south of Pine Ridge. Four million cans of beer per day is what they sell, and we are a dry state, or dry reservation, and we still have to prioritize if we are going to haul somebody that is drunk or a legitimate wreck or whatever. You know, something that--there is no legitimacy to this but the bottom line is, at the end of this fiscal year, the contracts, CHS does not get to pay for everybody, so they just get put on the back burner and we do not have that. I have a lot more time, but I think I am well over limit, so I just want to say thank you for giving me this time because we have a lot of issues. Mr. Cole. Thank you very much. Mr. Steele. If I may, Congressman? Mr. Cole. Oh, certainly. Mr. Steele. This is my Chief of Police, Mr. Richard Greenwald. I read his testimony and he has nothing in there about the full judicial responsibility on the 100-mile by 60- mile area that he has to cover because the Supreme Court's Hicks versus Nevada where state police can operate on reservations does not apply to Pine Ridge Reservation, so they cannot come on to our reservation, and he has full responsibility for everything in the judiciary area. Mr. Cole. Chief Greenwald. Mr. Greenwald. Good morning, sir. Mr. Cole. Good morning. Good to see you again. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY WITNESS RICHARD GREENWALD Mr. Greenwald. Good morning, everybody. Good to see you again. It was good to have you down at Pine Ridge, and it is odd that Mr. Gipp is sitting next to me because I graduated at United Tribes Technical College. Thank you for having us here today again. We spoke a little bit about our reservation, Pine Ridge, roughly the size of the State of Connecticut. We have a population of over 43,000 members and an unemployment rate of over 80 percent. Overcrowding in our housing--most families, housing areas are 15 to 20 people living within a household, which causes chaos and many social and public safety issues for us. Currently, we are funded at 49 police officers, less than half of what we need according to the BIA. I brought some charts here today and stuff just to show you some numbers and some discrepancies. Sioux Falls and Rapid City are our largest two cities in the State of South Dakota, Sioux Falls with a membership of 165,000, and 67,000 in Rapid City. The total calls for service this year in 2011 shows that we surpassed both of the big cities surrounding our Indian Country here, so our--and the other thing is our officers' ratio, you know, 49. They have 115 in Rapid City and 233 in Sioux Falls. Those are not counting the county officers or the state highway patrol that are also there in their area. Currently, because of our shortages in law enforcement and 122,000 calls for service, imagine 49 police officers trying to handle those calls for service. It is wearing my officers to the limit. I have lost probably 10 officers in the last 3 or 4 months either due to stress--we had a standoff with one of my police officers for 4 hours at gunpoint because his wife left him, because why? Because public safety took him away from her for 12-, 16-hour shifts a day, no days, did not get any time to spend at home. These are realities for my officers. They do not have backup, you know. I come to Washington, D.C., and I wanted to grab one officer from each block and take them back with me, you know, because there is one on every corner, it seems like, and I want to take some home with me, you know. Those are realities for us here on the Pine Ridge. One of the things that I wanted to say is that if we continue to ignore the issues that are going on on the reservation, it is going to get worse. I know I spoke to you about that when you were down in Pine Ridge. A week later, two officers of our friendship department in Rapid City who do have friendships with me--we work a big basketball tournament that is up in Rapid City together, we walk side by side with rapid City officers. They lost two police officers to a Native American that killed both of them, gunned them down in Rapid City. And the story will go on and on about property crimes, violence against each other off of the reservation. These are our memberships from our reservations moving to the cities and bringing our social unrest to their cities because we are ignoring the issues that are on reservation. Our court staff cannot handle this type of call service. I have three prosecutors and five judges on Pine Ridge, sorely understaffed. The last time they received any increases to their funding was in 1979. We gave them last year, with all these calls, 58,000 cases. There is no way the prosecutors can handle that caseload. So a lot of these things are falling through the cracks. When people are not paying for their misbehaviors, they think it is okay. It becomes a social norm for them. But when they leave our reservations and go to your cities, they bring that with them. Two weeks ago, three weeks ago, there was a shootout in Rapid City. Five Native Americans robbed a store and shot it out with the Rapid City Police Department. Last week, another one of our Native Americans was murdered in Rapid City, possibly by another Native American. So if we keep ignoring that stuff--and these stories that I am talking about, if you look across Indian Country, it is happening to their outside neighborhoods, Mobridge, South Dakota, Rushville, Nebraska, Gordon, Nebraska, any place that is surrounding Indian Country because we have failed to properly handle what is going on in our backyard. It is ending up in your backyard. Some good things that I want to talk about is, we have a highway safety program that we brought to Pine Ridge. It is called Sacred Cargo, and it was with funding with NHTSA, CDC and IHS, and I was to go out and educate all the people using media or local ratio stations in a way that we could get the message out to our people. We showed that we could reduce the fatality rates by over 75 percent, the serious crash injuries by over 70 percent. When I talked to the CDC at some of our meetings across the state, I asked them to start putting out numbers whenever I talk to them just about our numbers, I said, you know, I am sure the IHS is probably saving a few thousand dollars off of this, and there was a guy from CDC that said all I do is crunch numbers. He said Rich, your program has saved the government millions of dollars, not just thousands of dollars. So if we could show that if we put a little money and effort into fixing things on our reservation, in return we will save money in the long run. So what I am here to say today is that, you know, last 2 years, we spoke about this before, there was $80 million that came down for Indian Country law enforcement while Pine Ridge and one other reservation were left out of that funding. We got zero dollars. I do not know why or what the deal was. But if you look at the chart below and you look at some of the other reservations down south as it pertains to--there are variances from the down south region to our Great Plains region. Look at the differences. Hundreds of officers in these really small reservations yet the big land-based reservation that we have got here in South Dakota and North Dakota and Montana, there is a huge discrepancy there. We are not able to handle what is coming and it is getting higher and higher. So I know our time is getting short here, and I guess for right now, that is it, and it is really good to see you guys again and thank you for having us here. [The statement of Richard Greenwald follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole. Chief, thank you very much. Tex. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. MANDAN, HIDATSA AND ARIKARA NATION OF FORT BERTHOLD WITNESS TEX HALL Mr. Hall. Thank you, Chairman Cole, Ranking Member Moran, and Congresswoman McCollum. I am Tex Hall, the Chairman of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Ankara Tribes on the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota. I want to make a few comments about my tribe and then one about the Great Plains because I have been regional chairman for the Great Plains. On my tribe on staffing and quarters, we have got a new clinic and that was through the efforts of Senator Dorgan. And it went kind of a roundabout way. Instead of going through the IHS, it went through the Army Corps of Engineers because that is who flooded us in 1953. But I think that kind of became a problem because then it was trouble getting staffing. But IHS did work with us and we were able to get the staffing. But the third holdup now is the quarters. We need about $12 million for 60 units of quarters. We have put in several million dollars to take down a property. We are developing lots, water, sewer, curb, and gutters, streetlights, and we just need the help from the IHS for this last piece of quarters. So it is real critical because we are in the Bakken Formation right here and this is an Oil and Gas Expo Conference. And as you know, the Bakken is the hottest oil plain in U.S. right now and we are right smack in the middle. I call it Ground Zero because there are about 2,500 trucks coming at you every morning when you get up to try to get on the roadways. And, you know, so it is definitely a challenge to be on top of this oil plain. It is pretty hard just to say, oh, yeah, let's have oil plain right now. You have to be able to have planned development, energy corridors, infrastructure, electricity, housing, water, sewer, law enforcement. You have to have all of that or you are not going to do very well. And so the second thing I want to talk about on oil and gas is the BLM's misguided rule called hydrofracking. And this misguided rule has never taken any tribal consultation whatsoever, which violates the Presidential Executive Order 13175 where any federal agency that is going to propose a rule that potentially has an effect either negative or whatever on a tribe must consult. Well, this rule is about to into effect and so we met with Michael Nedd, Associate Director, yesterday, and will meet with our regional director in Dickinson, North Dakota, this Thursday. And I honestly think if I did not call, BLM would have never responded. This is going to require another permit. We have gone through boxes of permits for BIA in 2007, boxes, cardboard boxes. Where is this lease? Where is that lease? Oh, I do not know, got to go. Here, grab it over there. And you try to find a box and you will try to find the allottee or you will try to find a travel track and then we went through the APD, the Application Permit to Drill, and then BLM gets staffed up and then they lose their staff. So they are sitting there with a lack of staff in Dickinson, North Dakota. And then EPA comes in and says you need an Air Quality Permit. I said where are you going to do that from? Denver? Yeah, yeah. Well, we can do a good job from Denver. I said no, you cannot. You cannot manage an office from Denver or Billings or Dickinson, North Dakota, when the oil plain is in Fort Berthold, North Dakota. You cannot do it. I will tell you that right now unless you are a better manager than I. And so now, on top of that, now there is hydrofracking. It just seems like this merry-go-round never ends. And this will require another permit in the middle of the game. And we already have over 225 active wells on Fort Berthold in these last 2-1/2, maybe 3 years, and think our economy is really growing. We passed an environmental code that would fine a company up to a million dollars if you intentionally dump on our reservation. That has seemed to slow a lot of that stuff down. We passed a traffic civil code that gives us the authority to arrest--I call them--what kind of truckers do you call them? They will not listen. And it gives us the authority to finally arrest. And so things are moving but now we have federal agencies now putting another obstacle in the middle of what we are trying to do. So I guess the only thing I could ask is through the appropriations process--this is how serious I am. This has to occur now through the appropriations process, especially when Michael Nedd is sitting across from you saying well, you know, it is over at OMB. And I said oh, I know what that means; it means you cannot do anything now. You know, but you could have talked to us a long time ago. This continues to happen to tribe after tribe over and over. It is ridiculous. This is 2012. And some of us have economies that are getting to Fortune 500 economies. For goodness sakes, we are getting slowed down by things like this. We will never have an opportunity like this. So this is again something I will request from the committee and is something I asked all three of my own congressional delegation as well. And I will just say something briefly on roads. I do not know if Patty--oh, okay. Patty has got my picture over there. This will always be a problem for us. We get $2 million in Indian Reservation roads. The State will not help us fix our roads and the BIA has no money. We have done an engineering estimate from Interstate Engineering out of Bismarck, $100 million to fix over 1,100 miles of roads on Fort Berthold. And this crack here goes out west to Watford City. That is a state highway. And so really the road now to the left of that goes right in the ditch. And the road over to the left, well, last year we were in a flood; this year we are in a drought so we do not have to worry too much about that mud this year for now anyway. But we have to water the roads. We are going to have to lay some magnesium chloride down. And it is not cheap. I do not know the exact price but it is not cheap. But landowners or tribal members, cattle producers, horse producers, they are all complaining about pneumonia, they are all complaining about their livestock, and they are all saying you guys got to get on top of it. Again, everybody is looking at the tribe. Nobody else wants to step forward. And so we are looking at other avenues, but there has got to be consideration for oil and gas tribes. You know, if we could get more money that goes to the State, like I said, the State does not return $1 in taxes and we split that with the State of North Dakota. And if we could get some of those dollars back, that would go a long--I would not even be here asking for anything like that. If people who should pony up and ante up would do it, I would not even be here asking for it because the money is there. It is just not coming back to the reservation. And so I think there was just one other thing I wanted to mention. I will just finish with one comment on the Great Plains. The Great Plains is 16 tribes, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska. We have about 200,000 trust acres and about 200,000 members of those 16 tribes. We are the largest allotted reservation trust lands in the U.S. And we really had to almost drag or pull the car across the finish line to get consultation on the Cabell Trust Commission. And we do not know why; it went everywhere else--Chicago, Los Angeles, wherever else except for our region which was affected most. And so this has a huge impact on the Great Plains. And so we are going to try to continue to work and hopefully you can help us be an advocate to get the Commission to understand that anything to do with the trust fix or the fractionation or buying up fractionated shares, your biggest fractionations in the Great Plains are those 200,000 acres. It would go a long way towards addressing the problem instead of scattering all over the country. Focus on those parts of the country that need it the most. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. [The statement of Tex Hall follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole. Thank you very much. I may sit in this chair but the real chairman of the committee has arrived, so I am going to start with Chairman Simpson. Mr. Simpson. I do not have any questions. Mr. Cole. Let me go ahead and quickly--because there are so many subjects we will not be able to obviously cover them all, but I do want to get back to this issue which a number of you raised for the use tax on the whole issue of energy development on some of these reservations, the permitting process, and the revenue problems that you have, legitimate governmental functions that are not flowing back. And I guess the questions are in terms of permitting, what do you think we can do to streamline this process? Because this is like a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. This is what gaming can be for other tribes. This is an incredible resource here that could be a game-changer on a number of these reservations. And, you know, we have seen what the uses were able to do, for instance, with their energy revenue. It has been a big changer of life for them and it has improved the quality of life. I forgot the last witness. I was so taken by your testimony today. So I apologize. I will hold my question. Thank you very much. And I apologize very, very much, Mr. Gibb. I am an oil- and-gas guy, man. I was in this deal. Okay. Thank you very much. And I apologize. Thank you, Ms. McCollum. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. UNITED TRIBES TECHNICAL COLLEGE WITNESS DAVID GIPP Mr. Gipp. Thank you, Representative Cole and Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Moran. Thank you, Representative McCollum, for being the reminder on this. I appreciate that very much. Ms. McCollum. We have got it covered, oil and gas and education. Mr. Gipp. Well, you know, it is very unique that this subcommittee is hearing all of these witnesses because I am from United Tribes Technical College originally from the Standing Rock Sioux, which is in North and South Dakota, but our institution serves all of these tribes plus about another 70 or so numbers of other tribes around the Nation. And what is so unique about this panel is that we are going through tremendous change in this whole region in North and South Dakota. You look at what is happening in western North Dakota and northeast Montana. Economic change, health, education, transportation, certainly all of those things are very crucial to the development, particularly public safety. And we note that in the 43 years that we have served as an institution and as an inter-tribal organization out of the Bismarck, North Dakota. We occupy an old military fort, originally called Fort Abraham Lincoln, the second one actually. The first one is where George Custer rode out to his great fame and I will not go into the details of that one. We are at the second one built about 1900. And so we took it over in 1968, '69, and I would say it is a good example of the Indians taking over the fort this time for peaceful purposes, and we continue that mandate today. We have served thousands of students over the past 43 years. I will get to my request very briefly and then I would like to expand a bit on some of the topics that I just mentioned. First, we are requesting that $7 million is provided through the Bureau of Indian education to United Tribes Technical College under its Indian Self-Determination Program or contract. That would be about a $2.5 million increase over our fiscal year 2012 level and under Title V of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Act. Second, we are asking that one-time forward funding is provided for United Tribes Technical College and our colleague school located on the Navajo Reservation, the Navajo Technical College where we were left out of forward-funding program that began in fiscal year 2010. This would be one-time funding and would be about three-quarters of our appropriation for fiscal year 2012. Third, Congressional support for a tribally administered law enforcement training center, which we have been focusing on for a number of years in light of what has been happening with the lack of public safety and issues that relate to our 20- some-odd tribes that we serve in a three-state region. And last, we support $73.5 million request for our 27 sister tribal colleges that are funded under Titles I, II, and III of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Act. And those are the four basic things that I would speak to. I mention our base funding and I will go back a little bit on that one. We have administered a program under appropriations authorized by Congress and through this subcommittee for the past 35 years under the Indian Self-Determination Act. This would help us maintain and continue to utilize the over 100- year-old education facilities and the 50-year-old housing that we have for our students. Second, it would help us upgrade our technology capabilities; and third, provide adequate salaries for our faculty and staff who only receive about a 2.9 percent increase this past year in terms of cost-of-living. And fourth, fund programs and curriculum improvements to address many of the things that are going on in terms of economic development in our area, particularly when you talk about the Bakken, the oil formations, the coal, and all of those other minerals that are affecting our tribes hopefully in a positive way. But the issue of training an adequately trained American Indians is a crucial part of that thing. It is not just for the corporate community; it is also for the worker. And that is what we can do and will continue to do if we have this additional funding that I speak to. I would also point out that our issue of forward funding will be an important part of us continuing to be able to address these issues by a one-time extra appropriation of about three-quarters of our year's funding. One of the final pieces I point out is that there is a great need for a Northern Plains Indian law enforcement academy, something we have been working on for a good 10 years, at least in terms of concept. We have an MOU with the BIA and the American Indian Higher Education Consortium to do supplemental training. But we note--and I have been listening to our tribal leaders for the past 30 years--talking about the need for public safety, talking about the issue of attrition, of police officers that Mr. Greenwald pointed out has happened just in his area alone, the high pressure and all of those things, the need for additional training. But the issue of basic training is so crucial to the Northern Plains region. And that is what our tribes have been asking and belaboring the Bureau of Indian Affairs about for all of these years. It simply has not been forthcoming, mostly because the current training facility at Artesia, New Mexico, is unable to really meet the demand. They are equipped to only train a maximum of 150 people at any one time throughout a given year. Unfortunately, their attrition rate is also high. We think we can do the job as well as any by providing the basic training on our campus if we have the additional assistance to be able to establish some of those things. We have, by the way, I only have two copies but I have a copy of a simulator that we have in our law enforcement training that has been in use for the past year or so. We think we can begin to help our tribes begin to address this issue of public safety. There is a lot of data and statistics that we can provide to back up what I am talking about, but I just remind the subcommittee to take a hard look at that because we think that will be a major investment for assuring that there are safe communities and that the development we are talking about, whether we are talking about the safety of our children, our elders, or newcomers that are in our communities in terms of economic development are so necessary and crucial. I will just point out a few other statistics very briefly. We have an 83 to 90 percent placement rate. We have about a retention rate that is 80 to 85 percent. We have a K-8 elementary school that serves our families. Here is a picture of one of our families and an outstanding student here. We cater to the needs of families and the values of American Indian families by the way. I would just point those things out. We are accredited again from this past 2011 for 10 more years for our 25 different programs at the one- and two-year levels and we have just added three baccalaureate degree programs, one in criminal justice by the way. And so I just point those out in terms of the needs and what we think we can do in a very successful way as have in the past 43 years. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We appreciate all of your time. [The statement of David Gipp follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Cole. Well, thank you. And again my apologies for rushing us toward the Q&A and almost missing your testimony. But let me go back. I will relay the predicate of what I was going to ask about. I do think we are in a once-in-a- hundred-year opportunity right in front of us that could be transformative for some of the poorest areas in the country. But the problems you touched on--permitting, infrastructure where we have underinvested for a long time and really need to invest at a higher level to be able to take advantage of this, and cost-sharing on a government-to-government basis really stand in the way of some of these and we could end up squandering a great opportunity. So I would ask any of you that care to comment on those things, number one, what do we need to do specifically on the permitting? And we are not a legislative committee but we have the ability to encourage sometimes the BIA and other people since we control their budgets. Second, on the cost-sharing I would ask if any of you have sat down with your state governments? In Oklahoma we had a similar problem. We eventually have an Indian fuel tax arrangement for a certain percentage of money from our fuel tax statewide flows back to Tribal Nations to spend. In exchange, we then charge the state tax on our facilities. That is the agreement. And it comes back; it is used for governmental purposes. It is not for a per capita distribution. We build roads, education, healthcare, things that governments do with it. Are those things possible in your area? And then, finally, in terms of the human dimension to this. I do worry--I had the opportunity to visit a number of the reservations in South and North Dakota and it was pointed out, obviously, these are pockets of very high unemployment. We have job opportunities beginning to develop here. You know, we may not always have the most trained people but we need to make sure that as many of those folks as possible have the opportunity to get work, not just tribal income but the opportunity to go work for their families. So what are the sorts of things that we can do in that regard that might help some of you that are dealing with high unemployment issues? Why do we not start with you and anybody else wants to come in, come in. Mr. King. Well, thank you, Mr. Cole, Congressman. I think before I get started I would just like to give you a little background on my career. You know, I got a degree in petroleum land management out of Rocky Mountain College in Billings. I went to work for the BIA for 14 years running the Oil and Gas Leasing office on the Fort Peck Reservation. Then I started a career--lost an election actually--and then went for-- Mr. Cole. That is where good careers often start. Mr. King. Then went to work over at Fort Berthold as a land consultant to ExxonMobil XTO/Hunt Petroleum. So things that are working I think I know about; things that do not work I think I know about. I said the same thing to the Senate. Our attorneys came up with that. So, you know, my big frustration really is the fact that our BIA--it is not set up--let's just start at the very beginning. The leasing process, without leases there is no exploration. Fort Peck can take anywhere from a year to three years before it is approved by the superintendent. That is when it becomes a legal document, binding document is when the superintendent signs off on it. And if it takes 3 years on a 5- year lease, that is basically tying up my land, my allotted lands for eight years. And so this is grossly unfair. So that is where we need more expertise and more staffing. Now, at Fort Berthold, what they did was they started bringing down from Aberdeen all these realty people and kind of got them caught up--this was three or four years ago. What Tex said was absolutely right. There are boxes everywhere. Boxes, not file cabinets, boxes full of leases that needed to be approved or if they were not approvable should have been returned to the companies. And the same thing was going on at Fort Peck. What happens is sometimes when a company submits a lease for approval, there is a probate on there. The superintendent can sign for a probate but if it sits there and sits there for month after month after month, year after year, that probate will close. Now the superintendent can no longer sign that. That lease is no longer approvable. You have to go back and get all the new errors that have been established through the administrative law judge and you go back to square one. And I cannot tell you how frustrating that is to the oil and gas industry. And the federal employees act sometimes like it is no big deal. But it is a big deal and we need to make sure that we have enough staffing and enough expertise to do what needs to be done to get those leases approved. And the same is true for the BLM. They are understaffed. They are not set up for an oil boom. This is a once-in-a- lifetime deal. We want to be economically independent, economically sovereign. That is our goal. And so we need to really staff up, gear up, get ready for this boom. Fort Berthold is way ahead of us. It is right at our doorstep. In fact, our tribe drilled the first two Bakken horizontal wells. We are the ones through our strategic partnerships that paid for the well, that drilled it, fracked it. It is just happening. They are fracking one of them as I am sitting here right now. So we are taking a proactive role in this thing. We want to be in control of our own destiny, not as a lessor. Mr. Cole. Well, whether you address this or not--and I am taking a lot of time because I think this is an important issue and I am going to ask you guys to be briefer than I was--but could you sort of give the committee an idea of what the income flow potential here is at the tribal level and obviously sometimes this is individual allotment land for individuals as well. And I would assume you have got sort of checker-boarded jurisdiction here. Mr. Hall. It can vary, Mr. Chairman, and we started in '07 at about 50 bucks an acre. Soon went to 100 bucks an area, and then the BIA decided to do an auction bid sale in November of '07. I think EOG Resources out of Houston bid 625. And from then it went to 1,000 and over. And so if there is another round of leasing, you can bet your dollar the allottee is in a very strong position. Nobody knew what it was. Actually, the BIA is supposed to have an appraisal on every trust transaction, so every lease should have had an appraisal. It never happened so we are just assuming the auction bid sale kind of took care of that, you know. And so the royalty rates will go anywhere from 18 to about 22.5 percent, maybe 25 if it is a tribal drilling company. I think we started the tribal drilling company and we are promising the tribe and the allottees, you know, I know a lot more than 18 to 22.5. And so if you can average about 800 to 1,000 barrels a day on a good Bakken horizontal well, you are doing quite well. And some of these areas are very mature on Fort Berthold, especially that partial field up on the northeastern part. And as it comes across west and then down to the river, that whole west side is in a very mature Bakken formation. And so that is kind of like in the Badlands area it costs a little bit more but you can do what they call a multi- pad. What is his name from Oklahoma? Mr. Cole. Mr. Hamm. Mr. Hall. Yeah, Harold Hamm originally from North Dakota is going at that. And if you have a super pad that you can drill off of, that is perfect for the Badlands because we want to maintain that scenic beauty and it is nothing better to see an oil well drilling that has got a clean, specked oil pad that is very minimal, no dust, and it is happening right in the beauty of the Badlands pumping up and down, nothing better to see that. So I think that is kind of the best practices that we are looking at, you know, to continue on. Especially at our conference coming up, we want to promote companies that are having the best practices. And we are closing the closed-loop system where they got the pits, you know. The pad will have a pit where they got, you know, material, crude fracking material and they are basically dump pits. And so they are going to a closed-loop system. They are covering those up and everything is trucked out. You start eliminating those things in the Badlands and all that and now you are talking best practices. So that is where we are reaching to, Mr. Chairman. We are reaching to that, you know, from finding a cardboard box for Stoney's lease to getting the best practices. And you know, I want to make this one last point and that is the one-stop shop has never really taken off. And I keep raising this issue and I am going to raise it again with Secretary Salazar. But the whole idea was to have a coordinator position at Fort Berthold to tell BLM in Dickenson and Billings you need to get here to tell BLM in Denver and EPA in Denver and all these federal agencies we have got a problem. We have got a probate that is soon to expire. We have got an active lease. We have got 60 days. You guys get over here right now and let's see what we can do to get this salvaged, this lease, because there has already been x-amount of man hours put into this lease, landowners, allottees, tribes are waiting, oil companies waiting, we are all waiting on guess who. We are all waiting on the BIA. So that is what the one-stop shop was supposed to do. That was its intention and I cannot believe it when people will say, well, what is your idea of the one-stop? No, no. We got to get beyond that what is your idea of the one-stop shop. It is to coordinate, streamline, and to troubleshoot and get to these issues quickly and bring everybody to the table. Mr. Cole. Thank you very much. Mr. Moran. Ms. McCollum. OIL BOOM LEASING AND CRIME Ms. McCollum. Thank you. And I thank my friends to the west of me from the Great Plains, who did a great job talking about what is going on there because this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. You folks were not able to participate in the last oil boom that went through very much, were you? No. You got left out then and you do not want to get left out now. So I get it. My grandfather was from that area. I have got pictures of my kids, which might surprise Mr. Cole a little bit, standing in front of oil derricks that have our family name on them. This is, a sudden storm. Some people saw the oil boom coming and gathering, but all of a sudden it just hit. And some of the things that you are seeing are not the fault of the federal employees in the EPA and the BIA and the BLM. They do not want to give you bad service. There are just not enough of them. Right now, the good ones are being snapped up by private industry so there is a competition going on. We have frozen federal salaries. We have increased the number of employees that are needed in order for them to feel successful every morning when they are getting to work. There must be a way to use the money that is out there from the leasing to hire the necessary employees. The revenue is there to pay for the employees. There has got to be a way that we can figure this out. I just wanted to take a second, though, and tie this into two things. Minnesota Public Radio did a big story about some of the crime and some of the missed opportunities for local people to be trained up into some of these good-paying, high- paying jobs. There are people coming from all across the country into North Dakota and into Montana and these are not tribal lands. We want the employment going to tribal lands. I am wondering how many people are really being employed from the reservation areas into these jobs. Are people getting a fair shake at them? If they need training, what we need to do to get them trained up to have access to these jobs that pay fantastic money? The other thing that was coming up was the increase people are seeing in crime rates, with assault and murder. There is a bad side to oil booms, too. So if you could, please talk about that. The problem has been defined about what we need to do about getting these leases moving, but what are some of the challenges this committee should be aware that you are facing? North St. Paul, the city I represented, in three square miles, had 11,000 people, and eight officers. Mr. Greenwald. I do not know how the funding cycle was put together and I am sure it was not anything that you guys had to do with it. It is probably something in the past, historical numbers and stuff. But you are right. A lot of these things are going to bring crime into your area. I mean you are bringing multimillion dollar machinery, different things. I went up to Bismarck to visit my son who is also in the United Tribes College right now going to college, and it costs me almost $300 a night. Before you could get a hotel for $70 a night, and their hotels are filled with these workers that are there going back and forth north from there. I mean it is crazy when you go to North Dakota. It is hard to get a motel; it is hard to do things anymore. With that comes crime and it is not going to be just the reservations that are going to be dealing with that. You are talking about the cities. I mean people are going to be breaking into these people's vehicles. You do not know who is coming to work in your state. You know, who are these guys that are coming to your reservations that are coming to work? We already know that one in four of our women are going to be raped in their lifetime. That is higher than anywhere in this country. You know, but who are we bringing to our reservations and how is that going to affect our law enforcement when we are already so strapped already, you know? So definitely some food for thought. I mean we need to prepare for this stuff that is going on, including these big rigs that are coming through our reservation. Those roads are going to be torn apart like crazy. We are already dealing with that on our reservation in Pine Ridge, you know. So we anticipate that there is going to be some pipeline vehicles coming through there. They have already been routed through our reservation, so we are anticipating that is going to happen more, you know. Mr. Gipp. To the answer, training a lot of the incoming workforce are those who have got some training talent or experience in these kinds of enterprises, so that is good. On the other hand, we have Native Americans in the tribal communities who are not yet trained. And so we are beginning to try to mobilize that effort with at least five or six of our tribal colleges that are located either right on these reservation areas, including United Tribes. And one of our goals is to train about 1,400 workers in, for example, welding. Now, that is just one of the technologies; it is not all of them. And so we need more help to make sure that we can galvanize and train all of those who want to work in this kind of a field. So that is kind of the effort and what we have begun to put together. We are working in our case with the Nakoda College up at Fort Belknap, Fort Peck Community College, and Cankdeska Cikana at Spirit Lake as well as ourselves, and also Fort Berthold Community College could begin that process right now. But it does take some time to mobilize even if you are a community college. But we see more of our workforce becoming integrally involved with this, but we need the support to be able to do that. Mr. Cole. Mr. Calvert. Mr. Calvert. I apologize for coming in late. There are a lot of things going on here at once. Just a quick question on the BIA oil and gas exploration permitting process. Has the BIA ever used outside contractors, to process permits using fees from applicants to accelerate permit reviews? Mr. King. They have used outside contractors for other things, but not in oil and gas. Go ahead. Mr. Calvert. I guess the question I have is, can an outside contractor be brought in--there are a number of people who do this type of thing--to process applications for permits, make sure everything is filled out properly, and the forms and necessary studies have been completed, and then turn that application over to an officer at the BIA---- Mr. King. Right. Mr. Calvert [continuing]. To review, to make sure the paperwork is in correct form, and then merely sign off on that application, rather than having the bureaucracy get caught up in this type of thing? Do you think that might help streamline the process? I would imagine the applicant would happily pay the outside contractor, which could be picked just as one picks contractors for environmental impact reports. Mr. King. I actually broached that subject to the superintendent last week, just exactly what you are suggesting. And I think it is a great idea. We need to bring in experts that can get these leases done and we need to streamline that process to bring in contractors to do the work like this. The superintendent's words were do you know how long that is going to take? You know, so let's not get lost in this thing. Let's go for it. Mr. Calvert. I was going to say to Mr. Chairman that this might be something we ought to look at as a possibility of moving this permitting process along. It would free up the time of the agency employees that may be, quite frankly, a little over their head in some of these issues, with respect to some of the technical issues on these applications and so forth. Mr. King. As I said earlier, we have strategic partnerships in place now that enabled us to drill our own wells. And that expertise that they got, they fund their own software program that was better than the Bureau's. I am very familiar with the BIA's program so it was better than TAMS. They are ideally suited for just what you are suggesting. That would be the way to go I think. And then you would not have to train, you know, federal employees, you know, and bring them up to GS-12 wages and then have them, you know, forever. Just bring in when the expert piece is needed. Mr. Calvert. Sure. This is a mature industry. It has been around, obviously, for well over 100 years. Mr. King. Um-hum. Mr. Calvert. We enter into these contracts; forms are filled out all the time. An applicant should not be dragged through a long process that, quite frankly, can be handled in an expedited manner. We can assist the BIA in putting together a process to use outside contractors to expedite what should be a relatively simple process. Mr. King. And one of the bad effects of letting it sit in the Bureau for a year, two years, three years--I have seen it three years--is that where is my money? Where is my money? They are always coming up to us, you know, the oil company paid it in. They paid it in a year ago. Where is my money? Where is my money? Mr. Calvert. Yeah. And---- Mr. King. And I just cannot tell you, you know, how important it is that these people do--if what you are suggesting, Congressman Calvert, if that was implemented, we could get these leases in and out very rapidly. I even volunteered to go as a tribal councilman, go back to the Bureau--keep my seat on the council of course--but that is my expertise. I could have gotten them caught up. Mr. Calvert. That might be a little bit of a conflict. Mr. King. Yeah, they did not go for that. They did not go for that. Mr. Cole. Just quickly because we have run a little bit over here--my fault. Mr. Anketell. Mr. Chairman, I believe that, you know, all of us are wanting to be economically efficient but, you know, even with the tribal, you know, resources that we have, we could take care of our own destiny, but at the same time we have to have approval of like what you are talking about, sir. You have to have the blessings from the BIA. But I think if we could build up infrastructure, I am always thinking about our veterans that, you know, coming back from war that we need to include them in some of the different areas of this economic plan. So I think it could be done. It is just sometimes the superintendent or the area director, they do not know what they are talking about so they just sit on it so they can pretend they are smart. Thank you. Mr. Cole. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. You guys know a lot more about this oil and gas stuff than I do because we do not have a lot of oil in Idaho. So I am going to have to learn more about that. Mr. Anketell. You may find out you have more than you think. Mr. Simpson. Yeah, that is right. We can hope. We can hope. I just did want to say, President Steele, thank you for the hospitality you showed us while we were out on the reservation. We enjoyed it very much. It was very educational for, I think, all the Members that were there and the staff. And Chief Greenwald, you told us out there what kept you up at night. As I think you put it--the size of the reservation, the overworked officers, and the problems that they have in trying to address the needs. And I said at the time if it keeps you up at night, it keeps me up at night. We are going to work on this, try to solve it. So I appreciate you being here today. Mr. Greenwald. Thank you, sir. Mr. Cole. Last point before we move to the next panel, it should never cost $6,500 to get permits on Indian land when right next door it is $75 on non-Indian land. So that is something we need to look at, too. Okay. I am yielding the chair back to where it belongs. We will move along a lot faster now. Mr. Simpson. Okay. The final morning panel as we move in toward afternoon is Mickey Peercy, George Thurman, Charles Head, Virginia Thomas, and Harold Dustybull. I see three of the five. Okay. Ms. Thomas. Harold stepped out for a moment. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mickey, you are up first. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA WITNESS MICKEY PEERCY Mr. Peercy. Thank you, sir. Mr. Simpson. You bet. Mr. Peercy. Hopefully, we will speed our part up so you can get out and have lunch. I have to tell you a story. I am probably the only person who remembers seeing him fast dance with Mary Fallin, Congressman Fallin. Now she is governor. Anyway, thank you. I am Mickey Peercy, Executive Director of Health, Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. I want to thank you for allowing us to come today. Also I wanted to thank the committee for coming to Oklahoma and coming to Choctaw, especially in August when it is hot. It was hot but we were--yeah, we can do that. We can do that. But we want to thank you for being there. It was a good chance for you to kind of see what we have going there. So my comments today are going to be entirely on health and I am representing Chief Pyle. He sends his regards. Appropriations in Indian Country remain severely deficient for each of the programs that we are going to talk about. It is really not acceptable. We all know that healthcare in Indian Country is seen as rationed care. In the testimony today I am going to focus on programs. I will give you some dollar figures, probably just try to stay on three or four. But in my written testimony pretty much speaks to all the programs, as well as to let you know that we do support the comments and the stances taken by the National Congress of American Indians on healthcare and also the National Indian Health Board. So first of all, we are requesting Joint Venture increase to $90 million. We know that Joint Venture is one of those programs in Indian Country that is a win-win for everyone. The tribe is able to go in with the cooperative agreement within Indian Health Service, build a facility, and then Congress, through the Indian Health Service, provides staffing. I think that can be seen very much right now, Congressmen, with the Chickasaw Hospital as well as the clinics going in in Tishomingo and Ardmore. So that is very much a win-win situation. Contract Health Service, you have heard discussions on that. We are asking for an increase of $200 million. I am a participant on the workgroup with the Indian Health Service, a tribal rep that is looking at trying to figure out where that 800-pound gorilla is in Contract Health and what that number is. And GAO has informed IHS to come up with the number and we are working on that and hopefully that is going to come to fruition pretty quick. Contract support cost--I will probably spend the majority of my time talking about that and I know you had a long discussion this morning on contract support costs. Contract support costs do go directly to the tribal nations to support their health endeavors. Keep in mind if you were ever offered to get paid $50,000 a year to do a job and then someone just paid you 66 percent of that, you know, it would not be good. You have to decide to get out of the program, not starting that program initially, or come to you and ask for more money. That is what we are doing. And I think good things were said this morning in terms of the only contractor in the Nation probably that does not receive full contract support funding. We are asking an increase of $100 million over the President's request. I want to just point out reported contract support costs shortfall is nearly $5 million annual just for the Choctaw Nation. The President, in his '13 budget has requested $5 million increase. That would not even take care of the Choctaw Nation, not considering the rest of the Nations. So we really do need to get a handle on contract support costs and be able to fund that at 100 percent. So we certainly see that as a focal point for my testimony today and our encouragement for you to look at that more closely. $5 million is a drop in the bucket and it is almost an embarrassment. We appreciate the money but it is certainly going nowhere to take care of the problem. And then real quickly--it is not in my written testimony but I just heard about it this weekend--is the potential decrease in funding for Office of Environmental Health and Engineering. We are looking in Indian Health Service at a potential 20 percent decrease in funding. Keep in mind that is the line item that takes care of infrastructure in terms of sanitation facilities, clean water in Indian Country. And if you do not have clean water, you do not have sewer systems, the sanitations in, you know, that whole public health concept goes down the tubes. So I do not know if it where it is coming from, whether that be the President or I sense that it is the director of the agency. So we need to look into that, and I will send you, gentlemen and ladies, a supplement once we figure out that, but we have to keep that in mind. Thank you. Thanks for your time. [The statement of Mickey Peercy follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. George. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. SAC & FOX NATION WITNESS GEORGE THURMAN Mr. Thurman. Chairman Simpson and members of the committee, I thank you for allowing the Sac & Fox Nation time to come here for testimony. My name is George Thurman. I am the principal chief of the Sac & Fox Nation. We are a humble tribe of approximately 4,000 enrolled tribal members headquartered in Stroud, Oklahoma. And we are proud of the fact that we have a tribal member who was named the best athlete of all time, Jim Thorpe. And like Mickey said, at Sac & Fox we support the request of the National Indian Health Board and the National Congress for American Indians that have been put forward from all tribes. But I am here to talk about two tribal-specific requests. First one is $4.8 million for our juvenile detention center. In 1996, the detention center opened its doors and was the first juvenile facility designed for American Indians and Alaska natives. It is a 60-bed, full-service, 24-hour facility providing basic detention services to all. In a recent appropriations testimony, the Department of Interior Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Larry Echo Hawk requested $6.5 million for staff increases at newly constructed tribal and bureau detention centers. We take great exception to this request inasmuch as the Department of Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs has never provided the full funding that was committed for the planning, construction, and operation of our juvenile detention center. Due to the failure of the full funding commitment by federal officials not being honored and without the promise of full funding being realized, the detention center has not been able to meet the needs of tribes who need our help in guiding their children toward a successful future in a culturally and spiritually sensitive environment. Our second tribal-specific request deals with federal corporate charters. Also within Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk's recent appropriations testimony, he states the Department of Interior is seeking an increase for $43.8 million in funding for the Strengthening Tribal Nations Initiative, yet the Department of Interior does not support our federal charters, which require no increase in federal funding and they directly address the BIA's initiatives. We have two charters in accordance with the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act of 1936. In 1987, the first charter was signed by then- assistant secretary Ross Swimmer. Years upon years we have tried to put land in the trust, parcels of land, and I remember one parcel is over 30 years trying to get it in a trust. Finally, one day, we said no more. We are going to use our charter. And after we started using that charter, we have put 24 parcels of land into trust. The only opposition came in a letter from the BIA South Plains Region stating, ``it is a well established legal precedent that absent the Secretary's approval of such conveyance, trust status is not imposed.'' The transparent allusion that we do not understand the traditional trusteeship of the United States Government is insulting. The implications of that single sentence are the cornerstone of the resistance that has built of a wall of federal supervision and held back tribal self-sufficiency. And now the last, we hold firm that secretarial approval was granted in the signing of the charter. Our second charter was signed May 22, 2008, by then-assistant secretary Carl Artman after consulting with him on several occasions. And I am sad to report to you today we face opposition again. The 2008 charter waits to be scrutinized by the solicitor of the Department of Interior in advisement to the National Indian Gaming Commission. While Interior review was neither solicited nor warranted, the historical resistance of the Office of the Secretary of Interior is peeking over the shoulders of the National Indian Gaming Commission. Meanwhile, at projected $295 million in revenue is awaiting to revive a deprived economy in central Oklahoma as Assistant Secretary Echo Hawk fails to recognize the approving actions of two former assistant secretaries of Indian Affairs. As a leader of our sovereign nation, I am asking you to direct the assistant secretary of Indian Affairs to continue to federal corporate charters from the Sac & Fox Nation. Full funding of our juvenile detention center and support of our federal charters would further the economic growth for our tribe, the community and the State of Oklahoma. The Sac & Fox Nation is proud to say we are a self-governance tribe. Given the opportunity to exercise our right of self-governance, we can make contributions to our local economies and serve the needs of our people. Thank you. [The statement of George Thurman follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Charles. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. CHEROKEE NATION WITNESS CHARLES HEAD Mr. Head. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members. Thank you for this hearing. I am Charles Head, Secretary of State for the Cherokee Nation. I am here representing Chief Baker and our tribal government. And thank you for the opportunity to share my information with you. For several decades, Cherokee Nation has administered the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian Health Service Programs, and other federal programs, and this operation under contracting and compacting has allowed us to control and to administer these programs for our people. Currently, the Cherokee Nation is the largest employer in northeastern Oklahoma and based on a recent economic development study, which shows that we have more than a $1 billion impact on northeastern Oklahoma each year. The combined revenue of the tribes' business operations helps fund the central government services while offering foundation to expand and diversify economic development and job opportunity in Oklahoma. Adequate funding for both Indian Health Service and BIA is vital to the increase of this progress and keep this progress going. One of the most important budgetary issues facing Indian Country is insufficient funding of contract support costs, mostly for the Indian Health Service. In Indian Country, every dollar lost in contract support is one dollar diverted from direct services for healthcare, education, law enforcement, and other critical services. Under a self-governance compact with Indian Health Service and utilizing their contract support dollars, Cherokee Nation operates a sophisticated network of eight rural outpatient health clinics and W.W. Hastings Indian Hospital. Hastings Hospital is a 60-bed facility designed for 30,000 outpatient visits per year, and in 2011, we conducted 330,000 patient visits. Our overall system provided more than one million patient visits during 2011. Cherokee Nation utilizes our contract support funds to support health services. These are fixed costs that a contractor must incur. When sufficient support cost funding is not provided, tribes must either reduce funds budgeted for critical healthcare, education, law enforcement, or other services under contract to cover the shortfall or divert tribal dollars to subsidize the federal contracts. For every $1 million that Cherokee Nation must divert from direct patient care to cover the shortfall, our health system must forgo 5,800 patient visits. While we appreciate the President's budget for our Indian Health Services this year showing $115 million increase over 2012, the proposal calls for only a one percent increase in contract support costs. And as you have heard from other people today, this will cause more than $100 million shortfall in 2013. Fortunately, we do not have the same shortfall for contract support for Bureau of Indian Affairs programs. However, we do also call for the protection of the BIA budget so that we can at least hold the line so that the government can help fulfill its trust responsibilities. Cherokee Nation also joins fellow self-governance tribes in continuing to request funding increases for fundamental services provided as tribal party allocations. Of the 566 federally recognized tribes, 235 manage their own affairs under self-governance agreements with the BIA. Although these funds account for 42 percent of the federally recognized tribes, they receive only 15 percent of the funding from the BIA. The fiscal year 2013 budget being basically level with 2012 appropriation President's proposal, tribal party allocations must be protected during the budget process. The shining example of what happens when tribes administer their own programs is our Sequoyah Schools. In 1985, the Cherokee Nation gained control of Sequoyah Schools, a former under-provided, under-performing BIA boarding school. Now, Sequoyah creates an academic environment that mirrors college preparatory schools utilizing an advantage curriculum and data collection to track student progress and school performance. Sequoyah meets Adequate Yearly Progress goals and is flourishing. And in 2011, the school produced five Gates Millennium Scholars. Just as our students strive to achieve great success, we should strive to support these students by hiring capable teachers to provide our children with equitable education. In 2012, Congress appropriated $2 million for the STEP pilot project in the Department of Education budget. Therefore, we request the protection of the $2 million requested in 2013 for the pilot in hopes that the Subcommittee will work with the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies to ensure the pilot's funding. It is also necessary that appropriations language direct the Department of Interior and Education to directly provide ESEA funding to the tribes chosen to participate in the pilot. Direct funding without being submitted through the state would more closely resemble self-governance funding model for the BIA and the Indian Health Service. This system has proven efficient and effective and strengthens tribal self-determination. In conclusion, Cherokee Nation is committed to provided federal services and direct local-level programs including job creation, education, health, and law enforcement services. However, the Federal Government's current fiscal situation should and does not negate its trust responsibility to Cherokee Nation and Indian Country. Thank you. [The statement of Charles Head follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Virginia. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NATIONAL JOHNSON-O'MALLEY ASSOCIATION WITNESSES VIRGINIA THOMAS HAROLD DUSTYBULL Ms. Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the committee. Thank you for your time. My name is Virginia Thomas. I am a member of the Muscogee Creek Nation. I feel like I am in Oklahoma rural right here. I am here with Harold Dustybull from the Blackfeet Nation so we can kind of hit him on this side between us. And we are here representing the National Johnson O'Malley Association. I serve as the president and Harold serves as the vice president of our association. And we thank you for allowing us this time. We represent all the JOM programs nationwide. Well, not all of them because we do not have the accountability of all of them and we will get to that. But we have been entrusted to speak on their behalf. I have heard earlier and I really am touched by it, you know, all that happened this morning, all the things that are happening, it comes down to the education of our children. Period. That is where it starts from. If you are talking about people to get into colleges, to have the jobs that they need to have developed right now, it starts with our children. And our children are in the K through 12. We serve public schools. We are not involved in the bureau of schools. This is just the public schools. We serve close to 90 percent of the students in our programs in the public schools, both urban and rural and tribal schools that we have. It is with our program that we deal with. We fully understand how this committee has saved us over the years, have really worked with us to see what we can do for our programs and for the children that we serve. We are grateful for that. We are grateful to be back in the budget again after eight years of not being there, but we are back in and we are really grateful for that. And we understand how important this committee has played in the past to making the assurances of the trust responsibility is there for us. So at this time, I am going to let Harold speak on the main points of recovery. Mr. Dustybull. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity. And first of all, I want to say ditto to all the former testimonies. I live on an Indian reservation so I know the impacts and the true reality that is faced there. We have four major concerns in the JOM program. The first one is we oppose combining JOM with Title VII. And the reasons are JOM served Indian children who are enrolled members of federally recognized tribes. Title VII serves students who fill out a 506 form and declare themselves Indians. JOM falls under the Snyder Act and the United States trust responsibility which was established by treaties. Title VII falls under the Department of Ed. JOM and Title VII have different regulations. They are different programs for different purposes. JOM is administered by Indian tribes. Title VII is administered by state agencies. And our second request is we request that JOM be restored to the 24 million. This is the level that it was at in 1994 when the BIA and the Bureau of Education froze our student account. Now, I truly believe that this funding is still within the Bureau of Indian Education. It just has been moved out when they were trying to eliminate the program at that time, and that is why they froze our account. We request a new student account, a current student account. The last one was made in 1994. That was 13 years ago. You know, the census takes a count every 10 years because of population changes and so it is here, too. We urge the Department of the Interior to reinstate the JOM position in the Bureau of Indian Education in the central office. As of to date and after many requests, we still have not been able to meet with the Bureau of Indian Education officials and that is probably because we do not have any representation there. We are not seen there. And last and most importantly is that JOM does an excellent job on Indian reservations but you folks never hear of it because our chain to you is cut off at the Bureau of Indian Education. We need that position there. We need that new account. We need that 24 million back to move back into the program. And those are our concerns. But most importantly, we do not want to be combined with Title VII. We are different. Thank you. [The statement of Virginia Thomas and Harold Dustybull follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair. TRIBAL HEALTHCARE CLINICS Getting back to healthcare for a second, let's discuss what you are seeing with your hospitals, and with your resources. I was just with a tribe in Wisconsin, in Green Bay, the other night. They have so many people coming to their hospital right now that are tribally enrolled but they are not tribal members. They are getting to the point where they are going to have to start turning them away. In the other areas of Wisconsin nearby, there were not clinics. There were not hospitals. There is nothing out there. So, I asked the folks from Oneida--they were building on some more space, ``Do you have the work- through with the Bureau of Indian Affairs for the staffing?'' They kind of do, but it is really not at the level that is meeting everybody's needs, and they would like to do some more expansions. However, they do not know if they can get more funding for the full-time equivalents to get people out there. We have heard this a little bit in our travels last summer. Can you elaborate with some specifics from your own experiences? We saw some fabulous places in Oklahoma where good things were happening, but I know there are still waiting lists in Oklahoma. Mr. Peercy. And again you all came down to our facility in Talihina, which was a joint venture also. But what we are seeing--and we are a little lucky and unlucky; we are down in, you know, rural southeast Oklahoma so you really got to want to get to our place to get there to the hospital. But we have the eight clinics that I think you saw one of the clinics---- Ms. McCollum. Um-hum. Mr. Peercy [continuing]. Also in McAlester. The problem is our numbers are increasing, you know, every month. We are opening new charts. And, you know, when we talk about excluding folks, with the federal money that we get, we sign on with the open-door policy that anybody that is a tribal member of any tribe that walks in the door that those folks will be taken care of. And the problems that folks are running into--because we have 200,000 tribal members and they are all across the Nation a lot of them--and they are getting denied services at other facilities because they are just focusing in on their own tribal members. And if you receive federal money, you know, you are not supposed to be able to do that. But if it got to the point with us, we would probably do the same. You know, we would take care of our tribal members and then if somebody from Alaska is living in Talihina, Oklahoma, they can come to our facility. But with the economy the way it is, with people losing insurance the way they are even though they are not supposed to, our numbers are increasing. And so we are looking at things like expanding hours, you know, but with that is expanding cost. Ms. McCollum. Right. Mr. Peercy. And so we are fortunate enough that the tribe does supplement our health system to a small degree, but keeping in mind some tribal nations cannot. And you know, where does it end and where is the obligation the government has to fully fund? So I guess to answer your question, yeah, what you are seeing out there is true. The numbers are increasing; the dollars are staying fairly flat. We are trying to be innovative. Those tribal systems that can supplement do and those that cannot, do not. Charles. Mr. Head. Well, like everyone else, we are maxed out and if using our dollars from our businesses to supplement, if we were to take a significant sequestration hit or budget cut, you know, we would have to make decisions on how to focus our tribal dollars and where to put those. We would probably focus on healthcare, law enforcement, and education. That leaves a whole range of programs all across the board where we are providing important services to hundreds of thousands of people each year that we are going to have to think about cutting. It is not going to be a very nice process. Do you agree with that, Mickey? Mr. Peercy. Yeah. Because really the folks do not have any place else to go. You know, and if you cut services, you got to start selecting what services you cut. And politically, it is certainly not a good thing that you do that but you also, the humanity of it of those folks who are chronically ill, they have to go somewhere and there is nowhere else in the system. Mr. Head. I believe that Congressman Cole--excuse me. Ms. McCollum. We have run over and I appreciate the indulgence. If I understood correctly--and I might not have--the Oneida said that they lose money by caring for non-tribally enrolled individuals. Even though there is federal money coming in, that does not make them whole. By closing off and not taking other patients, they could make their operation more business effective and do some of the things that they want to do with enhanced diabetes care for their own tribal members. Would you agree with that? Mr. Peercy. I would think that is true what they are saying. We have a fairly small population. If you get x number of dollars and you say--just like having a panel if you are a physician. You have got x number of patients you see and you focus on those folks, but then where do the other folks who are of another tribe go to? You know, they end up in the urban center or at somebody else's center and they have to drive many miles. But, you know, to close off the open-door policy and just treat your tribal members is something that everyone is looking at right now. Hopefully, we will never get to that point but they are in other places because I get calls from California, from Oregon, from up north in Bemidji that says they will not see me. Or they say they will give me an appointment but it is going to be a year and a half, which is basically a form of excluding you from service. Ms. McCollum. Bemidji, Minnesota? Mr. Peercy. Um-hum, Bemidji area. Ms. McCollum. Straight down. Okay. Mr. Peercy. Bemidji area. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Cole. Mr. Cole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will try to be brief but I think these are such important issues. I want to address this question to Charles and to Mickey. And it is sort of two questions I think just to help the committee. One, I know both of these tribes supplement what the Federal Government provides for healthcare so if you could give us some sort of idea the order of magnitude how many tribal dollars are on top of federal dollars, either percentage or whatever. And the second one, these are both very large tribes, you know, both well over 200,000 members. They are two of the largest tribes in the country. From your standpoint on not contract services but contract support, how many dollars are you sort of out because you are not whole on the contracts? Because that is an issue that we have really struggled with on this committee. Mr. Peercy. I think with our contract support cost shortfall is $5.5 million. And so that is what it is. Mr. Cole. By your request for this year's $5 million addition, is that correct? Mr. Peercy. Yeah. So we are $500,000 off if it all came to Choctaw, which would be fine if you want to send it all down but the other---- Mr. Cole. I will let you and Charles argue that out. Mr. Peercy. Well, we might work a deal. But---- Mr. Head. Or we could take two-and-a-half each. Mr. Peercy. There you go, two-and-a-half apiece. Mr. Cole. It would have to be a three-way deal here, some Chickasaw. Mr. Peercy. So you see the problem. So ours is $5.5 million and for our contract that would make us whole at about $18 million. And I know OMB has got a circular out and they are trying to talk about flat rates for contract support cost and we definitely are against that because you are going to end up at a 15 percent, which would cost us a lot in shortfall. So we still like to negotiate and use the rules that we play under. Secondly, we got about $78 million from the Indian Health Service to the Title V contract. The tribe puts in for this contract alone $7 million. And then for what I mentioned earlier, the OEH program, we get $1 million. So $8 million total from the Tribal Nation. Mr. Cole. All right. Charles. Mr. Head. Our contract support shortfall is over $5 million also. And another area of need is contract health dollars. We just passed a bill taking 5 percent of our gaming revenues and putting it into contract health on top of what we get. I do not have the figures in front of me for the rest of our health programs, but we supplement a considerable amount of money each year for patient care, for dental and eyeglasses, as well as contract health. Mr. Peercy. And to add to that, Charles, I forgot about the EDH. That is another $2.5 million. And as Charles and I talk about contract health, them putting more money in contract health, it still does not get out of category one, priority one. That does not do anything other than, you know, it does not pay for anything that would be elective. You know, I know some areas to use contract health dollars to pay for orthodontics and transportation to the orthodontist. And, you know, we do not get anywhere like that. We do not get out of the CHS category one even spending $14 million a year. Seven is from the feds and seven is from the tribal CHS. Mr. Cole. And to our folks from JOM just again for the record and I know you do not have an exact student count because we have not done the census as you pointed out, do you happen to know what the overall budget for BIA schools and how many Native American kids we have there are and then how many Native American kids we have in the public school system that we are trying to cover with a very limited, you know, JOM budget? Mr. Dustybull. Well, as far as the BIA schools, they serve about 6 percent of the Indian students nationwide and the JOM serves 93 percent of the students nationwide. Ms. Thomas. I would like to give an example here because you can realize how important this is. We have not had a count. My tribe, the Muscogee Nation, we were counted at 10,919 students in '94. That is how much I get. I serve over 17,000. How can I turn away--as they said earlier, you cannot say oh, no, you are not in my tribe because we serve--we have 39 tribes in Oklahoma alone and we serve all of these. We have Alaska natives that come in and we do not say oh, no, we are not going to serve you. We have to take them in. So we have this count. I am truly blessed to be from the Muscogee Nation. I am truly blessed that my Chief Tiger and my council members believe in education and they subsidize what we cannot make for the other ones. And here, we are giving our students $60 per student to use. That is just one-time supplies almost. How can you meet the rest of their needs? I mean we are not trying to say we want to make our students better than anybody else. We are just trying to bring them up to the norm. You know, if they do not have these tennis shoes, they do not have the school supplies, how can they be successful? You know, you just heard how many students in one tribe gets gate scholarships. All of our tribes, you know, we encourage this. That happens. We try to make them go along but we do not have the money either. And then you look at smaller tribes who do not have gaming, who do not have other commercial ventures that can, you know, subsidize these programs where you are looking at little rural tribes that that is all they have got. That is what we are here for. We are here fighting for the small as well as the large. So our counts are much needed and we have to show that there has been growth because I know when we first started coming to Congress years and years ago--I know I do not look it, but I have been here a long time--see, see, see. But the problem is is that they do not understand that that count is frozen. You see that count and you think oh, that program just stays all the same this whole time, but we do not. We have never been able to show you the count. We have never been able to get it passed into the BIA--BIE now. You know, we were told flat out to our faces that it was too much trouble to do a count. Mr. Cole. You know, Mr. Chairman, maybe we could solve our Medicare and Social Security problem if we just said we froze a number of people on it right now and there is never going to be anymore no matter what. We are not counting and then we will balance this budget in short order. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Thank all of you for being here today, for your testimony. It will be very helpful to us as we try to put together the budget for the next year. I appreciate the information. Thank you. And the committee will stand adjourned for 34 minutes. [Recess.] Mr. Simpson. Dr. Robert Martin, President of the Institute of American Indian Arts, Ervin Chavez and Faye BlueEyes, President and Director of Finance and Facilities, Nancy Martine-Alonzo, President of the Board of Trustees, Ramah Navajo School Board, and Edward Begay, Chairperson of the Navajo Agricultural Products Industry Board of Directors. Same procedure as we had this morning, and we will have again tomorrow morning. Five minutes for your opening statements, and then questions from the members of the committee. And we will have some drifting in and out, I suspect, during the hearing because there are a lot of weird things going on in Congress right now. So, Dr. Martin. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. INSTITUTE OF AMERICAN INDIAN ARTS WITNESS ROBERT MARTIN Mr. Martin. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. It is a pleasure for me to be here to speak on behalf of the Institute of American Indian Arts. We are located in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and we are chartered by the United States Congress to empower creativity and leadership in Native arts and cultures, and we do that through our academic programs. And, of course, we have all of the studio arts. We also have new media arts, creative writing, museum studies, and indigenous liberal studies. And we also operate a museum that has the largest collection of contemporary Native art in the world, a magnificent collection, and we are also a 1994 Landgren Institution, so we operate the Center for Lifelong Education that does outreach and training for tribes. Mr. Simpson. I planned on being out there to have a look at the place this September. Mr. Martin. We are looking forward to the visit, Mr. Chairman. From 2000 to now we finally have a permanent campus, so when you come, you are going to see a beautiful 140 acres and mountain views, vistas. You are also going to see 10 buildings, four of which were just constructed in the last several years, so we have got additional square footage that we are operating and maintaining, beautiful campus. Our student body is really, though, you know, the most important thing that we have going for us. And we have 400 students, and student enrollment is more than doubled in the last five years, and we have 84 tribes represented in our student body, and it is continuing to grow. Also, this year is 2012, and we have been in existence 50 years. We are celebrating our 50th anniversary, and we are going to have a number of celebrations where we really highlight our contributions to contemporary Native art, and also the contributions of our more than 4,000 alumni. And many of them you have probably heard of, Dan Dominga, T.C. Cannon, Tony Abeyta, just to name a few. So we are looking forward to that celebration, and hopefully you will be a part of that when you come out. I am here to ask you to support the President's request for fiscal year 2013 for Institute of American Indian Arts, and that is at $9.369 million, and we are asking you to support that. That is about an $850,000 increase over what we are receiving this year, but for the last 2 years we have been at more or less flat line funding. And as a result, you know, we have had challenges with additional square footage, and maintaining that. We have added, as I said, new buildings, and that is 60,000 square feet of additional space that we have to operate and maintain, so we have had increased custodial expenses, security. Utility costs have gone up. And as we add new students, we have had to add new faculty, so that has been a real challenge for us as well. So the increase would permit us to reinstate a summer school that we had to cancel the last year. That would allow our students to expedite their graduation, and would also allow our new students to come in that need remedial work, or get a head start on their college educations. You know, with Native Americans, we have the lowest participation rates in higher education, the highest retention rate, so this would really help our students. We would also add to our counseling programs. We had to cut back in that as well, and we know student support is so important to success of our students. Also capital improvements, it would permit that as well. Our buildings now are 13 years old. When we built the first couple of buildings, they cut corners, and the HVAC system is totally inadequate, especially for studio arts. We are not able to permit oil based painting instruction in our classrooms because the ventilation is just not good enough. And then we have students and professors coming in and say we are doing a disservice to our students, so we have got to address that issue. It would also allow for some technology enhancements for your databases in finance, human resources, student advancement. They are not integrated and talking with one another, so that would allow us to upgrade our technology then. And then we would also like to give our faculty and stuff a modest two percent increase in their pay. It has been two years since they have had any increase at all. So, in conclusion, we are hoping you will support the President's request, and we take it very seriously. For the last 5 years we have more than matched our federal appropriation with funding from individuals, corporations, foundations, and other Federal sources, as well as the State of New Mexico. They have been very supportive. So, again, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, and I invite you to visit our campus in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Thank you. [The statement of Robert Martin follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Dr. Martin. We look forward to coming out. And I am going to be in New Mexico and Arizona in September, so we will stop and say hi and let you take us on a tour of the place. Mr. Martin. We are looking forward to that. Mr. Simpson. You bet. Mr. Martin. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Ervin Chavez. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. DZILTH-NA-O-DITH-HLE COMMUNITY GRANT (DCG) SCHOOL BOARD WITNESSES ERVIN CHAVEZ FAYE BLUEEYES Mr. Chavez. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. My name is Ervin Chavez, School Board President of Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community Grant School, a tribally controlled grant school located in New Mexico. Mr. Simpson. Could you pronounce the name of the school for me? Mr. Chavez. Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mr. Chavez. Okay. It is a tribally controlled grant school in New Mexico, part of the Navajo Reservation. With me is Faye BlueEyes, Director of Finance, who will be presenting our testimony on behalf of the Board. We will focus on three areas of concerns regarding fiscal year 2013 funding requests for the Bureau of Indian Education. One is facility operation and maintenance, tribally controlled support costs, and the proposed cuts to Indian School Equalization Program funding formula. Ms. BlueEyes. And yes, my eyes are blue, and it is Navajo blue. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Ms. BlueEyes. Facilities operation and maintenance funding has been chronically and significantly underfunded for a number of years. BIE reported in the fiscal year budget justification that 63 of 181 BIE schools are rated in poor condition, the same number as in fiscal year 2012. According to an objective report, Facility Condition Index For fiscal year 2011, there were 150 projects with deferred maintenance needs, totaling $304.4 million. Our school, which is among the poorest rated facilities, is not able to provide a safe, healthy learning environment for our students, based on the limited funds we get. And some of our health and safety problems include closure of the restrooms servicing our junior high classrooms because of leaking sewer lines, and water lines are so corroded and filled with sediment that we are having to bring in bottled water for our students, an additional cost that most public school do not face. For the health and safety of our students and staff, we urge that Congress provide the NCAI recommended $76 million for facilities and $109.8 million in facilities operation funding. Tribal grant support costs, which is light and contract support for school, the BIE requests a two million dollar increase in order to provide a TGS rate of 65 percent of the administrative cost need for the 125 tribally operated schools. The TGS for this school year is only 63.7 percent. Our school, which should be getting around $700,000, is instead receiving only $445,000. Thus we have had to consolidate internal controls, streamline checks and balances, and scale back significantly on our management staff due to litigation brought by tribes to correct BIA and IHS failures to fully fund CSC and all other BIA program areas, except education. Funding increases for those support costs have been tremendous. From fiscal year 2009 to 2012, the non-school BIE- BIA-CSC account has grown by an astounding $73.9 million, which raised the percentage of CSC need pay from 75 percent to nearly 100 percent. In contrast, for school programs, the tribal grant Support funding during the same period increased by a mere $2.8 million, with the TGS rate rising from 61 percent to 63.7 during that period. Congress needs to fix this problem and fully fund tribal grant support at $72.3 million for the indirect cost requirements of current tribally controlled schools, and provide two million in startup funds for newly converting schools. We ask that Congress restore the 4.4 million to Indian School Equalization Program funds account that the BIA proposes to cut. Although BIE says the reduction reflects a one percent decline in student population, please recognize that schools still have costs that are not directly tied to the number of students enrolled. Although not appropriations related, we want you to support the Native Class Act, S. 1262 and H.R. 3568, which addresses many of our concerns, while also recognizing and supporting the role of tribes to direct the education of their students. More importantly, we ask that you oppose any attempts to transfer the BIE from the Department of Interior, Indian Affairs, to the Department of Education. Such a transfer would seriously undermine the separate and distinct trust responsibility that the United States has with American Indians regarding education. In conclusion, it is widely acknowledged that investments in education have a direct economic impact, as well as benefits to the individual. Studies have also shown that reductions in education expenditures have negatively impacted employment rates. With our Native students coming from some of the hardest hit areas in these times of economic downturn, we ask Congress to provide the levels of education funding that will enable us to provide a quality education and safe and secure environments for our students. We thank you for any assistance you can provide. Thank you. [The statement of Faye BlueEyes follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Nancy. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. RAMAH NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD, INC. WITNESS NANCY MARTINE-ALONZO Ms. Martine-Alonzo. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the Board of Trustees for the Ramah Navajo School Board, that is located in Cibola County in Pine Hill, New Mexico, we come here to address three major areas of need that we have. The first is appropriating 2.1 million for a new BIE early childhood education center at our school and reservation in Pine Hill, New Mexico. Second is to appropriate 3.63 million for a Ramah Navajo community elder center, and then three is to appropriate 2,925,000 for replacement construction for a new central administration for the Ramah Navajo School Board, and our organization was founded in 1970. I think some of you are familiar that we had come here and got direct appropriate from Congress to establish our K-12 school. And it has been in existence now 42 years, and we have graduated over 800 Native American students from the Ramah community, and we are proud to say that a lot of our students have gone on to college, and we have doctors, pharmacists, and lawyers. You know, we are just starting at the beginning level with many other various professionals, but we are grateful to Congress for the partnership and the help they have given us year after year over the 42 years. And today we are here, and the background for the appropriation request, for the first one, the early childhood education center, is because we have four preschool programs, and this includes a Head Start, a family and child education, early intervention program, and a child care center, and the four programs are currently housed in portable buildings that are separated. And we would like to consolidate it under one building so they can share dining facilities, they can share a playground, they can share other support system and network for them. And this will accommodate a little over 200 students that are in this category. The second appropriation request is for the Ramah Navajo Community elder center. While we are able to provide a lot of the medical services through the Pine Hill Health, our reservation is located geographically in rural, you know, isolated, scattered housing. And it is very labor intensive for our nurses or our doctors to do homebound care, and so it would really accommodate the services provided, and streamline some of those services if we can build a community elderly center right within close proximity to the health facilities. That way we can take care of the illnesses or other medical attention, short term, long term, or other personal kinds of needs that our elders have. And the population we are talking about, the ages, there are 50 years to 64 years, we have close to 1,000. And then those that are 65 and older, we have 500. So that is about 1,500 population. Our reservation population is around 4,000, so it is over, like, over a third of our population. You know how all the baby boomers, we are all coming to that age, and there is a growing need for that. And then the third request is appropriation for a new central administration. And the buildings we have were established way back in the early 1970s, so they are about 35 years old. And just due to the wear and tear of the building, they have some challenges. And we have environmental health hazard, just because of the old age of the building. We have rodents and different kinds of snakes and other lizards that get into the building. And, you know, it always poses the potential for hanta virus. And we know how the infestation of that plays out, and so we know that that is a challenge we are having to deal with. And then we need to update the automatic sprinklers, you know, to prevent fires. We are among a lot of vegetation and trees. We are very potential to fire. If something should happen in our area, we are unable to address it quickly enough. It would really pose a threat to our buildings, and especially to this building. We also have frequent power outages and hazards. Because we are at 8,000 feet, we have a lot of rain, a lot of electrical storms, a lot of snow that impede, you know, the wiring in some of our buildings. And we put in a new infrastructure for our finance and business, where we have computers and service systems that require 24/7 maintenance and operation. And with the kind of wiring that needs to be updated and improved, you know, that is also a need. And then, of course, just the technology needs that we have to try to get our building up to par in all these areas. And so we are very grateful for the financial assistance, the support system, that Congress has given us in the years prior to this, and then we look forward to the same assistance this year, and we are so grateful for everything that you have provided. And this is respectfully submitted by myself, Nancy Alonzo, as president of the Board of Trustees. Thank you so much. [The statement of Nancy Martine-Alonzo follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Edward. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NAVAJO AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY (NAPI) BOARD OF DIRECTORS WITNESS EDWARD T. BEGAY Mr. Begay. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. I am here on behalf of Navajo Agricultural Product Industry. It is established by Navajo National Council as an entity that are doing farming 110,630 acres of land. We are up to 72,000 acres of land that we cultivating. Under this is an organization called Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, which is United States government's program, supposed to be manned by Bureau of Indian Affairs, Navajo Region. BOI, BIA supposed to oversee this, under the statute that was signed into law, 1962. And in there, the Navajo Nation was promised, I will just use NIIP, as 110,630 acres irrigable land, commitment of Federal government to shoulder operation and maintenance to do this development. However, the NIIP was to be completed the same timeline as San Juan-Chama Diversion project as a companion, which the Navajo Nation agreed to relinquish some of the water rights that has been diverted into the Rio Grande River, and that was done decades ago, while the Navajo portion is still lacking, 40 years after that was agreed to. So now I will refer to the chart here. Despite commitments, funding for NIIP has been very erratic. The President's budget fiscal year 2013 request is woefully inadequate, $3.381 million. In addition to the initial budget, NIIP has eight percent Federal overhead for the project, which Bureau of Reclamation and Bureau of Indian Affairs overhead consumes 58 percent. Yes, 58 percent of the funding. So we get very little of none at all. Mr. Moran. BIA's overhead? No, Bureau of Reclamation you said? Mr. Begay. Yeah, combined, in all the---- Mr. Moran. Combined? Mr. Begay. Yeah. See, the---- Mr. Moran. So you get less than half the total money that was allocated? Mr. Begay. That is right. Mr. Moran. Excuse me for the interruption. Mr. Begay. That is okay. Mr. Moran. I just wanted to clarify that. Mr. Begay. Yes. Mr. Moran. That is the point you wanted clarified. Mr. Begay. That is right. Yes. So Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Reclamation readily admits the inadequate funding for operation and maintenance, creating deferred maintenance year after year. Now, to do this adequately, in the initial budgeting process and all that, it is either the Bureau of Indian Affairs or Bureau of Reclamation failed to do its responsibility in budgeting. All the Federal budgets that I am aware of have a base budget, okay? NIIP has a zero base budget. And they should be the one justifying that, but no. Ed T. Begay, on behalf of NAPI, is here to emphasize that there is a failing of the fulfillment of the obligation, Federal government. As the chart shows, somebody is not turning to the farm. So that is the reason why, on the backs of the Navajos, the Federal employees are getting the pension, sick leave pay, and retirement pay, while the end product, they got nothing to show for at this point. So I am here to just emphasize that NAPI is fulfilling its job as to right now. I said 72,000 acres being farmed. Yes, we got a turnaround, making the profit, but the profits that we make, we get it back and plow back into the business. So I am asking the subcommittee to assist in accomplishing the fulfillment of the United States government. So I am asking a restoration of $35 million annually to do the job that was agreed upon in 1962. And I think this is the body that would really help us. I go to OMB, I go to BIA, and they just said, go over there, and they said, go to the Hill. I think this is the Hill, right? And I thank you very much for your attention. The detailed testament is received by your staff, for further analytical stuff and so forth. I do appreciate the time, and you have a good week. [The statement of Edward T. Begay follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Moran. Mr. Moran. Well, I am going to say this probably only once, Mr. Chairman, but I say it to everyone in the room here. If you do not get what you think you deserve, and have every right to expect, it is not the fault of any of the members sitting at the table right now. People assume that Democrats are easier to get money out of than Republicans, but in the case of Chairman Simpson and Mr. Cole, they are in there fighting, but they are fighting within an environment that is going to be extraordinarily difficult this year. Anything that is put into Indian programs is going to have to come out of something else. And so I just want to make sure you all understand how extraordinarily difficult this budget process, this appropriations process is going to be. But you should also know that you just happen to be speaking to four allies right now who will do everything they can to put as much as we can into funding Indian programs. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Cole. Mr. Cole. I just want to associate myself with Mr. Moran's remarks. This is a tough budget cycle, and, you know, we have got a large deficit. We have got, obviously, a lot of differences, but this committee has worked through those things, really, the last several years under both Democratic and Republican leadership. And so it is pretty committed, and I think we actually led certainly the Senate, and, with all due respect, the administration in many areas last year, and I know we will do our best to do that again this year. But, again, it is going to be a tough year. But thank you for coming. I have to tell you, that is the most beautiful set of squash blossoms. My eyes have been on those ever since I walked in the room. If my wife was here, she would say, get them somehow. That is just a beautiful array. Mr. Simpson. So that is what the tribal wars were about for years? Mr. Cole. Well, back then we actually brought the women back with the squash. Mr. Simpson. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. In Minnesota we have the pipe stolen, so nobody wore it around. I have had the opportunity to be down in Santa Fe and see the fabulous facility there. Anything we can do so that our kids are engaged year round in school, it reinforces what they are learning. Learning about culture, you are reading. Learning about art, you are learning math. It is all so interrelated for success, so I am going to look at this some more. EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION Now let's talk about early childhood for a second. Your school is in a trailer? How is Head Start allowing you to stay open? In a trailer, you do not have the right bathroom facilities for that age group. I was just at a reservation where they got cited and were threatened to be shut down for having a plunger on the site in one of the restrooms, because this tribe has sewer challenges. So tell me about your Head Start. I have been to Laguna. Now, a lot of their facility is paid for, so that is one of the reasons why they have what they have. But what is your enrollment list, and are you fearful of losing your Head Start program? We need to figure out a way in this committee to get the education folks, our colleagues, to pay a little more attention about what is going on with Head Start and some of these issues, because they are just so interconnected. Ms. Martine-Alonzo. Thank you for the question, and request for clarification. I am happy to respond. Our early childhood programs are in portable buildings, and they are disconnected. They are not all, you know, in one complex. They have been acquired over the years, the different programs, and so that is how they are situated. And we contract the different programs. Head Start is direct with Federal headquarters, and so we work closely with them to be in compliance. We are in good compliance on every level because we have been able to try to keep everything adequately as much as we can. But we feel that, in the long term, we need to have more coordination among the early childhood programs because we know that that is where it is the most important place to put the investment, is at the early years. Those are the formative years, and those are the place that you need that good seamless coordination, you know, with the programs, because these serve the zero to age 12 category. And you are talking to somebody that is very passionate about education. Ms. McCollum. Um-hum. Ms. Martine-Alonzo. I retired from State government a year ago after 37 years as an educator and a principal, so I hear your concern. And I know that we try very hard to be in compliance, but we need our programs to be improved in that ways. Ms. McCollum. So, one more question to you, and then I will switch to the secondary topic. All your teachers are in compliance, correct? With Head Start, you are not worried about that? You have native speakers in the Head Start program? Ms. Martine-Alonzo. Yes, we do. We do. It has taken us a while to really find qualified certified people because the reason the Ramah Navajo School Board established their own education system is we truly believe in educating children to be bicultural, bi-literate, and bilingual, knowing both their native language and culture, read and write, as well as to be able to know the English and get the education, be able to be successful in both worlds. And that is what we strive for, so we make sure we provide that. AGENCY CONTROL OF INDIAN EDUCATION Ms. McCollum. And, Mr. Chairman, if I could ask Ms. BlueEyes, you made it very clear that you did want the Department of Education taking over your schools. We heard you loud and clear. Should some of the programming in the Department of Education be coming over into BIA? Part of it is that programming is very fragmented, but you are doing a holistic approach in your schools. Esther Martinez Johnson O'Malley and a lot of Indian Education Programs are handled through State education. Do you want us to leave the status quo as is? What are your suggestions? Ms. BlueEyes. Our school does not get some of those fundings, but we do get the Title VII through the Department of Ed as a flow through, and it goes to the BIA, then it comes down to our school. I think we like the way things are set up, because then the BIA is the one that we pretty much deal. And we also fear, if we were under the Department of Ed, we are going to be lost, because they are a huge program. But the concern that we do see is our BIA, BIE operated schools, like, we do not qualify for Race To The Top funds, so we are left out many times on certain fundings for public school. BIA funded is left out. So we would like to be included for those types of opportunities. Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chairman, we did get that fixed legislatively with the Race To The Top, but there is still not enough money. That we could not fix. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Thank you all for being here today. It is very interesting. We look forward to using the information that you have given us as we try to develop our budget for the coming fiscal year. I will tell everyone that we have some votes going on right now. We have a 15 minute vote, and then three five minute votes, so the next panel we will call as soon as we get back from this recess, which will be probably 30 minutes. Mr. Cole. At least. Mr. Simpson. In that neighborhood. Mr. Cole. Probably longer than that, Mike. Mr. Simpson. Thirty to 35. But I would encourage members, as soon as the last vote is over, to hurry back, and we will start on the next panel, because we still have three panels that we need to do today. So I apologize for the delay, but that is kind of the way it goes. They make us vote here. Committee will be in recess. [Recess.] Mr. Simpson. We apologize for that brief delay. The next panel is Irene Cuch, Ben Shelly, Lorenzo Curley, and Richard Trujillo. Is that close? So you see once again we are an hour behind. Yeah, that is right. Thank you all for being here today. Irene, you are up first. Can you see the red light? Ms. Cuch. There. Mr. Simpson. There you go. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. UTE TRIBE OF THE UINTAH AND OURAY RESERVATION WITNESS IRENE CUCH Ms. Cuch. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee. My name is Irene Cuch. I am the Chairwoman of the Ute Indian Tribe. Our reservation is located in the State of Utah. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. In my testimony, I am going to focus on appropriations needed for energy and law enforcement. We need Congress to begin taking Indian energy seriously. Excuse me. The Bureau of Indian Affairs, BIA, is filled with staff that can process a lease for agricultural grazing, but the BIA lacks the staff and expertise needed to oversee energy permits. Excuse me again. On our reservation there are two or three BIA staff involved in processing oil and gas permits. It can take a year or longer for a permit to be approved. The tribe knows these issues all too well. Production of oil and gas began on our reservation in the 1940s. Over the past 70 years the tribe has become a major oil and gas producer. We have about 7,000 wells that produce 45,000 barrels of oil a day. We also produce about 900 million cubic feet of gas per day. Despite our progress, the tribe's ability to benefit from these energy resources is directly limited by the agencies who oversee permitting. Just ask the oil and gas companies who operate on our reservation. These companies say that the permitting process is the single biggest risk factor in conducting business on the reservation. The lack of BIA staff and expertise has a real impact on the tribe. Tribal earnings from energy development are not spent on luxuries or sit in some investment account. We use those revenues as primary source of funding for our tribal government and the services we provide to our members. We also need the Federal agencies to work more efficiently. Funding is needed to increase Indian energy development offices that would bring all of the agencies together under one roof to streamline processing. Former Senator Dorgan called these one stop shops. There are three one stop shops already in Indian country. Senator Dorgan reported that the one at Fort Dorthal helped to increase oil and gas permit approvals by four times. On our reservation we need 10 times as many permits approved. Currently only 48 application for permits to drill APDs are approved each year. The tribe and its business partners estimate that 450 APDs will be needed each year as the tribe expands operations. We believe that a one stop shop is the best way to get Federal agencies working together to manage the high level of permitting needed on our reservation. We also need funding to protect our rights once a permit is issued. Without explanation, the President's Fiscal Year 2012 budget eliminated funding for lease compliance and surveys performed by the BIA Western Regional Office. This funding is needed to address title boundary, trespass issues, and should be restored. Finally, increase appropriations are needed for Federal law enforcement responsibilities. Our reservation is the second largest in the United States, but the Federal government, excuse me, only funds eight police officers. At the most, that is three officers per shift. With only three officers on duty, calls for police assistance are not answered in a timely manner. Our officers are forced to work alone, and police cars travel over 500 miles per shift. To make matters worse, our BIA funded jail was recently condemned and closed. Currently the BIA only pays to house 10 criminals at local non-Indian jails. This means that the criminals who are caught and convicted are released back into the public instead of being held. The situation is serious that the tribe is using its own money to construct a new detention facility. We are doing our part by funding three additional police officers, building our own detention facility. Congress needs to do its part, fulfill its Federal trust responsibilities, and provide at least 20 more police officers and the staff needed for our new detention facility. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. Nothing is more important to the tribe than keeping our members safe and developing energy resources that will provide for long term economic security of our members, our children, and grandchildren. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. [The statement of Irene Cuch follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you very much. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NAVAJO NATION WITNESS BEN SHELLY Mr. Shelly. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, it is an honor to testify today regarding the Navajo Nation 2013 budget priorities, and discuss our plan to develop a sustainable economy. Our priorities include infrastructure, development, public safety, and education. We continue to be concerned that our plan for economic development will be stopped by Federal regulation. Economic and infrastructure development supports job creation, as we all know. Projects like the Navajo Agricultural Products Industry fulfill our goals of economic development and job creation. The NAPI farm is supported by water brought by the Navajo Indian Irrigation Projects. The Federal Government promised to fund the NIIP as part of settling water rights in New Mexico. The President's 2013 budget again reduced funding for the NIIP. This level of funding is unsustainable for operation and new construction. The Navajo Nation asked the committee to restore full funding to these long overdue projects to a close. Another essential infrastructure project is the Navajo- Gallup Water Supply Projects. This prioritized project for the administration will bring much needed water to Navajo and bring thousands of jobs to the Navajo Nation. We support the President's budget requests and urge the committee to retain the full funding level. Health care facility construction projects are also essential for community infrastructure. Hospital facility construction is underfunded. The Navajo Nation has five priority hospitals due for replacement, Winslow-Dilkon, Kayenta, Pueblo Pintado, our Gallup Indian Medical Center, and Bodaway-Gap. These projects bring health care viable, as well as jobs to rural community. We applaud the President's request for IHS funding, but the majority of increase went to funding for staffing joint venture, not for long overdue priority hospital projects and for needed water and sanitation fund. In addition to infrastructure, another priority of the Navajo Nation is public safety. Our court and law enforcement program needs full funding to make our community safe and prosper. The Interior budget is inadequate to put Navajo Nation on the same level as other rural community. The Navajo Nation has fewer officer per person than other comparable rural community. At time there is only one law enforcement officer to cover up to 5,000 square miles. The President's 2013 budget is also inadequate for facility replacement of jails and employee housing. Another priority of the Navajo Nation is supporting education. The Interior budget for fiscal year 2013 eliminates facilities and school and construction program. The Navajo Nation has many schools that need replacement. Further, this past fiscal year many students did not receive their scholarship funding due to delay in appropriation. The Navajo Nation urge Congress to fund the BIA higher education program as it does for other BIA programs, such as K-12 school and tribal college. Additionally, Congress should support a building study to determine the true facility need for the college and the Navajo Technical College. The Navajo Nation has renewable resource, as well as large resource of non-renewable resource, like large reserve of coal, oil, and natural gas. The Navajo Nation support full funding for development and technical assistance to help us develop our resources. Unfortunately, the Navajo Nation face many regulatory burdens placed on us and our energy development by the EPA negative view toward further coal development. The Navajo Nation is trying to create sustainable economy that will reduce our dependence on the Federal government. We urge support on projects and program that build infrastructure in creating jobs and clear the path for Indian energy independence innovation by reducing regulatory burden on us. And I also would like to add on too I was asked by Darema to ask them for funding. They are a member of the Navajo Nation, even though they have a grant. They use grant money. Again, they are the citizen of the Navajo Nation, so my support for what they ask for is right along with them. So, again, thank you very much for listening to me. [The statement of Ben Shelly follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Tuesday, March 27, 2012. NAVAJO HOPI LAND COMMISSION, NAVAJO NATION WITNESS LORENZO CURLEY Mr. Curley. Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the subcommittee, my name is Lorenzo Curley. I am a member of the Navajo Nation Council, also the chair of the Navajo Nation, Navajo Hopi Land Commission, and I represent the Nahata Dziil chapter of the new lands, which was created primarily as a relocation site for those families that were moved off their former lands. I thank you for the opportunity to testify in what is perhaps the most difficult chapter in modern Federal tribal relations, the Navajo Hopi land dispute, which has resulted in the relocation of nearly 15,000 Navajos, and a building freeze which has prevented development on western Navajo lands for over 45 years. Although the legal dispute between and among the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and United States are largely resolved, there still remains a large and ongoing toll on Navajo families affected by the land dispute. As a representative of the Nahata Dziil chapter, I know personally the pain and sense of disorientation which comes from being forced off ancestral lands. Virtually every day my constituents approach me to talk about hardship that they have suffered because of the relocation law and the construction freezes, including lots of young people whose families have relocated, but who cannot themselves build homes on relocation lands, making them effectively homeless and landless. The impact of the land dispute and building freeze will be with the Navajo Nation for many generations. The Federal agency which oversees the relocation process is the Office of Navajo Hopi Indian Relocation, also known as ONHIR. ONHIR has had a very difficult job that has taken far longer and cost far more than originally anticipated. However, this is not the fault of the Navajo Nation, which opposed the relocation program, but must now live with the awful consequences. ONHIR has two primary missions, relocation of Navajo families, and supporting relocatees through important economic development programs. In this regard, we would ask the ONHIR budget be doubled to $18 million in order to accelerate the conclusion of the relocation process for those many families who have relocated, but have not yet received their benefits, and to provide critical support for programs within the relocation communities, such as my own chapter, Nahata Dziil. I also urge the subcommittee to increase funding for housing and other improvements in the former Bennett freeze area of the Navajo Nation with $10 million from the BIA Trust Natural Resources Account and $10 million from the BIA Housing Improvement Funds, Department of Interior. As the administration noted in 2011, the building freeze was the product of a longstanding land dispute between the Navajo and the Hopi relocation boundaries. More than 12,000 Navajos living in the area were subjected to a 41-year freeze on development. During this era, the Navajo people were prohibited from building new schools, homes, health facilities, construction of water, roads, and electricity projects, and other community and economic development ventures. As a result, the Bennett freeze area is locked into the poverty if 1966, when the freeze was imposed. It was only in the 111th Congress that the freeze legislation was finally repealed. The President's fiscal year 2013 budget indicates that some funds will be allocated for the former Bennett freeze area from the Natural Resource Sublicate Activity to address rehabilitation, but provide no amount. I urge the subcommittee to make a bold statement by supporting substantial funding to rehabilitate the area. Although the Navajo Hopi land dispute and the Bennett freeze are painful issues, I thank the committee for this opportunity to provide testimony on a path forward to ensure that many Navajo families who have suffered under these Federal actions can have hope for a better life. I thank you for your attention. Thank you very much. [The statement of Lorenzo Curley follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Richard Trujillo. Mr. Trujillo. Trujillo. Mr. Simpson. Trujillo. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. HOPI TRIBAL COURT WITNESS RICHARD TRUJILLO Mr. Trujillo. Trujillo, if you do it. Yeah, that is the Spanish teacher in me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to speak, and members of the committee, staff. I am the Chief Judge of the Hopis, and it is an honor to have this position. I am a retired Superior Court Judge from Maricopa County. You know, that is the county where we have a sheriff that is the meanest sheriff in the world, and the people wear pink underwear, et cetera. One thing that is not mentioned with the national cuts with respect to the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, and it really has nothing to do with the gentleman who attracts the camera every place he goes, it is the professionals who have been there for years. We have got a lot of very good law enforcement people running the jail system. As I was on a criminal assignment for five years, and sentenced people to jail for substantial periods of time, and oftentimes, as conditions of probation, they would receive up to one year in the County Jail as a condition of probation. The jail would offer programs for people who had problems with alcohol, even programs for sex offenders, basic adult education. And oftentimes that gave the inmate an opportunity to work their way out of jail earlier than the one year probation term. In December of 2010 I met a gentleman by the name of Leroy Shingoitewa, and he is the Chairman of the Hopi Tribe, and he invited me to have lunch with him and have dinner. We did, and he says, I would like you to be the Chief Judge for Hopi. And I am a fourth generation Arizonan. I know where Hopi is located, but I had never visited. I said, okay. He said, come up and visit and see how you like it, and then maybe you can help us with some of our problems. Well, that invitation I am extending to you, Mr. Simpson, and Ms. McCollum, on behalf of the tribe. Come and visit Hopi. I can tell you that in the course of my year there, and now into my second year, during the summer, you see busloads of people come in to visit. And I have been at the various hotels, La Posada in Winslow, the cultural center on Hopi at the Legacy and Tuba City, and you hear German being spoken, and Italian, and busloads of people from Germany and from France. And when they describe Hopi, they say mystical, land of enchantment. Not to borrow from New Mexico, but they describe the area, and they are enchanted by this culture, this people that live up on mesas that extend, you know, the breadth of 100 miles. And I am hearing the comments of my neighbor here, suggesting that Hopi Navajo land has created a lot of hard feelings, and I am sure that is all accurate. But nonetheless, we in law enforcement, and I consider myself in the Justice Department of Hopi, patrol from Tuba City to King's Canyon. It is about a distance of about 100 miles. We have our chief of police present, Jamie, was it? Yeah. And his staff responds to a call, and sometimes it takes an hour, an hour and a half to get to the location of where the call is coming from. And if you have looked at the written materials we have submitted, you will see that in 2011 there were almost 7,500 calls. Almost 3,000 of those calls had to do with intoxication. Jamie tells me that there are times that by the time the police officer arrives, the intoxicated person has moved on, or passed out, and sometimes the families do not want the person arrested, sometimes they do. And Jamie's police force is 23. And I heard this morning the young officer, I think from North Dakota, who talked about the need to double the number of officers on that reservation, for a lot of good reasons, and I am sure you hear that endlessly when you have these hearings. The message I received when I was hired by the chairman, and the vice-chairman Honanie, was we need to do something about, you know, law and order. We need to address law and order, and, Judge Trujillo, we want you to implement the new Federal Tribal Law and Order Act. And the chairman said, are you familiar with it? I said, well, vaguely. He said, well, I want you to become an expert on it, meet with the U.S. Attorney's Office, and implement the Law and Order Act on Hopi. We now have rewritten the code. The council has not passed on it, but the law and order committee of the council has, and that has taken every bit of a year, and we are now at the stage where if the council passes on it, the law may be effective in 2012. Maybe July 1, maybe August 1, maybe September 1. As I understand the Law and Order Act, I do not mean to use political terms here, but it is another unfunded mandate. Because Law and Order is going to require people to go to jail for longer periods of time, and maybe that will turn things around, in terms of people's attitudes and their conduct. I was there about three months and decided to convene meetings of various community leaders. And at one time I told Judge Leslie, who had been a Hopi Judge there for 26, 27 years, I said, Judge Leslie, why do we not convene all the leadership of the villages, we have 12 villages, and let us talk about this whole area of intoxication in Law and Order. It was an interesting experience because we had, I believe, six governors. That is the term they give to the elected person who heads up the village. We had six governors present. Probably 70, 80 people were present, and one of the governors stood up and said, what do you call this committee? I says, well, we really have not given it a name, but we call it the Hopi Justice Committee. We are trying to bring about some significant change in our community. He looked at me, and he said, you are the Chief Judge? I said, yes, sir. He says, well, justice on Hopi is a joke, and the jail is a revolving door, and you Judges, I do not know what you are doing about the problem, but you are not helping the villages. Well, that is another aspect of my learning experience of Hopi. I had mentioned that when I was a Superior Court Judge I would sentence people, and the Italian Stallion sheriff that we have would house them and make sure that, you know, they move on into the prison system. But on Hopi, the Judges meet every Wednesday, and the prosecutor meets with Jamie and the people who are running the detention facility, and we determined how many people to release, because we are at capacity. And capacity is anywhere from 70 to 100. And this weekend we know there are going to be another 10 to 15 people arrested, and the violent offenders we want to make sure are locked up and not released. So it is kind of like, who is running the show here, in terms of Hopi justice? And I do not think it takes the students very long, and we have a whole group of Hopi students present. And I guess I am really speaking for them, because it is their community that we want to talk about, you know, public safety for them. It is the BIA that runs the jail. It is the BIA that runs the detention facility, and it is a two headed monster, I learned. They have different supervisors. And I do not know at what level you can reach someone who speaks for both detention and the police, but you have to deal with the various supervisors. And, for the most part, there does not seem to be any urgency about doing anything about it, from the BIA's perspective. That is my view. The good news is Dorothy Fulton. There is a lady named Dorothy Fulton who I met recently, representing BIA, and she does seem to be interested in bringing about significant change on Hopi. I have mentioned the Law and Order Act, July 29, 2010. Another significant date in Hopi justice is 1981. In 1981, and I do not know who the Secretary of Interior was, but I suppose there was rejoicing among BIA people because there was a new building that was constructed on Hopi, and it was a rehabilitation facility. And I suppose the people at that time, if this committee was constituted at that time were talking about, we need to set up a rehab program to deal with alcoholism. Well, that facility is now our jail. It has been converted to a jail, and it is inadequate, obviously not sufficient words to describe the condition of the jail. Just this past weekend I hear from our chief of police that the electronic doors failed and two prisoners walked out. We have had a reconstruction effort, meaning they had to really redesign and reconstruct this building to meet specifications. And in 2004 it was learned that the condition of the facility was such that we could not house our juveniles. So the juveniles had to be transported, if they were going to be detained, to Colorado, or McKinley County in New Mexico. I come on the scene, and I learn that there is a negotiated contract with Navajo County. The county seat is Holbrook, that is about an hour and a half away, and that agreement has been in place for about 18 months, but the BIA has not approved it yet, and eventually, in 2011, in April or May, it was approved, so that was almost two years later it was approved. We now house our juveniles in Holbrook, an hour and a half away. The stress to families, the inability to provide support to children, is obvious. We need the facility that this written proposal speaks of. And I know you have been listening to the presenters all day, asking for millions and millions and millions of dollars. You know, I asked the chairman before I left, I says, Chairman, what do you expect to accomplish by sending me to represent you? He said, well, you know, just hope for the best. So I am here on a plea, asking that this committee visit this land of enchantment, this group of mystical people, and they are. You know, you have got bad apples, but for the most part you have got a wonderful community and a great culture. At one of the Justice Committee meetings, one of the ladies spoke up and said, you know, alcohol is destroying our culture, and jail is not the answer. Well, that is one view, in terms of punishment. The chairman, and some of the leadership currently, believe that the Law and Order Act is going to make a difference, and that we need to prepare. And by preparation, meaning we need to develop the jail facility that can provide services. And if we sentence to three years, where are they going to go? Are we going to come to you and say, we need you to talk to the Bureau of Prisons and try to find some facility for us? That is not going to work. At least, based upon what I have seen so far, it is not going to work. So we need to house them there, and hopefully rehabilitate these people before they return to society. And under the Law and Order Act, as you are, I am sure, well aware, we can stack three times, so conceivably 6 year sentences, 9 year sentences. My final remark has to do with the violence that occurs, and the need for officers to concentrate more on those cases. And Jamie and I have talked about this, but some of the cases that I am aware of, the violence against women, and the need for appropriate punishment for those that violate, is something that Law and Order can bring about. The U.S. Attorney's Office is not the answer. U.S. Attorney's Office position is if you do not have a rape kit, if you do not have hard evidence, if it is just he said, she said, we are not going to prosecute. So the only place justice is going to occur is at the Tribal Court. Thank you. [The statement of Richard Trujillo follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Ms. McCollum. EDUCATION CONCERNS Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chair, members, the one thing that I had noted to ask you about was education. Is there anything more you would like to add about education? Ms. Cuch. Education? Yeah. Ms. McCollum. If you would like to---- Mr. Simpson. Are you asking her? Ms. McCollum. Yes. Ms. Cuch. Are you asking about education? Ms. McCollum. I am sorry. Yes. Ms. Cuch. My testimony did not focus on education. Ms. McCollum. Yes, I know. But I am asking---- Ms. Cuch. You are asking---- Ms. McCollum [continuing]. If there is anything anyone would like to add on education, because I know when you come here you only have five minutes---- Ms. Cuch. Yeah. Ms. McCollum [continuing]. You cannot talk about---- Ms. Cuch. Yeah. Ms. McCollum [continuing]. Everything. Ms. Cuch. Okay. Education, what comes to my mind is the Johnson-O'Malley Program, and that is funded through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and that helps the students that are attending local public schools. Ms. McCollum. Right. Ms. Cuch. And it is supposed to provide, well, they call it the unique problems of Indian students. It has to do with addressing their learning, and it has to do with their culture, and providing the counseling to the Indian students that are attending public schools. I know from time to time that is sometimes stricken from the BIA budget, but I think it needs to be put in there permanently. It should be a permanent program in the BIA. And it is called the Johnson-O'Malley Program. That comes to my mind. And I have worked with Indian students attending public schools, and yes, they do have problems, and they are at times maybe two or three grades behind their non- Indian peers. So that counseling, and also tutoring, is needed to help our Indian students to move up. So that would be my comment, to keep it in there. Let it be a permanent fixture in the BIA budget---- Ms. McCollum. Thank you. Ms. Cuch [continuing]. For the education. Ms. McCollum. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Mr. Cole. Mr. Cole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Ms. Cuch, I have a question for you, and then for President Shelly as well. You talked at length, obviously, about the problems you have with energy permitting, and recently the Department of Interior and BIA announced a new policy for surface and renewable energy policies, whereby they would allow the tribes to license development. You would sort of get your procedures approved by the BIA, and hope that that would expedite energy. And I know there is at least some thought at the BIA about doing the same thing, in other words, turning over to Utes on the land after a regulatory regime had been agreed to. You would administer that there. So would that help, and do you feel comfortable that is an appropriate solution for the problems you have? Ms. Cuch. My answer to that is yes, it would help, because there is a lot of red tape. BIA, like I mentioned, is not funded adequately. And unless they have more funding to hire more people to process the APDs, yes, that would help. But, again, as far as my comment on one stop shop, put everything together, all the Federal agencies, that would help too, rather than going to each one. Mr. Cole. And the Chairman just reminded me of something. In report language, at least, we asked the BIA to look at this for sub-surface mineral rights on coal, and oil, and natural gas, and try to assess tribes who carry. And Mr. Shelly, you mentioned the problems you were having with coal, and we all know there is a lot of opposition to coal sometimes. You mentioned the EPA in particular. Do you have any reason to believe that that opposition is just, well, are they opposed, or are they just not equipped to handle this, or are they putting roadblocks in your way, in terms of development of coal resources, in your opinion? Mr. Shelly. What I think is that the green energy, the environmental, and the EPA is the one that is driving this, the green energy probably driving this whole thing. And new rules and laws, like BARK and others are popping up, and it is really shutting down a lot of our uses of coal. And these are things that have to go through tribal consultation, and working together with each other on these to alleviate some of those regulatory burdens that we get. Mr. Cole. Do you---- Mr. Shelly. And I think that is one way of doing it. Now, I would like to add one more thing. Mr. Cole. Please do. Mr. Shelly. On the permitting, the BIA---- Mr. Cole. EPA? Mr. Shelly [continuing]. We--yeah. And what we did is we did the MOU with Lawrence Livermore to do a study on oil and resource on our nation, and to do a blueprint and a roadmap for developers to come in. And we would like to handle the permitting ourself, and that is what I want, not to get BIA involved so much. Because once they get involved, it takes too long, you know? So if we do it ourself, since we are going to have the blueprint and the roadmap, the developers would know what they want. And whatever they want, they come in to deal with us, we will negotiate with them right away on it because you do not have to do any---- Mr. Cole. Last question. Is the permitting process, in your opinion, or to your understanding, faster off of non-Indian lands? In other words, you see private developers basically bypassing opportunities in Indian country because they can permit faster, cheaper in lands just outside your reservation, as opposed to coming on the reservation? Mr. Shelly. It is faster out of the reservation than it does in the reservation, so that is what I mean. I think Navajo Nation should permit with developers within our nation, instead of going through another agency, because it takes longer that way. So what we are saying is, we will have the blueprint and the roadmap. We will exactly know what we have with a national resource, or whatever it is. Developer comes in, we deal with them, we permit them where they want to set up their business. Mr. Cole. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I thank all the panelists for being here today, and look forward to working with you as we develop this upcoming budget. The next panel is Chairman Randy King, Jimmie Mitchell, Director of Natural Resources, Energy ``Ribs'', or Eugene ``Ribs'' Whitebird---- Ms. McCollum. He is full of energy, though. Mr. Simpson. Yeah, full of energy. Tom Maulson, and Jim Zorn. Where did Ribs go? Ms. McCollum. He was out there. Mr. Simpson. You saw him out in the hall? Ms. McCollum. I saw him out in the hall earlier. There he is. You can sit down here by me, Ribs. Mr. Whitebird. Okay. Mr. Simpson. Randy, you are first. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. SHINNECOCK INDIAN NATION WITNESS RANDY KING Mr. King. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. I am Randy King, Chairman of the Shinnecock Indian Nation Board of Trustees. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today concerning our need for new tribes funding. We are located in Suffolk County, New York, at the eastern end of Long Island. We have lived there as a self-governing nation exercising jurisdiction over our lands since time immemorial. Despite this history, we only recently were reaffirmed as a federally-recognized tribe on October 1, 2010, having spent over 3 decades in the interior petition process. Over many decades we preserved our community using revenues from our annual powwow, limited New York State and federal grants, and private foundations. While these funds provided some resources, they fell far short of the monies needed to maintain a proper tribal government and to meet the most basic needs of the our tribal members. Today, the nation numbers over 1,400 enrolled members with approximately 662 tribe members residing on the reservation. The services we provide as a tribal government are funded primarily with non-federal dollars and limited federal funding. These services include community center, a cemetery, health center, family preservation education center, and environmental protection programs. Through our acknowledgement the Bureau of Indian Affairs concluded that we existed as a tribe well before the arrival of non-Indians on our shores. However, our nation and our members have not been able to access most federal services and benefits for decades. It is our understanding that tribes recognized after 1997 simply have not had access to the same level of funding as those recognized before then. This resulted from a policy change at the BIA on new tribes funding that set annual base funding levels based on population. We are significantly underfunded compared to other tribes under BIA jurisdiction prior to '97. All we are asking for is a level playing field to allow those tribes recognized after '97, the tribes that need federal support the most, to obtain our fair share of federal funding to meet our tribal government responsibilities. As a nation, we are moving forward on pursuing economic development initiatives to increase our self-sufficiency, however, in the meantime we do not have the necessary monies to support our tribal government operations, capacity building, and infrastructure. We are grateful that the Bureau of Indian Affairs has made the fiscal year 2013 budget new tribes funding request on our behalf. We ask that the Congress appropriate these monies and also review and consider the extent to which post '97 new tribes like ours are underfunded. We know that the Congress is facing severe budget constraints, but we have been living with minimal federal support for many decades. Thank you for the opportunity to hear me today, and I will answer any questions you have. [The statement of Randy King follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Jimmie Mitchell. Mr. Mitchell. Yes. With all due respect, out of the culture of our nation I would like my elders to go and speak before me out of respect for them, if it is all right. Mr. Simpson. Who wants to speak? Ribs? ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012 LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE WITNESS EUGENE ``RIBS'' WHITEBIRD Mr. Whitebird. Thank you, Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Moran, Representative McCollum, and other members of the committee to allow me to testify today. My name is Ribs Whitebird. I am a member of the Leech Lake Tribal Council. Our reservation is located in northern Minnesota. I would like to recognize the delegation from Leech Lake here today with me, including Jackie Ward, the superintendent of the Bug O Nay Ge Shig High School, please stand. Like last year, today my testimony focuses solely on the band's need to replace its high school facility at the Bug O Nay Ge Shig High School. The school is administered and funded by the BIE. We estimate the cost to replace the high school is about $25 million. My hope is that I can come back next year to give a verbal report on the replacement of the school. Under our treaty of 1855, the Leech Lake Reservation was established. The bank gave up millions of acres of our homelands. In return the U.S. was supposed to provide for the band's welfare, which included providing kids decent and safe schools. Further, the U.S. Congress passed the Nelson Act of 1889, a Dawes Act for Minnesota and other federal law specific to Minnesota will take more of our land. Logging companies wanted our valuable white pine, and homesteaders wanted our land for farming. In return proceeds from land and timber sales were supposed to be used for our schools. The U.S. has never met these obligations. The schools are standard Indian children in grades K through 12. The students commute to the school, which is from 14 communities within a 70-mile radius. The school has won many awards for its academic achievement and its native language programs. The elementary and middle school facilities are in satisfactory condition, but the high school needs to be replaced. The current facility is a metal pole barn. One-third of the facility was destroyed in a gas explosion in 1992. The facility has severe structural and mechanical deficiencies and lacks proper insulation. The facility does not meet safety, fire, and security standards. Also, the facility has electrical problems and lacks an alarm system. Further, the building lacks a communication intercom system, telecom technology, and safe zones, which puts everyone at risk during emergencies. Also, the facility jeopardizes the health of the students and faculty due to poor indoor air quality from mold, fungus, and a faulty HVAC system. The facility suffers from rodents, roof leaks, sagging roofs, roof holes, uneven floors, poor lighting, severe sewer problems, lack of handicap access, and lack of classroom and other space. These are just a few of the numerous deficiencies. I have a set of folders here. Due to unsafe and undesirable conditions of the high school, many students leave after middle school to attend other schools. Students are embarrassed about the condition of the high school, resulting in negative image of the school in the community and a lower enrollment rate. The school is on the BIA list of schools in need of replacement. The BIA has acknowledged that the school has exceeded its life expectancy by decades. The BIA categories the high school facilities as being in poor condition. The BIA's fiscal year 2013 budget proposes eliminating funding for replacing BIE school facilities and focusing instead solely on facilities' improvements and repair. This is unacceptable. We urge the committee to provide funding to replace school facilities. You can only put so many Band-aids on something. Our school is one big Band-aid, and no amount of improvements or repairs will address the serious deficiencies in the facility. Why keep throwing money at temporary fixtures? The BIA just needs to build a new high school. Our kids deserve this. This change in BIA school construction policy to eliminate funding to replace facilities and instead focus on improvement and repairs was done without any government-to-government consultation. There must be consultation. BIA should not be allowed to make these decisions without talking or listening to our point of view. The high school is among more than 63 schools funded by the BIE that are in poor condition. The BIE construction backlog is at least $1.3 billion. There needs to be some funding to address the backlog. We appreciate that times are tough financially, but our kids should not be the ones supposed to shoulder the burden. The Administration's fiscal year 2013 budget request is extremely disappointing. The Administration proposes only $52.9 million for BIE school construction. This is a huge cut from past levels. You cannot do much with that. To address the backlog we need adequate funding over a sustained period of time. In conclusion, the fact is that the high school is not safe and should not be a place where our kids go to school. As I said last year, I doubt that anyone sitting at this table would allow their children to attend school in this type of facility that our children go to school in. We respectfully request the committee's assistance in replacing our high school facility. Thank you. [The statement of Eugene ``Ribs'' Whitebird follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Jimmie, you are next. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. LITTLE RIVER BAND OF OTTAWA INDIANS WITNESS JIMMIE MITCHELL Mr. Mitchell. Yeah. My name is Jimmie Mitchell, and first of all, Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Simpson. Is the mic on? Mr. Mitchell. Yeah, it is. I will move it a little closer here. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mr. Mitchell. I am here as a tribal member for the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, as well as representative for the Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority. It is a five-tribe resource management authority that exercises management, over not only our commercial fishing rights but also in conjunction with the Inland Treaty Right which was just recently established. And today as I speak I think back to the history that we have in Michigan. It was exactly to this date 176 years ago that 29 of our chiefs came to Washington, DC, to negotiate a treaty, which became the treaty of 1836. During that treaty the Ceded Territory in Michigan was established, which is roughly 13.8 million acres of Michigan. It is within the northern lower peninsula of Michigan as well as the eastern portion of the peninsula of Michigan. In living that we have the ability to have co-management within that area, but unfortunately, without the funds to do so it really limits our ability to exercise that treaty to its fullest extent, and with the current conditions that the environment is in, the depletion of resources, not only within the natural resources, but within the state and Federal Government's abilities to adequately manage those, much of that burden has fallen back on the tribes to try to fill in that niche to help not only ensure that the species are not further degraded from the condition that they are now but also to be able to have the restoration reclamation enhancement abilities to make sure that the sustainability is there as well as looking at other species that we need to bring back in to help our cultural needs within our communities to be realized again. Many of those things are missing and have really caused a detriment within the communities, and it is wonderful to see some of those identifiers coming back, to be able to look up in the sky and see the eagle again, for instance. You know, that was really, to us as Indian people, a severe detriment to us, and the reasons why, you know, with it being as part of our culture. In 2004, the tribes were challenged with our right again by the State of Michigan. They felt that the right did not exist any longer, and so we went into a lengthy negotiation process, and during that process not only did we fight to preserve our rights to hunt, fish, and gather, but we also fought for co- management, which we were able to achieve. And so with that looking at the responsibilities, again, we have within the consent decree, there are mechanisms within there that if we do not manage it appropriately, that there is mechanisms that will come into place that limit our ability to have access to fish, called regression models, and so the tribes are really forced to continue the management aspects, again, that the state and the Federal Government can uphold. And so with that, you know, I want to thank the support that we have had from this, from you as being the supreme protector of our environment. We would not be able to do what we do without having that support, and, again, I think in looking at the collaborative efforts that we have with the tribes, looking at our responsibilities, not just, again, as part of our culture but also with all peoples within our areas, these things are important to everyone. One of the things that we have been doing back home at Little River, we have been working on our sturgeon restoration program. We have a remnant population of sturgeon that were just about extinct, and so we developed a sturgeon-rearing facility that actually uses water from the big river, and it has been successfully running for 8 years, and we have introduced probably, I am going to guess close to 600 sturgeon back into the system that most likely would not have made it. We went as far as we have created a DVD that I would like to share with the committee here just to have an idea of the kind of collaboration and efforts, again, we did not do that by ourselves. We used Fish and Wildlife monies. We used forester cooperation as well, and so it is really a collection of sovereigns coming together to help these things, help the environment, help our cultures. And so with that I just wanted to, again, thank you for the support. The President's budget does have a base funding established finally for our consent decree for the inland portion of it, and we would like to respectfully ask your consideration in this process, and I am here to answer any questions you may have about that. [The statement of Jimmie Mitchell follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Mitchell. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Appreciate it. Tom is next. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS IN WISCONSIN WITNESS TOM MAULSON Mr. Maulson. I just want to let you know that my Indian name is Wind Coming, otherwise in a Christian way Tom Maulson, and I am the President of the Lac du Flambeau Band in Lake Superior Chippewa Indians with my relatives that is with us here. You know, Mr. Chairman, I want to sort of give you a book here, and my colleague to my right will definitely--this is a good story. You know, sitting here a good part of the afternoon, and I know you people are busy people, we, too, have some priorities coming from Indian Country. And I sat back there and listened to the Holocaust that is still going on in Indian Country, you know, here, not only in, you know, in my reservation or across this country. We need a lot of help. We have many priorities. Same as the other tribes out there. Protection of our natural resources, education, welfare, and these things are just, you know, funded at their base funding. We need more support, Mr. Chairman, in many other issues out there. And I have got my natural resources program right here, and I will turn it over to him when I get to about that point right there. We have got a lot of issues there to represent to EPA at the national level. I have been, you know, cross country dealing with, you know, about what mining has done to my colleagues back home in the northern part of Wisconsin and what they have done to the Oklahoma tribes, and I can just go on and on. But I think there can be some resolutions instead of coming back every year like Rib said over there. He talks about, you know, I remember him when I was sitting here, he talked about that school again, knowing that money just goes so far. We know that. I think we are quality people today, educated, and we know the system today. And all we ask is maybe another opportunity that this committee can take a look at setting us as Indians off to one side because you all have the fiduciary responsibility to me as a tribal president of my nation of what that treaty rights, you know, the bearing that we have on each other. Maybe we need to take a look at all those fundings, instead of putting us into the melting pot of America today, there is more people that come in every year than Indians across this country. We need to maybe put those type of dollars off to one side so we can have new schools, we can have better prosperity for our natural resources, and we can have healthcare and all these, you know, type of things that we are trying back home. I think, you know, Martin Luther said he had a dream. We have visions. We want to be free. We want to make sure that we can make our own decisions, where tribal presidents can put their own initials down for certification, may be whatever level. We are starting to get that qualification back home. In education we are just playing catch up today. You know, our young people are still having tough times, you know, understanding what we call the Tamuccachoma Inn, where that white language or those white process and what our kids have to go through. We still have somewhat of the old boarding schools back home, and I think, you know, and we have the quality of what we want as Indian people, and you can help us. You can put that money aside. You can work on these things and make it a lot easier and safer and more wealth for our people, because sometimes we are bitter poor. We are happy people. But I hope that this year's subcommittee can take a look at all the things that are owed to Indian people, and I say it in a good way. You owe us all that. You people that sit there as our leaders. You owe us that. I am going to turn it over to the Natural Resource Program for Larry to expound on in a minute. [The statement of Tom Maulson follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Would you state your name for the record? Mr. Wawronowicz. Larry Wawronowicz. I am the Natural Resources Director for the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians. I do not know how much more I could say that the chairman could say so eloquently, but the clean air, water, and land is very, very important to Lac du Flambeau tribal members in order to be able to exercise their treaty rights on and off the reservation. And our testimony that is being presented today in written and oral form really, you know, concentrates on funding for environmental programs like EPA Program GAP, $28 million increase. We really strongly support and hopefully that you do to see that we could get that money into the EPA GAP Programs that increases our environmental capabilities. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is very, very important to the tribes along with the Circle of Flight. In order to be able to document some of the things that we are able to do with Circle of Flight and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative dollars, we put together a brochure for all the tribes in the Great Lakes region in Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. So basically we are asking you to take a look at that. You are appropriating the money. We are putting it to good use in a good way and in a quick way. We are able to take the money from the EPA, put it through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, through a 638 contract, and get it at the Indian Country to work and make a difference really fast. The other things that are important here are conservation law enforcement, our tribal management development program, there is a pretty good increase in the Bureau budget for Lac du Flambeau. I think it comes down to $60,000, but in Indian Country $60,000 goes a long way. It is going to take our tribal management development program from $181,000 annual budget to $241,000. So that is pretty good. But when you consider it in terms of how much healthcare costs, for example, it is costing us $23,000 per individual that has a family life insurance policy on the reservation. So $61,000 will pay for approximately three health insurance policies. So it is a little bit that goes a long way. Conservation law enforcement. Last year the Bureau of Indian Affairs went ahead and put conservation law in for $1 million. Congress did not support it. This year they went in there and put conservation law enforcement in there again for half a million dollars, and we hope that, you know, can go some place. We could use it for training for our conservation law, but, you know, $500,000 for 556 federally-recognized tribes is not going to go too far. It is costing us about $100,000 per law enforcement officer to, you know, be certified, be kept certified, be trained to make sure that they are a public servant and protect the safety of our community. Tribal education, so important to us. I mean, here I am speaking on behalf of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians. I am Polish decent. I am not Ojibwe. We need students to be able to take this job and tell their story in their way and their language. So, you know, when I see, you know, possible cuts in Pell Grants or higher education, it gets a little difficult for us to try to recruit people into our natural resource program in order for them to be able to protect those resources for present and future generations and to be able to supply the opportunity for future tribal members to hunt, fish, and gather in the Ceded Territories of Wisconsin. I am over, but I really just want to say that we support, you know, we really appreciate your support in the past. Your continued support is very, very important in order for us to be able to have clean air, water, and land. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Jim. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. GREAT LAKES INDIAN FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION WITNESS JIM ZORN Mr. Zorn. We can make up time. Do not worry. Jim Zorn, Executive Administrator, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, and on behalf of our 11 tribal nations, the 38,000 members, their families, and their communities, our program affects about 60,000 square miles of treaty ceded territory in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota, and we have been at it for about 30 years now, and that is what the book is about, Mr. Simpson. Our 25th anniversary we put together a treaty symposium that really creates the historical record of what these rights are to the tribes, what these rights mean to their communities, as well as the benefits that come not only to tribal communities but surrounding communities. So I know the committee is deeply understanding of those, so I will cut to the chase. GLIFWC here today would like to address the rights protection line item in the BIA budget. Mr. Cole said before that this committee, subcommittee has provided leadership to the Administration. In fiscal year 2010 you did that, fiscal year 2011 you did that in rights protection, and finally the Administration heard and in the fiscal year 2013 proposal we have more money going to rights protection and supporting the tribes' treaty commissions. It is a great thing. We support that, and I know the tribes in the Great Lakes Region support the notion that 34 percent of that line item certainly should come to the Great Lakes Region. It is a good way to spend the money, and we helped document those results in that book and elsewhere as Larry pointed out. And even with that, with all the funding we can leverage and with our base budget, for example, this year about 5.6 million we got, I was able to leverage about 2.4 million other funding sources to bring us up to about 8 million, including DOJ COPS and other funding that one would not think so. So that base is so important we can really do a lot with it. And even with all that we are still only at 75 percent of need in terms of funding. So we still have unmet needs, but, you know, we are very happy. So thank you for what you have done. Secondly, contract support. Two simple words. Thank you very, very, very much. I cannot tell you what that has meant to GLIFWC. We can put more program dollars out there because we had no contract support shortfall last year, and we had a little bit extra to apply to some of our direct contract support costs, so I could even get more benefit and keep an extra conservation officer on that I could not have otherwise done. So thank you for your leadership on that. Finally, EPA Great Lakes Restoration. We support the Administration's proposal of $300 million. We would suggest, as President Maulson said, some sort of tribal set aside. We suggest, you know, $25 million, some amount that the tribes could get. GLIFWC need is about $1.2 million, and we strongly support whether it is through interagency agreement or it is through some other mechanism using the Indian Self- Determination Act as a funding mechanism, whether it is self- determination or self-governance because it gets money out the door faster in a way the tribes know how to use it. And the results, I think speak for themselves. You know, we have our member tribes, and now they are harvesting 25 percent of the wild rice from restored rice beds. We have fish consumption advisories. We are preventing invasive species spread and introduction. So the context we have here I think in these treaty commissions is good government, accountable, transparent, efficient programs, on-the-ground results, and in that I just want to bring out one thing. This is a picture of one of our conservation officers, full garb, on an Iowa National Guard Black Hawk helicopter. Nine of our officers were involved in a multiple-agency effort that discovered and eradicated and arrested six individuals, including five Mexican nationals, illegal in this country, about 10,000 pot plants in Chequamegon National Forest. This is where our tribal members hunt, fish, and gather. This where my staff goes out and works and the staff of the DNR and the Forest Service go out and work. We help protect that area, so why are we involved as conservation officers? I need to know out there. Our staff picks up people going through the woods on our trail cams that we put out there for the fur bears that we are monitoring. We see people in masks, with camo faces, and so our presence there helps the general public. It is just one example. So with that fiscal year 2010 restoration this is exactly the type of things we can put on the ground that gets out there and gets things done. The partnership, state, federal, international level, bi- national with Canada, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement that hopefully will be modified this year to provide not only good protection and restoration but get tribes to the table more often. And so with Great Lakes Restoration I want to point out it is called the GLRI, but do not forget protection. Tribes need to be proactive to protect those areas that are still pristine that have not caught on fire. What do we have to do? Wait around for the river to catch on fire before we get involved to prevent that? So, please, I know the committee is very concerned about not putting people out there. You want dirt shovels turned, but in Indian Country the protection is the project that they need. So if we could work through that, we would greatly appreciate it. With that thank you very much. We really appreciate the opportunity to be here. [The statement of Jim Zorn follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chair, Mr. Whitebird, could I have the photographs that you have underneath your speech? Mr. Whitebird. I think we got some for you. SCHOOL CONDITIONS Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chair, you are from a northern climate. Imagine a pole barn. We go in Minnesota from over 100 degrees in the summer with heat and humidity to well below freezing, well below. Mr. Simpson. But I do not live in Minnesota. Ms. McCollum. I know, but this is the high school we welcome our youth into, a pole barn. The reason why it has problems with rodents and that is not because they do not have excellent staff and people. They are working night and day to eliminate it, but it is a pole barn. It is a pole barn, and you cannot fix a pole barn. When the Secretary was here, he was talking about delaying the construction and doing a moratorium to conduct the inventory. The inventory on this school is done. It is done, and it is just beyond belief. You know how passionate I am about schools in other areas, and although this is not in my district, it is in my home state. I have to look these children in the eye in my community and say, you are worth a pole barn? You are worth a pole barn that cannot be repaired anymore. So, Ribs, thank you for being here, and I know that you speak passionately about this because you care about children and having safe schools all over this country. Mr. Chairman, with this one, enough is enough. ASIAN CARP I would like to turn now to Lake Superior for a little bit. The chairman has been talking about how we need to have a holistic approach about invasive species. The asian carp is coming, and we need a better approach than the one that is currently out there in Minnesota to shut one of the locks and dams. That is not going to do it. You talked about the cooperation that we have. Could you elaborate a little more about how you work with state DNRs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and how we are getting a big bang for our buck out of here? Circle of Flight is a model program and it was my honor when you came to me and asked me to help work with others to keep the funding in place. Could you talk a little bit more about what you are doing with that funding? Mr. Maulson. Look at this. These are that many Indians right here today. We have got all these tribes walking on the Capitol Building, talking to their legislators, and the reason why I get so really, you know, not upset, we had 1-year colleagues come and make a speech to us, and the gentleman was a 30-year, how do you want to call him, he is a surgeon and become a politician, and these same group of Native People I asked a question about drug abuse on our reservations, these here OxyContins that are being sold. And he knew nothing, and that is scary to me as a leader to you all. You know, this is what I have got to, you know, he said just come and see me and educate me. Well, we are trying to figure out how to do that, so we got organizations, Indian Health Board that we are going to put together something where we can educate you all. I mean, I do not have to educate you people. You guys, we have been here, done this, you know. Otherwise you would not be here. But the scary part is these other people that have to raise their hands to the destiny of Indian people, that is why I asked that we take a look at, you know, set asides for Indian Country completely out of the melting pot of America today, because, you know, we are paying off the backs of Indians for a multitude of other ethnic groups almost 12 million illegal Spanish people here from Mexico and all these other people that are coming in, and you forgot about Indians. I do not say you forgot here, otherwise we would not be here again. But as a tribal leader I sort of when I come here I sort of feel like I am begging for something that is owed to us, that is obligated by, you know, this organization to us because we are doing the work for you. Our great organization of the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Commission and other collaborating people that we are working with, especially state people, and they are starting to recognize us as you asked that question, that DNR is working very closely with the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Commission and also with the tribes in Wisconsin to make sure that we have a better protection. You see the officers sitting in the helicopter. My son is a chief game warden. He is getting the best education for every one of those because they are out there by themselves sometimes. They are out there with people with automatic weapons, you know, trying to take down the drug lords and everybody else, something that keeps coming to Indian Country, selling us all this here type of stuff. That is why I think we come here and ask your help. You know, far greater, and I do not know how you guys do what you are doing. I commend you for it to try to give us the best you have, Mr. Chairman, and it just, sometimes we look at it, it is not enough. I do not know why. So, I guess, you know, if you could ever put a budget together and say, hey, this is for Indians, and we are not going to put them in with all the other ethnic groups in America today because, you know, they have a special interest here, which we do. Obama gives me 15 minutes. I tried to ask for more but the staff would not let me. But it is good dialogue, and I think, you know, that is where, and I appreciate you asking the questions, giving that respect to us as tribal leaders because we do have a lot of problems back home with sexual abuse, we have got, we just got through getting more law enforcement. We cannot even indict the people that we catch with drugs in our courts because you heard one of the judges say, he said or she said, and they just sort of let them go. It is really tough, and I, too, would encourage you guys, come and take a look at what we got. We did it because we pulled ourselves up by the bootstraps. We used our money wisely, the little bit of dollars that we got here. We used it wisely. We built an organization that is, you know, the top of the line. People are looking at the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Commission. We have got a brand new building. We are trying to do the things America wants, and we are doing it basically a lot ourselves with what I call ingenuity. So if we could get more help, Mr. Simpson, we would definitely appreciate it, because you guys do one heck of a job with the little bit that you got to do with, you know. The dollars that you get. Hopefully, maybe the war will get over with and maybe the monies will come back home and start to build our communities again. Mr. Zorn. Do you want a couple particular examples just after the record? Okay. For example, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, Fish and Wildlife Service, kicked over $500,000 to the BIA to get out to tribes for the state and interstate aquatic invasive species plans. We are involved on the Asian carp everywhere from up the Mississippi to what Chicago is doing down at the Chicago River and what they are talking about doing there. So we really take a comprehensive view, and this is where the GRA money is so important because you have to be so many places at once. The staff and I had this conversation about this initiative proliferation. I wish we could clone ourselves. You can only be so many places at once, and what we are hearing from the cities, from the states, and others is the value of the tribal perspective at these tables, it brings a vision, it brings a clout, it brings some responsibility, it brings some help. And so those are a couple of examples that we have that if you want more, we can document some of this stuff. But it does work, and people are trying to piece together what funding they have to get the best amount for the dollars that we have. Mr. Wawronowicz. Mr. Chairman, can I respond? Mr. Simpson. Sure. Mr. Wawronowicz. Circle Flight dollars. We are able to utilize, we have this, what we call the Paul Marsh in the northern part of the State of Wisconsin. Part of it on the reservation, part of it is off the reservation. We were able to utilize, you know, some of the Circle of Flight dollars to help supply water control structures and other infrastructure development on the state side of the Paul Marsh through a cooperative agreement, and also they were able to provide some dollars through Ducks Unlimited. So there was, you know, tribal, state, Federal Government, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was involved, as well as private sector. So it, you know, gave us a lot of leverage by utilizing the Circle of Flight dollars to make some big improvements within the Paul Marsh area of northern Wisconsin. Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Chairman, if you do not mind, in understanding, you know, the proximity that the tribes that are representing this region are really looking at and what is very concerning to us is to understand that we have the responsibility to ensure that 20 percent of the world's fresh water supply that is available to all peoples is protected and reserved, and I will share a story real quickly, because I understand we are running late, that was shared to me by Frank Ettawageshik, who was a tribal chairperson of the Little Traverse Band of Odawa Indians. And he was flying over Lake Michigan one day, and he looked down from way up in the sky, and he saw a little tiny ship, and he realized, well, that was one of those iron freighters that was going across the lake, probably down to Gary, Indiana, or some place to drop its load off, and he realized that, you know, that ship is probably over 1,000 feet long, and if you took that ship, and you picked it up by one end, and you stuck it into Lake Michigan, at its deepest place you would still have a significant portion of that boat sticking out of the water. To understand that, when you look at the Great Lakes and understand how important they are, but they are really just a sheen of water. They are not this inexhaustible resource that everybody touts them out to be, and if we are going to understand what it means to our communities as the Lac du Flambeau community as well as the human community, I think having that tribal voice at that table and understanding the significance to all peoples and how important those waters are to protect and to ensure their survivability and sustainability into the next seven generations. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I appreciate you all being here today. I can tell you, President Maulson, that we do not look at it as you all coming here and begging for something. What we view this as is the opportunity for us to learn about what the needs are in Indian Country and listen to you all and what your priorities are as we try to put together a budget with limited resources and try to address those high priority items for the tribes. And I will be the first to admit it would be nice if we had some more money, and I suspect that school was not built last year after your testimony because you are back testifying again, and I suspect you will be back every year until we get it built. Mr. Whitebird. Whenever I am called upon, I will be back. Mr. Simpson. I appreciate it, Ribs, but thank you all for coming here because it is important to us, and you have brought up a new issue that frankly I did not know was an issue, but it is something that we need to look at in terms of treatment of tribes that were what, post 1997, and---- Mr. King. We are just looking for a fair share. I mean, we see it as a macro-economic situation where, you know, we are supportive of the tribes, you know, that have gathered here today, you know, for the bigger part of the budget, you know, such as, you know, Johnson-O'Malley, you know, when we had our first consultation with the National Office of the BIA, they said, you know, the Johnson-O'Malley Act, it probably will not be funded by the time you guys are eligible and get your stuff going. On a micro-economic side we are just looking, you know, it is $160,000 to run our government, you know, to pay the payroll, the fringe, the start-up costs, and that is what we are looking for on the micro-economic, you know, side of it. Mr. Simpson. Yeah. I appreciate it. Thank you all. Next, our final panel today is Colley Billie. Is that right? Kitcki Carroll. Is that even close? Kitcki. Mr. Carroll. Kitcki. Mr. Simpson. Kitcki. Okay. Kitcki Carroll, and Bill Harris. Chairman Billie, you are first. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA WITNESS COLLEY BILLIE Mr. Billie. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. My name is Colley Billie. I am the Chairman of the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida. Thank you for providing me the opportunity to testify today. The Everglades have been the home of Miccosukee people for hundreds of years, and our commitment to its restoration is unwavering. We have the most at stake because protecting our home and our traditional way of life depends on this. My testimony focuses on the following two priorities. One is stopping the massive environmental skyway bridging of the Tamiami Trail adjacent to tribal lands, and number two, ensuring that EPA, the Department of Interior, and of course, prioritize improving water quality in the Everglades. To give you an idea of the Everglades, I brought here today a satellite map. If you look over to my left, I want to show you where our tribal lands are. All this area is our tribal land, and also the Everglades National Park is south of our tribal lands. They are in this area way down to here, all the way down into Florida Bay. Tamiami Trail goes through our reservation on the south side, and that takes you from Miami all the way up to Naples, from the east coast to west coast, and the national park and the Corps are constructing one mile of bridging on the Tamiami Trail and where they propose another 5.5 miles of bridging, and that is in this area. This is a close-up map of the bridging itself over here. This is the Tamiami Trail, a closer view of this section. Miami and Broward are in this area, Palm Beach is up there. So all on the west coast. You have got Miami, Broward, Palm Beach, and the Keys are way down in this area. Sugar, orange, and cattle farms are located to the north of us. They are up on the north side. If you look at the top, you are going to see a part of Lake Okeechobee. These are farming areas, generate high levels of phosphates and other pollutants. I am sorry. Here are areas designated to be storm water treatment areas to treat the polluted waters from these farms and urban areas by which it seems the Federal Government and the State of Florida have abandoned after investing over $200 million. That would be these areas in pink. Lake Okeechobee, where water from the historic River of Grass started before man reengineered it, and that would be at the very top. Over 100 years ago the water flowed from Lake Okeechobee to Florida Bay. It would flow from north all the way down in the south and come out in the Florida Bay in this area. Florida Bay is the fishing capital for sports fishing. Also, we have here various canals and levies developed in the Everglades over the past 100 years by the Corps. Some of these canals dump highly-polluted water directly onto our reservation. These canals that I am talking about are here. You got two canals here, you got Miami River over here, you got L- 28, L-29, and I believe this is L-67 over here. No. This is L- 28. This is the L-28 interceptor, and this is the other L-28. This is the L-29. If you look over to my right, this is a close-up picture of this interceptor that dumps polluted water right into the middle of our reservation. That would be this picture right here. As you can see, there is nothing to catch all this water being dumped into our reservation. It just flows directly into the reservation, and if you look closely at the picture such as this one, you should be seeing sour grass. Instead what you see is cattails. Cattail growth is an indication that there is a lot of phosphors in the water. It should not be like this. In here is one of our tree islands, which you can see from an aerial picture right there, the surrounding area should be surrounded by sour grass, but because sour grass cannot grow in such a polluted water, it has given way to cattails, and this is the tree island which we took, Assistant Secretary, Mr. Larry EchoHawk, to one of our tree islands before. As you can see, we live in the heart of the Everglades. This committee has appropriated more than $1.3 billion on Department of Interior Everglades Project over the past decade. Full Everglades restoration is projected to cost at least $13.5 billion. Given these tight fiscal times, taxpayer dollars should be used wisely and effectively. We see a disjoined approach on projects by federal agencies resulting in decisions that harm the Miccosukee people. One of the projects is the bridging. If you look over to my left, you are going to see the bridging picture here, and that will be this one in the corner. These are the pilings. It is under construction, and on this side of the canal you see a levy that runs on the north side. The tribe strongly opposes this. One mile of this bridging currently under construction was funded in the National Park Service portion of the fiscal year 2009, Omnibus. The cost of this one-mile bridge is at least $81 million. Another 5.5 miles have been authorized but not funded in the National Park portion of the fiscal year 2012, Omnibus. It was also contained in the fiscal year 2012, House Interior Appropriations Bill. The estimated cost of this additional bridging is at least $310 million. These skyway bridges are destroying our traditional ways of life and tribal sensitive and archaeological resources. They also are negatively impacting the water levels on our lands. These bridges are a waste of taxpayer dollars. National Park Services claims that this bridging is needed to improve water flow into Everglades National Park. However, if the park used existing water delivery structures like the flood gates, clean out clogged, existing culverts under the trail as well areas and install additional culverts, the park could achieve equally-effective water flow at a fraction of the cost of bridging. One of the pictures in here show a culvert that is existing on the Tamiami Trail, and that picture is right here. This is an existing culvert that should be cleaned out and the swell could be built, and it would allow water to flow. Right now it is clogged up. That is why water does not flow under that culvert. Culverts are found throughout the Everglades. Studies have shown that culverts work. If culverts work everywhere else in the Everglades, it makes no sense to get rid of the culverts on a 10.7 stretch of the Tamiami Trail and instead construct a $310 million skyway environmental bridge. There are no plans to remove the massive levy that runs parallel to the Tamiami Trail where the bridge is. Again, I pointed out where the picture shows the levy, which is right here. This is the bridge. You have got a levy here that would have water flowing under the proposed bridge that is being constructed. The tribe's second priority is the need to improve water quality. Science shows that ten parts per billion is needed to protect the Everglades. On Miccosukee lands the canals and pump stations dump water onto our land that is oftentimes 100 parts per billion of phosphates. Our land is being used as a defecto storm water treatment area. Improving water quality to meet the appropriate limits was a focus in House Interior Appropriations Bill from fiscal year 2001, through fiscal year 2008, including developing storm water treatment areas. There are no immediate actions planned to improve water quality in the Everglades, even if bridging is constructed. Everglades National Park does not want dirty water to flow into it. We strongly support language in the fiscal year 2004, committee report stating, ``The committee believes that future federal funding for Everglades restoration should be tied to specific progress to improve water quality.'' The President's fiscal year 2013, budget requests $8 million for road improvement on the trail and does not request funding for further bridging. Our hope is that there will be no funding for further bridging of the trail in the fiscal year 2013, Interior Appropriations Bill and future bills. It is difficult to tell if the fiscal year 2013, budget requests funding to improve water quality, which we would strongly support. In closing, we respectfully request that the committee consider the tribe's perspective as it develops its provision relating to the Everglades, and also, I wanted to invite Mr. Simpson and Ms. McCollum to our reservation out there in South Florida, out to the Miccosukee Reservation, which you see to my left. It is always part of our tradition to invite our friends and those people that we work closely with. So in conclusion, I would like to leave that door open and say I hope you can one day come down and visit with us. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Billie. Thank you. [The statement of Colley Billie follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. I appreciate it very much. Kitcki. Mr. Carroll. Kitcki. You are doing fine. You are doing fine. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBES, INC. WITNESS KITCKI CARROLL Mr. Carroll. Chairman Simpson, Representative McCollum, my name is Kitcki Carroll. I am the grandson, seven generations removed, from the great Cheyenne Peace Chief Black Kettle. I currently serve as the Executive Director for United South and Eastern Tribes, otherwise known as USET, and I thank you for this opportunity to testify on the President's fiscal year 2013 budget and budget priorities of USET. As you know from the earliest days of the United States, the founders recognized the importance of America's relationship with the sovereign native nations and native peoples of this land, incorporating important references to those relationships into the Constitution. Notwithstanding this recognition over the years federal actions have resulted in loss of vast and rich native territories, resources, and culture. Out of those injustices and from other legal sources, there has arisen a federal trust obligation to support native governments and native peoples. That trust obligation as reflect in the Indian programs in the federal budget is fundamentally different from ordinary discretionary spending. In fact, we feel strongly that any funding should not even be considered in the process that allows for discretion. The trust obligation is sacred and must be honored in such a manner. In the budget deliberations that difference should make a difference. From fiscal year 2002 through fiscal year 2008, despite annual increases, after taking into account the affect of inflation, most federal domestic programs, including Indian programs, saw a purchase power decrease for approximately 14 percent. Recent gains have not offset this loss. I have included a chart in my testimony that depicts the percentage of the federal budget dedicated to funding the BIA. As you can see as a percentage, the overall budget, the BIA budget has declined from .115 percent in fiscal year 1995 to .075 percent in fiscal year 2011, approximately a one-third decline as a percentage of the overall budget. The President's fiscal year 2013 budget proposes an increase of 2.6 percent in the Indian Health Service budget, which is $116 million over the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. Although USET recognizes that in these difficult budgetary times any increase should be celebrated, I must note that the general rate of inflation in 2011 was over 3 percent. The medical rate of inflation was even higher. Meanwhile, the President has proposed a modest $4 million cut in the budget of the BIA, but in light of inflation this must be understood to be potentially a 3 percent cut in purchase power. Overall both agencies lose purchase power from fiscal year 2012, even if some individual programs receive funding in excess of the inflation rate. Of course, the Budget Control Act of 2011 provides for a 7 to 10 percent across-the-board cut for nearly all domestic programs starting in January 2013. When you add the effects of sequestration to inflation, Indian programs, which have always been inadequately funded, could be effectively cut by as much as 11 to 14 percent. This would be devastating to native communities across the lands. Federal budget problems should not be addressed on the back of native peoples. Indian Country deserves much better. At a minimum, federal Indian programs should be held harmless from any reductions coming from sequestration or similar feature cuts just as other low-income programs are held harmless in the Budget Control Act of 2011. While USET believes that all Indian programs are vital to creating strong tribal governments and healthy tribal communities, the USET priority programs and the BIA are tribal priority allocations, TPA, tribal courts, scholarships, contract support costs, and cultural resources. USET also firmly believes that the IHS budget should be held harmless in terms of budget reductions, including across-the-board rescissions and sequestration. Healthcare is not something that can be reduced, delayed, or withheld without real damage to people. Congress and the public have rightfully supported maintaining healthcare funding for members of the military and veterans, and USET believes the same should be true of the Indian Healthcare System. I would like to note that there is no request for funding for built-in costs such as population growth, inflation, except for contract health services or pay increases in the fiscal year 2013 proposal. While substantial increases in contract support cost appropriations in prior fiscal years have reduced shortfalls significantly, underfunding of contract support costs continue to impose major hardships on tribal healthcare providers and patients around the nation, including USET's member tribes. There are several changes to federal law that would create jobs and promote Indian Country economic development. Foremost, USET would like to see passage of the Carcieri Fix, which the President includes once again in this budget. The Carcieri Decision has created a host of legal, practical, jurisdictional, and financial problems for Indian Country. In addition, there are many other actions that Congress could take, including repealing the essential government functions test, advancing Indian energy and leasing legislation, and establishing truly bold tribal tax rezones among others that would serve to create jobs and promote economic development in Indian Country. While the current economic environment calls for drastic funding cuts, it must equally call for systemic structural changes that foster and promote independence and self-sufficiency via greater economic opportunities in Indian Country. I recognize that in challenging times all Americans must be called upon to sacrifice for the common good. However, when it comes to sacrificing for the good of all Americans, the historic record demonstrates that nobody has sacrificed more than the Native Americans. Indian Country stands ready and eager to work in partnership on a government-to-government basis to further strengthen our communities and country. Thank you for this opportunity to provide our testimony on how the budget concerns of the United States rather than being addressed on the back of many tribes could be addressed by freeing Indian tribes to realize their maximum economic potential. Thank you. [The statement of Kitcki Carroll follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Harris. ---------- Tuesday, March 27, 2012. CATAWBA INDIAN NATION WITNESSES BILL HARRIS Mr. Harris. Thank you. On behalf of the Catawba Indian Nation, a federally-recognized tribe located in South Carolina, I thank you for this opportunity to testify before the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. My name is William Harris. I am the newly elected Chief of the Catawba Indian Nation. Although I am newly elected, I am aware of the support that this subcommittee has offered my tribe in addressing budget and audit issues with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Your support means a great deal to the Catawba people, and on behalf you have our heartfelt thank you. I am here today to urge this subcommittee and, indeed, the full House Appropriations Committee, to invest federal dollars in programs that support economic development for smaller tribes and programs that support economic development for smaller tribes that have limited resources like Catawba. Our Settlement Act specifically refers to the policy of the United States to promote tribal self-determination and economic self-sufficiency, and it is about fulfilling this promise of support for economic self-sufficiency that I appear before you today. The limitations in our Settlement Act significantly inhibit our ability to achieve economic self-sufficiency. As is the case with many Native American tribes, the Catawba Nation struggles with poverty and its related issues. In the 2000 census, the Catawba Nation had a per capita income of just $11,096. The estimated current unemployment rate among the Catawba is more than double that of the State of South Carolina, which has very high unemployment itself. The tribe currently has no operating economic development ventures. In our case, the Catawba Indian Nation is one of a handful of federally-recognized tribes that does not enjoy the full range of sovereign powers possessed by most federally- recognized Indian nations. Under the terms of our Settlement Act we possess second class tribal sovereignty. For example, state government has enormous civil and criminal jurisdiction on our lands, far in excess of commonly accorded to states over other tribes. Additionally, in the area of gaming, we are not authorized to establish gaming operations pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Instead, we are limited to two bingo halls, neither of which has been in operation since the state adopted a lottery that ended up consuming most of the gaming dollars within in the State of South Carolina. We are allowed certain electronic play devices on our reservation, if the state authorizes them. Since the State of South Carolina authorizes casino cruise ships, we believe that we can have the similar games on our reservation. However, the state is opposing us and now, at great cost, we are seeking to vindicate our rights in the courts. Programs that have helped us in the past, funding for the Energy and Mineral Development Program for the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development. The Catawba Nation has found this program to be extremely helpful. We have used it to fund a feasibility study for a one megawatt photovoltaic system, as well as to fund analysis, testing, and surveys related to energy efficiency and renewable energy for four administrative buildings on the reservation. These two projects have laid the ground work for more ambitious proposals by the tribe to develop an energy strategy plan that will establish a Catawba vision of energy production and consumption on the reservation. This plan will be integrated with the tribe's other efforts, like economic development, job creation, and reinforcement of cultural values. It is programs like this that enable smaller tribes, like Catawba, who have limited or no economic development, to take control of their futures and to have a hope that the next generation of Catawbas will have a more prosperous life than this generation. I urge the subcommittee to support this and similar programs of use to smaller, less-economically developed tribes. There are other areas where the tribe needs funding support. In addition to energy development, the Catawbas are looking to establish a convenience store that would allow tribal members quick access to groceries and supplies without the undue burden of traveling 15 miles roundtrip on country roads. The tribe also supports the extension of Dave Lyle Boulevard, which would provide a critical connection between York and Lancaster counties, creating an outer loop of I-45 which is south of Charlotte, North Carolina. Approximately 1\1/ 2\ miles of this road would cross the Catawba Indian Nation. The tribe is also maintaining a transportation program to get tribal members to work centers, and we have a summer program for tribal youth. Within this program we are training them in life and job skills. Finally, the Catawba Nation seeks to continue a job training and placement program to assist Indian people to acquire the job skills necessary for full-time, satisfactory employment. Within that framework, the program provides testing, vocational counseling, or guidance to assist program participants in making career choices relating personal assets to personal options and availability of the jobs in the labor market. This also includes vocational counseling and employment service on reservations and other home areas in communities near reservations, in and off the reservation area. Let me give you a brief history of the Catawbas. Since time immemorial the Catawbas have lived in the Piedmont generally and along and upon the Catawba River. In ancient times, the Catawba lived off the land and the river, hunting for game, fishing for shad and eel and other fresh water species, and farming corn, beans, and squash. The tradition of pottery making among the Catawba, unchanged since recorded history, links the lives of modern Catawba to our ancestors and symbolizes our connection to the earth and to the land and the river we love. No less today, the sovereignty of the nation, of the Catawba Indian Nation and our survival as a distinct people from the land is tied to our lands and the river. Like our pottery, the Catawba people have been created from the earth. We have been shaped and fired over time and have survived many hardships to provide a living testament to our ancestors and to this place we call home. The Catawba world was transformed by contact with European explorers and the colonists. The first of these encounters with the Europeans was Spanish, with Hernando de Soto in 1540. Our next experience was Juan Pardo in 1566. The Europeans brought guns, but they also brought disease, and small pox was one of the diseases they brought, and it continually with the contact of small pox, it decimated the tribe. It decimated all the tries in the south. In 1760, the Catawbas entered into a Treaty of Pine Hill with the British authorities, which established a 15-square-mile reservation in South Carolina. Although the Catawbas honor that treaty, South Carolina white settlers did not. Catawba was continuously encroached upon and by 1826, only a small number of tribal members remained, and we were all only occupying one square mile. Notably, during the Revolutionary War the Catawba Indian Nation stood with the American colonists in their struggle for independence from the dictatorial mandates of King George III. Catawba scouts accompanied then General George Washington on many of his campaigns. Ever since, the Catawbas have answered the call of country, living up to their half of the tribe's government-to-government relationship with the United States, and we continue to do so today. Regrettably, in 1959, the Congress enacted the Catawba Tribe of South Carolina Division of Assets Act, which terminated the tribe's federal recognition and liquidated the tribe's 3,000 acre reservation. Along a long struggle, and only after the tribe threatened to invoke its treaty rights to 225 square miles of South Carolina, did Congress act in 1993, by passing the Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina Land Claims Settlement Act of 1993, which restored the tribal trust relationship between the Catawba Nation and the United States. This law has had the effect of settling treaty-based Catawba land claims on highly- favorable terms to the State of South Carolina. In conclusion, I would like thank you for this opportunity to talk about the needs of the Catawba Nation. Your support of our people and, indeed, for all the native people is greatly appreciated and truly in the best interest and tradition of the government-to-government relationships. I thank you. [The statement of Bill Harris follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Where are you located? Mr. Harris. In South Carolina. Mr. Simpson. I mean, where in South Carolina? Mr. Harris. If you were to---- Mr. Simpson. If I was in Columbia, where would I be? Mr. Harris. If you were in Columbia, you would go northwest. Mr. Simpson. Northwest. Okay. Mr. Harris. You are approximately 66 miles northwest of Columbia, and you are 26 miles southwest of Charlotte, North Carolina. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Thank you, and I thank you for your testimony. It is very interesting. I learned that there is, to use your term, a second-class recognition of sovereignty. I do not know how you could have sovereignty second class, but I will learn some more. Mr. Harris. I would be more than happy to provide you with information. MICCOSUKEE TRIBE AND EVERGLADES RESTORATION Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chair, some of the challenges that we heard from the Miccosukee involve the Park Service, they involve the Army Corps of Engineers, and they involve us because we have a very direct fiduciary responsibility from this committee to work with Miccosukee for education and for health. I am concerned about this issue, and I had a conversation with the Park Service. I have not had a conversation with the Army Corps of Engineers, because there are two issues. There is the bridge issue. They are interconnected, sir, and I do realize that, but there is a bridge issue, and then there is also the flow of all the polluted water. Do you have that map, that big map? Could you point out for the chairman and I the canal that comes down that speeds water right into the reservation? You have got the bridge holding water back, but you also have the Army Corps canal. Mr. Billie. Yeah. That will be the L-28 intercepted canal. This is the one that dumps all the pollution into the reservation, and that is the picture she is pointing to. Ms. McCollum. That water is sped up and brought in really, really fast. It does not even have a chance to do any filtration before it comes into the reservation land. It goes right into the reservation. Mr. Billie. This canal cuts through the farming area and where sugarcane is raised as well and orange crops. So all the fertilizer and all the waste that cattle produces washes into the canal, and everything is carried into the Glades through that canal. It is dumped right into the middle of our reservation, and as you can see, we are located in the heart of the Everglades. So---- Ms. McCollum. Thank you. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife, the State of Florida, and others are purchasing and trying to build up a buffer as it comes into the Everglades. They are working on it, but it is happening slowly. Mr. Chairman, we have the Everglades park where we definitely want to see improved water quality in the Everglades, and I know that is the goal of the Park Service. We also have a sovereign nation which is impacted. I do recognize that bridging is there, but I am focusing on the Army Corps and the canal right now, which puts this water down really fast. The Army Corps is in charge of building things and moving water fast, but it is impacting two issues which we have direct jurisdiction over. I do not know what the Army Corps' long-term plans for this canal are, or how old it is. However, I would be very curious as to what the Army Corps role should be. Maybe they should not be calling all the shots in what affects the Park Service and affects a tribal sovereignty here. We know that there is a lot of pollution going on. I do not want to get into the minute details of what is going on with Everglade restoration, but I think what the Miccosukee have asked us here is, as money is spent on this, we should consider how is the water healing itself. If this is about restoring the Everglades, before more money is appropriated we need to see what happens. And the last thing I would say, Mr. Chair, is no one is taking credit for the language that is in the Omnibus Bill. No one. That language, to use a term that I heard a very famous, very wise man say one time, got parachuted in. It is amazing, you know, how we love to take credit for something. Mr. Simpson. I do not think it was parachuted. I think it was in our bill, was it not? Ms. McCollum. I tried to figure out how it got put in, who offered it, and why it got offered. Maybe we can talk later. Maybe I have not been asking the right people the right questions, or maybe people have not wanted to give me the right answers. I am just very concerned that we need to have a big picture plan here. This should not be about pitting the Park Service against the tribe as water flows in the Everglades to be improved. From the conversations I have had they both, I believe, are on the same track to restoring the Everglades. Right now, however, especially with this canal coming down, the tribe's land is being used as a holding pond. You and I know that is why cattails grow, and we have the before and after pictures. So we will leave the bridge aside. Regarding this canal, I really think that the Army Corps should be telling the Park Service as well as the Department of Interior and the tribes what their plan is to slow the water down to treat it before it gets dumped into the Everglades and gets literally dumped into an Indian reservation. So that is my commentary. I am just laying it out there that I am interested in this. Mr. Simpson. I know. Ms. McCollum. But the pythons are there, so I do not know if I want---- Mr. Simpson. I am not going until they kill all the pythons. Mr. Billie. We will make sure that the pythons will not get you. Ms. McCollum. Python free. Mr. Simpson. They can swallow us. I am scared of pythons. Anyway, I appreciate it. Ms. McCollum. And the Seminole are impacted by this, too, are they not? You represent all of USET. There is a little bit of the Seminole that are up at---- Mr. Billie. The Seminoles are located north of us. Their reservation is right here. Ms. McCollum. So they are impacted by some of this as well? Mr. Billie. Right. Ms. McCollum. Okay. Mr. Simpson. I appreciate you all being here. I actually have to get to the Senate since we are an hour and a half behind in our presentation, but I appreciate you all being here with your testimony, and we will certainly take into consideration your views as we write the 2013 appropriation bill. Wednesday, March 28, 2012. TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS PUBLIC WITNESSES--AMERICAN INDIANS AND ALASKA NATIVES Mr. Simpson. The hearing will come to order. Good morning and welcome to the third of three public witness hearings specifically for the American Indian and Alaska Native programs. Despite a somewhat abbreviated hearing schedule this year, I am proud that the subcommittee is able to hold hearings on these very important programs. They have been and will continue to be a funding priority for this subcommittee. The chair will call each panel of witnesses to the table one panel at a time. Each witness will be provided with five minutes to present their testimony. We will be using a timer to track the progress of each witness. When the button turns yellow, the witness will have one minute remaining to conclude his or her remarks. Members will be provided an opportunity to ask questions of our witnesses, but in the interest of time, the chair requests that we keep things moving in order to conclude our morning testimony at a reasonable hour. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from Washington if you have an opening statement. Mr. Dicks. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to welcome all the witnesses from the Pacific Northwest and I appreciate the fact that, as chairman, that you continue to hold this hearing. Our committee has had such a bipartisan record in support of tribal programs for which I appreciate your leadership and Mr. Cole and others. So thank you. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Cole, do you have anything? Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Simpson. Our first panel of witnesses is Fawn Sharp, David Bean, Joseph Pavel, Billy Frank, and Clifford Cultee. Come on up and have a seat. Mr. Cole. Fawn, can you keep these guys under control? It is a major assignment. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Fawn, you are first. The floor is yours. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. QUINAULT INDIAN NATION WITNESS FAWN SHARP Ms. Sharp. Thank you. On behalf of the Quinault Indian Nation, we truly thank the committee for this opportunity to provide testimony, and we would also like to extend words cannot even express the amount of gratitude we have for the commitment of Congressman Norm Dicks. Norm, you have been a stalwart champion for tribes, not only in the Northwest but throughout Indian Country. And for that, I will be truly grateful. And you always have a place to fish at Quinault. Mr. Dicks. Good, thank you. Ms. Sharp. So with that I want to speak first to the Quinault specific priorities and then I want to spend a little time talking about a comprehensive fiscal strategy that we like to recommend to the committee. First, the Quinault Indian Nation is requesting $8.714 million for our Blueback Restoration project. This has been an undertaking that the Quinault Nation has worked on quite diligently for the last five years. Our prized blueback salmon declined to maybe a thousand a run a year. At historic levels, we had millions of blueback running through the Quinault River. This restoration effort is a cutting-edge, innovative way of engineering to restore some pretty sacred areas for our prized blueback historical spawning habitat. In the upper Quinault through widespread logging, rip-rapping of the banks, nearly two-and-a-half miles of precious spawning habitat was wiped out but we are now slowly recovering that effort and the Quinault Nation is leading that effort along with many state and local partners as well as federal agencies. So we would like to continue that project. We call it a legacy plan. It is a 40- year plan that will take a number of years to fully restore that watershed. The second priority and request we have is for $4.64 million for substance abuse and a comprehensive drug strategy. Last year, I mentioned that our drug strategy has expanded into national security issues. We have 30 miles of international border along the Pacific Ocean. We have had many of our tribal members who have a crabbing fleet off the coast. They have noticed small boats coming in and out of our waterway systems, Raft River. We have 2,000 miles of logging roads and 22 points of entry from the ocean to Highway 101, an interstate highway. We have had low-flying helicopters visible dropping things within our lanes and territories. We do understand that the Senate Committee on Homeland Security is reaching out to the GAO to look at the extent of international drug trafficking in Indian Country, and we believe that the Quinault Nation has been targeted as a haven for many of these drug activities. The third priority that we would like to mention is $2.21 million for the McBride Road and an emergency evacuation route. There is only one entrance into our primary village of Taholah and one exit. We are located below sea level and right in the middle of a tsunami zone, so we have many of our residents that are at risk. We have had a number of studies in our area that lands are subject to liquefaction if there were ever a large seismic event. Our village could potentially just sink into the ground. There are examples of that happening in Alaska and other parts of the world where there have been large seismic activities and the ground is basically like a sandpit. And with a large shake, we could lose an entire village. So we have had that study complete and finished so we do need to really focus on some emergency evacuation options for our community. I would like to spend this last minute really focusing on what I talked about at the outset and that is we are advocating Congress to consider a comprehensive fiscal strategy to look at tribal treasuries. We know that with the sequestration, cuts are going to run deep; they are going to run widespread into Indian Country 2013. We fully expect major cuts. We expect those cuts to run even deeper in 2014, and we would like to point out that federal appropriations and grants are just one revenue stream into our national treasuries. For us to be successful, we need to look at a comprehensive tribal economy that includes insulating our borders from state and local taxation that looks at incentivizing private sector investment into Indian Country. We have utilized the Low-Income Housing Tax Credits to build houses. We have sold those tax credits to private investors not costing a dollar from the Federal Government but they have been able to defer tax revenue. We could increase our national budget by about 25 percent if we could sell the low Indian employment tax credit. So those are just some ideas that we believe that this Congress has a duty knowing that those cuts are going to be deep to assist us in looking at a comprehensive fiscal strategy. Until we do that, we are going to just be dealing with symptoms. We need to elevate these issues to look at a comprehensive fiscal strategy to make sure that we have the funding for basic needs. With that, on behalf of the Quinault Indian Nation, I thank you for your time. [The statement of Fawn Sharp follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Fawn. I appreciate it. Next is David Bean. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. PUYALLUP TRIBE WITNESS DAVID BEAN Mr. Bean. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Good morning. Mr. Bean. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. We thank you for the opportunity to be here today to offer this testimony. My name is David Bean. I am a member of the Tribal Council for the Puyallup Tribe of Indians. I am here in place of my chairman, Herman Dillon, Sr., whose health has not allowed him to be here today. We appreciate the increased funding for the operation of Indian programs within the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Indian Health Services. However, years of inadequate funding and the effects of inflation have impacted the tribe's ability to fully exercise self-determination and self-governance. As negotiations proceed with fiscal year 2013 budget and appropriation, we urge you to continue efforts to ensure that there is adequate funding for Indian programs. The Puyallup Tribe's first priority is ensuring the safety and security of our community; thus we greatly appreciate the emphasis that the subcommittee has put on funding tribal law enforcement programs. This year, we specifically support $6.3 million requested increase for operation of new detention facilities expected to be operational in 2013. The Puyallup Tribe has one of these facilities. While we are disappointed that the Puyallup facility is not listed on the BIA Budget Justification as one of these facilities that will be operational in 2013, we have met with BIA staff and they assure us that they are planning to fund the Puyallup detention facility. We have no reason to doubt this. Over the past few years, the Puyallup Tribe has been working closely with the BIA Office of Justice Services to identify the operating staffing costs associated with this facility. We ask the committee's support for language directing the BIA to provide funding to all of the facilities that will come on line in 2013 and report back to Congress the status of these efforts. The lifeblood for the Puyallup Tribe is our natural resources, including our fish, shellfish, and wildlife. I am a fisherman and I personally know how important these resources are to the culture and the economy of my people. Not only does the harvest of these resources provide the means for many people to support their families but equally as important is that this activity is the direct tie to our ancestors. For generations, my people have relied on these exact same resources to support their communities. Our ancestors believed that when they entered into our treaties more than 150 years ago that it was these resources that would sustain and ensure the survival of our people in the future. And they were right. Thus, proper management and protection of these resources is a priority for the Puyallup Tribe. In this regard we fully support the funding in the BIA budget for Northwest Fisheries Commission, the Timber, Fish, and Wildlife Program, Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Program, and the Fish Hatchery Maintenance and Operation Program. One area of concern is the need to support tribal efforts to enhance the treaty protected off-reservation wildlife management. The Puyallup Wildlife Management Program is the lead agency in management activities to benefit the South Rainier Elk Herd. The South Rainier Elk Herd is a primary stock of elk harvested by the Puyallup Tribe. The tribe has not only established more reliable methods for population monitoring but has also been proactive in initiating habitat enhancement projects, research, and land acquisition to ensure sustainable populations of elk for future generations. We would urge the Congress to consider increasing funding for off-reservation treaty hunting resources. Puyallup believes that improving the educational opportunities for our children is critical for our future. Thus, we are very disappointed in the BIE's proposal to cut funding for tribal and BIE schools. We operate pre-K through 12 Chief Leschi Schools. Our student enrollment is 910 students, and this number increases annually. We believe that BIE's assertion that BIE tribal school enrollment is decreasing; moreover, even if our enrollment was decreasing, the cost of educating the children already enrolled in our school is increasing. Specifically, the salary costs, the transportation costs, and the related administrative costs are also increasing. So it is simply not feasible for the BIE to recommend any cut to the BIE school program. Finally, the inadequate funding of the Indian Health Service is the most substantial impediment to improving the health status of Indian people. The Puyallup Tribe has operated its healthcare program since 1976 through an Indian Self- Determination Act contract. The Puyallup Tribe Health Authority operates a comprehensive Ambulatory Care Program providing health services to 9,000 in Pierce County, including 1,700 members of the Puyallup Tribe. There are no Indian Health Service hospitals in the Portland area, so all specialty care and hospital care is paid from our contract healthcare allocation. This places a particular strain on the tribe's contract healthcare program, which the tribe subsidized with a $2.8 million contribution. Thus, we fully support the requested increase for contract healthcare, as well as other programs within IHS budget request. I remain open to any questions you may have. [The statement of David Bean follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I appreciate that very much. Next is Joseph Pavel. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. SKOKOMISH TRIBE WITNESS JOSEPH PAVEL Mr. Pavel. I am Joseph Pavel with the Skokomish Tribe. Thank you, committee, for hearing our testimony this morning. I would like to especially recognize Congressman Dicks for his distinguished service to Washington State, the United States, the Tribes. We certainly appreciate that. I know that---- Mr. Simpson. Can you talk him into running again? Mr. Pavel. You know, I would not feel right doing that. I respect his decision. Mr. Dicks. Thank you. Mr. Pavel. You know. I have been before this committee before. I think one of the items we stress is the law and order and judicial system needs in Indian Country, the Skokomish Tribe, a small tribe in western Washington, a Public Law 280 tribe at one time, going through the steps to have retrocession from the Public Law 280. We struggle to find resources to establish and maintain a law enforcement and a judicial system. We initiated our program in '95 with I think a domestic violence grant and we hired two half-time people, one was an advocate and another guy to sort of patrol the neighborhoods on foot, eventually bought him a blue shirt, bought him a badge and bought him an old beat-up pickup. Since then, we have been able to, through various grants and funding sources, the program has fluctuated but we pretty much are able to maintain a staff of six for our area of patrol and that is bare minimum through creative staffing and scheduling to maintain 24/7 services. We have two Fish and Wildlife officers that have to patrol a tremendous area, our entire seated area and all of the canal and the Olympic Mountains. And so these are, you know, vital needs, certainly law enforcement officers on the ground. But as much as that, you know, people that are in the judicial system, we utilize the services of an intertribal court system, Northwest Intertribal Court System in there, we support their requests. A few years ago we were able to get a one-time add-on through BIA identifying this need and we used that to hire a probation officer. You know, the backlog in our system, people get in the system, they need some help to just guide them through the steps. So that was a successful program to try to get rid of some of the backlog of cases in our courtroom. Many of these cases will derive from a single violation that is then compounded by failures to appear, et cetera, do not pay fines, and so on. A probation officer can monitor these folks and be on them and remind them and help them get through the system and get out of the system. So that was successful. The one-time BIA funding, we continued that position with our own, you know, with some input of our own tribal fundings. But we would like to continue to see that approach that we need to help people that are in the system, not just arrest them and throw them in jail but we would like to be able to get in and be successful negotiating the system and maybe learn something and get out of it and become, you know, an approved citizen and an asset and resource to our community. We have also entered into an agreement with the University of Washington to provide a public defender, help these people there. You know, we are not required to do this but these are some of the things we are doing, you know, because we recognize the need of our people not only to, you know, make the community feel safe to be able to track and apprehend and punish violators, but also when they are, you know, we know these are our people, our community and we know these violations are often just symptomatic of, you know, some of the larger and deeper issues. I think substance abuse is a huge issue. We would certainly support the programs for treatment and those sort of resources, those mental health counseling resources. Those are all, you know, I think law and order and health, education. You know, we do not have a tribal school. I think that is maybe something that gets missed, you know, where we do not have an actual Indian school but we still have Indian kids. They are still in the education system. We try to work closely with the local education system. We have a state school district on our reservation that is about 30 to 40 percent tribal members in there, and we work with them, have used the Pathway Program that just expired. A Pathway grant was very successful four-year program of being able to put mentor tutors in the schools to work with our children, after-school programs. So we do have an education program even though we do not have a tribal school. And I would just like to remind the committee that there are those needs for our Indian students who are not in an Indian school. [The statement of Joseph Pavel follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Joseph. Next is Billy Dean. Mr. Frank. Frank. Mr. Simpson. Frank Dean. Did I say---- Mr. Frank. Billy Frank. Mr. Simpson. Billy Frank--Billy Dean, yeah. Mr. Dicks. He is the dean. Mr. Simpson. That is what I was thinking. It is good to see you again, Billy. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. NORTHWEST INDIAN FISHERIES COMMISSION WITNESSES BILLY FRANK MICHAEL GRAYUM ED JOHNSTONE Mr. Frank. Thank you, Chairman. I am Billy Frank, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. I have been here plenty of times. And, you know, I would like to just recognize our Congressman Norm Dicks. You know, we have worked together for the last 40 years and the State of Washington, all of our tribes including tribes, the whole Nation are going to miss Congressman Norm Dicks. And we wish him well. You know, we are behind his decision to get out and have a happy time here, you know. He has been down this road. He has been our guy that has led us, the leader that has led us through the environment and putting initiatives together and continuing them going, you know, and so we thank him. And we thank you, Chairman, for allowing me to say that. It is a privilege for me to be among our tribal leaders here throughout the day here. And, you know, their strong support gives our organization focus and direction and helps make us successful in protecting and enhancing our treaty rights to meet the many natural resource management responsibilities required of the tribes. We are here today to communicate our fiscal year 2013 funding requests for the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Environmental Protection Agency. We make these requests at a time when our treaties and reserved rights are in grave risk. They are at risk because of diminishing salmon populations which threatens to eliminate our right to harvest. All of this is due to our inability to restore salmon habitat faster than it is being destroyed. The tribe ceded millions of acres of land to the United States through treaties in which they reserved the right to fish, hunt, and gather in their traditional areas. These treaty rights are constitutionally protected and are the supreme law of the land. Our treaty rights guarantee the right to harvest fish, not just the right to fish. Now, I have with me my executive director Michael Grayum, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission; and then I have our treasurer Ed Johnstone. And so I would like to have Michael just take a minute and walk you through the budget. Michael. Mr. Simpson. Just go around and introduce yourself for the record. Mr. Grayum. Michael Grayum, Executive Director of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Congressman Dicks, for everything you have done. I will just quickly highlight our requests. The Commission and its member tribes' primary interest is in the BIA's Rights Protection Implementation Account. That is the account that funds our base Fisheries Management programs. And we greatly appreciate the fact that the President's budget contains an increase of 3.669 million over the fiscal year 2012 enacted amount, and we appreciate that it brought the accounts of interest to us up to near the levels that Congress provided in fiscal year 2010, this committee in particular provided. We do, however, note that the increase was distributed differently in the various accounts than it was when Congress provided the increase in 2010 and we have not been provided an explanation of why that is so we are uncertain about that. It is important that we maintain these overall funding levels and provide additional funding to address the increased management needs and responsibilities that the tribes are required to assume to protect the treaty rights that Mr. Frank just spoke to. So specifically for Western Washington Fisheries Management--that is the base funding for our tribes--we are requesting an additional 8.486 million over the President's request consistent with the requests that we have been making for at least five years to meet the true needs that the tribes have. We support what is in the Washington Timber, Fish, and Wildlife Program, what is in the President's budget. We request a small increase in the U.S.-Canada Salmon Treaty Implementation line of 436,000 over the President's request to meet the requirements of implementing that international treaty. And in the Salmon Marking Account, we are requesting an additional 1.332 million to meet the needs of marking the ever- increasing hatchery production of the tribes and to meet the needs of assessing the impacts of marked fish in the fisheries. The other account in the BIA is the Fish Hatchery Maintenance Account in Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. That is very important to our tribes and we would like to have that increased back to the level that it was in fiscal year 2010 I believe it was, which would be an additional 614,000 over the President's budget. That account is paying for the huge backlog of maintenance projects for our hatcheries, which is primarily supporting the fishery treaty right now. And then contract support, we support what the President has in the budget. And EPA, the Indian General Assistance Program is very important to us. We support what is in the President's budget. That is providing the capacity for the tribes to engage with EPA in their environmental programs. We are, however, disappointed that the President did not include the Multimedia Tribal Implementation Grants Program. It has been in the last two budgets but not funded and it was not included in this year's budget. We see this as a hugely important opportunity to move from capacity building to implementation, actually doing the projects that we have identified need to be done. And so that is one that we would request funding be provided. And then lastly, Puget Sound restoration, that is very important to us and we request that that be increased to the levels that were funded in fiscal year 2010 at $50 million. Mr. Dicks. 2010 was a very good year. Mr. Grayum. Yes, it was. Thank you, Congressmen. Mr. Simpson. We are going to have to have a lot more revenue for that. Mr. Frank. Could I have Ed Johnstone, our treasurer---- Mr. Simpson. For just a minute. Mr. Frank. Yeah, just a minute. Mr. Simpson. And identify yourself for the record. Mr. Johnstone. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Ed Johnstone for all Indian Nation policy representative for Fisheries and treasurer of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. I want to follow up just a little bit about where Billy was talking about our treaty rights at risk. And the relevancy to the treaty rights at risk when he is talking about the habitat, our treaty rights at risk also because of the court decisions and the mandates into the court decisions--for instance, U.S. v. Washington, when Judge Boldt, you know, instructed us that the things we needed to do to be self-regulating for instance and to be co-managers of the resources, he put out some criteria that you had to have enforcement of your own tribal members, your own officers. You had to have scientists available or on staff. You had to show that you could manage your fisheries, and we were able to be funded at that time through Senator Magnuson. And through the work of Billy and others, we got what is called Western Washington Bold Account, your baseline account. But subsequently, there are other decisions like the Rafitti decision where there were no instructions and there was no opportunity to get that account plussed up, and we can distribute it if it is proper to show you in a bar graph. The impacts of the other duties and responsibilities and subsequent decisions where the tribes are at the table and are co-managers and the funding has not followed that upward line or upward trend. In fact, it has been decreased at several points over time. And so we were talking about getting back to the 2010 level. We are talking about our treaty rights, our requirements under those decisions are just as great as everyone else that comes before you in trying to demonstrate their need. And this is a graph that demonstrates how far outpaced our duties and responsibilities to us are versus the amounts of money that we, you know, get appropriated through these different funding streams. And so when we see an account gets plussed up, we wonder how maybe, for instance, another region gets more consideration than we do. And I think our decision predates some of those other decisions. So we are just concerned about where we are going with some of these accounts but again very appreciative of being able to work with Congress and the committee as we look at these vital areas of our survivability out in the Pacific Northwest. [The statement of Billy Frank follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Thanks, Billy. I appreciate it. Next, we have Clifford Cultee. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. LUMMI INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL WITNESS CLIFFORD CULTEE Mr. Cultee. Good morning. Mr. Simpson. Good morning. Mr. Cultee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished committee members, for the opportunity to share with you the appropriation priorities of the Lummi Nation for the fiscal year 2013 budgets of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service. The Lummi Nation is located on the northern coast of Washington State and is the third largest tribe in Washington State serving a population of over 5,200. The Lummi Nation is a fishing nation. We have drawn our physical and spiritual sustenance from the marine tidelands and the waters for hundreds of thousands of years. Now, the abundance of wild salmon is gone. The remaining salmon stocks do not support commercial fisheries. Our fishers are trying to survive from the shellfish products. In 1999, we had 700 licensed fishers who supported nearly 3,000 tribal members. Today, we have about 523 remaining. This means that over 200 small businesses in our community have gone bankrupt in the past 15 years. This is the inescapable reality the Lummi Nation fishers face without salmon. We can no longer survive in the traditional ways of our ancestors. Lummi's specific requests, BIA, $2 million, Phase 1, new water supply system--increase in funding for hatchery construction, operation, and maintenance. Funding will be directed to increase hatchery production to make up for the shortfall of wild salmon; $300,000 funding for the Conservation Law Enforcement Officer Program to ensure that the Lummi Nation need for natural resource enforcement officers will be funded. Committee Directive Requests, Bureau of Reclamation--the Lummi Nation requests that the Committee directs the Bureau of Reclamation to fund Lummi Nation work to develop comprehensive water resources conservation and utilization plans that accommodates the water needs of its residents, its extensive fisheries resources. BIA Natural Resources Branch--to work with the Lummi Nation to ensure that its needs related are available for harvest are compensated through the increased hatchery construction, operations and maintenance funding. DOI Office of Indian Energy, Economic, and Workforce Development to work with the Lummi Nation in support of its comprehensive Fisherman's Cove Harbor and Working Water Front Project which addresses Indian Energy, Economic and Workforce Development needs of the Lummi Nation membership. Implement ACA and IHCIA--asking the Department and the U.S. Indian Health Services to fully and completely implement the Indian Specific provision of the Affordable Care Act and the newly reauthorized Indian Health Care Improvement Act. Wellness is the number one priority of the Lummi Business Council in 2012 and '13. Lummi Nation requests that the committee support the SAMHSA Proposed Tribal Block Grant to combat drug epidemic among the Lummi Nation membership. Head Start for Tribal Development--the Lummi Nation requests the committee direct BIE and DHHS, Children's Bureau, support the construction of a new Lummi Nation Head Start/ daycare facility with technical and financial assistance. Serve Indian veterans--direct the Indian Health Services to immediately develop and provide formal consultation between Indian Health Services, U.S. Veterans' Affairs and tribes on the formal Memorandum of Understanding for the provision of VA medical services to tribal veterans and their families. BIA, $2 million, Phase 1, water supply increase in funding for hatchery, construction, operation, and maintenance. Funding will be directed to increase hatchery production to make up for the shortfall of wild salmon. And with that, I would like to conclude and thank all of the committee members for their work. [The statement of Clifford Cultee follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I appreciate you being here today, appreciate all of you being here today. Let me ask Joseph. You mentioned that you are attempting rescission from being a Public Law 280 tribe? Mr. Pavel. Yes. Mr. Simpson. What exactly does that include? I mean how do you---- Mr. Pavel. Well, we have said in Washington I think it has been a new thing. The State has adopted a new procedure, but when we did it, you have to get the concurrence from the State and involve the process of the state legislature passing an act and approving, the governor to sign a retrocession---- Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mr. Pavel [continuing]. To the tribes. So that and then so we passed that act. You know, and basically it was an amendment. Some other tribes had already done it so we just kind of went in and amended that particular act to include the Skokomish Tribe. Then you have to get the concurrence from the Department of Interior and they also have to have an opinion from Department of Justice that they would concur with that. And then I think part of that process is for Interior to evaluate whether you have the capacity and the ability to sustain the capacity to implement the necessary law enforcement and judicial programs to handle those duties. Mr. Simpson. Okay. I just wondered because some tribes in Idaho have tried to go through that same process and I did not know what was included. It is a typical government process. Mr. Pavel. Yeah. It is important to get the endorsement of the local county. Mason County is kind of a depressed area of the State and they were certainly very supportive of the tribe taking on these duties. They were looking at it as a way to get more law enforcement dollars into their area and also to reduce their area of coverage, so they were very supportive of us and that had a lot to do with our ability to do that. I know some counties are not like that. Mr. Simpson. Good. Of the Puget Sound restoration, the geographic program gets, what, 30 million in this budget? In last year's budget it was 50 million--how much of that goes to the tribes? Do they compete competitively for various programs or is some of it set aside for the tribes? Mr. Grayum. The EPA has allocated a certain amount of that to the tribes both for specific projects and for capacity for the tribes to be actively participating in the effort. So it is an EPA allocation. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Mr. Moran? Mr. Moran. Yeah, that is fine, but I would defer to Norm on this since they are his constituents. He has invested so much time to focus on these issues. Mr. Simpson. We agree with you on his retirement also by the way. Mr. Dicks. Oh, thank you. Well, I just want to thank the chairman and Mr. Moran for being so supportive and Mr. Cole and the whole committee has been very supportive on tribal programs. I think that says a lot. And I just want to say that I have enjoyed our working relationship with the tribes. Each one of the tribes--I am not as close to the Lummis but the other four are in my district and we have had extensive working relationships. And they have always been positive, always trying to protect the resource to help the people, the tribes. I was out at the Nisqually last weekend with Jean Takekawa and that whole area has been restored. We have restored the Skokomish area back into an estuary. I mean those two projects alone probably increased estuary in the State of Washington by about 30 percent because so much of it had been developed. And the Puyallup Indian Land Claim settlement, I am an appropriater, not an authorizer, but right here in this committee we appropriated $105 million back when $105 million was a substantial amount of money. And to see the growth of the tribes has been great. We have still a long ways to go but on the salmon issue, especially taking out the dams on the Elwha. I appreciate the committee's steadfast support for that. That will help us. But again, I have enjoyed our working relationship. Down on the Quinault many times, say hello to Guy for me, but I appreciate your being here today. And we've got one more year to go. We are going to do a good job. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Simpson. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair. When people are testifying, I go to your websites so I can picture what you are talking about with restoration. And all of you have fabulous websites, so I really felt like I am landlocked in a way. I am around a lot of water but I am not on an ocean, so this was very helpful for me. Can I just ask a question? The Supreme Court is hearing the healthcare case right now. The Supreme Court is going to talk about severability, and as we know, the Indian Healthcare Act is part of the Affordable Care Act. Do you know if the tribes submitted to the court (as they are talking about severability if they strike down the rest of the law) to leave the Indian Healthcare Act stand as-is because it is a different section of law? And if I have caught you off guard, I apologize. Someone can get back to my office later. Mr. Bean. There was a brief filed by the National Congress of American Indians. Mr. Simpson. Is your mike on? Mr. Bean. I am not entirely familiar with it but I understand that the National Congress of American Indians had submitted a brief to the court. Ms. McCollum. That is good. And then my only other observation is that we are hearing a lot about law and order and the importance of enforcement. So I think we are hearing a common thread, Mr. Chairman. I do not think we heard quite as articulate an argument last year about the dollars. So I want to thank you all for being so crisp in your testimony on that. Mr. Simpson. Ms. Sharp? Ms. Sharp. I would like to maybe add to not only the law enforcement piece but just substance abuse prevention. We did some formulas at Quinault and we determined that the national average spent per capita on substance abuse prevention and education is roughly $1,600 per capita. Washington State is 1,900 per capita and just for our tribe it was $414 per capita. And when you consider that state governments have a tax base, it further magnifies the need within Indian Country for precious dollars for substance abuse prevention. And so I really appreciate your making that observation and that point because we are off the charts and off the scale on substance abuse and all the associated problems, domestic violence and suicide, so it is very important to look at those factors. Thank you. Mr. Dicks. Violence against women, too, by people coming from outside the reservations is a serious problem. Mr. Simpson. Did you have something you want to say? Mr. Bean. Yeah, I just have a brief comment from the Puyallup Tribe if I may for Congressman Dicks from the Tribal Council from the children at our school at Chief Leschi, from our fishermen, from our elders, from our community, we raise our hands and say thank you. Thank you for being here. Thank you for all the work you have done for us. Mr. Simpson. Thank you all for being here. When Congressman Dicks decided to retire I said who the heck is going to take care of the Puget Sound now? And he looked at me and said you are the closest one. So I appreciate all of you being here today. Thank you for your testimony. Our next panel is W. Ron Allen, T.J. Greene, and Sneena Brooks. How are you doing today? And Ron, you are going to testify on two different subjects, on behalf of the Pacific Salmon Commission and also the tribe? Mr. Allen. Yes. Mr. Simpson. Okay. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM TRIBE PACIFIC SALMON COMMISSION WITNESS W. RON ALLEN Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. Again, I am Ron Allen, Chair for the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe. We are located in western Washington. We are in Norm's district and we also equally raise our hands to Norm for your service, Norm. Mr. Dicks. Thank you. Mr. Allen. Thirty-eight years you have done a fabulous job for not just our state and our community but for the United States and your leadership will be missed I know by all. I am also very active with the BIA, the Tribal BIA Budget Advisory Committee. I represent the Northwest tribes and so I am active in that forum. I am also active on the IHS side in terms of the budget needs in IHS. Before I jump into some of the issues from my tribe first, you know, the question was raised about the review by the Supreme Court, one thing that I think that you guys need to know is that the Indian Healthcare Improvement Act, it took us eight years, eight years to get it reauthorized, which is very annoying for us in tribes and this is a treaty obligation. And what people do not realize is that even with the four- plus billion dollars that is provided by IHS--and you have been doing a great job in terms of providing additional resources for it--what you do not realize is that probably 50 to 60 percent of our citizens live outside what we call the service area that IHS provides. And so when we talk about those unserved or underserved people that it was trying to address, many of them are our people and we do not have the authority under the Indian Healthcare Improvement Act to serve those people. So that is an important issue I think that we need to raise. And then you talked about the retrocession issue. It is more than just the process of getting the retrocession done; it is about making sure it is collaborated with the BIA so that we are provided they be law enforcement programs and court systems in order to take over the jurisdiction that we have under our authority for the tribes in our area. So shifting back to my tribe, you have our testimony and we appreciate being able to submit it to you. We are very supportive of the request and recommendations that are being provided by many of our organizations in the Northwest, you know, the Northwest Fisheries Commission, the affiliated tribes, northwest Indians that Fawn is the president of and Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission that collaborates with the northwest tribes, and NCAI, who do a great job of analyzing the budget and providing recommendations to you. My tribe is a small tribe. We have a very small land base and we have limited resources. But nevertheless, we have equal interest and one of our requests is for some financial assistance to buy a small piece of property that is a culturally relevant piece that we are trying to prevent from being developed because it has a very religious traditional purpose in it. So you see the $495,000, we have asked for that. The other simple request was we wanted to get additional resources in our fishery base budget because like all the tribes in the Northwest--well, on the west side of Washington State, we not only just manage the thin fish but we manage shellfish and we have limited resources to manage shellfish and it is a very complicated industry to manage but from clams to gooey duck to crab to shrimp, et cetera. And so we all are in need of additional resources to appropriately and effectively co-manage with the State on those kind of resources. And so that is what our request is from the Jamestown Tribe. I would note in here that in our testimony we identified recommendations from the different entities with regard to the BIA budget. We are very delighted that you have been holding BIA pretty much harmless at this point and IHS some slight increases. My testimony has a small error in it, actually probably significant for you. In contract support on the BIA side you are going to fund 100 percent, and we are very delighted that you are going to do that. On IHS side in my testimony it says 145. That was last year's request and so I did not catch that error before we actually submitted it to you. But I do know it is $100 million shortfall. And so that is a big issue for us. Again, it is a contractual obligation between the United States and Indian Tribes and contracts are contracts. So where we would honor it with any other entity--I do not care whether it is defense issues or educational institutions or whatever it is, we would honor those contracts. And we believe that that is important for the tribes to do a good job. So those are the points that I would raise with my tribe. Shifting to the second topic that I want to raise--it is related--I am a commissioner for the U.S.-Canada and Pacific Salmon Commission. I represent the 24 tribes, the Puget Sound Tribes and Columbia River Tribes up into Idaho including Nez Perce. And, you know, our job is to make sure that we manage the salmon well and make sure that we turn it to a sustainable level. We have to make sure we have salmon so that Norm has fish to catch when he is in retirement. And so I take this duty seriously. Mr. Dicks. I release all my fish. Mr. Simpson. The one that is on your wall did not get released. Mr. Dicks. That was in Alaska. Mr. Allen. Okay. Anyhow, Chairman, so it is a very important treaty that was consummated back in 1985. We renegotiated it three different times and there were never areas where we received the resources in order to manage the responsibilities from Alaska all the way to the upper reaches of Idaho. And everybody has a role. The States have their role and they get their resources through Commerce. And the State Department has a role because the resources for the international obligation is processed through them. The tribes' role in this process comes through the Department of the Interior and we have been funded about $4.1 million and I think the proposal is around 4.3 and we are asking for 4.8. I think what we want to emphasize with Congress is that when we engage with all of our counterparts both within the United States from Alaska to the three states and then with our Canadian counterparts, the tribal expertise is critical to that process. We are very, very active and we are among the leaders with regard to that technical responsibility. And we have to share that responsibility. So we do it with the tribes and we coordinate with the Northwest Indian Fish Commission and Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission in order to accomplish this objective. That money that is in there is distributed among all of us in order to carry out our respective responsibilities and it is critically important and we just need the resources to be able to do the job. When you think about our intergovernmental relationship, we are a small fish in this great big pond and we have to fight for our rights and we do do that. But we have to have the capacity to do it. You have to have the resources and the talent. So if you were ever to walk into our forum and realize the technical responsibilities to manage that fishery, assure that we are carrying it out responsibly whether it is the Chinook, the Coho, the Saki, the Pinks, the Chum Fishery. It is a challenge and we kind of overload our staff in a big way. So we are trying to get additional resources to do a responsible job to make sure that we are harvesting it correctly while we deal with the other H's, meaning the hydro issues or the habitat issues and so forth. So that is my request. You will see it in here---- Mr. Simpson. Harvest. Mr. Allen. Pardon me. Mr. Simpson. And yes, the harvest, too. It is a tough issue. It is a balancing act when you are dealing with ESA with regard to the fish you are trying to protect while being able to harvest what is harvestable. And that is true both in Canada, you know, where they have their own ESA legislation, as well as our own country. So it is complicated; it is tough, but we take it responsibly. And as Billy Frank always says, we are fish people. We are going to make sure that the fish are going to be here for our future generations. Thank you. [The statements of W. Ron Allen follow:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. I appreciate it very much. T.J. Greene. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. MAKAH TRIBAL COUNCIL WITNESS T.J. GREENE Mr. Greene. Greetings. It is good to be here among friends. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am T.J. Greene, Treasurer, the Makah Tribal Council. I am accompanied by Councilman Brian Seveck. We want to thank you for this opportunity to present testimony on the views of Makah Tribal Council on the fiscal year 2013 federal budget. This hearing is especially meaningful to us at the Makah Tribe because it is the last chance we will get to appear before Congressman Dicks. We have truly been blessed not only that Norm Dicks is our Congressman but also by his long- standing friendship with our tribe. Congressman Dicks has visited our reservation many, many times since he was a young man. He has spent countless hours visiting with us, touring our reservation, and hearing our concerns, but he may have spent just as much time off our shores in what he recently called his favorite fishing spot. I do not know if he says that to everybody but he says it to us. Mr. Dicks. It is the most beautiful place to fish for salmon. Mr. Greene. Words cannot express our gratitude to you, Congressman, for all that you have done for us and all that you mean to us. I would like to testify today on three priority issues: one, federal assistance for cleaning up the Warmhouse Beach dump on our reservation; federal grant funding for replacing our commercial fishing dock; and lastly, our work in support of a sustainable federal ocean policy. The Makah Tribe is taking aggressive steps to address the serious environmental and health risks posed by the Warmhouse Beach Open Dump, a decades-old landfill located on the Makah Reservation that was used by the U.S. Department of Defense and other federal agencies to dispose of hazardous waste. The dump is leaching harmful chemicals into a nearby stream which flows into the pristine waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca at Warmhouse Beach, a traditional shellfish location for the Makah people. This summer, we are taking the important step of opening our new solid waste transfer station in Neah Bay, which will enable us to close the dump. Now, the challenge before us is to clean it up so it will stop polluting our waters. The tribe has documented that the Makah Air Force Station, which supported radar operations at Bahokus Peak from World War II through 1988, disposed of many hazardous substances at the dump since its opening in the 1970s, including asbestos, batteries, pesticides, paints, and waste oil. For many years, other federal agencies with operations on the reservation also disposed of their waste at the dump. So the Federal Government bears substantial responsibility for cleaning it up and preventing further exposure of the reservation community to the environmental and health hazards it causes. The Makah Tribe has been trying for many years to secure federal assistance for cleaning up the dump, especially through negotiations with the Defense Department or possibly through the federal Superfund Program. We would appreciate the subcommittee's support in our efforts. The second issue, the Port of Neah Bay Commercial Fishing Dock is over 60 years old. The condition has now deteriorated so badly it has been closed to semi-truck traffic for seven years. Structural surveys of the dock indicate that the dock now needs to be completely replaced. This commercial fishing dock generates over 6 million in fish landings annually. It supports the traditional maritime culture of our tribe, about half of the working-age population of Neah Bay, and over 100 minority-owned business enterprises. It also supports the ecosystem management and biological data collection efforts of the State of Washington, National Marine Fisheries Service, and tribes to ensure sustainable fisheries of over 20 groundfish species, salmon species, halibut, and shellfish. We have been working with many federal agencies, including the EDA, BIA, U.S. Department of Transportation, the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development, and state agencies to find funding that can help us with this dock replacement project, thus far without success. We have grant requests pending through EDA and the TIGER IV program. We would appreciate the Federal Government's assistance in finalizing this important economic development initiative. The Makah Tribe works to be careful stewards of ocean resources. We are one of the hosts of the First Stewards Symposiums entitled ``Coastal People Address Climate Change'' this July at the National Museum of the American Indian, the first national symposium on the impacts of climate change on coastal indigenous peoples. We are proud that our tribal chairman, Micah McCarty, has been asked to serve on numerous advisory bodies on ocean fisheries issues, including the Governance Coordinating Committee that is working with National Ocean Council on national ocean policy. The Makah Tribe is unique in having a marine sanctuary, the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary right of four shores and within our ``usual and accustomed'' fishing area. We are proud of our work on ensuring tribal consultation on federal maritime matters and helping to improve oil spill pollution prevention and response. Many vessels involved with the sanctuary, ocean and fisheries research, and oil spill prevention and response are stationed in Neah Bay. We are the only ocean harbor in the Pacific Northwest that is not closed in heavy storms because of hazardous bar conditions. In order to serve the growing number of these vessels, however, we need to improve our harbor, for example, by deepening our entrance channel. We would appreciate the subcommittee's support for our efforts to make Neah Bay Harbor a first-class home port for vessels helping to keep our ocean resources sustainable. We look forward to expanding our collaboration with federal and state governments and private sector to ensure maritime policies that will be sustainable well into the future. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, for this opportunity to testify before you today. Kuwhat is Norm's Makah name. It means killer whale. Salmon is important to the killer whale; it is important to Norm. [The statement of T.J. Greene follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette [presiding]. Mr. Green, thank you very much for your testimony. And as you may have noticed, there has been a bloodless coup and I am going to chair this subcommittee for a little bit. I want to thank you very much for your testimony and thank you for informing us about Mr. Dicks' name. Some of us who have traveled with Mr. Dicks have had to fight off Greenpeace as they have attempted to roll him into the ocean from beaches across the world. Next, we are going to hear from Sneena Brooks, a member of the Colville Business Council. Welcome and we look forward to your testimony. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION WITNESS SNEENA BROOKS Mr. Brooks. All right, thank you. I do not have a really cool name for Mr. Dicks but we do appreciate all the support you have given for the Colville Tribes. Thank you, subcommittee today. This is my first time testifying in front of this committee so I am really pretty nervous. Mr. LaTourette. You cannot screw up. Mr. Brooks. I cannot screw up. Well, I am following this guy right here, you know, so pretty well seasoned. Mr. Greene. Real pro. Mr. Brooks. Yeah. So thank you. Good morning to you. I am Sneena Brooks. I am the vice chair of the Colville Business Council and I am here today to talk about the President's fiscal year 2013 request. The Colville Tribe was pleased for the first time in many years the fiscal year 2013 request contains a significant increase, the $15.4 million as allocated to the BIA Trust Natural Resource Management Program. This increase will restore programs that were cut from previous budgets and provide tribal land managers with the needed assistance to ensure tribal trust resources are protected. One of the activities that is funded under this account for the Colville Tribes is the ability for us to patrol 161 shoreline miles of Lake Roosevelt, the reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam, the national recreational area which about 1.5 million visitors attend annually. The National Park Service also conducts patrols, you know, on the lake there but the Colville Tribe is responsible for 35 percent of the lake and we are the most visible presence on the lake there today. So we are very pleased that the budget contains the total of $750,000 for that increase and I hope the subcommittee supports that. The second thing that we would like to point out on the increase is the $1.5 million for the attorney fees and litigation support program. This is pretty valuable to the Colville Tribes. This program was cut in the 2012 budget but now that it might be back in there on this budget the Colville Tribes and other tribal programs use this to protect the trust resources. We have one of the largest lead-zinc-copper smelters in the world just about 10 minutes north on the Columbia River. For the last 100 years up into the '90s it is dumping a lot of slag into the river and polluting the river and not only the Colville Tribal Trust properties but also the Bureau of Reclamation properties, the National Park Service properties, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service properties. And so this $1.5 million is not very much in the grand scheme of the Indian Affairs budgets but it is pretty vital to us because we are able to bring those guys back to the table and get them back into the work area to start cleaning up the mess that we are looking forward to them doing for us. The Colville Tribes is also very pleased to see the $11 million increase in the law enforcement activities. There is a portion, though, $3.5 million that is increased for the Criminal Investigation and Police Services account. We would like to see that increase up to a $15 million mark. Currently, the Colville Tribe, you know, we have 1.4 million acres to reside over. Service time for our police officers within our reservation boundaries, you know, it is within about a two-hour time frame, the response to some of the activities that happen on the reservation, so we are very well aware, very understaffed for the tribal officers. And oftentimes we even have at least one tribal police officer operating the whole 1.4 million acres. And so that is extremely difficult to deal with, you know, as far as, you know, we have an increase in gang violence, we have drug smuggling coming onto our reservation and a lot of different activities like that, you know, that we are not able to capture with the amount of staff that we have. So we would like that account increased from $3.5 million up to the $15 million mark. And actually, this is the first year where we may have to almost drop 20 of our tribal police officers because of BIA not being able to fund our police services. So I would appreciate if we could raise that amount to a $15 million mark to alleviate some of that stress from our police officers there. So I think that is my time but I just thank the subcommittee here and, like I said, I am nervous as hell and I thank you guys for listening to me. Thank you. [The statement of Sneena Brooks follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Well, Mr. Brooks, you have nothing to be sorry for. You did a great job and we appreciate your insights and your testimony. Getting here late, I do not have a lot of questions but, Mr. Greene, you were talking about dredging and one of the problems that not only the Congress but the whole country faces is the inability to free up funds to dredge navigable waterways. And aside from your interest, you should be aware that there are folks who are working on releasing some of the funds from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund to hopefully go in and help not only your harbor but other harbors around the country. If we could ever get our act together here, hopefully, we could get that out of here. So Mr. Moran, questions? Mr. Moran. I will defer to Killer Whale here. Mr. LaTourette. Mr. Killer Whale. Mr. Dicks. Well, thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I want to say that Mr. LaTourette has been a big supporter of the bipartisan approach on this committee in support of our tribes, and it is very much appreciated. And also, when I was chairman, he always voted for the bill. So he gets a big star. Mr. LaTourette. I just liked the bill. Mr. Dicks. Right. Yeah, but it was important. And I just want to add, Neah Bay is at the northwest corner of the lower 48 States. You have got the Strait of Juan de Fuca on one side; you have got the Pacific Ocean on the other side. So you cannot get much better than that. And there is a little island as you go out called Waddah Island. When I was fishing there with my father in the '50s, in 1952. One day the limit was three kings and six silvers; we got nine kings. That was one of the great days of salmon fishing. Mr. Moran. But that was over the limit, though. Mr. Dicks. Well, but there were three of us. My brother--I want to make that perfectly clear. Mr. Moran. Oh, okay. Mr. Dicks. And in recent years, we would go 23 miles off the coast to a place called Blue Dot and caught big salmon, Billy, 35- to 40-pound king salmon. That was pretty spectacular. And there is a place called Skagway right around the corner where we used to fish a lot and it is just one of the most amazing places on Earth. And I have enjoyed our relationship and working with Ron Allen, of course, and the Colvilles have a special place in my heart because they took a gillnetter and converted it into a purse seiner so they could release wild fish. Selective fishing is important. I may offer an amendment this year that it is a national responsibility to catch hatchery fish so that they do not breed with wild fish in the river. And the Nisqually Tribe have just put in a weir; the Elwhas have a weir. We are moving in the right direction but it has taken leadership--and over on the east side it is not that easy to do. There are some differing views on these issues but we will leave that for another day, Mr. Chairman. But thank you for your testimony and thank you for your friendship over the years. And I will be up there this summer. Mr. Moran. I just tried to envision in the 1950s you bringing in a 40-pound fish. You could not have weighed much more than 40 pounds. Mr. Dicks. Well, I was about 12 years old and I was able to handle it. Mr. Moran. Wow. Mr. Dicks. The only problem was the first one my dad had a bad net and it went through the net and I started to cry. Then we caught all the rest. And there were three of us, Jim. Three times three is nine. Okay. Mr. Moran. It is beyond the statute of limitations anyway. Mr. Dicks. Yeah, well---- Mr. LaTourette. Mr. Dicks, thank you very much for your kind words and also for your testimony. I assume everybody knows that Mr. Dicks announced that he is retiring, and it is going to be a great loss to not only the committee and the subcommittee but the United States Congress, but you can also tell that he is a retiring member because he has admitted to poaching on the record. He would not do that if he was facing reelection. I am going to recognize Ms. McCollum next, but on the Great Lakes we know that Neah Bay is an icebreaker that has gotten us out of a lot of trouble in the wintertime. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the oldest granddaughter, I understand limits and being in the boat as a youngster. Then when I started being able to actually figure out how to catch them myself we were not out for as long, which meant then we had to stop someplace to get me a Coke because part of the fishing was kind of a little escape from Grandma. But yeah, you count if you are in the boat. You count if you have a license. As I mentioned before, I was looking at the websites, and you have a children's page. Not that many tribes have children's pages. Congratulations. That is really very, very good. Mr. Greene. Thank you. Ms. McCollum. And the breaking news is your temperature. I will not tell you what it is; it is a little colder than it is here. I just wanted to ask a little bit more about what is going on with the Department of Defense helping you with cleaning up the dump site, and the toxins leaching into it. I have an old army arsenal in my congressional district, Arden Hills, and we had problems with water being contaminated and filters put in and all that. Could you tell me a little more about what is going on with the clean up at the Warmhouse Beach Open Dump? What a lovely name to call a dump, the Warmhouse Beach Open Dump. Mr. Greene. Well, it is a real beautiful location is one of the sad things. It is actually used as a landmark for fishing. And we would like to get rid of that landmark out there. Mr. Dicks. Called the Garbage Dump. Mr. Greene. The Garbage Dump, fisherman go there, there is halibut and link cod and different things off of that site and they use it as a landmark. But getting back to where we are at with the Department of Defense, you know, it has been a few months since we have had any actual dialogue with the Department of Defense. We have had some good dialogue. There have been some Department of Defense investigators came out, took depositions from people at the tribe, former Air Force personnel that married into the tribe and are living there. And so it is in kind of that fact-finding stage still, you know, just I guess ground truth everything that the tribe is claiming. So that is where we are at. And, you know, we are looking at doing a partnership with the Federal Government, you know. We are not here to demand that you take care of everything; we just want you to take care of what you are responsible for and, you know, certainly we will take care of what we are responsible for. So that is kind of where that is at right now. We are trying to do it in a cooperative manner and not adversarial. Ms. McCollum. Well, that is what my municipalities are doing with the Department of Defense with cleanup. They are making sure that the water stays contained where it is and that it does not get into drinking water and municipal wells and other things like that. So I will be interested to follow that along with you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Greene. Okay. Mr. LaTourette. Thank you, Ms. McCollum. I want to thank all of you for your testimony and answering our questions. You go with our thanks and again, you did fine. Next year you will be a veteran and you will come back and just wow us with your polished testimony. So thank you very much. We will call up the next panel. On the next panel--and if you could again attempt to observe the 5-minute rule, the lights will be instructive in that regard--we will hear from Andy Joseph, who is the chairperson of the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board; Larry Blythe, who is Intertribal Timber Council member; Ron Suppah, the vice chairman of the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon; Les Minthorn, who is the chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservations; and Gerald Lewis, who is the chairman of the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission. We will wait for the door to close. I think Mr. Dicks is out retelling some fish stories. Maybe the fish got to be 60 pounds by the time he is done now. Again, we are in receipt of your written testimony. If you can confine your remarks to five minutes, we would appreciate that. If you cannot, we will certainly understand that as well. I want to welcome you. We look forward to your testimony. Mr. Joseph, you are first. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. NORTHWEST PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD WITNESS ANDY JOSEPH Mr. Joseph. Good morning. My name is Badger. I am Andy Joseph, Jr., Chair of the Health and Human Services Committee for the Confederate Tribes of Colville and also the Chair of the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board, 43 tribes of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon. And good morning, Chairman and Ranking Member Moran, members of the subcommittee. First, I will summarize our recommendations by underscoring the federal trust responsibility to provide healthcare to Indians and the significant health disparities that affect our people. My written testimony documents these health disparities. This fact, along with the trust responsibility, makes it a requirement that Congress provide an adequate level of funding for the IHS budget. The fundamental budget principle for the Northwest Tribes is that the basic healthcare program must be preserved by the President. Preserving the IHS-based program by funding the current level of health services should a fundamental budget principle of Congress. Otherwise, how can unmet needs ever be addressed if the existing program is not maintained? In fiscal year 2013, we estimated it will take at least $403 million to maintain current services, yet the President's request only $115.9 million increase for IHS. The IHS explains that the overall increase is adequate to sustain the Indian health system, expand access to care; however, we do not believe this will be the case. The Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board estimates that an additional $287 million is needed to maintain the current levels of care. Our estimates are based on actual medical inflation rates from the Consumer Price Index and growth in the IHS user population. My written testimony explains our methodology with the following recommendations. One, the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board recommends that the subcommittee restore the $126 million in funding eliminated in the President's request for inflation, population growth, and a tribal pay cost. Our estimates are based on budget worksheets provided and used by the IHS during the fiscal year 2013 National Budget formulation meeting. Two, the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board recommends that at least an additional $10 million be provided for the contract health service program CHS, to cover the inflation and population growth. Three, we recommend that the subcommittee provide an additional $99.3 million to fund past years' contract support cost shortfalls that are owed to tribes under the P.L. 93-638. Four, the Portland Area has developed a new initiative approach to constructing health facilities in order to address the health needs of tribes. My written testimony provides a detailed explanation of this new initiative program, and we recommend that the subcommittee include $10 million for the Portland Area to develop a demonstration project to prove the viability of this program. I recognize that our recommendations may seem unreasonable in the current fiscal environment, but when the significant healthcare needs of Indian people are considered, our recommendations are realistic. I hope you will agree by supporting the IHS budget, and I am happy to respond to any questions from the subcommittee. Thank you. [The statement of Andy Joseph follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Mr. Joseph, thank you very much for your testimony. Mr. Blythe, next we will hear from you. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. INTERTRIBAL TIMBER COUNCIL WITNESS LARRY BLYTHE Mr. Blythe. Mr. Chairman, committee, good morning. It is good to be back here in Washington again, in front of the committee. I am Larry Blythe. I am currently President of the Intertribal Timber Council, and also I am the Vice Chief for the Eastern Band of Cherokees in North Carolina. The Intertribal Timber Council is a 36-year-old association of 60 forest-owning tribes and Alaska Native corporations that collectively manage more than 90 percent of the 18 million acres of timberland and woodland that are under BIA trust management. Mr. Chairman, as the first order of business the ITC would like to express our deep appreciation for the leadership provided by you and this subcommittee in understanding and protecting the BIA and Indian Health Service budgets. Even in the best of times Indian Country struggles with joblessness and economic deprivation many times that of the country as a whole. The BIA and IHS budgets are a core element of the Federal Government's solemn promise to our people and are vital to our welfare and progress. We thank you for your commitment toward honoring these historic and enduring obligations. I have submitted the Intertribal Timber Council's full testimony for the record and will focus today on just some core priorities. Number one, we ask that the committee consider providing BIA natural resource funding in amounts sufficient to assure the Federal Government's full compliance with its trust obligations to manage and protect tribal natural resources. Our forests and all natural resources are important to all tribes. Their protection and management is an integral part of the trust responsibility of the United States. Unfortunately, the failure of the United States to exercise its fiduciary responsibilities for management of the Indian estate for individuals as well as tribal governments has necessitated costly settlement of litigation. The Colville Tribe's $193 million trust management settlement is a recent example. Morally and legally, the United States must live up to its trust obligations to the Indian people. We ask that, as this Committee reviews the BIA's proposed fiscal year 2013 budget for natural resources trust management, please bear clearly in mind the solemn obligations of the United States to ensure that trust responsibilities are met. Secondly, in the BIA operations of Indian program budget, restore the inequitable funding cuts proposed for administrative cost savings. The Intertribal Timber Council urges this committee to reject the $33 million in Administrative Cost Savings, ACS reduction in operation of Indian programs, and to restore those funds. The BIA devised the reduction allocation process on its own, without consultation, and the results are grossly inequitable. While BIA says it will consult with tribes on the ACS cuts, the BIA, by having already allocated the ACS cuts among BIA locations and programs, has made a sham of the promise of consultation. If the BIA is to pursue cost savings through streamlining, consolidation, or other efficiencies, any process for allocating those savings must be open, fair, and equitable, and consultation with the tribes before such an allocation occurs is essential to achieving those goals and obtaining broad tribal support. ITC urges you to reject the ACS cuts and restore the $33 million, including the $1.9 million reduction proposed for forestry which would eliminate 9 BIA forestry positions and most likely be at regional or the agency locations. Thirdly, we ask that BIA TPA Forestry Program be increased by $5 million above the fiscal year 2012 recommendation. The program has been seriously underfunded for years. Independent studies by nationally-recognized forestry experts in 1993 and 2003 documented BIA forestry per-acre management funding is less than half that of the National Forest System. These funding inadequacies in BIA trust forestry are now being made manifest in large tribal trust mismanagement law suits and settlements against the United States. The requested $5 million increase is also needed to maintain a wide range of tribal forest trust activities customarily supported by forest management deductions which have been severely eroded by years of depressed timber markets. Fourthly, stewardship contracting expires at the end of 2013 cutting off an essential tool for tribes, local communities, and others to perform needed forest management activities on Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land. For tribes in particular, stewardship contracts can be key in carrying out protective forest health activities on adjacent federal land under the Tribal Forest Protection Act, Public Law 108-278. Under fire management, the Intertribal Timber Council requests the restoration of the Department of Interior hazard fuel funding to $216 million. Efforts to reduce the risk of fire are critical to sustaining fire adapted tribal communities, adaptable ecosystems, cultural values, and economies that sustain tribes. The Intertribal Timber Council also requests the restoration of Department of Interior Burned Area Rehabilitation funds to $33.2 million. The Intertribal Timber Council also requests the suspension of the Department of Interior Hazard Fuels Prioritization and Allocation System until such time as it can be tested and proven reliable. Current runs of the model project drastic, unprecedented transfers of funding from BIA-sponsored tribes dependent on commercial forests to Bureau of Land Management shrub-grass ecosystems. The new model's removal of significant amounts of fuels funding away from tribes will greatly increase fire and health risks to tribal trust forests and pose significant and unjustified threats to tribal forest revenues, subsistence uses, and tribal employment. We do not believe this shift is warranted. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, that concludes my testimony. Thank you. [The statement of Larry Blythe follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Thank you very much for your testimony. Mr. Suppah, we would like to hear from you now. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. THE CONFEDERATE TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON WITNESS RON SUPPAH Mr. Suppah. Good morning, Chairman, other members of the committee. Our people are the Warm Springs, Wasco, and Paiute Tribes. I am Ron Suppah, Vice-Chairman of the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. Our over 640,000-acre reservation in central Oregon ranges from the snow-capped Mt. Jefferson to the salmon-bearing Deschutes River, with forests, farmland, and high desert between. The vast majority of our tribal members live on the reservation, where we are suffering from almost 60 percent unemployment. Putting our people to work and providing basic social service, especially healthcare and education for our members, is extremely challenging at Warm Springs. Our federal appropriation priorities reflect the circumstances we face, and I deeply appreciate your invitation to speak before you today. My full testimony is submitted for the record. Today I want to focus on our priorities. Number one. Indian Health Service. In 1992, Congress authorized a joint venture agreement between the IHS and Warm Springs. The tribe financed construction of a new clinic, and the IHS agreed to fully fund and staff the facility. Unfortunately, the federal funding has been far short of its commitment. The Warm Springs support the proposed $4.4 million funded level for IHS. This increase is about half of what is needed to maintain existing services and prevent cannibalizing current services to pay for federal mandate increases. Of that amount the Warm Springs requests a $1.9 million increase in funding for IHS hospitals and clinics to provide full direct services for Warm Springs joint venture. Clean water is critical for human health. The Warm Springs community is facing a costly replacement of our water treatment system, an estimated $30 million. We request these funds from the Sanitation Facilities Construction Program. Tribal Forestry Management. The Warm Springs are concerned about a net cut to the BIA's forest management account. The tribe, pursuant to contract with the BIA, manages the forest land on the Warm Springs Reservation. Over the past decade several hundreds of thousands of forest lands have been destroyed, many of the fires coming from adjacent federal lands. The Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs aligns itself with the budget request given today by the Intertribal Timber Council. This includes three items. Number one. Restoration of the $1.9 million in inequitable ACS cuts in BIA TPA Forestry, number two, that the BIA TPA Forestry Program be increased by $5 million above fiscal year 2012, and third, that the DOI Hazard Fuels Prioritization and Allocation System be suspended until such as it can be. Indian school construction. Currently Jefferson County operates a K through five school at Warm Springs, and older children must travel a significant distance to the Town of Madras to attend school. Both the Warm Springs and Jefferson County are submitting referendums to fund construction of an on-reservation K through eight school. As such, the Warm Springs oppose the proposed $52.8 million cut to the Bureau of Indian Education construction budget. Some funding for replacement school construction would be extremely beneficial to fulfill an intergovernmental agreement. Trust reform. The Bureau of Indian Affairs and Office of the Special Trustee have been confronted with trust mismanagement claims from individual Indian allottees and tribes for mismanaging both monetary assets and non-monetary or natural resources assets that span many decades. The Inter- Tribal Monitoring Association has provided a very valuable central source of policy-level information and analysis, technical assistance, legal research, and help in facilitating interactions between tribes and federal officials to engender more trust effective relationship and solutions. Tribal fisheries management. Warm Springs is a founding member of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, our policy and technical coordinating agency for treaty fisheries management for the Columbia River and International Fisheries. We support the testimony given today from CRITFC Chairman Gerald Lewis. That concludes my testimony, and again, I would like to thank you guys for the time. [The statement of Ron Suppah follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. LaTourette. Mr. Suppah, thank you very much for your testimony. Chairman Simpson has returned. He obviously thought I was not doing a good enough job, but I want to thank you all for your testimony, and we will turn the reins back over to Chairman Simpson. Mr. Simpson. I had to go ask the BOR about Indian water right settlements and what their budget is going to be. Mr. Minthorn. Mr. Minthorn. Yes, sir. Mr. Simpson. Okay. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. CONFEDERATE TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATIONS WITNESS LES MINTHORN Mr. Minthorn. For the record my name is Les Minthorn. I am the Chairman of the Umatilla Tribe in northeastern Oregon. My enrollment number is X162, and I am also a full-time U.S. Army Veteran, and I am here today to highlight, you know, the budget concerns that you have been listening to all morning. We have six items that we would like to highlight, and we are also, you know, for your information we are in the district of Greg Walden, Doc Hastings, and Cathy McMorris Rodgers. So when you go around the neighborhood in Washington, those are the representatives in our area. And so as we come here we have six items that we would like to talk about, and as you mentioned when you talked about water litigation, that is one of the things that we would like to highlight because of our treaty in 1855, and we do not have a water right unless we negotiate it, and so we are hoping that the BIA Water Rights Protection Budget is increased to a level that allows litigation and technical support to help us negotiate with the federal, state, and local stakeholders. So there is a lot of technical work involved with the basins that we certainly live in and depend upon. The Umatilla Basin Project, the Walla Walla area is also in our area, and we certainly support the Water Rights Protection Budget and the increase that is available. We are happy to support that for assisting our Oregon Congressional stakeholders to try to negotiate a reasonable settlement. You know, we have never got to the table all these years. We would like that technical support to help us get there. Under contract support, we support the increase for contract. Because we are a 638 tribe, we do compact with the Bureau of Indian Affairs programs, and we certainly expect contract support to be there as well as direct funding that comes with the appropriations for that particular agency. Under law enforcement activities, we have one item that we have never pushed before because of many reasons, but we would like to propose that the conservation, because the treaty activities on the Columbia River with our fishing rights and hunting in various parts of our area, conservation officers are very important for not only enforcing tribal members but non- tribals. And so the jurisdiction issue on all reservations is very critical to sanity, as you well know in the Court systems. Under tribal courts, talking about sanity, you know, we need more revenue or support in that particular arena because in 2010, when the Tribal Law Enforcement Order Act impacted our tribal court that we have, and there is only 33,000 people live on our reservation, and most of them are tribal members, and so we do have a tribal court. But when the Law and Order Act was passed, it added burdens on our tribal court, and we would like to see an increase in that particular budget line item. And you have been hearing good words about Indian health service and the good work that they do. We would like to support that increase for contract health support, and again, it is an issue that we have compacted for that particular arena with our Indian Health Service group in Oregon, and we have a little clinic on the reservation, and so that is really critical. Because if you do not have enough budget, you are just putting patients off until the next budget cycle we can cover that. So we do support that. Under treaty fisheries management, we are going to stand up and support the Columbia River Treaty. The tribes in the Columbia River, they are here to offer testimony. We support the testimony that is going to be provided by the chairman of that group. And basically we agree that most of the work that is done by the committee and whoever in the City of Washington here, you know, it is very difficult, but when we come, we are building our capacity to the point where we are not self- sufficient yet, but each time we come and we ask for specific funding, it builds our capacity to take care of our own. And eventually we will be self-sufficient some day, but until then we need the support of your committee and the rest of the federal agencies that we have a relationship with. And we value our relationships very highly with Congress and the State of Oregon and all the other tribes and states that we have to deal with. Thank you. [The statement of Les Minthorn follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Gerald Lewis. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. COLUMBIA RIVER INTERNATIONAL-TRIBAL FISH COMMISSION WITNESS GERALD LEWIS Mr. Lewis. Good morning, Chairman Simpson and subcommittee members. My name is Gerald Lewis. I am a member of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation. I am also a Tribal Council Member and Chairman of the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission out of Portland, Oregon. It is my pleasure to address you today regarding our funding needs and those of the fisheries programs for our member tribes; the Yakama Nation, Nez Perce Tribe, Umatilla Tribes, and the Warm Springs Tribes. We often refer to ourselves by our acronym, CRITFC. We are celebrating our 35th anniversary year in 2012. Our base program funding is in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Rights Protection Implementation Account. Our programs are carried our pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination and Assistance Act. We conduct a Comprehensive Treaty Fisheries Program intended to maintain compliance with court orders, regional intergovernmental agreements, and international salmon treaties. Together our tribes manage and co-manage lands equivalent to the size of the State of Georgia. We are leaders in ecosystem management, working in collaboration with five states, 13 federal agencies, and private entities. CRITFC and our member tribes are principals in the region's efforts to halt the decline of salmon, lamprey, and sturgeon populations and rebuild them to levels that support ceremonial, subsistence, and commercial harvests. To achieve these objectives, we emphasize the highest level of scientific rigor, cost-effective management strategies, and holistic approaches to protection of first foods. While many of the Pacific Coast salmon stocks remain in distress, our tribes are building Columbia Basin successes acre by acre, tributary by tributary, and stock by stock as we witnessed within this document here, which we will share with the committee. However, we are very appreciative of recent increases to rights protection implementation. However, we have two requests. First, the need remains high. We ask that this subcommittee exceed the President's request for the base programs for CRITFC and our members' Tribes Fisheries Programs, both in the Bureau of Indian Affairs Rights Protection Implementation Account specifically. We request $7.7 million for the Columbia River Fisheries Management, $3 million above the President's request. We also request, as you heard earlier, $4.8 million for the U.S. Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty, 364,000 above the President's request to implement obligations adopted by the United States and Canada under the treaty. Second, as leaders of our member tribes have stated, Chairman Brooklyn Baptist, Les Minthorn, and Ron Suppah, we are appreciative of recent increases to rights of protection implementation but are troubled by the arbitrary allocation of increases and decreases within the subaccounts. We ask this subcommittee to direct the BIA to return to the 2000, allocation formula, then sit down with account holders to determine where and how, if at all, the formula should be changed. I want to speak for a moment about public safety and law enforcement in treaty fishery areas. Our written testimony details recent court rulings related to criminal jurisdiction in Oregon and Washington. CRITFC currently contracts with DIA for two federal enforcement positions. We seek two more full- time enforcement officers so we can provide the comprehensive safety and service coverage the tribal people living along the Columbia River have asked for and deserve. We support the President's request for BIA Enforcement Services. In closing, thank you, Chairman Simpson. We will be holding our May commission meetings at our Hageman Genetics Lab. I want to extend a personal invitation to you and your staff to stop by and spend some time with us while we are there. Thank you. [The statement of Gerald Lewis follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Mr. Moran. Mr. Moran. I think I will pass, Mr. Chairman. It is good testimony, and it involves Idaho and the northwest, so I think I will defer to those who are more intimately familiar with it. Mr. Simpson. Mr. LaTourette. Mr. Moran. Respect the testimony and you coming here. Mr. LaTourette. Well, that puts me in a tough spot being from Ohio, but I am going to ask a question anyway. Mr. Suppah, I am interested in your observation about 60 percent unemployment and would ask you to give me, if you could, sort of a historical perspective. I presume it is higher with the difficulties that the entire country has suffered, but 60 percent is about seven, eight times the national average. So can you share with me where it has been for the last 10 years? Is it always in the 60 percent range? Is it 50 percent, and it has grown to 60? What has gone on in the last 3 years? Mr. Suppah. Basically it has been consistent at that level for about the past 5 years, and the problem we are having is mainly with development of economic development on our reservation, and maybe inviting outside businesses to come onto the reservation because they are so much of a problem with all of the regulations that they have to encounter in order to conduct business on our reservation. So I think that is one of our highest priorities is economic development for our tribe. Mr. LaTourette. Do you have or could you provide to the subcommittee, I assume the tribe is interested in attracting economic development and businesses to the reservation and supply jobs and other commerce. Do you have somewhere at your disposal a list of the specific impediments in terms of regulations that are preventing people that want to come to do business with you from doing so? Mr. Suppah. Sir, probably the highest level that you could go to on that question there, that issue is taxation simply because you sometimes drive off potential financers and business people by having maybe dual taxation on the projects, whether they are on the improvements or whether they are on the revenues produced by that. Mr. LaTourette. Okay. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, that is something I am interested in, maybe we could talk about it a little bit later. Thank you all. Mr. Simpson. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair. In your testimony, you asked for increases for working on invasive species with the Forestry Council and the welfare of fire work. I see the importance of that, but one of the things that our Forestry Councils in Minnesota have really been fueling more stress with is invasive species, such as the ash borer and the gypsy moth. So if maybe I could ask you to speak to that just for a minute because I have another question afterwards. If you have some documentation you can give us later, that would be great, too. Mr. Blythe. Under the stewardship contracting, of course, with the United States Forest Service, our tribe has been doing some invasive species work locally with the Forest Service ranches close by, and some of that has to do with eradication, some of the aquatic species in some of the lakes that are, you know, specifically I do not know, you know, which species they are, but I know we have had several contracts over the past few years, and of course, our testimony today is stewardship contracting. From a reduction of fuels, a reduction of, you know, just the thinning of the forest that surrounds the reservation, and particularly to fire hazard reduction, but the invasive species area, the reservation experiences it, you know, locally with some of the things that we are doing, but it is mainly with the working with the Forest Service. Ms. McCollum. Okay. So if the Forest Service is getting a cut, and you are getting a cut, that is going to have an impact on that. Mr. Blythe. And we look at it as an employment issue for us. I mean, we have crews that are just doing specific things, which helps some, you know, not just the reservation, but I am sure they have contracts with the county folks or just general contractors doing work, too. So it is an impact to employment. Ms. McCollum. And I have two other questions. One, you are looking at doing your levy referendum for building your K-12 school. Right now you are K-5. Does your levy referendum then include operations funding? Or if you are successful with passing your levy, do you go to the Bureau for more dollars for hiring teachers? How does that work? Mr. Suppah. Right now the process is that the Jefferson County School District will be having a referendum for a bonding for the complete, approximately $21 million need for construction of a K through eight on the reservation. At the same time, running parallel to that, the Warm Springs Tribe will be having a tribal referendum asking the membership to pay half of that or a little bit over $10 million for our share of that because I guess we have to strategize to reduce the terrible dropout rate by our membership from the Madras 509J School District, so that is why we are proceeding towards building our own school on our reservation so we have more control and more management elements including curriculum and et cetera. And I think that the school district will be providing the teachers, and they will be sending an administrator to the reservation for that. Ms. McCollum. Thank you. Sir, when you were talking about job opportunities to address your 60 percent unemployment, do you have a strategy when seeking out businesses that provide training for tribal members to be able to take advantage of the jobs, especially with dropout rates the way that they are sometimes and a lack of skills? I have been on several reservations where they have attracted businesses but then it is non-reservation people who are working on the business. So they get some bit of a profit for having the business there, but they are really not reaching the full potential of employing people from their own village. So do you have a two-step solution for that--attracting the business and then also trying to gear up the training and the job opportunities for tribal members? Either one of you can answer. Mr. Minthorn. The Umatilla Tribe is a little different than Warm Springs. Warm Springs is pretty much a closed reservation. Ms. McCollum. Okay. Mr. Minthorn. And we are a checkerboard reservation where we have non-tribal members, non-trust land across our reservation, and we are fairly small, about 172,000 acres remaining. So part of our strategy we have the I-5 freeway running through the reservation and railroad, and so part of our economic development strategy was to secure enough infrastructure planning monies to put water, sewer, dark fiber to the business park that we have created. And so we set aside 12 square miles of enterprise zone and the dual taxation that was referenced, that was an issue in the very beginning. So we negotiated with the State of Oregon to allow the tribal tax ordinance that we have to prevail, and the state would not tax that business that came to our reservation, and we negotiated that agreement so that we did not have a double taxation on any business that wanted to come. And so we do have 12 square miles of enterprise zone, we do have infrastructure, and we do have a sign out there that we have three tenants on that square mile, 12 square miles, but one of the tenants has 300 employees. So as you secure the infrastructure through EVA or whoever for water, sewer, transportation departments, that helps attract higher job paying businesses to the reservation. And we do negotiate other benefits similar to the county, but we have 12 square miles of trust land that we are trying to fill with higher businesses, and our unemployment rate used to be 35 percent, and now it is roughly 10 to 12, and I think Oregon is roughly 10. So we are getting there, but we still have issues relating to the dropouts word that you heard and getting them to work. We need places for them to be and things for them to do to keep them in school. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Thank you, and I thank the panel for being here today, and we look forward to working with you as we try to put together the budget for the coming fiscal year. Thank you. I am pleased to invite the Honorable Don Young up to introduce the Alaska tribes that are here today. Mr. Young. For those from Alaska, please, thank you, Mr. Chairman and the ranking member for inviting such a diverse group of Alaskans whose work for organizations has tremendous impacts on the lives of the Alaskan native people, and I simply want to welcome and introduce the following individuals for the long trip. By the way, it is 5,500 miles. I cannot figure it out. My Senator said it was only 4,000 miles. I cannot figure out how that happened, but that is the Senate for you. First we have Patty Brown-Schwalenberg, Executive Director of the Chugach Regional Resources Commission. Please come up, Patty. And we have Dan Winkelman, Vice President for Administration and General Counsel, Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation. The Yukon Health Corporation provides basic health services for about 30,000 Yupik Eskimos in the western portion of Alaska, and most of the time, Mr. Chairman, it is only accessible by plane and small boat. Marie Carroll, President and CEO of the Arctic Slope Native Association. Marie and Arctic Slope Native Association have worked tirelessly towards opening the Barrel Replacement Hospital, which will service 38,000 patients who reside in Alaska's most-northern community. And we have Gloria O'Neill, President and CEO of Cook Inlet Tribal Council. The Cook Inlet Tribal Council has been able to develop strong partnerships to ensure Native Alaskans in one of Alaska's urban areas to be able to pursue educational opportunities. This is a fine example of what can be done with dollars when they are available. Ed Thomas, President of Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. Mr. Thomas represents Native Alaskans in the southeastern portion of Alaska; the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida is responsible for preserving sovereignty and enhancing economic and cultural resources and promoting self-sufficiency. James Segura. Mr. Simpson. This will be the first panel, and then the other ones that Don will mention will be called up on the second panel. Mr. Young. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Then we have James Segura, Chairman of Southcentral Foundation. Southcentral Foundation has recently received the Baldrige National Quality Award, which is the highest Presidential award for performance excellence. We have Victor Joseph, Tanana Chiefs Conference President. Tanana Chiefs Conference provides a unified voice for advancing tribal governments for promoting physical and mental wellness, education opportunities, and cultural values to the Native Alaskan tribes to the interior of Alaska, which is my area. We have Charles Clement, President and CEO of Southeast Regional Alaska Consortium. SEARHC is health consortium of 18 native communities in southeast Alaska. They have done a fine job of providing for healthcare and dental service in these communities. And last we have Lloyd Miller, the National Tribal Contract Support Cost Coalition. Mr. Miller has worked tirelessly to ensure that contact support costs are foremost in IHS conversions. May I say, Mr. Chairman, this is a group that has done well in Alaska, and we want to continue to do that because if you laid Alaska over all the land east of the Mississippi River, all the land east of the Mississippi River, that is Alaska, and in that you have 245 Congressman. You only got one, Mr. James, keep that in mind. And that is really crucial because it is all diversified. It is just a large, big area with different problems. With that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I will sit for a few seconds. Then I have to go and vote on subpoenas. Not mine. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Don, and I was going to say, it is not going to a subpoena on me, is it? But I appreciate your support for not only Alaska Natives but Indian tribes all across the country, and I know you have worked very closely with this committee and members of this committee to address the issues, the unique issues that they face. So thank you for being here today. Mr. Moran. Mr. Chairman, if I could, because Don is going to leave while we are hearing testimony, I want to thank you, Chairman Young, for being here to introduce the leaders of the Alaska tribes and villages. I know it took extra effort to do that, but they appreciate it, and most importantly I am sure they appreciate the fact that they are so well represented. I do not know how you represent as vast an amount of land and diversity as you do, but you do a great job. So I just wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, we are very pleased to have Don Young before this panel. Thank you. Mr. Young. Thank you, Jim. I appreciate that. Mr. Simpson. I was just wondering what you did to your nose. I mean, who did you mouth off to? Mr. Young. This is a classic keep your nose out of other people's business. Mr. Simpson. Good lesson. Mr. Young. Thank you. I do have to leave. I do apologize. Mr. Simpson. Thanks, Don. Patty, you are up. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. THE CHUGACH REGIONAL RESOURCES COMMISSION WITNESS PATTY BROWN-SCHWALENBERG Ms. Schwalenberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am an enrolled member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians in northern Wisconsin and honored to serve as the Executive Director of the Chugach Regional Resources Commission, a capacity that I have held for the past 18 years. Chugach Regional Resources Commission or CRRC is tribal nonprofit that was established by the tribes in the Prince William Sound and Lower Cook Inlet area to specifically address natural resources, substantive, and environmental issues. They thought that having a stand-alone organization would better serve the environment and the resources upon which they depend. So we have been funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs for quite some time. However, we have a 638 contract, but they have not met their contractual obligations for the past 10 years and that we were never in the BIA budget, and so we would have to come back here and fight for money and make sure they carved out a piece somewhere, which takes quite awhile, and so then we go without funding for the first several months of the fiscal year. I am pleased to report that the BIA has finally recognized its obligation and requested the full $350,000 in fiscal year 2013, so we are in the President's budget, and I would urge the subcommittee to support this funding and keep it in there. I am humbled to listen to the testimony earlier with the issues that Indian Country is facing nationwide and the millions and millions of dollars that are needed, and I sit here before you asking for $350,000. But with that $350,000 we have been able to take that and multiply that six times. In the age of partnerships now where funding agencies are requiring that you have partnerships in order to get any funding from other funding agencies, we have been doing that for 18 years because we have to. We do not have the luxury of having a lot of money to do many things with, but with that money we have been able to establish the Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery, the only shellfish hatchery in the State of Alaska, and we are working on research and culture of the king crab, sea cucumbers, geoducks, purple-hinged rock scallops, mussels, and littleneck clams among others. We are in the process of finishing up the development of a K through 12 natural resource or science curriculum that integrates traditional ecological knowledge with science, and we will be piloting that in the K-9 school district, the Chugach Region of the Chugach School District, excuse me, as well as the Effie Kokrine School up in Fairbanks. So we are real excited about that, and we are also going to be working on a math curriculum that will do a similar thing. We are also an active participant in the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-management Council, establishing regulations on an annual basis for the substantive harvest of migratory birds in the spring and summer and any other variety of fisheries enhancements and research projects that affect the people in the Chugach Region are the kinds of things that we work on, and we are able to do because of this funding. So I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I would urge you to include our $350,000 in your fiscal year 2013 budget, including 100 percent of contract support. That would also be very helpful. [The statement of Patty Brown-Schwalenberg follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Patty. Dan. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. YUKON-KUSKOKWIM HEALTH CORPORATION WITNESS DAN WINKELMAN Mr. Winkelman. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. The Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation is a consortium of 58 tribes and has been contracting with the Indian Health Service for over 20 years. Today in remote western Alaska YKHC's budget is over $150 million, and we have 1,500 employees who provides comprehensive health services as Representative Young said to about 30,000 residents, mostly Yupik Eskimo, some Deg Hit'an Indian, which is what I am. Our region is a roadless area nearly as large as your state, Mr. Chairman, where our annual per capita income is around $11,269. Our unemployment rate in our villages is over 20 percent according to the State of Alaska and over 30 percent live in poverty. In our main hub, the city of Bethel, our gas has been $6.15 a gallon since last fall. If you go farther out into our villages, it ranges from 7 to $8 a gallon. We are expecting a large price increase this spring when the next barge full of gas comes in. Many homes in our region are without piped water and sewer, and approximately 6,000 homes in rural Alaska are without safe drinking water. Over the last 10 years as the cost of fuel has increased, the airfare has increased dramatically for patients that go to and from our villages to our Bethel Hospital for a higher level of care to treat their illnesses. A good example is if you are a Kolik man living, which Kolik is a village which is near the Bering Sea coast, and if you need to get to the hospital, you would have to get on a small single-engine plane, ride for a half an hour to the village of Emmonak, and in Emmonak you would transfer there, that is near the mouth of the Yukon River, like I said, and go from there to Bethel, and that is another hour and a half journey. Current costs of that is $690 round trip. You can just imagine that if you are from a large area where a lot of people live in poverty, that is very tough to do to try to get access to healthcare. It is against this sort of backdrop that we have been delivering healthcare in our region, and as we all know, in the Cherokee Nation case versus Leavitt, a unanimous Supreme Court reaffirmed the government's legal obligation to pay full contract support costs, and they base that upon, first, it is the statutory duties and also the contractual duties. Yet 24 years after this Congress passed full contract support cost legislation to tribes and 7 years after the Cherokee Nation case that reaffirmed those obligations, tribes have yet to receive full contract support costs. So why are tribes the only group of federal contractors not paid full contract support costs when it is mandated by both law and contract and, in fact, this committee last year directed the agency, the Service, and the Bureau to both submit their full contract support costs payments in this year's proposed budget. Why? Well, indeed, even the U.S. Supreme Court wondered why when in Cherokee Nation, its decision, it listed several ways that the Federal Government could avoid breaking its contractual promise to pay full contract support costs to tribes. The Court said, and I quote, ``We recognize the agencies may sometimes find that they must spend unrestricted appropriated funds to satisfy needs they believe more important than fulfilling a contractual obligation. But the law normally expects the government to avoid such situations. For example, by seeking added funding from Congress.'' Yet, the Indian Health Service in its proposed fiscal year 2013, budget did not even come close to fully funding contract support costs when there is a $100 million shortfall. They only requested $5 million. Why? The impact was described by September 28, 2011, bipartisan letter sent from nine U.S. Senators to President Barack Obama, ``When these fixed costs are not paid, tribes are compelled to divert resources by leaving positions vacant in the contracted programs serving their members in order to make up the difference.'' That is certainly true. YKHC's year end fiscal year 2011 shortfall, it consisted of $3.6 million. These shortfalls directly affect the ability of tribal health organizations and tribes to provide healthcare to their members and to reduce, most importantly, health disparities within our regions. This is really important because the cancer mortality rate where I come from in my region is 26 percent higher than it is for whites. While in America cancer rates are decreasing, in Alaska it is increasing dramatically, and in fact, is the leading cause of death for Alaskan native women. Just as disturbing as our suicide rate. We are nearly four times higher than the national average, and if you look at 15 to 19 year olds in our region in the YK Delta, it is a staggering 17 times the national average. Even though our region is nearly as large as your state, Mr. Chairman, our genuine interactions, that is what we cherish. We cherish our people, our friends, and we know most everyone, even though it is a very large region. Others speak with numbers and statistics, but with us what is important are those friendships. To us essentially they are not just statistics, but they real people, real people with names like my mother, Louise, my aunties Katherine and Nora, my uncles, Benny, Gilbert, and Adolph. Personally I stopped counting when I was preparing my testimony at ten people in my family that passed away from cancer. I stopped counting at five people from my family that committed suicide. These are staggering numbers, and unfortunately, unless you are an Alaska native, it is hard to understand that, and what is probably more tragic is that within our communities that almost becomes normal or expected. Ultimately receiving full contract support costs is not just about money. It is about being able as a health corporation that is made up of tribes or a tribe, it is about being able to direct those resources and come up with a program to help reduce those disparities. It is about portable mammography machines and being able to take those and deploy those out to our villages and being able to detect breast cancers early in stage one when our survival rates are much higher versus later stages. It is about the ability of developing a behavioral health initiative and deploying that to a village and being able to combat those suicides and help save a teenager's life. Unfortunately, it is too late for my mother, Louise, and my aunties and my uncles, but it is not too late for the 30,000 other residents of the YK Delta and the rest of Indian Country. Thank you. [The statement of Dan Winkelman follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Dan. Appreciate it. Marie. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. ARCTIC SLOPE NATIVE ASSOCIATION, LTD. WITNESS MARIE CARROLL Ms. Carroll. Good morning, Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Moran and other distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the honor and opportunity to testify before you this morning regarding the fiscal year 2013, budget for the Indian Health Service. My name is Marie, my Eskimo name is Cacom, Carroll. I am the President/CEO of the Arctic Slope Native Association, Limited, a tribal health organization based in Barrow, Alaska. I am an Inupiat from the northern-most tribe in the United States. We operate the Samuel Simmonds Memorial Hospital under the Self-Determination Act through Title V 630 Compact with the IHS. We provide health and social services to eight villages spread across the region the size of the State of Minnesota. I am here to provide testimony about the staffing package for our hospital project to replace our 49-year-old hospital, which was constructed in 1963. In partnership with IHS, ASNA is constructing the replacement regional hospital through a Title V agreement. I am pleased to report to you that our hospital construction project is on budget and is the first hospital project of its size to be constructed by a tribal health organization under Title V. We anticipate that ASNA and IHS will begin the acceptance and commissioning process at the end of this year, 2012. ASNA plans to move from the old facility to our replacement hospital between April and July of next year in 2013. The main purpose of my testimony today is to address the exclusion of our staffing package from the President's fiscal year 2013 budget. IHS has told ASNA that they did not recommend the staffing package for fiscal year 2013, because of the uncertainty of full funding for a construction budget in fiscal year 2012. Thanks to you and your colleagues Congress gave us full funding for fiscal year 2012, which has kept our project on time and on budget, a significant accomplishment in the arctic environment. This brings me to the conclusion of my testimony. ASNA has been responsible in carrying out the Title V Construction Agreement, and we are now without a staffing package to bring our replacement hospital online in the second quarter of 2013. On behalf of ASNA I am here to request that you fund our staffing package for the portion of the fiscal year in which our replacement hospital will be operational, because our staffing package is approximately $1.1 million per month. The total amount we would need in fiscal year 2013 budget is $6.6 million. We are grateful for the new facility that will benefit not only the Alaskan native people who reside in the Arctic but also everyone who lives or visits our region because we operate the only hospital north of the Brooks Range, and from the east to the western village of Point Hope, approximately 650 air miles in our region. We have only six exam rooms today in our existing hospital, which was designed to serve a population of 2,133 people. Today our service population is more than 15,000. That includes non- tribal people and growing. We are expecting more visitors beginning this summer from the Coast Guard and Shell Oil, who has been permitted to drill in the Chukchi Sea. Now more than ever there is a greater sense of urgency to meet the needs of our growing service population, and in my language we end our public statements by simply saying cleon nokbuck, meaning thank you very much. So please do not hesitate to call me if you ever have an opportunity to visit our part of the world. Thanks, again, for this opportunity to testify. [The statement of Marie Carroll follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Marie. Gloria, good to see you again. Ms. O'Neill. Good to see you, too. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL WITNESS GLORIA O'NEILL Ms. O'Neill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. Again, my name is Gloria O'Neill, and I serve as President and CEO of Cook Inlet Tribal Council. CITC is an Alaska Native tribal non-profit organization which serves as the primary education and workforce development center for native people in Anchorage. CITC builds human capacity by partnering with individuals to establish and achieve both educational and employment goals that result in lasting, positive change for themselves, their families, and their communities. CITC serves Alaska Native and American Indian people primarily in the south central Alaska area, which includes Alaska's most urbanized and populated communities. It is home to an Alaska Native/American Indian population of more than 40,000, constitutes 40 percent of the native people of the State of Alaska, and Anchorage is the fourth largest native community in the Nation. CITC's programs address many of the social, economic, and educational challenges faced by Alaska Native people. For example, Alaska Native students are twice as likely to drop out as their non-Native peers, 33 percent of Alaska's unemployed are Alaska Native people, and almost 20 percent of Alaskan Native people have incomes below the federal poverty line, nearly three times the rate of non-Native people. So how do we successfully as native communities address these disparities? An effective and proven tool available to Native American people in responding to community and social issues is the Indian Employment Training and Related Services Demonstration Act or the 477 Program, administered by the Department of the Interior. The law allows the consolidation of funding streams from the U.S. Departments of Interior, Health and Human Services, and Labor into a single employment and training program and report. And on a national level the 62 travel grantees in consortia of 477 Programs serve 267 tribes out of 545 tribes. So this is big impact. So how does 477 work at CITC? The 477 Program allows CITC to increase effectiveness and innovation and eliminate inefficiency and maximize program outcomes while adhering to the strictest government accountability standards. CITC provides a comprehensive, integrated service delivery model to assist Native job seekers, combining DOL, DOI, and HHS funding. A key component is our Tribal TANF Program, which is based on a philosophy of self-sufficiency. CITC has transitioned over 2,270 TANF recipients from welfare to work in the past 5 years, with an average hourly wage of a little over $11.50. And efficiencies gained within the TANF Program resulted in a 5-year savings of $7.1 million. These savings that have been re-invested in supporting participants and their self- sufficiency efforts. Over the past 5 years 477-related Programs in our organization have provided 8,257 jobseekers with career coaching, training, and job search assistance, of which nearly 5,500 were placed in jobs, so 65 percent. The average hourly wage of a jobseeker coming into CITC for services increased from $9.95 an hour to $17.23 an hour. Again, CITC has demonstrated that the 477 Program is very successful in connecting people to long-term, meaningful jobs. In short, the 477 Program is a win-win for the federal funders and CITC, since it eliminates wasteful inefficiency, while maximizing program outcomes. In addition to being successful on the ground, the 477 Program is fully accountable. It achieved the highest Office of Management and Budget rating in Indian Affairs. These programs provide tribes, tribal organizations the ability to leverage their federal job training and job placement funding for DOI, HHS, and DOL, including TANF, Childcare, and other programs. And as a result, 2012, 477 National Report shows that tribal programs served over 41,000 people, of whom only 4 percent did not complete their objectives. More importantly, of those who obtained employment, adults gained $9.25 per hour, youth gained $6.40 per hour, and people on Cash Assistance gained $7.60 per hour. As you can see, the 477 Program is critical to our effectiveness, especially in this environment of shrinking federal dollars. So this committee has been very responsive to the tribal concerns and supportive of the 477 Program, and we are grateful that your action last year resulted in considerable momentum to resolve agency issues regarding 477 implementation. We continue to meet in good faith with the agencies but have not reached a solution. In spite of our progress in our meetings, we still struggle with the agency's fundamental acceptance of the flexibility of 477, that 477 offers, and the spirit of the law. First, we request permanent suspension of the 2009, OMB Circular A-133, and any similar requirements to account by funding source number. Second, we request written assurance that 477 funding will permanently be transferred through 638 contracts and self- governance compacts. Third, we request that the subcommittee reintroduce Section 430, the language about 477 that was offered last year and add the following paragraph to read to clarify the intent of the program, and that is, ``all funds transferred under an approved Public Law 102-477 Plan may be reallocated and re-budgeted by the Indian tribe or tribal organization to best meet the employment, training, and related needs of the local community served by the Indian tribe or tribal organization.'' While working diligently and hopeful about the process, the National Tribal Work Group representatives remained concerned that in the absence of specific language, authorizing language, as provided in Section 430, with the requested addition, the spirit, the letter, and the opportunities of Public Law 102-477 law will be subject to changes in implementation from Administration to Administration. Thank you for your time and consideration. [The statement of Gloria O'Neill follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Gloria. I appreciate it very much. Edward. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. CENTRAL COUNCIL OF THE TLINGIT AND HAIDA INDIAN TRIBES OF ALASKA WITNESS EDWARD K. THOMAS Mr. Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee. My name is Ed Thomas. I am President of the Central Council out of Juno, Alaska, and I did tell Gloria to be short, so she was only 2 minutes over her time. Mr. Chairman, I have been managing federal programs since 1976, which is a long time ago, and I have been involved in the federal budgeting process almost every year since then, and my biggest disappointment in that involvement is we keep building the Indian budgets based on previous year's budget as opposed to what the needs are. I wanted to thank the members of the committee of the panel up here that pointed out the dramatic needs in Alaska, that the needs are very great. The unemployment rates are much higher in our rural Alaska than they are in this country, and as you know, when the unemployment rate grows above 10 percent, the public wanted to throw people out of Congress and get rid of the President. So if you multiply that by seven times, that is what it is in some of our villages here in the winter months. So that is the gravity of the situation in our area, and I think that with the high rising cost of energy you are going to see the problems get worse because the budgets did not adjust to meet the needs of those people who are already in a poverty situation and now the high cost of energies are going to increase their cost of living even more. Another problem that I talk about in my testimony is the problem of the way money is appropriated to the various departments. The Department of the Interior tries its best from their perspective to do a good job in allocating amongst the various bureaus, but if you look at the budget for the Department of the Interior since 2004, to 2012, you are going to see every one of those agencies getting more increases than went to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Bureau of Indian Affairs grew during that period of time by 8 percent. The Fish and Wildlife grew by 30 percent, Park Service by 27 percent, Geodetic Surveys by 18 percent, and BLM by 13 percent. And, so, you know, as you look at the cutbacks that are inevitable and because of the need to cut back federal spending, you are going to find the Bureau is going to say, well, gee whiz, we are barely cutting you, we are tightening our belt. Well, there really should not be any cutting in the BIA until those agencies have been reduced down to the 2004 level plus their 4 percent or 8 percent, rather. This is very important because as we go through this cycle of budget debates, I think you are going to see that those who have the strongest voice in Congress are going to be those that want to celebrate and the Park Service. You are going to see those agencies that are not dealing with people continuing to protect themselves because they have large public interest groups behind them. I also talk about the indirect costs, and I appreciate the panel talking about the indirect cost problems. I will not go into it, but I want to just state that we are a Nation of laws, and indirect cost laws are there. We do our best to live by it, but they are never funded by the Administration in accordance with what is required by the law. And so it really is critical that we address that. Now, I was honored last year to provide testimony to Congress, and there was an appropriations of just a little over $360,000 for Tlingit and Haida to make up some of that loss. Well, we did not get any of it. The reason being that when it went forth to the Administration, it was for shortfalls in BIA. Well, we did not have a shortfall in BIA. We had shortfalls in all of those other non-BIA programs, Head Start, Economic Development, and I can go down the list, but I do not have the time. But I think that it is important to make sure that as we develop laws, that we develop them so that we can abide by them. What I mean by that, we are required to do an audit of our tribal operations, and indirect cost is set by the government, and so the government then should fund that percentage rate. There are a lot of ways to have lawyers talk around that, and that is what we have been doing for all these years, and it really has not done us any good. I did in my testimony provide some language that would help us address that. One final note is that for years and decades and generations Indian programs have been non-partisan in nature, and I am an Independent. I am not a Democrat or Republican. But I must say that in this debate going on in Congress, we must get rid of the tax breaks of 2001 and amended in 2003. We cannot afford them. And why do I mention that? Because if we do not get more income, we are never going to be able to fund programs for the needy, whether it be Indian, or whether it be non-Indian. There just is not the resources there, because we have a couple wars going on, and we have the declining economy. So, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I know that that is a hot budget item, a hot item around here, and I hope you do not hold it against the other Indians for my comments, but I guess it was---- Mr. Simpson. Thanks for---- Mr. Thomas [continuing]. Important to state that as I walk out the door, and---- [The statement of Edward K. Thomas follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thanks for bringing up that non-controversial subject. That is certainly an issue that is going to be faced by the coming Congress. I mean, we have got to reduce our deficit. I am one of those who happens to believe you have got to do everything to reform entitlement programs. You have got to control discretionary spending, and you have got to have more revenue. How you do that is what the debate today on the floor and tomorrow on the floor will be all about. So---- Mr. Thomas. I will be happy to provide you some technical assistance. Mr. Simpson. You mentioned writing laws that we can abide by. It is interesting to note that throughout all of the Federal government, the authorization is about three times what we actually spend. Everybody thinks that the Appropriations Committee is just willy-nilly going out and spending money, but the authorizers have actually authorized about three times the level of spending, and then we get criticized by the authorizers. So I do find that interesting. When you talk about contract support, and fully funding contract support, that is something this committee is committed to doing, and we actually thought we had done it last year. We had a debate with IHS about what fully funding it was. From what I have been told, the best scenario is to find out what is needed to fully fund contract support costs, and then be just barely below that, because if there is excess, if you have overfunded what contract support will fully cost, that money then cannot just be shifted to some other program. It goes back to Treasury. So in a limited budget, I do not want to put too much money in there, but I would like to come as close as I can. We have had a debate with IHS about how you find the correct numbers to fully fund contract support costs. We want to be as accurate as we can. We want to fully fund contract support costs, and we are going to continue to work to do that, so I appreciate your testimony. Mr. Winkelman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I just spoke with the director in Alaska, she was just there a few days ago, and she did bring up that point, that the agency would never be able to fund fully contract support. Well, they are not even close now. Mr. Simpson. Yeah. Mr. Winkelman. And I reminded her that for new and expended programs, all you have to do is budget for it, much like the Department of Defense does. It is my understanding that the Department of Defense and their Federal contractors, they budget for it a year ahead of time, and they propose it in their proposed budget. And that is how you would be able to fully fund contract support costs. All you have to do is budget for it. And, unfortunately, the shortfall is so large now, and I am more frustrated than you are, and this committee, because when I saw that $5 million, and now there is a projected number of $100 million, it is not even close. And it is in law, there has been a court case on it, and if they would just put the request in, then I would not have had to travel down here, and we would not have to talk about contract support. Mr. Simpson. Do you not like being in Washington? Mr. Winkelman. No, I love being in Washington, I really do, but it is in law. I mean, what else do we have to do? Mr. Simpson. Yeah, I know. And we are going to, this committee, do everything we can to make sure that we find those resources to do it. Ms. McCollum? Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chairman, in light of the hour, and the fact that there is a classified briefing at one o'clock, we have the information. My office will follow up with a couple of you with a little more, but I want to be able, to the best of my ability, to hear the next panel before I attend the classified briefing. Which they will not reschedule just for me. Mr. Simpson. I know, I have got a bunch of interns out in the hallway that I have got to step out and take a picture with, so as the next panel is coming up, I will go take that picture, and Betty will start it, and then I will be right back in. I appreciate all of you being here. We will work on these issues as we try to address the upcoming budget. And I should say, to all of you from Alaska, we mentioned Don, and what a great representative he is, and what a great job he does for all of you. Also, the ranking member on the Interior Committee in the Senate is Senator Murkowski, and our staff have worked very closely with her and her staff in trying to address these issues. She is very influential, and does a great job for all of you too. The next panel. Mr. Winkelman. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. James Segura, Victor Joseph, Charles Clement, Selina Moose, yes, you are on this panel, and Lloyd Miller. If you would come up? And the first one to testify will be James. If you will start that? I will be right back in. Ms. McCollum. I will wait until the door closes. Good afternoon and welcome. And James Segurna---- Mr. Segura. Segura. Ms. McCollum [continuing]. Segura, Chairman of the Board at the Southcentral---- Mr. Segura. That is fine. Ms. McCollum [continuing]. Foundation. If you would please lead off, sir? Thank you. ---------- -- -------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. SOUTHCENTRAL FOUNDATION WITNESSES JAMES SEGURA Mr. Segura. Sure. It gets mispronounced a lot. My name is James Segura. I am Chairman of the Board for the Southcentral Foundation in Anchorage, Alaska. Southcentral Foundation is a tribal organization, and we have a self-government compact with the Indian Health Service. Under that compact, we carry out various IHS medical, dental, optometry, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment service programs for over 45,000 Alaska Native and American Indian beneficiaries in and around Anchorage, plus another 13,000 people in 55 rural villages. Our service area is larger than the State of Oregon, and to do all this we employ over 1,400 people. The first issue I need to discuss concerns our joint venture of contract. Three years ago Southcentral Foundation and the Indian Health Service entered into a binding joint venture contract. Under that contract, the SCF agreed to build a new 88,451 square foot primary care clinic in the Mat-Su Valley using borrowed funds from non-IHS sources. We have done our part, and we will receive our Certificate of Beneficial Occupancy for the Mat-Su Clinic on July 15 of this year. In return, Indian Health Service agreed to pay to staff the facility at 85 percent of its designed capacity, which comes to $27 million. Indian Health Service commitment includes a commitment to request funding from Congress on the same basis as Indian Health Service requests funding for any other new facility. But something has gone terribly wrong, and it is probably due to budget pressures. Indian Health Service's budget only requests 50 percent of its staffing requirement for the clinic, or $13.5 million. This is a huge gap. If Indian Health Service does not cover the full $27 million cost of operating the clinic, SCF will be forced to reprogram other funds to make up for the difference. We understand that there are budget pressures, but a deal is a deal. A contract is a contract. Before the administration requests discretionary increases, it needs to honor its contractual commitment to SCF. We did our part. The administration must do its part. The second issue I need to discuss concerns our main contract with Indian Health Service. Once again, the President's budget does not call for full funding to reimburse the contract support costs we spend on these Federal programs. We are running the government's programs. We are incurring costs to run those programs. Costs like federally required audits, and Workers' Compensation Insurance. Our contract and the law says Indian Health Service must reimburse those out of the costs. The committee has said IHS must reimburse those out of the costs. But the budget does not allocate sufficient funds to pay all of the costs of all of the tribal contractors, like SCF. Our best estimate is that the administration budget will mean a $99 million shortfall across all of the tribal contractors next year, yet the budget only requests a mere $5 million to cover these contract requirements. At Southcentral Foundation, we have no choice. These costs are fixed costs. They are audited costs that are set by the government. If Indian Health Service does not reimburse these costs, we at Southcentral Foundation have no choice but to cut positions, cut services, cut billings, and collections, cut medical care. It is as simple as that. Cutting contract support costs actually cuts our programs. Last year this committee reiterated the binding nature of these contracts. It instructed the Indian Health Service and the BIA to fully fund all contract support cost requirements. The BIA has done this. Indian Health Service has not. So far as we can tell, no other contractors are treated this way. Only tribal contractors are treated this way. This has to stop. In fiscal year 2013, Indian Health Service should pay its contract obligations in full. The contract support cost line item should be full funded at a minimum of $571 million. This way the Department can finally honor these contracts in full. Remember, every tribe has contracts with Indian Health Service to run some Federal facility or program. Every tribe is hurt by the shortfalls, and every tribe will be helped if the shortfall is eliminated. To summarize, before any other increases are considered, these contract obligations must be honored in full. Joint venture staff funding and contract support cost funding must be funded at 100 percent. Just as our contracts require, we have done our part. It is time for the government to do its part. Thank you for granting me this opportunity to testify on behalf of the Southcentral Foundation and the 58,000 Native Americans we serve. Thank you. [The statement of James Segura follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, James. Victor. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. THE TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE WITNESSES VICTOR JOSEPH Mr. Joseph. Thank you. I want to take a minute to thank you for this opportunity, and the other subcommittee members. And I also recognize Andy Jimmy, our Board Chairman, back in the back there. My name is Victor Joseph. I am the health director for Tanana Chiefs Conference. TCC is an Alaska tribal consortium that serves 39 Federal recognized tribes across an area that is almost the size of Texas. Today I will testify on three matters. First I will explain TCC's need to receive its full staffing package of $30 million for our joint venture construction project. Next I will explain our concerns with the limited increase in contract support cost. Finally I will offer TCC's full support of H.R. 4031. IHS has long recognized the need to build a new medical facility in Fairbanks that serves the IHS beneficiaries in the interior of Alaska. The facility is needed to support services across our region, but IHS has never provided the money to build one. Two years ago we offered to build a new facility with borrowed funds, if the government would agree to cover the full cost of staffing. Government agreed, and in 2010 IHS signed a joint venture construction project with TCC. Today construction is under way. We are under budget, ahead of schedule, and we project receiving our Certificate of Beneficiary Occupancy in early September. Under our agreement, IHS should be able to provide TCC with full 100 percent funding for our staffing package. But because of budget restrictions, IHS has only requested 27 percent of our staffing package, or about $8 million. You have heard from other tribal entities from Alaska, and like TCC, IHS has requested less than 100 percent for their projects too. We can only think of two reasons for this disconnect. First, it is possible that when these budget requests were developed last summer, IHS used dated information. If that is the problem, we hope that IHS submits a revised budget request that fully funds all staffing needs. Second, it is possible that IHS is treating our facilities different than other smaller facilities. If that is the case, that is simply wrong. We at TCC, and other tribal entities, will spend far more than IHS requested. In order for us to carry out our responsibilities under this agreement, we need to receive the full amount that was agreed upon in negotiated staffing packages. We recognize, of course, that we are not the only joint venture projects that must be funded next year. IHS has correctly requested 100 percent funding to honor its contract with the Chickasaw and Cherokee Nation. All that TCC asks is that IHS also honors its contract with us. It is not a matter of choice or priorities. It is a matter of obligation. We have borrowed heavily to build a new IHS facility. There is no tearing back for us. We expect the government to likewise honor its written commitment to fully fund joint venture projects that were agreed upon. Like the joint venture projects, we have similar concerns with contract support costs. TCC incurred substantial contract support costs in operating our IHS programs across our region. IHS has a commitment, a contractual commitment, under Indian self-determined action to pay those costs. Just last summer the House Appropriations Committee agreed that the legal obligation must be honored in full. Thank you. The Committee directed IHS to submit a budget that would do that, but that did not happen. Even though there is currently a $50 to $60 million shortfall in contract support payments, and even though it is clear that the shortfall will grow to almost $100 million under the President's proposed budget, the budget requests only $5 million. Not only does the budget request defy the House Committee's clear instructions, not only does it make the current situation worse, but once again it violates our contract rights to be paid in full. Please understand that we are incurring these contract costs every day, and when the government fails to repay them, we have to take them out of programming. Finally, TCC fully supports H.R. 4031. H.R. 4031 will also allow a court to hear our claims. An amendment is necessary to provide a just outcome for self-determining tribes. We encourage the support of this bill. Our joint venture contract with IHS is a contractual obligation for IHS to provide full staffing in exchange for TCC building its own clinic, and then leasing it to IHS. Contract support costs are a similar contractual legal obligation for IHS to provide full support in exchange for tribes to operate IHS programs. We know times are hard for everyone, but we operate IHS programs under contracts, and now we have a second contract with IHS. All we ask and expect is the government to hold up its end of the bargain and honor these contracts in full. Thank you for this opportunity to present this testimony. [The statement of Victor Joseph follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Victor, appreciate it. Charles. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. SOUTHEAST ALASKA REGIONAL HEALTH CONSORTIUM WITNESS CHARLES CLEMENT Mr. Clement. Yes, sir. Chairman Simpson, my name is Charles Clement. I am the President and CEO of SouthEast Alaska Regional Health Consortium, SEARHC. In light of the comments that have been made, I will address my testimony. My written testimony has been submitted to the committee. Thank you for your time. I would like to echo many of the comments that have been made with regard to contract support cost, but I would like to share with you and the committee a little bit about how those impact SEARHC specifically. SEARHC is a consortium of 18 tribes and tribal organizations throughout southeastern Alaska. I think, like everybody else in Alaska, we have to define it to a state. It is about the size of Maine, is the state that I serve. So maybe that will endear somebody. Mr. Simpson. Minnesota, and everything west of the Mississippi. Mr. Clement. And there is Texas to the left, and I am also a member of the southernmost tribe in Alaska and the easternmost tribe, so we have got the geography lesson covered. SEARHC operates in a compact with the IHS that is valued at about $42 million. We have an operating budget of eight million. We have about $118 million. It has long been our goal to sort of fully realize our contract support cost funds that are due the organization. I think, you know, the challenge in Alaska is largely associated with some of these geographical challenges. I think that is why we all bring it out. It is transportation, it is energy, and then there are just these substantial health disparities due to a variety of reasons, largely socioeconomic impacts. But I think when we talk about how it impacts SEARHC specifically, I am a new CEO. I have been on the job for about 60 days. I actually used to work for Jim for the last 15 or so years. So I have been on this job, you know, 60 days, but I can tell you, as a new CEO, what you do is you try to gauge an assessment of the organization. And I can tell you, from SEARHC's perspective, what is really happening with lack of payment on contract support costs, is there is a slow deterioration of infrastructure and services. You know, as has been stated before that, you know, these funds are fixed costs. We have to pay them. So where does the money come from? Well, you have deferred investment in infrastructure, and you have deferred investment in services that are provided to beneficiaries. And so you start to spiral down. I mean, if you look at SEARHC, we have almost 100 vacancies that are pending that we are not going to fill, or we have no plans to fill until we get more funding. And when we get more funding, we see more services, we generate more revenue. It is a self-fulfilling cycle. We have facilities and physical plant infrastructure that is some of the oldest probably left in Alaska. I mean, it has been heavily invested in over time, but in the last several years, I would say the last decade or so, there has been very specific deferred investment, that we have not upgraded the facilities, we have not kept up to date. I mean, I think one of our favorite facilities we like to talk about is the double wide trailer that was built in 1954 out in one of our villages. I do not think, I mean, it is on par with anything, and anywhere in Alaska. Well, maybe not in Victor's area, but they've got some real challenges there also. But, you know, what you have is a cycle. And so we talk about, you know, I think our contract support shortfall was $2.8 million. It is the culminating effect of that shortfall year over year over year. And so what you have is you have multiple years of deferred investment, and it compounds the problem. I mean, it makes a tough situation, an impossible situation, that much more difficult. And so when we do make up the shortfall, we will get, you know, say it is fully funded. That money will be the down payment, and the rest will be on our shoulders, admittedly. But it, you know, the work just begins when we get the money. We have to put the money to work and make that investment so we can see patients, so we can invest in our communities, invest in our physical plan and our organizations. We want to have organizations that our beneficiaries are proud to come to, that they are not 1954 double wide trailers that have not seen investment in 20 years. We want to have facilities and organizations that we can lure providers to. There is no medical school in Alaska. We have to bring every doctor, just about, either we have to steal them from another tribal organization in the State, or we have to bring them in from outside of Alaska. And, you know, talk about a hard sell, you know, to come in to Alaska in the middle of winter to a facility that is a marginal, you know, maybe a marginal, I am trying to find a nice word for it, but it is difficult. You know, you bring these folks in, come from a new highfalutin medical school, to bring them in to rural Alaska, and you drop them off, it is a shell shock. And so the investment and contract support cost is really just the beginning for us, but it is a substantial beginning. It shows the commitment on behalf of the government to work with us in partnership for the success of all Alaska Natives and American Indians. My written testimony is a little bit different than that, but just in light of the comments that have already been said, I did not want to repeat too much. So thank you for your time, I appreciate it very much. [The statement of Charles Clement follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Just out of curiosity, who does the WWAMI Program benefit? I mean, Alaskans go to medical school in Washington, along with Idaho and Montana students. Do most of those students return to Alaska? Mr. Clement. I do not know if most of them do, but a lot of them do. It plays a big part in the tribal health system and overall Alaska because we place residents through the WWAMI Program and the various organizations, so it is a big benefit to Alaska and Alaska Native organizations, but I do not know how much specifically actually come back into the system. Mr. Simpson. Idaho is having that debate right now of whether we ought to build our own medical school, or whether the WWAMI does the job for Idahoans. It is an interesting debate. I appreciate it, thank you. Selina? ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. NATIONAL NATIVE AMERICAN AIDS PREVENTION CENTER WITNESS SELINA MOOSE Ms. Moose. Thank you. First of all, I would like to apologize for earlier. This is my first time here---- Mr. Simpson. That is okay. Ms. Moose. And I did not want to be left out, being that I came all the way from Alaska just to---- Mr. Simpson. That is okay. All right. Ms. Moose. Chairman Simpson, esteemed members of the House subcommittee, my name is Selina Moose. I am an Inupiat from northwest Alaska, the size of Indiana, and I am speaking to you today as a member of the Board of Directors for the National Native American AIDS Prevention Center, also known as NNAAPC, and as a concerned indigenous person. Thank you for allowing me to come to you from Alaska and to speak to you today openly and honestly. The National Native AIDS Prevention Center is the only national HIV and AIDS specific Native organization in the United States. It was founded in 1987. NNAAPC's mission is to stop the spread of HIV and related health disparities among American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. NNAAPC is providing education, resources, training, and development services in all 50 States. We are creating materials to support the public health infrastructure that is slowly growing in Indian country. I am concerned because I believe that the government is turning its head away from the HIV epidemic, particularly not paying attention to the impact on the first peoples of this land, and it is the issue that I would like to discuss today. In 2002 my brother died of AIDS in the village, and because of that I got involved with HIV and AIDS, particularly for our native peoples. And we also did a documentary video of how our family went to our village and told them about, you know, the concern we have, and that my brother was positive. That is concern of our people. We are finding that more and more Native communities are responding to our message, but the Federal government is the one pushing us further and further down on the list of priorities. In 2010 the CDC released a total of $250 million over five years in prevention funding directly to grantee organizations. Only one Native organization was funded. Out of $43 million annually, only a little over $300,000 was granted to a Native organization, and our organization, NNAAPC, almost closed its doors in 2009. Our funding disappeared as a reflection of the funding shift that no longer categorized Native Americans as racially specific priority population for HIV prevention activities. States with smaller population sizes and fewer AIDS cases are finding their prevention budgets slashed by up to 50 percent. Fewer prevention opportunities are available in states with large Native populations, like South Dakota, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska, Hawaii, and Montana because the money is no longer there to support local programs. New initiatives also call for targeting specifically African-American, Hispanic, Latino communities, further diverting money from Native communities. I understand that these decisions are based upon HIV and AIDS surveillance, and I do not want to underscore the importance of providing appropriate prevention activities in these communities of color, yet Native Hawaiians and American Indians, Alaska Natives, have the third and fourth highest rates of new HIV infections annually, respectively. In fact, between 2007 and '10 the number of new HIV diagnosis among American Indians, Alaska Natives rose by 8.7 percent, greater than many other groups. Also, fewer of us survive after having received an AIDS diagnosis. These statistics do not support the de-prioritization of our communities. In fact, they suggest a serious health disparity. I believe that the U.S. government has a responsibility to its native people. We have a commitment from the government, a commitment that says we care about the health and wellbeing of our Native American people, a commitment that says that the government's trust relationship to provide for the health care of Native people is sacred, and exists not only just in writing, but in practice as well. This relationship demands that American Indians, Alaska Natives, always be placed as a priority population, that we do not fall in the shifting government whims. I know I am running out of time. I do not have very much left. Okay. With the 2010 release of the President's national HIV/AIDS strategy, the whole of this country needs to examine how we are meeting the prevention and treatment of needs of people living with, and are at risk for HIV. This nation cannot afford to continue to allow Indian country to linger 10 years behind the rest of the country. In order to address these health disparities and ensure the health of our Native peoples, I ask you to consider the following as you move forward with your budget deliberation. One, I ask that the Congress increase funding for American Indian, Alaska Native specific HIV programming in the budgets of Federal agencies like Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Indian Health Service. I ask that the Congress examine the success of special diabetes program for Indians that set aside $150 million annually for local diabetes education and prevention efforts, and model a similar HIV program for Native Americans that would allow for stable funding and local ownership prevention efforts. I ask that Congress designate funds specifically for the creation of a national Native HIV/AIDS resource center so that consistent funding would be set aside to create a persistent presence at the national level to provide support for community efforts at education and guidance for decision-makers. And lastly, I ask that the Congress allocate funds for the specific provision for HIV testing materials to American Indians and Alaska Native communities to support enhanced testing initiatives. Again, I think you for the opportunity that you have provided me to share some of the facts, and to share my feelings about the state of HIV in American Indian and Alaska Native communities. I hope that you consider our request in light of what I have shared with you today. Thank you. [The statement of Selina Moose follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Selina. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. NATIONAL TRIBAL CONTRACT SUPPORT COST COALITION WITNESS LLOYD MILLER Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman McCollum, thank you for the honor to appear today. My name is Lloyd Miller. I am an attorney with Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Miller and Munson. I have been litigating contract support cost cases for many years, and I litigated the Shoshone Paiute and Cherokee case in the Supreme Court in 2005. And for the committee's information, there is another case to be argued next month, on April 18, involving the Ramah Navajo Chapter, and the Pueblo Zuni, and the Oglala Sioux Tribe involving contract support costs in the Supreme Court. But I am here today not so much to talk about litigation as to talk about the contract support cost issue from a legal perspective. I represent the National Tribal Contract Support Cost Coalition. It includes some of the organizations you have heard from today. It includes the Cherokee and Choctaw you heard from yesterday. It includes the Shoshone Paiute, Shoshone Bannock Tribe. It includes Riverside, San Bernardino Community in California. It includes 290 tribes in 11 States, tribes or intertribal organizations, over 50 percent of the federally recognized tribes in the United States. All of them suffer contract support cost shortfalls. And these shortfalls are shortfalls in reimbursements. As you heard today, quite eloquently, these costs are paid. It is not a question of paying them. They are paid. And if they are not reimbursed by the government, then they come out of health care services, they come out of law enforcement. And this is very true with the Shoshone Paiute reservations, where they have had to make cuts in law enforcement in order to balance the books. In the committee's report this year, the committee requested that the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs fully fund contract support costs. The Bureau of Indian Affairs heeded to committee's instruction. The Indian Health Service did not. On page 98 was the instruction to the committee. The second problem with the budget submission from the President and the Indian Health Service is that the Indian Health Service did not tell this committee how much the budget was going to be short. As we all recall, I think, because of the discussions, in the prior fiscal year, the President shared with the committee that at the funding levels being requested, contract support would be underfunded by about $149 million. This year you have not been given the information by how much will the President's budget request under fund contract support. We have, however, undertaken the task of trying to figure that out for you. We retained a gentleman named Ron Demaray who used to run the contract support cost activity for the Indian Health Service. He is the nation's expert in this area. What I gave you a moment ago is his estimate. Completely transparent. It shows you the assumptions and the calculations he has made, which would show that, at the President's budget request, there would be a 99.4 million shortfall in fiscal year 2013. So you have heard statements that the shortfall will be $99, $100 million. This is where the calculation comes from. Of course, the request is that there be a full funding allocation made in the 2013 budget. That is request number one. But what I mentioned about the absence of information leads to request number two. The second request we make, and it is in this language, which I will distribute to the committee, and which was included in my written testimony, addresses the secrecy which has descended over the agency. I have been practicing law since 1979. I have been around contract support cost issues since contract support costs were addressed by Congress in the 1987 hearings and the 1988 amendments. Never before have we witnessed the kind of secrecy we see today. The Indian Health Services refuses to disclose any information whatsoever to tribes and tribal contractors around the country how much are we paying you, how much are you entitled to, how much are you short? They will visit with each tribe individually, but they no longer, as of a few months ago, share any of this data on a national basis. It is therefore impossible to know what the national shortfall is. It is impossible for us to test the statements the agency makes to the committee. As you know, last year the agency made incorrect statements to the committee. At that time we were able to test those statements, we were able to correct them with the committee. This year we do not have that information. So we are requesting language that would require the agency, this would have to be language in the statute, that would direct the agency to share all of its data with the Indian tribes, as it did for every year until this past year. Then the third and final thing I would mention about contract support costs is to echo what Mr. Thomas testified to a little while ago. This issue about indirect costs due from other agencies is actually a no cost problem which costs tribal contractors around the country. And if I may just take a moment to explain it, when the Federal government sets an indirect cost rate, then you are entitled by that rate to tap each of your grants, or contracts or your own tribal accounts at that rate. So if you get a 25 percent rate, you take 25 percent out of every grant. But some of the agencies will say, no, you may not take any money out of the grant we are giving you, or you may only take 15 percent out of the grant we are giving you. What Mr. Thomas's proposal is asking is not that there be more money. It is asking that he has the permission and the authorization from Congress to take the 25 percent out of the grant because he was issued a 25 percent rate, which tells him he must tax every grant he receives by 25 percent. When he is unable to carry out the direction to tax the grant by 25 percent, he must dip into his own tribal funds to make up for that tax. Otherwise he is penalized by the Federal agency that set the rate. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. [The statement of Lloyd Miller follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Thank all of you for being here today. The issue of fully staffing IHS facilities is something this committee takes very seriously, because it is just stupid to build facilities and not put the staff in there for them. Why build the facility if you are not going to have a staff there? We will look very seriously at this budget, and make sure, A, that everybody is treated fairly, and, if we can find the resources, that, B we will staff those facilities so that they can do what they were built to do. Secondly, I would like to say that last year we put more money into contract support costs than ultimately ended up in there. Some of the pushback we got was from the Senate, and so we need help with the Senate. I am not trying to overfund it. I am just trying to fund it, and to fully fund it. And at the last minute, IHS came in and said, no, you guys overfunded it, according to their numbers. Now, not to blame them too much, but they indicated that they had had one person that worked there for years that did all of this stuff, and he left, and so it was kind of a new effort for them. I think IHS wants to fully fund contract support too. I know they do. But, again our big difficulty is trying to find out exactly what it is. Now, I can tell you that IHS has told us that they believe the shortfall is going to be in the neighborhood of 70 to 80 million, not $100 million. That is the difficulty we have in finding out what the number is. And as I said, what they have said is that we do not want to overfund it, because then the money just goes back to Treasury. Now, maybe that is what we need to change, so if it is overfunded, it could be used for contract support, rather than the contract health support, or the referral support. I am going to rename it so I can keep the two straight. But there are some challenges here, and I think everybody is working toward trying to have the best result and do what is right. And I think we all agree what is right, and that is to fully fund it. And we are going to work on getting that done again this year. But, again, when we get a bill and go over to the Senate, and we have done what we think is right in contract support, we are going to need some help in trying to push that through, because, you know, everybody throughout Congress has different priorities. This is one of my highest priorities, so we will do what we can. Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman---- Mr. Simpson. Go ahead. Yeah. Mr. Miller [continuing]. One suggestion. I heard the concern that you have shared, a very important concern, that the account not be overfunded. Years ago a portion of the account was made available without regard to fiscal year limitation, shall remain available until expended was the language in the bill. This might address the committee's concern. Maybe $20 million of it remains available until expended, or maybe all of it remains available until expended, whatever, in your judgment, is the right thing to do. But there is a way to address the problem of not overspending the account. Mr. Simpson. Yeah. That is a good idea. Because then you could say whatever is not spent remains available, and next year it would lower your amount you would have to put in---- Mr. Miller. Precisely. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. For your estimate. Ms. McCollum. Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chair, I really appreciate all the succinct testimony, and I will speak to others who care passionately about AIDS funding. Are you coming to Washington, D.C.? There is going to be an international conference here. Ms. Moose. Yes, I am. Ms. McCollum. So please give your office my card, and we can talk more later. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. Thank you all for being here today and coming all the way from the great State of Alaska, that includes the State of Idaho, Indiana, Maine, all the others we have mentioned. Texas, all of those. All these dinky little states down here. Thank you. Mr. Miller. Thanks a lot. Mr. Simpson. You bet. Thank you. Last panel is Michele Hayward, Leonard Masten, Bambi Kraus. Is that right? Ms. Kraus. Yeah. Mr. Simpson. Close? Ms. Kraus. Are there three of us? Mr. Simpson. Michele. Which one is Michele? Okay. You are first. Ms. Hayward. Do I hit this button? Mr. Simpson. Yeah. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. CALIFORNIA RURAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD WITNESSES MICHELE HAYWARD JIM CROUCH Ms. Hayward. All right. Good afternoon. My name is Michele Hayward. I am a member of the Redding Rancheria. I am the secretary with the tribal council there, and I am the Chair of the California Rural Indian Health Board, which places me on the National Indian Health Board. And I am also on the CSC Work Group representing California, so I appreciate today being here. Thank you for your time, and I am very honored to represent California Indians. I brought my staff and the Board members, so I want them to introduce themselves real fast. Mr. Crouch. Jim Crouch, Executive Director, California Rural Indian Health Board. Mr. LeBeau. Mark LeBeau, Health Policy Analyst, California Rural Indian Health Board, and member of the Pit River Tribe from Northeastern California. Ms. Cazares-Diego. Andrea Cazares-Diego from Greenville Rancheria and Health Board Member. Ms. Hayward. Group was founded in 1969 and represents about 32 tribal governments, and we serve 28 IHS active users. But we are here today to request for budget funds, and the first one is a $10 million increase for the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund, and $50 million for the contract health care, $17 million for the youth regional treatment facility in Southern California, and $350,000 for a special case with Smith River Rancheria, who reside in Curry County in Oregon. So, with that, I am going to turn it over to my executive director, Jim Crouch. Mr. Crouch. Thank you, Michele. You have our written testimony. Basically we are talking about another lawsuit, different than the one Mr. Lloyd Miller was talking about, known as Rincon v. Harris, that was adjudicated in the 1980s. It basically requires that the IHS resource distribution process be reasonable, rational, and defensible, which basically means that what is known as current services funding, or base budget funding, is not sufficient to withstand those criteria. For that reason, Congress created the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund, it was initially known as the Equity Fund, to bring funding equity to tribal health programs and IHS operating units across the country. They are, in essence, putting no money in that account for this year, and we are urging you to put aside $10 million of the hospital and clinic line item money in a committee move in order to fund some effort towards equity. You are going to get a report on Indian Health Care Improvement Fund from the agency this year. What you will see is that they have not brought equity to their system, and that they are setting aside maybe two percent of their appropriations over these last several decades to achieve equity in a $4 billion budget. Secondly, we are asking for hospital and clinics. One of the mechanisms for achieving equity is to fund used, excuse me, contract health care. The contract health care distribution fund has four basic co-factors. Three of those are essentially base budget funding co-factors. The fourth issue is reasonable access to an IHS inpatient facility. The entire tribal health program in California is ambulatory clinic based. There are no IHS hospitals in the entire State of California, which is pretty much the size of the State of California. We therefore need better access to contract health funding. The formula tries to do that, but, actually, if there is not more than $100 million put in in new money each year to the CHS program, you will not reach those other components and have any impact on funding equity. We would like to ask $17 million in facility construction. Again, there have been no IHS facilities built in California. There is one joint venture project just a year and a half old. We would request that you go into the design and build phase for the Southern Youth Regional Treatment Center, which would serve youth in the southern part of California. There is another Northern YRTC on the way. The south has the land in hand. It belongs to IHS. You should fund the next phase. Finally, special case of Smith River. They live seven miles south of the Oregon border. Their membership is fully recognized tribe. On their reservation they have a clinic that is part of a consorted tribal health program, United Indian Health Services. By law and statute, that clinic system, which is governed in part by Smith River members, must not provide contract health care dollars and services for the Smith River members who live in Curry County, Oregon. This is because the contract health service delivery area in California is statutorily defined. What we are proposing is that you use your authority as a committee and fund the account for new tribes, which is a portion of the contract health service line item, in the amount of $350,000, an appropriate amount based on the new tribes formula for the 174 members of this Federally recognized California based tribe that live in their traditional Tolowa homelands, which happen to be north of the California line. Those are our four requests. Thank you for your time this afternoon. [The statement of Michele Hayward and Jim Crouch follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Where do those 174 people get their health care now? Mr. Crouch. Seven miles south of the Oregon line, on the Smith River Rancheria. It is 638 operated tribal health program that they participate in the governments of. It is a satellite of United Indian Health. And they like the primary care, but it is difficult, of course, that the providers cannot do the necessary referral to other kinds of service. Mr. Simpson. So that is what the $350,000 would---- Mr. Crouch. Yeah. These guys literally fall into a crack. Mr. Simpson. Okay. Leonard. Mr. Masten. That would be me. Well, the short version, and the long version. I will give you the short version. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE WITNESSES LEONARD MASTEN HAYLEY HUTT Mr. Masten. My name is Leonard Masten. I am the Chairman of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, and Hoopa Valley Tribe is one of the largest land based tribes in California. We have a little over 3,000 tribal members. We are a successful self-governed tribe. However, we face important funding needs. Mr. Simpson. Where is the Hoopa Valley? Mr. Masten. We are, as the crow flies, about 60 miles from the Oregon border. We are in Humboldt County. Sorry. The Trinity River flows through our reservation, and then into the Klamath River, then another 20 miles to the ocean. But one of our main concerns, and from sitting back here and listening to everybody else, is IHS. And we have an ambulance service shortfall every year of about $470,000 that we have asked IHS for funding repeatedly for the last three years, and again we are told that they do not fund ambulance services in Indian country. Again, we hear and see through Appropriations that they are funding several other reservations for air ambulances. And maybe because one has wings and the other has wheels there is some kind of difference. And again we ask that it be put into their budget, and if you do not ask for it, you are not going to get it. So we are asking, and we did talk to the director several times about her putting that into her budget. So, you know, if possibly we could get funded the help, our services, we service not only the Hoopa Valley Reservation, but the Yurok and the Karuk are around us. We have another town that is 10 miles away from us, Willow Creek, another one the other way 12 miles, Orleans, that we service, and we are not getting any funding from those people. Our closest ambulance, besides us, is about 70 miles away, over hills and through a two lane road to get to the coast, where the hospital is. But it is something that is really needed. We have to search through tribal budgets to try to meet that shortfall every year. And we are having meetings. We do have our supervisor for our area, who is a Native now, that is helping try to help find funds. And the local communities now are having fundraisers to try and come up with that funding, but it would be nice to have some secure funding so we do not have to close down, and threatening to basically not go into those other areas, and stay on the reservation, just so that we can get our people where they need to be. But we really do not want to do that, so with some increased funding, we will hopefully be able to move forward with that. Number two would be law enforcement. I had retired from law enforcement with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, but the law enforcement is huge in our area. We have a standing cross deputization agreement. We were one of the first in California to have a cross deputization agreement with Humboldt County. Our officers are trained just like the State officers, and they cross deputize us to enforce State Law on our reservation because of the Public Law 280 that gives the State jurisdiction for criminal activity on our reservation. We do have the Law and Order Act code that was enacted this last year. We had two meetings now with the U.S. Attorney's Office, and I am a little disappointed that there is no funding that came with that. And we are being told by the FBI and our own District Attorney's Office that, because there is no funding, that the FBI is really reluctant to commit to coming onto our reservation to enforce Federal law. And right now we are kind of getting a little flak, or I am, I guess. Our sheriff, who we have the cross deputization with, is kind of threatening to pull our cross deputization if we enter into the Federal law enforcement agreement. And that is what I was saying, and I have got a meeting next week with him, but it is all over. He think, I guess, if we go with the Federal stuff that we are going to be taking our cases all the way to San Francisco, which is a five hour drive from where we are. It do not make any sense, but we are not going to do that. And without some additional funding for the law enforcement Order Code, I do not see how we could be able to even participate. We only have two officers on at a time for 24 hour coverage, only one during the day, and we have to drive the 120 miles round trip to go to court, which is off the reservation, so it is very difficult. So we are asking for $1.5 million to staff eight to 10 officers and help deal with the problem that we have now. It is the county's responsibility, but we have one officer from the country that has to deal with not only us, but the neighboring towns. And the Karuk Tribe, which is the northern tribe from us, they actually contribute money to the county to provide a half time officer for their area, because they have no officers up there. So it is a huge problem, but it is something that I think can be addressed through the Appropriations. I will have Hayley do the--she has been involved with the wildland fire, and I will pick up after she is done. Ms. Hutt. Okay. Hi, my name is Hayley Hutt. I am a member of the council for the Hoopa Valley Tribe, and one of our big issues is our Wildland Fire Department. We are a self- governance tribe. We are the first to compact our Wildland Fire Department. We are up in a real mountainous area, as he described. Anyway, we have to pay for the fire, and then we get reimbursed, and only compact tribes have to do this. So if any other organization, like, Forestry, or Bureau of Land Management, or Parks and Recreation, if they fight fires, they do not have to come up with their own revenues to pay for the fire, but we do. And it is an average anywhere from 500,000 to a million dollars. We are a timber tribe, so that is where we get our revenues. We have not made sales, and we may not make a sale this year. Our prices are really low, so this offsetting is a big problem. So we have a solution, and our solution is that we did receive an escrow amount of money of $175,000. We want to put that in Treasury account and draw it down through the ASAP system. We would continue to file our reimbursements through the Bureau of Indian Affairs Regional Office, and then the monies would go back into that ASAP account. Right now that money is in our general fund, and we are always way over that. So if we are into $500,000 or more, that money comes from our revenues. Last year we said to the BIA, we cannot do this. This will break us. And we are now in a drought year, and we are going to have big fires, and we do not have a timber sale. So we are asking for that escrow account to be put in this other system, for it to be increased to the 10 year average. We know that monies are already set aside based on a 10 year average, and so we want access to that money in advance so we do not have to front the Federal government to protect the forests, and we protect all the forests around our reservation as well. This solution has been pitched to everybody, so if you bring it up with Bill Downs, or Lyle Carlisle, or Vicky Force, anyone, they know Hayley, and they know the fire issue, and they know the solution. So that is what we are asking for. We also have a big problem with our septic system. Our whole valley floor is septic systemed up to our ears, and they are old systems. They are failing. We are not meeting the EPA standards, and we cannot build more homes. We cannot build businesses. We do not have the basis for economic development just on our sewer line alone, let alone, of course, all the other stuff. So we have come up with a plan, and we are shovel ready, but that plan is $26 million. It is a five year phased plan. So we just want to put that in the forefront of your mind, that we are desperate for help on that need. I think we have taken up our time. Mr. Masten. I only have one other issue. We have a couple others in there, but it is in already written testimony, so I will try to shorten it up so you can kind of get back on time anyway, but the other one was our Klamath Basin Restoration Project. In 2010 several Klamath Basin entities signed an agreement, including the so-called Klamath Restoration Agreement, KBRA. The Federal agency signed the KBRA. Nevertheless, the Department of Interior, in 2012, enacted budget cuts from the real estate services to implement this. And our concern is that we have a huge problem with real estate and property that is on our reservation, and we are having a really tough time funding any type of services for a program to deal with our land. We are having to contract a lot of that out to get another group of surveyors. We have even asked help from the National Guard, who comes in and provides help through our health service for doctors, nurses, and dentists, and those types of things, to help out during the summertime. And we have not seen them yet, but it has been two years now that we had to ask them to bring in, they said they would when they were there, was bring a team of their surveyors in to help us get caught up and get a lot of that stuff done. But I do not, you know, I think we need to keep the money where it is supposed to be for the activities of the land, and to trust stuff. But we think that Congress should not fund Indian termination activities, and monies that are needed to provide these real estate services to the Indian tribes in our area. And with that, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your attendance, and wish there were more people here, but---- [The statement of Leonard Masten and Hayley Hutt follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Well, most of them take a chance to read it over. Unfortunately, there are about 38 hearings going on. Mr. Masten. Yeah. Mr. Simpson. I had to step out for a minute and run up to BOR hearing, talking about Indian water rights, and---- Mr. Masten. Yeah. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. How BOR is going to pay for those. So it gets crazy time around here. But it actually helps us and helps the staff---- Mr. Masten. Yeah. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. Decide what to do. Bambi. ---------- Wednesday, March 28, 2012. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TRIBAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE (NATHPO) WITNESS BAMBI KRAUS Ms. Kraus. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Again, thank you for listening to the testimony the past two days. It is always compelling, and I appreciate your time. Chairman Franklin is the actual chairman of The National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Office. He was unable to be with us today. He is in California. I am based here in Washington, D.C., and I am actually Tlinget from Kake, Alaska, so it has been nice to see all the Alaskans here earlier. I am actually here to talk about programmatic needs versus specific issues, even though I think contract care and contract support costs are indeed a programmatic issue. But in terms of the Interior programs, I am here to talk about the National Park Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and then just to touch onto the Smithsonian Institution. So The National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Office works with over 130 tribes, even though we provide technical assistance to all Indian tribes, and there are currently over 130 tribes participating in this program. And that is 30 states and millions of acres of land that the tribal governments are responsible for managing. The THPOs that are in existence, for the most part, almost all of them have accepted the responsibilities of a State Historic Preservation Officer for tribal lands, and that includes a Section 106 performance compliance work, per the National Historic Preservation Act. So I try and make sure that everybody understands it, historic preservation is not just a feel good project. It really is a needed necessity for Federal compliance with various cultural and environmental laws. So in terms of the people you have heard from the past two days, any Indian school, any Indian health clinic, is going to have to go through, you know, compliance work, any other development project that breaks ground. So that gives you an idea of the tribes that we work with. I want to thank you for your prior support for the Historic Preservation Fund for tribal programs. The administration requested level funding from last year, which is, you know, a great success in today's economy, however, there are more tribes coming into the program. And without the money that comes along with additional tribes participating, it means there are fewer dollars for the tribes that are already existing. So it is a very popular program, and it has been wildly successful. It is severely underfunded. It is nothing you have not heard, but for a lot of reasons I am here to try and explain why it is so important, and if you could get a slight increase over the administration request so that they could take, you know, at least fund some of the tribes that are coming into the program. So that is the Historic Preservation Fund. We also do quite a bit of work in monitoring the National Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. Federal Indian law that was created for the benefit of Indian tribes, and yet the Government Accountability Office did a report in 2010 with a title, ``After 20 years, Key Federal Agencies Still Have Not Fully Complied With The Act''. And it looked at the Bureau of Indian Affairs, BOM, BOR, Fish and Wildlife, the Park Service, as well as Forest Service, Army Corps of Engineers, and Tennessee Valley Authority. And that report title summarized the experience that Indian people have had trying to implement a law that was created for their benefit. It has been a very frustrating experience. It has been very expensive, in terms of not funding the tribes at a level that they can actually use to benefit their own programs. I like to try and point out to people that when it was passed in 1989 and implemented in 1990, Indian tribes did not have the wealth that they do today. So if you think about 20 years ago, Indian tribes were told, you know, learn how to talk to a museum, and figure out what they hold of your lineal descendants, their cultural sacred objects. I mean, it is an amazing amount of complex work, and they were told overnight to go and contact museums and Federal agencies to try and get back things that had been taken out of Indian country. So that, you know, it was gratifying to see the GAO do that work and bring that topic at least to some level of attention. That was the first time any Indian law and cultural preservation had ever been looked at in such a way. They followed that up with a second part on the Smithsonian, and the title said it all also. It was ``Much Work Still Needed To Identify And Repatriate Indian Human Remains And Objects''. So in terms of that particular GAO report, which was just released in June of 2011, they calculated that it takes about three years for an Indian tribe to work through the process of repatriation for the Natural History Museum. But one example was it took one Indian tribe over 18 years to get through the process to repatriate remains and objects. So there is a lot of work to do, and our testimony puts in there monies to help rectify that problem, or to support the tribes. And my last bonus minute, I want to just point out for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, to this day they do not have any line item specifically for cultural resources, which is astounding. And I just, you know, had e-mail to me while I have been sitting here that the BIA was established March 11, 1824, which is 188 years ago, and it was transferred from the War Department to Interior in 1849. And so we are looking at 188 years that they have never included any money to do any compliance or feel good work for Indian people, and something that is so uniquely American Indian today, and that would be our own cultural preservation and identity. And I just wanted to, you know, make the plea to, you know, the BIA needs to look at what they are doing. It is one thing to serve a contract. It is another thing to actually work with living human beings. And NATHPO has stepped out to try and start bringing this issue to the attention of the Congress and the administration. It would be great to have, you know, people actually working to create health communities that can take advantage of all the other money that you are putting into it, whatever infrastructure you are doing. So with that I would like to, you know, I am available for questions and follow-up later, but thank you very much for your time. Thank you. [The statement of Bambi Kraus follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Simpson. Thank you. You know, I thank all of you for being here. I have served on a City Council. I do not know of any community that does not have a problem funding ambulance service. It is amazing. We always fight with our county about who is going to fund it. The County pays the City so much to run their ambulances out there, and then they always fight about how much to pay, and every local community has problems with ambulance service. But you are right, it is a big problem. We went to some reservations last summer where they do pay for the air service because the reservation is so vast that getting an ambulance there is not going to be helpful. Mr. Masten. That is right. Mr. Simpson. So, anyway, that is something that we also will look at. But I appreciate all the testimony on all the variety of issues that come up. And the one thing we always find out through these hearings for a couple days, with tribes from across the country, is that there are some common issues that run throughout Indian country, contract support, police services, those kind of things, and yet there are unique tribal issues that are different for every tribe that we try to address. We appreciate very much your testimony here today, and it will help inform us as we try to write the budget for this coming fiscal year, which we will probably get into in the next three or four weeks, five weeks, something like that, before we get it to the floor. I think it will be June before it gets to the floor. We need you to stay for just a second so that, just this last panel, so that we can get your names correct for the record, okay? I am a big fan of historic preservation, and, as a country, we are still a young country compared to, you know-- -- Ms. Kraus. Um-hum. Mr. Simpson [continuing]. European civilizations. I am not saying our civilization is young. Yours is obviously very old. But as a country, we are a young country, and we can do a lot to preserve our history and culture, and if we do not, it will be gone. Thank you all very much. [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] I N D E X ---------- Part 8 Interior, Environment & Related Agencies Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations for 2013 Public Witnesses Day One--March 22, 2012 INDEX--ORGANIZATIONS Page American Thoracic Society........................................ 33 Animal Welfare Institute......................................... 80 Association of State Drinking Water Administrators/State of Delaware....................................................... 40 Cancer Survivors Against Radon (CanSAR).......................... 58 Children's Environmental Health Network.......................... 52 City of Edinburg, TX............................................. 46 Defenders of Wildlife............................................ 86 Dusty Joy Foundation............................................. 64 Friends of Deer Flat Wildlife Refuge............................. 155 Friends of the Refuge Headwaters................................. 161 Geological Society of America.................................... 21 Interstate Mining Compact Commission............................. 2 LWCF Coalition................................................... 129 Marine Conservation Institute.................................... 142 National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA)............... 27 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation............................ 98 National Wildlife Refuge Association............................. 135 The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)........................................................ 74 The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)................... 9 The Friends of the Potomac River Refuges......................... 149 The Nature Conservancy........................................... 111 The Wilderness Society........................................... 92 The Wildlife Society............................................. 122 The Wilderness Land Trust........................................ 117 USGS Coalition................................................... 15 Wildlife Conservation Society.................................... 105 INDEX--WITNESSES Brad Brooks...................................................... 92 Christy Plumer................................................... 111 Desiree Sorenson-Groves.......................................... 135 Dr. Jeffrey B. Hales............................................. 33 Dr. Robert Gropp................................................. 15 Dusty Donaldson.................................................. 64 Edward Hallock................................................... 40 Elias Longoria, Jr............................................... 46 Elizabeth Hoffmann............................................... 58 Greg Conrad...................................................... 2 Greg Knadle...................................................... 98 Gregory E. DiLoreto, P.E......................................... 9 Joan Patterson................................................... 149 John F. Calvelli................................................. 105 Kasey White...................................................... 21 Kevin Boling..................................................... 129 Mary Beth Beetham................................................ 86 Nancy Blaney..................................................... 80 Nancy Perry...................................................... 74 Nsedu Obot Witherspoon........................................... 52 Reid Haughey..................................................... 117 Robert C. Christensen............................................ 155 S. William Becker................................................ 27 Terra Rentz...................................................... 122 Todd Paddock..................................................... 161 William Chandler................................................. 142 Public Witnesses Day Two--March 23, 2012 INDEX--ORGANIZATIONS American Forest Foundation....................................... 294 American Historical Association.................................. 207 Americans for the Arts........................................... 170 Americans for the Arts........................................... 178 Civil War Trust.................................................. 245 East Bay Regional Park District.................................. 262 Federal Forest Resource Coalition................................ 313 National Association of State Foresters.......................... 268 National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers...... 226 National Endowment for the Humanities............................ 188 National Endowment for the Humanities............................ 195 National Parks Conservation Association.......................... 233 National Recreation and Park Association......................... 250 National Trust for Historic Preservation......................... 220 Partnership for the National Trails System....................... 239 Preservation Action.............................................. 214 Public Lands Foundation.......................................... 320 Society of American Foresters.................................... 300 The Trust for Public Land........................................ 256 Wyoming Humanities Council representing the Federation of State Humanities Councils............................................ 200 INDEX--WITNESSES Barbara Tulipane................................................. 250 Bill Imbergamo................................................... 313 Deborah Frances Tannen........................................... 195 Dr. James Grossman............................................... 207 Elena Daly....................................................... 320 Erik M. Hein..................................................... 214 Gary Werner...................................................... 239 Hunter R. Rawlings III........................................... 188 Jim Lighthizer................................................... 245 Katherine DeCoster............................................... 256 Ken Pimlott...................................................... 268 Paul Ulrich...................................................... 200 Robert E. Doyle.................................................. 262 Robert L. Lynch.................................................. 170 Robert Malmsheimer, PhD, JD...................................... 300 Ruth Pierpont.................................................... 226 Stanley Tucci.................................................... 178 Tom Cassidy...................................................... 220 Tom Kiernan...................................................... 233 Tom Martin....................................................... 294 American Indian & Native Alaskan Witness Days Day One--March 27, 2012 INDEX--ORGANIZATIONS Catawba Indian Nation............................................ 558 Cherokee Nation.................................................. 439 Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma....................................... 426 Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community Grant (DCG) School Board.......... 460 Fort Belknap Indian Community.................................... 384 Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission.................. 533 Hopi Tribal Court................................................ 498 Institute of American Indian Arts................................ 455 Lac du Flambeau Band of Chippewa Indians in Wisconsin............ 526 Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe........................................ 515 Little River Band of Ottawa Indians.............................. 521 Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation of Fort Berthold.............. 403 Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida........................... 544 National Congress of American Indians............................ 330 National Council of Urban Indian Health.......................... 343 National Indian Health Board..................................... 336 National Johnson-O'Malley Association............................ 445 Navajo Agricultural Products Industry (NAPI) Board of Directors.. 472 Navajo Hopi Land Commission, Navajo Nation....................... 493 Navajo Nation.................................................... 487 Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee............................. 348 Oglala Sioux Tribe............................................... 390 Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Public Safety................... 396 Ramah Navajo School Board, Inc................................... 466 Sac & Fox Nation................................................. 433 Shinnecock Indian Nation......................................... 508 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Ft. Hall Indian Reservation....... 354 The Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation.... 377 Tribal Law and Order Commission.................................. 360 United South and Eastern Tribes, Inc............................. 551 United Tribes Technical College.................................. 413 Ute Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.................... 480 American Indian & Native Alaskan Witness Days Day One--March 27, 2012 INDEX--WITNESSES Affie Ellis...................................................... 360 Ben Shelly....................................................... 487 Bill Harris...................................................... 558 Brooklyn D. Baptiste............................................. 348 Charles Head..................................................... 439 Colley Billie.................................................... 544 David Gipp....................................................... 413 Dr. Robert Martin................................................ 455 D'Shane Barnett.................................................. 343 Edward T. Begay.................................................. 472 Ervin Chavez..................................................... 460 Eugene ``Ribs'' Whitebird........................................ 515 Faye BlueEyes.................................................... 460 George Thurman................................................... 433 Harold Dustybull................................................. 445 Irene Cuch....................................................... 480 Jefferson Keel................................................... 330 Jim Zorn......................................................... 533 Jimmie Mitchell.................................................. 521 John Yellow Bird Steele.......................................... 390 Kitcki Carroll................................................... 551 Larry Wawronowicz................................................ 532 Lloyd Miller..................................................... 373 Lorenzo Curley................................................... 493 Mickey Peercy.................................................... 426 Nancy Martine-Alonzo............................................. 466 Randy King....................................................... 508 Richard Greenwald................................................ 396 Richard Trujillo................................................. 498 Stacy A. Bohlen.................................................. 336 Stoney Anketell.................................................. 377 Tex Hall......................................................... 403 Tino Batt........................................................ 354 Tom Gede......................................................... 360 Tom Maulson...................................................... 526 Tracy ``Ching'' King............................................. 384 Troy Weston...................................................... 390 Virginia Thomas.................................................. 445 American Indian & Native Alaskan Witness Days Day Two--March 28, 2012 INDEX--ORGANIZATIONS Arctic Slope Native Association, Ltd............................. 672 California Rural Indian Health Board............................. 726 Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. 687 Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission...................... 650 Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation.................. 619 Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservations.......... 645 Cook Inlet Tribal Council........................................ 680 Hoopa Valley Tribe............................................... 733 Intertribal Timber Council....................................... 632 Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe........................................ 601 Lummi Indian Business Council.................................... 593 Makah Tribal Council............................................. 613 National Native American AIDS Prevention Center.................. 711 National Tribal Contract Support Cost Coalition.................. 718 Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission............................ 586 Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board...................... 626 Pacific Salmon Commission........................................ 601 Puyallup Tribe................................................... 574 Quinault Indian Nation........................................... 568 Skokomish Tribe.................................................. 580 Southcentral Foundation.......................................... 694 SouthEast Alaska Regional Health Consortium...................... 706 The Chugach Regional Resources Commission........................ 660 The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon 639 The National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (NATHPO)....................................................... 741 The Tanana Chiefs Conference..................................... 700 Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation............................... 665 American Indian & Native Alaskan Witness Days Day Two--March 28, 2012 INDEX--WITNESSES Andrea Cazares-Diego............................................. 726 Andy Joseph...................................................... 626 Bambi Kraus...................................................... 741 Billy Frank...................................................... 586 Charles Clement.................................................. 706 Clifford Cultee.................................................. 593 Dan Winkelman.................................................... 665 David Bean....................................................... 574 Ed Johnstone..................................................... 586 Edward K. Thomas................................................. 687 Fawn Sharp....................................................... 568 Gerald Lewis..................................................... 650 Gloria O'Neill................................................... 680 Hayley Hutt...................................................... 733 James Segura..................................................... 694 Jim Crouch....................................................... 726 Joseph Pavel..................................................... 580 Larry Blythe..................................................... 632 Leonard Masten................................................... 733 Les Minthorn..................................................... 645 Lloyd Miller..................................................... 718 Marie Carroll.................................................... 672 Mark LeBeau...................................................... 726 Michael Grayum................................................... 586 Michele Hayward.................................................. 726 Patty Brown-Schwalenberg......................................... 660 Ron Suppah....................................................... 639 Selina Moose..................................................... 711 Sneena Brooks.................................................... 619 T.J. Greene...................................................... 613 Victor Joseph.................................................... 700 W. Ron Allen..................................................... 601 Written Testimony from Individuals and Organizations INDEX 11 Tribes and Tribal Organizations............................... 750 Air Chek, Inc.................................................... 753 Ala Kahakai Trail Association.................................... 757 Alaska Tribal Health Compact..................................... 759 Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Inc....................... 763 Allied Radon Services, Inc....................................... 767 American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists, Inc.. 769 American Bird Conservancy........................................ 773 American Forests................................................. 777 American Geosciences Institute................................... 781 American Indian Higher Education Consortium, The................. 785 American Institute of Biological Sciences........................ 789 American Lung Association........................................ 793 American Public Power Association................................ 797 American Society for Microbiology................................ 799 American Society of Agronomy..................................... 803 Andrew D. Chavez, Commissioner, District III, Taos, NM........... 806 Appalachian Trail Conservancy.................................... 809 Association of American State Geologists......................... 812 Association of Art Museum Directors.............................. 816 Association of Clean Water Administrators, The................... 820 Association of Community Tribal Schools.......................... 823 Association of Public and Land-grant Universities................ 827 B.A.S.S. LLC..................................................... 830 Berkley Conservation Institute................................... 832 Bernalillo Board of County Commissioners......................... 833 Cancer Survivors Against Radon................................... 836 Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority............................... 840 Coastal Wildlife Refuge Society.................................. 844 Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum...................... 846 Colorado Water Congress.......................................... 850 Columbia Gorge Refuge Stewards................................... 852 Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon.................. 854 Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Inc........... 858 Conservation Fund, The........................................... 861 Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement...................... 865 Dance/USA........................................................ 868 Debra J. Greenman, Private Citizen............................... 872 Environmental Council of the States, The......................... 873 Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge, Inc....................... 877 Friends of the Little Pend Oreille National Wildlife Refuge...... 878 Friends of the National Wildlife Refuge of Rhode Island.......... 882 Friends of the Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuges, Inc.......... 884 Friends of Virgin Islands National Park.......................... 887 Green Mountain Club, The......................................... 890 Healing Our Waters--Great Lakes Coalition........................ 894 Hendrick Associates.............................................. 898 Independent Tribal Courts Review Team............................ 899 Inter Tribal Buffalo Council..................................... 903 Izaak Walton League of America................................... 907 Kern County Valley Floor Habitat Conservation Plan Industry and Government Coalition........................................... 911 League of American Orchestras.................................... 914 Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians....................... 918 Marlene MacEwan, Private Citizen................................. 921 Merritt Island Wildlife Association.............................. 924 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California............... 928 Michigan Department of Natural Resources......................... 931 Minnesota Radon Project, The..................................... 933 Moat Creek Managing Agency....................................... 936 Multiple organizations in support of FS International Programs... 939 National Association of Forest Service Retirees.................. 942 National Association of State Energy Officials................... 946 National Ground Water Association................................ 948 National Institutes for Water Resources.......................... 951 National Radon Safety Board, The................................. 955 National WH&B Legislative Team................................... 956 National Wildlife Federation..................................... 960 Natural Science Collections Alliance............................. 964 Northern Everglades Alliance..................................... 967 Norton Sound Health Corporation.................................. 969 Nuclear Energy Institute......................................... 972 OPERA America.................................................... 976 Oregon Water Resources Congress.................................. 980 Outdoor Alliance, The............................................ 982 PALA Tribal Historic Preservation Office......................... 986 Performing Arts Alliance......................................... 987 Pueblo of Acoma.................................................. 991 Ramah Navajo Chapter-Ramah Band of Navajos....................... 995 Red Cliffs National Conservation Area............................ 999 Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians................................ 1001 Santa Clara Pueblo............................................... 1006 Sawtooth Society................................................. 1010 Standing Rock Sioux Tribe........................................ 1013 State of Utah, Office of the Governor............................ 1017 State of Wyoming, Office of the Governor......................... 1019 Teaming With Wildlife Program.................................... 1021 Theatre Communications Group..................................... 1023 Thrush Aircraft.................................................. 1026 Tina Nappe, Private Citizen...................................... 1030 Tom and Georgiann Manz, Private Citizens......................... 1031 Town of Ophir.................................................... 1032 Tribal Education Departments National Assembly................... 1035 Washington Wildlife Recreation Coalition......................... 1037 Whitetails Unlimited, Inc........................................ 1040 Wildlife Conservation Society.................................... 1043 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources........................ 1047 Written Testimony from Individuals and Organizations--received after submission deadline INDEX Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium........................... 1049 APS Four Corners Power Plant..................................... 1051 Barbara Sorgatz, Private Citizen................................. 1053 Bat Conservation International................................... 1054 Carpe Diem West.................................................. 1058 Clean Vapor, LLC................................................. 1062 Coalition in support of FWS International Programs............... 1066 Coalition in support of USFS International Programs.............. 1070 Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa....................... 1073 Friends of Balcones Canyonlands National Wildlife Refuge......... 1077 Friends of Rachel Carson NWR..................................... 1080 Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition......................... 1082 Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society Legislative Fund, and Doris Day Animal League.............................. 1086 Malheur Wildlife Associates...................................... 1091 National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE) Local 1957....... 1094 National Tribal Environmental Council............................ 1098 Oregon Water Resources Congress (OWRC)........................... 1102 PNM Resources, Inc............................................... 1106 Pueblo of Zuni................................................... 1108 Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy............................... 1112 Squaxin Island Tribe............................................. 1115 Sustainable Northwest............................................ 1119 Ukpeagvik Inupiat Corporation.................................... 1123 University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)........... 1126 Wyoming State Engineer's Office.................................. 1128