[Senate Hearing 119-275]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-275
S. 107, THE LUMBEE FAIRNESS ACT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
NOVEMBER 5, 2025
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-673 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii, Vice Chairman
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
STEVE DAINES, Montana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma TINA SMITH, Minnesota
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
JERRY MORAN, Kansas
Amber Ebarb, Majority Staff Jennifer Romero, Minority Staff
Director Director and Chief Counsel
Lucy Murfitt, Chief Counsel Darren Modzelewski, Counsel
Lenna Aoki, General Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on November 5, 2025................................. 1
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................ 42
Statement of Senator Mullin...................................... 3
Statement of Senator Murkowski................................... 1
Statement of Senator Schatz...................................... 2
Statement of Senator Tillis...................................... 3
Witnesses
Barnes, Hon. Ben, Chief, Shawnee Tribe........................... 31
Prepared statement........................................... 33
Hicks, Hon. Michell, Principal Chief, Eastern Band of Cherokee
Indians........................................................ 22
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Locklear, Arlinda, Esq., Special Counsel on Recognition, Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina........................................ 12
Prepared statement........................................... 14
Lowery, Hon. John, Chairman, Lumbee Tribe........................ 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Appendix
Hoxie, Dr. Frederick E., prepared statement...................... 49
Letters submitted for the record................................. 56-68
Owle, Hon. Jim, Chairman, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians Tribal
Council, prepared statement.................................... 53
U.S. Department of the Interior, prepared statement.............. 55
S. 107, THE LUMBEE FAIRNESS ACT
----------
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m. in room
106, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
The Chairman. Good afternoon. The Committee will come to
order.
On our agenda this afternoon is one bill, this is S. 107,
the Lumbee Fairness Act. It is introduced by our friend and
colleague, Senator Thom Tillis.
This bill represents the latest effort in the Lumbee
Tribe's more than 120-year quest for full Federal recognition.
An identical companion measure passed the House of
Representatives earlier this year. It has been incorporated as
an amendment into the House version of the National Defense
Authorization Act.
President Trump has also expressed support for Federal
recognition of the Lumbee Tribe. In a Presidential Memorandum
he declared it ``the policy of the United States to support
full Federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina,
including granting the tribe eligibility to receive all
associated Federal benefits.''
So, once again, it is the Senate's turn to take a closer
look. This Committee has had a long history of examining and
debating the Federal recognition process for tribes, including
whether recognition should occur through the administrative
process at the Department of Interior's Office of Federal
Acknowledgement under Part 83 or through direct Congressional
action.
Our Committee has also heard arguments that favor and
oppose Lumbee going through the administrative process at
Interior under Part 83 versus the Congressional legislative
recognition process. So today's hearing continues that work
with respect to the Lumbee Tribe.
I think it is important to remember that Congress has never
given up its Constitutional authority to decide whether a group
constitutes a tribe. As recently as 2019, Congress granted full
Federal recognition to four tribes through passage of the NDAA,
and since 1978, when the Interior established its
administrative process, Congress has recognized at least 39
tribes.
So this is serious work. And it is work that I take
seriously both as a Senator and as Chairman of this Committee.
Full Federal recognition establishes a government-to-
government relationship between the United States and the
Tribe, and it also creates a fiduciary trust responsibility on
the part of the Federal Government to the Tribe and to its
members. Recognition makes a tribe eligible for the special
programs and services the United States provides to Native
peoples because of their status as Indians.
It also affirms important elements of tribal sovereignty,
the ability to govern their own affairs, to tax, to establish a
tribal court system, and to exercise limited immunity from
certain State and local laws.
Federal recognition can also open the door to specific
economic opportunities, including the ability to conduct gaming
under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
We have a full panel of witnesses with us today, and I am
looking forward to hearing from them. However, it is notable
that no representative from the administration is present. We
did extend an invitation to the Department of Interior, but due
to the ongoing government shutdown, the Department declined to
testify in person. The Department has submitted written
testimony, which will be made part of the hearing record and
posted on the Committee's website, alongside the rest of our
written submissions.
So with that, I will turn to Vice Chairman Schatz for his
introductory remarks.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair Murkowski, for calling
today's hearing on the Lumbee Fairness Act. Congress' authority
over Indian affairs is broad. It is enshrined in the
Constitution and it is plenary.
One of our most sacred duties in the exercise of this
authority is Federal acknowledgement. We do this by either
delegating our power to the executive or directly recognize
tribes by statute. Either way, Federal recognition forms the
basis for a tribal government-to-government relationship with
the United States that is political in nature and incredibly
powerful.
To put this Congressional power into historical context,
until 1871, the United States carried out its Indian policy
through treaty negotiations. Treaty-making was replaced in
favor of the legislative process that we use today.
Over 150 years, Congress has federally recognized just 39
tribes. So it is especially poignant that since 1888, Congress
has considered dozens of bills related to the Lumbee Tribe and
our Federal obligations to them. The majority have been on
Lumbee recognition alone, including Senator Tillis' S. 107,
bipartisan legislation that I am a co-sponsor of.
The House of Representatives has passed several Lumbee
recognition bills and the Senate has had multiple hearings over
several decades. We are here today to continue to build on that
record. Each time we have a hearing on Federal recognition for
the Lumbee Tribe, we learn more. This is a deliberative
process, as it should be. Federal recognition of a government-
to-government relationship between sovereigns is rare. That is
because no aspect of Congressional power over Indian affairs is
greater than our ability to recognize Tribal relations with the
United States.
Thank you to our witnesses for being here today. I look
forward to your testimony and the opportunity to add to the
record.
The Chairman. Thank you, Vice Chairman Schatz.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA
Senator Mullin, I will give you the courtesy of any
comments if you wish. But otherwise, we will turn to our
colleague.
Senator Mullin. Senator Tillis is very impatient. I don't
want to get in his way. He kind of gets grumpy.
Senator Tillis. Like Senator Mullin.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. We will immediately turn it over to the
sponsor of the bill, Senator Tillis. Thanks for coming over to
the Committee. You may proceed with your remarks, and welcome.
STATEMENT OF HON. THOM TILLIS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA
Senator Tillis. Thank you. Chair Murkowski, Vice Chair
Schatz, Senator Mullin, and distinguished members of the
Committee, on behalf of Senator Budd, myself, and members of
the North Carolina Congressional delegation, I want to thank
you for the opportunity to speak in support of the Lumbee
Fairness Act.
This issue has come before Congress many times over the
decades, but never with this level of unity and support. These
days, it is rare to see Republicans and Democrats come together
on anything.
But when it comes to Lumbee recognition, the support is
overwhelming, and it is bipartisan. We are talking about
support from President Donald J. Trump, President Biden, Vice
President J.D. Vance, former Vice President Kamala Harris,
Governor Josh Stein, the North Carolina General Assembly, and
nearly every member of our State's Congressional delegation.
Here in the Senate, nearly two dozen members from both
parties have co-sponsored the Lumbee Fairness Act, including
Senator Schatz and Senator Mullin, who sit together on this
very Committee. And maybe most remarkable, more than 235
federally-recognized tribes who have stood with the Lumbee
people, including the Alaska Federation of Natives,
representing 186 tribes and corporations.
I also want to offer my special thanks to president
Benjamin Mallott and former president Julie Kitka for their
unwavering support, unsolicited, and unwavering support.
This kind of unity is rare. It proves that fairness for the
Lumbee Tribe isn't partisan; it is simply the right thing to
do.
The Lumbee's history is long and well-documented. They were
recognized by the State of North Carolina in 1885, and began
seeking Federal recognition just three years later. That was
137 years ago. During the 20th century, the Lumbee were among
the dozens of victims of the termination era, one of the
darkest periods in Federal Indian policy.
In 1956, Congress passed the Lumbee Act. It acknowledge the
tribe but cruelly denied them the benefits and the recognition
that every other tribe receives. The Federal Government has
since worked to correct the grave injustices of the termination
era for nearly every single tribe except for the Lumbee.
Time and again, the Lumbee have proven their case. The
records are filled with testimony, studies, and reports that
all lead to one conclusion: the Lumbee are a tribe fully
deserving of Federal recognition. The House has acknowledged
that repeatedly, passing Lumbee recognition with broad
bipartisan support in every Congress since the 116th. This
year, it was unanimously included in the House-passed NDAA,
without a single voice of opposition.
In 2022, I promised to identify and expose the small but
persistent opposition to this bill. I have done that homework.
What I found is simple: a small handful of well-funded tribes,
hiring high-priced D.C. lobbyists to spin half-truths and stir
fear, motivated by profit, not principle.
At the center of that opposition is the Eastern Band of the
Cherokee Indians, who I assume you will hear from today, and
their constituents of North Carolina, and their lead advisor,
William Pipestone. Plain and simple, their opposition is rooted
in financial self-interest.
And that is their right. But let's not pretend it is
anything more than that. The Eastern Band has opposed nearly
every recognition effort in their geographic vicinity that
might affect their financial interests. They even tried to
block the Catawba Tribe's land into trust application and lost,
something I also supported.
Now, they are running the same playbook against the Lumbee.
They are spending millions of dollars on lobbyists and pay-for-
play reports that have been discredited and condemned by the
National Congress of American Indians. It is disappointing to
see this kind of money wasted on tearing down other tribes
instead of lifting up their own people.
However, the lobbying has failed. The ship has already
sailed and it is headed full speed toward Lumbee recognition.
Today, you will hear the same tiring talking points, that this
somehow sets a bad precedent, that Congress should sit back and
just let the Interior Department handle it.
That argument doesn't hold water. Recognition through
Congress is the precedent. It is the norm. Since 1978, twice as
many tribes have been recognized by Congress through the
administrative process. Congress has recognized tribes by
legislation many times, including the Little Shell Tribe of the
Chippewa Indians in the Fiscal Year 2022 NDAA, and six Virginia
tribes in 2017. I supported both because it was the right thing
to do.
Next month will mark 25 years since Congress passed
legislation to grant the Shawnee Tribe full Federal
recognition. So, when people say Congress shouldn't act, what
they really mean is Congress shouldn't act when they don't like
the outcome. I invite anyone with doubts to visit Robeson
County, Hoke County, or Scotland County. Go to the University
of North Carolina and Pembroke, founded by and for the Lumbee
people.
You will see the rich Lumbee culture, their deep roots in
North Carolina, and their extraordinary contributions to our
State and our Nation. You will find a community defined by
pride and resilience and service, educators, first responders,
health care professionals, small business owners and farmers.
And situated just miles from Fort Bragg, the largest military
installation in the world, you will meet countless Lumbees and
veterans who have served our Country honorably for generations.
They have done everything this Nation has ever asked of them,
and all they ask in return is fairness.
I do know one leader who has visited Robeson County and has
stood with the Lumbee people. That is President Trump. Just
three days into his second term, President Trump made it the
official policy of the United States Government to support full
Federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe. That includes access
to every Federal benefit that they have earned. And now is the
time for Congress to act.
The Lumbee people have waited long enough. They don't ask
for special treatment, only fair treatment. They have earned
and deserve full Federal recognition. To my friends and
colleagues on this Committee, I hope you understand just how
important this is, not only to the Lumbee Tribe and the people
of North Carolina, but to me personally.
Madam Chair, I am about to wrap it up. I know I am over
time. But I really need to emphasize what personal means to me.
I became speaker in 2011. Shortly after I became speaker, I met
none other than the now-chief, he was the principal chief at
the time, Michell Hicks. He came in to tell me the story about
the Cherokee and how they need to negotiate a new compact. And
I told the chief at the time, I said, I need to study this, but
quite honestly, I am embarrassed to say, I don't know much
about your story in North Carolina.
So I took time to figure out that story. And this bill, and
that study, and the wrong that I wanted to fix there, was
embodied in a bill that was passed by none other than me, and
it is the only bill in the entire time I was Speaker of the
House that I allowed to go to the Floor that did not have a
Republican majority vote.
Thankfully, Congressman Tim Moore, who was my Rules Chair
at the time, was able to shepherd this through and create a
transformational result for the Eastern Band of the Cherokee.
Now, two years later, I discovered the Lumbee Tribe, and I
realized that they were working hard to maintain their culture
and to do everything that they could if they were to go through
the administrative process to prove that they had done the
homework, which is why I signed another bill making sure that
their cultural heritage could be maintained and continue to go
through the process that they were prepared to go through.
But the defect in the statutes is going to prevent this
from happening. The only way this happens is through Federal
recognition and through an act of Congress.
So, Madam Chair, I appreciate your leadership and I have
appreciated your friendship in the ten and a half years, almost
eleven years that I have been here. But when I tell you it is
personal to me it is because it is because it is an injustice
that needs to be righted.
I look forward to your serious consideration and I look
forward to listening to the testimony. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Tillis, for your remarks
today, as well as your continued relentless advocacy.
Now we will invite the witnesses up to the table, please.
We will have the Honorable John Lowery. Mr. Lowery is the
Chairman of the Lumbee Tribe from Pembroke, North Carolina. We
have Arlinda Locklear, who is a tribal attorney from here in
Washington, D.C. We have the Honorable Michell Hicks, who is
the Principal Chief of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians,
from Cherokee, North Carolina, as well as the Honorable Ben
Barnes, who is the Chief of the Shawnee Tribe from Miami,
Oklahoma.
To all of you, we would remind you that we do have your
full written testimony, which will be included as part of the
official record. We would ask that you keep your comments to no
more than five minutes, so that we have plenty of time for
members to ask questions.
I introduced you going in this direction, so we will just
continue it, beginning with you, Mr. Lowery. Welcome to the
Committee, and you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN LOWERY, CHAIRMAN, LUMBEE TRIBE
Mr. Lowery. Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz,
Senator Mullin, thank you for convening this hearing today and
for the opportunity to speak in support of S. 107, the Lumbee
Fairness Act. I am John Lowery, Chairman of the Lumbee Tribe.
The Lumbee Tribe has a longstanding appreciation for the
vital work of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. Over the
past 30 years, we have benefitted from at least nine hearings
before this Committee.
Throughout the time, we have received strong support from
past committee chairs, such as Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
Daniel Inouye, Daniel Akaka, John McCain, Byron Dorgan, and
many others who were true friends of Indian Country. Senators,
please know that your commitment to tribe and your attention to
the Lumbee are deeply valued and appreciated.
I am also proud to highlight the tireless efforts of North
Carlina's senior Senator, Thom Tillis, on behalf of the Lumbee
Fairness Act. Alongside Senator Ted Budd, they have championed
and sponsored the cause of full Federal recognition for our
tribe following the bipartisan footsteps of North Carolina
Senators Terry Sanford, Elizabeth Dole, and Richard Burr.
As you are aware, the House of Representatives has again
taken action on our legislation, led by Congressman David
Rouzer and with the support of nearly the entire North Carolina
delegation, H.R. 474 was included as an amendment to the Fiscal
Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act. Just this
morning, President Trump issued a statement supporting the
advancement of full Federal recognition of the ``great Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina.''
I would like to point out also that we have Catawba Nation
Chief Brian Harris and Assistant Chief Patricia Leach with us
today. They are our brothers and sisters directly to the west
of us, with whom we share a close bond.
We also have Chief Keith Anderson of the Nansemond Indian
Nation of Virginia, who are our brothers and sisters to our
north. They are all standing in solidarity with the Lumbee
people.
Behind me are members of the Lumbee Warriors Association,
who are veterans of the United States Armed Forces, and we also
have numerous Purple Heart recipients, including Mr. Rudy
Locklear. Their service exemplifies the patriotism and the love
of country that defines as a people.
Senators, my roots run deep in Lumbee history. I am a
direct descendant of Henry Berry Lowery, who during the Civil
War led a campaign against a Confederate home guard as they
encroached on Lumbee land and conscripted our Indian people.
Henry witnessed the murder of his father and brother, execution
style, by Confederate leaders, and he vowed revenge. My great-
grandfather's grandfather and members of the Lowery gang fought
back against those who sought to oppress and steal from us.
Additionally, I am a descendant of Solomon Locklear, Sr.,
one of 44 tribal leaders who in 1888, 1888, petitioned Congress
to recognize the Lumbee Tribe, an essential step toward
securing Federal funding for our children's education. Today,
137 years later, I stand before you once again advocating for
justice and equal treatment through full Federal recognition.
In 1956, the United States Congress passed the Lumbee Act.
Sadly, that law was enacted during the height of the Federal
Indian termination era, a period when the Federal Government
was actively ending tribes' legal relationships with the United
States.
While the 1956 Act says that we are Lumbee Indians, it also
included language stating that our tribe, the Lumbee Indians,
were not eligible for full services or benefits. The language
specifically says, ``Nothing in this act shall make such
Indians eligible for any services performed by the United
States for Indians because of their status as Indians. And none
of the statutes of the United States which affect Indians
because of their status as Indians shall be applicable to the
Lumbee Indians.''
This problematic language of the termination era continues
to hinder us today, placing the Lumbee in a legal limbo that
only Congress can resolve. There is no bureaucratic process
that can amend what Congress has legislated.
Thankfully, since the end of termination, Congress has
repeatedly taken steps to undo these unjust laws and move
toward self-determination. I am confident that this year,
Congress will finally amend this law, this flawed law, and
extend the full services and benefits that the Lumbee deserve.
A tribe's legal status should be clear, concise and
unambiguous. The Lumbee Fairness Act ensures this for our
tribe.
In 1958, just two years after the Lumbee Act, the Ku Klux
Klan attempted to intimidate our community by rallying in
Lumbee territory and burning a cross. However, that night, more
than 100 tribal members, many of whom were World War II
veterans, stood ready, armed with rifles and shotguns, and
successfully drove the Klan away. It is only by the grace of
God that no lives were lost that night, and the headlines
across the Country bore witness to the resilience of the Lumbee
Indians.
Today, I stand before you as a leader of a people who have
never been afraid to fight, to stand our ground and to resist
oppression. When we are pushed, we push back.
As a descendant of Henry Berry, Solomon, and the brave
Lumbee who faced down the KKK, I urge you all to act now to do
everything within your power to pass the Lumbee Fairness Act
and eliminate harmful termination era language. Henry, Solomon,
my grandparents, my father, and many others who are no longer
with us, Senators Sanford, Inouye, Akaka, McCain, have all
passed on. Senator Dole is in her twilight years.
Do not let us bury another Lumbee or lose another ally in
this fight for justice. Congress must move to ensure the Lumbee
Indians are no longer second class Natives in our own land.
Thank you.
And Chair, I would like to submit into the record a
comprehensive list of resolutions and letters from federally-
recognized tribes and tribal entities that support Lumbee
recognition. The list includes Catawba, Tunica-Biloxi, Oneida
Nation of Wisconsin, Pascua Yaqui, Mashantucket Pequot, and
many more.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lowery follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Lowery, Chairman, Lumbee Tribe
Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice-Chairman Schatz, and members of the
Committee, thank you for holding this hearing, and for the opportunity
to appear before you today in support of S. 107, the Lumbee Fairness
Act. My name is John Lowery. I am the duly elected Chairman of the
Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.
The Lumbee Tribe has long appreciated the vital work of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs. Over the last three decades, we have
benefitted from at least nine hearings before this Committee, and we
remain grateful for the Committee's work to favorably report our bill
out of this Committee at least five times. Senators, please know we
appreciate your commitment to Indian Country, and the kind attention
you give to the Lumbee people again today.
It is with great pride that I also highlight the work of the senior
Senator from North Carolina, Senator Thom Tillis, who has been tireless
in his efforts on behalf of the Lumbee Fairness Act. Together with
Senator Ted Budd, they have again done the honorable and important work
of sponsoring and championing full Federal recognition for the Lumbee
Tribe. They follow in the bipartisan footsteps of North Carolina
Senators Terry Sanford, Elizabeth Dole and Richard Burr, who during
their terms introduced legislation for our Tribe a total of thirteen
times before passing the baton in succession to each other, and now to
Senators Tillis and Budd.
We will never forget what these proud North Carolinians have done
for the Lumbee people; they have our people's everlasting gratitude.
Based in no small part on their work, today, S.107 enjoys wide
bipartisan support from the nineteen Republican and Democratic co-
sponsors of this important legislation, and we are so grateful to each
of them.
As you know, the House of Representatives has once again acted on
the House version of our legislation. Championed by our Congressman
David Rouzer, and enjoying bipartisan sponsorship from nearly all of
the North Carolina delegation, H.R. 474 was added as an amendment to
the House's Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.
Today I am here as a direct descendant of Solomon Locklear, Sr.,
who was one of the 44 tribal leaders who signed a petition to Congress
in 1888 asking the United States to recognize our Tribe, a crucial
predicate to obtaining Federal funding to educate our Lumbee children.
One hundred and thirty-seven years later, I am here again on the same
business as my ancestors--to seek from Congress justice and the equal
treatment of the Lumbee people through full Federal recognition. Seated
immediately behind me are representatives of the Lumbee Honor Guard,
all veterans of the United States armed forces. The Lumbee Honor Guard
reflects my people's patriotism and love of country so fundamental to
who we are as a people. We ask our country, in return, to do right by
the Lumbee Tribe.
Lumbee Tribal Community and History
Home for us is the area in and around what is now Robeson County,
North Carolina. This has been our home since the time of European
contact when we were forced to take refuge in the swamps of Robeson
County to find protection from ever-increasing encroachment from non-
Indian settlement. We have been there ever since. Many of you have
visited our home, and for those that have not, we urge you to meet our
tribal members and experience this vital part of Indian Country.
Our roughly 60,000 enrolled members all directly descend from
historical lists of tribal members that date back to the early 1900s.
Our kinship ties to one another define our people. All of our people
maintain close ties and live in communities--what you might call
neighborhoods--that are composed of nearly all Lumbee residents. Most
of our people attend schools and churches that are mostly Lumbee and
marry other Lumbees. We have historic Lumbee institutions in our
community that reinforce these community ties. For example, we have
church conferences that consist of all Lumbee churches, such as the
Burnt Swamp Baptist Association, which was formed around the turn of
the twentieth century. There is also a separate Methodist conference
for our Indian churches.
Our tribal government is organized according to our tribal
constitution. We have a Chairperson elected by the Lumbee citizenry,
and a Tribal Council composed of 21 tribal representatives elected from
districts within our territory. We live and exercise tribal authority,
independence and self-governance. We are a fiercely independent people,
with a very long history as a cohesive, self-governing community. We
have protected our community in part by organizing and exercising our
influence in local offices that affect our people on a day-to-day
basis. Lumbees serve in all levels of local government--as county
commissioners, on the board of education, as superior court and
district court judges, and district attorneys. The Town of Pembroke,
which is the heart of Lumbee territory, has a Lumbee mayor and all-
Lumbee town council. \1\ The Chancellor at the University of North
Carolina is also Lumbee. \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Town of Pembroke was incorporated in 1895. But at that
time, it was singled out as the only incorporated town where the
Governor appointed the mayor and other leaders. All those appointees
were non-Indians. Our Lumbee warriors returning from World War II
refused to accept this situation. In 1945, State law was changed under
pressure of Lumbee people to allow for election of these positions.
Ever since, the Town of Pembroke leadership has been all Lumbee.
\2\ The University began as ``the Indian Normal School,'' and was
designated by the State of North Carolina as an historically American
Indian university in 2005. General Assembly of North Carolina, Session
2005, Sess. Law 2005-153, Bill 371.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is one other important thing to know about our people. Our
community is dedicated to ensuring the best possible education for our
children. Shortly after the Lumbee Tribe was formally recognized by the
State of North Carolina in 1885, the State authorized the Tribe to run
its own school district for our children. Tribal leaders controlled it
completely and enrollment was limited to Lumbee children only. Two
years later, the State authorized an ``Indian normal school'' to train
teachers for our Indian schools, but provided no money for construction
of facilities. This why in 1888 our tribal leaders approached Congress
to request that the Federal government recognize the Tribe and by doing
so provide Federal funding for education.
In the absence of Federal funding, tribal members pooled their
resources and built their own Indian normal school to train Lumbee
teachers for our Lumbee run school system. The Indian normal school
evolved over time and eventually became the University of North
Carolina at Pembroke--a remarkable achievement by any standard. So even
though our efforts to obtain Federal Indian education assistance
failed, our dedication to the education of our children persisted. In
fact, the Tribe operated its own Indian schools and the Indian normal
school until the mid-1970s, when a Federal judge ordered the
desegregation of our schools because the Tribe was not Federally
recognized.
Lumbee Tribal community and history also have been the subject of
extensive professional research and is well-documented by a host of
doctorate-level and legal experts. I am attaching to my testimony today
the Prepared Statement of Dr. Fred Hoxie, who along with various other
experts, like Dr. Jack Campisi, have testified before Congress on
multiple occasions confirming the Lumbee Tribe's status as a tribe
deserving of federal recognition. I am also honored to be joined in
this hearing today by the United States' foremost legal expert on
federal recognition, Ms. Arlinda Locklear, who I am proud to say is
also a member of the Lumbee Tribe. Ms. Locklear will testify in much
greater detail about the immense amount of documented scholarship
verifying the vitality and continued existence of our community.
Respectfully, I say all of this to demonstrate that the Lumbee are
a vibrant, productive, proud people, and we have dealt with the same
problems as other Indian communities. We have not only survived, we
stand strong. We are well known in Indian Country. We are the largest
tribe east of the Mississippi River and the largest non-Federally
recognized tribe in the country and our people have served this country
and Indian Country in the military, as educators, doctors, lawyers, and
business people.
Passage of the Lumbee Fairness Act is Very Long Overdue
As both this Committee and the House of Representatives committee
of jurisdiction have well documented, congressional efforts to extend
formal recognition to the Lumbee Tribe stretch back to 1899. \3\ These
proposed Federal bills generally followed the terms of the most recent
State legislation recognizing the Tribe but none was enacted until
Congress passed the Lumbee Act of 1956. \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Senate Report No. 111-116, 111th Cong., 2d Sess; House Report
No. 111-103, 111th Cong., 1st Sess.
\4\ The State recognized the Tribe as Croatan in 1885, as Indians
of Robeson County in 1911, as Cherokees of Robeson County in 1913, and
as Lumbee in 1953. The final name change was the only one requested by
the Lumbee Tribe, following a referendum conducted by the State. Up
until that point, the Tribe has simply followed whatever name the State
imposed so that it could continue to maintain control of its State
authorized school district.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, this enactment occurred at the height of the Federal
Indian termination era, when the Federal government was actively
terminating tribes' special legal relationship with the United States.
As introduced in 1955, the bill was once again intended to recognize
the Tribe on the same terms by which the State had most recently
confirmed its recognition of the Tribe. But the bill was amended in the
Senate before enactment to include termination language. Thus, while
the 1956 Act designated the Tribe as Lumbee Indians, it went on to
provide ``nothing in this Act shall make such Indians eligible for any
services performed by the United States for Indians because of their
status as Indians, and none of the statutes of the United States which
affect Indians because of their status as Indian shall be applicable to
the Lumbee Indians.'' 70 Stat. 254.
Sadly, at the time the Lumbee Indians thought that we had been
recognized and so we celebrated--oral tradition tells us that the
streets of Pembroke were closed for a tribal-wide celebration. \5\ But
instead of clarifying the status of the Tribe, the 1956 Lumbee Act
caused confusion and effectively has relegated the Tribe to ``second
class'' status. For example, at various times, lawyers at the
Department of the Interior have interpreted the 1956 Lumbee Act as
prohibiting administrative action to clarify the Tribe's status, and at
other times, they argued the opposite. However lawyers might interpret
the 1956 Lumbee Act, the reality is that the Tribe never received
Federal Indian services or enjoyed the protective reach of Federal
Indian statutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Because of the history of State recognition under various
names, tribal members viewed the ``giving of a name'' as recognition.
Even today, older tribal members who inquire about the pending bill
will sometimes ask when Congress will give the Tribe its name.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bottom line is this: only Congress can for all time and for all
purposes resolve this uncertainty with the Lumbee Fairness Act. The
1956 Lumbee Act is now 70 years old. It is long past time to rectify
the injustice it has inflicted on our Tribe and our people.
Broad Support for Lumbee Recognition in Indian Country
The Lumbee Tribe is honored to have broad support throughout Indian
Country for full Federal recognition of the Tribe. Altogether, more
than two hundred tribes have expressed support. This includes large
tribal organizations, such as the Alaska Federation of Natives, with a
membership of 186 tribes, and the Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes,
with a membership of 35 tribes. It also includes approximately 20
individual tribes that have adopted resolutions of support. These
supportive tribes represent all regions of Indian Country. For example,
the Blackfeet Tribe from Montana, Jamestown S'Klallum Tribe from
Washington State, the Jamul Indian Village of California, Hopi Tribe
from Arizona, Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and Oneida Nation from
Wisconsin all support Lumbee recognition. The long list of support also
includes tribes which are members of United Southern and Eastern Tribes
(USET), such as the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation (Connecticut),
the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe (Massachusetts), the Pamunkey Indian Tribe
(Virginia), the Catawba Indian Nation (South Carolina), and the Tunica-
Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana.
The Eastern Band of Cherokee, which for generations has jealously
guarded its position as the only federally recognized tribe in North
Carolina, has long waged a vicious campaign against Lumbee recognition
based on mistruths. While the Eastern Band has urged some other tribes
to join in their opposition, the reality is that theopposition has been
wildly overstated. For example, Eastern Band has argued that all 35
tribal members of USET oppose Lumbee recognition--but this is
demonstrably untrue, as Lumbee has received from eight individual USET
Tribes letters and resolutions explicitly supporting the Lumbee
legislation. Not only that, Eastern Band's claim of USET opposition was
based on a USET resolution that supported the administrative
acknowledgment process, but which did not oppose Lumbee recognition or
even explicitly reference the Lumbee Tribe. This is, at best, a
misrepresentation about those tribes' positions.
When letters and resolutions are fairly and closely read, it
becomes clear that the majority of tribes that have expressly taken a
position on recognition of the Lumbee Tribe support recognition. In the
end, though, a fair and just Indian policy does not depend upon a head
count in Indian Country. It depends upon equal treatment for all Indian
tribes and the Lumbee Fairness Act is built upon this principle.
There is No Sound Reason to Oppose the Lumbee Fairness Act
Some people have urged that the Lumbee Tribe should be made to go
through the administrative recognition process. But Congress has never
imposed this on tribes in a position like the Lumbee Tribe--instead,
Congress has enacted recognition or restoration legislation. The best
example is the Tiwas of Texas. Just as the Lumbees were recognized by
the State of North Carolina, the Tiwas had been long recognized by the
State of Texas. But in 1968, Congress enacted legislation to transfer
any Federal responsibility to the State and included termination
language--in fact, the legislative history of the 1968 shows that it
was modeled on the 1956 Lumbee Act. 82 Stat. 93. In 1987, Congress
enacted remedial legislation to restore Federal responsibility for the
Tiwas and recognize them as the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo. 101 Stat. 667.
It is long overdue for Congress to do the same for the Lumbee Tribe by
enacting the Lumbee Fairness Act.
Some people alleged that the origins of the Lumbee Tribe are
unknown and therefore Congress should not recognize the Tribe. This is
just not true. In response to one of the many bills to recognize the
Indians of Robeson County as ``Siouan Indians of Lumber River,''
Senator Wheeler, Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs in 1934,
asked the opinion of Dr. John Swanton on the origins of the Lumbee
Tribe. Senate Report No. 204, 73d Cong., 2d Sess. Dr. Swanton was the
most well-known and respected anthropologist in the field of American
Indian studies. Dr. Swanton researched the question and concluded that
the Robeson County Indians descend from the aboriginal Cheraw Indians,
along with remnants of other Siouan speaking tribes.
Other historical data support Dr. Swanton's conclusion. A 1725 map
showed that at the time of sustained European contact, there was a
Cheraw Indian community located on Drowning Creek. A 1771 document
lists names of the ``Charraw Settlement'' and the list included classic
Lumbee names, such as Sweat, Groom, Locklear, Chavis and Dees. The 1790
census identifies families with these same names residing around
Drowning Creek, and modern-day Lumbees can trace genealogical descent
from those families. In 1809, the State of North Carolina enacted
legislation to change the name of Drowning Creek to the Lumber River.
NC Public Laws of 1809, Chap. XXXII. This is the very same river where
Lumbees reside today. It is from the Lumber River that we derived our
name, and the same river after which our name was acknowledged by the
State of North Carolina in 1953 and by the Congress in 1956. Congress
has known of our origins since at least 1934, and likely even earlier.
\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In a 1915 report to Congress, Special Indian Agent O.M.
McPherson conducted a thorough review of the historical record, noted
other historical possibilities, but also identified Cheraw as the
probable origin of the State recognized Croatan Indians. Senate
Document No. 677, 63d Cong., 3d Sess., at 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some have argued that making Lumbees eligible for Federal Indian
services will cost too much, or that the budget for those services may
reduce the services for other recognized tribes in the Eastern Region,
Bureau of Indian Affairs. Not only inaccurate, this is the most unjust
reason of all to oppose the Lumbee Fairness Act. It is simply beneath
the dignity of other tribes even to suggest that Federal recognition of
a deserving Tribe should depend upon cost to the federal government.
And it is factually inaccurate to suggest that the cost of Lumbee
services will impact the level of services for other tribes in the
Eastern Region. \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ As a state recognized tribe, the Lumbees already receive
Federal funding from several Federal agencies, including Housing &
Urban Development, Department of Energy, Department of Education, which
means that enactment of S. 107 would impact only the Bureau of Indian
Affairs at the Department of interior and Indian Health Services at
Health and Human Services. And these agencies have processes for
bringing on so-called new tribes into their programs, processes that
protect the services of other recognized tribes. The Bureau of Indian
Affairs has a three-year process for this purpose, at the end of which
the newly recognized tribe receives services when Congress provides
appropriations for that purpose. Similarly, the Indian Health Service
brings new tribes into its budget process in a way that guarantees
those tribes will receive services when Congress explicitly
appropriates funding for those services. Finally, there are regulatory
guardrails in place that protect the existing budgets for Federally
recognized tribes. See 25 C.F.R. 900.19 (Secretary must provide full
amount of funds set out in self-determination contracts with tribes);
25 C.F.R. 1000.501, 1000.671 A self-governing compact is an
enforceable contract under which Secretary must provide all funds for
which the compact contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sum, I am sad to say that in my opinion, all of these
allegations are beneath the dignity of the tribal leaders who have made
them.
Conclusion
We Lumbees are now in the seventh generation of efforts to achieve
full Federal recognition. In many tribal traditions, Native people plan
for their future for the next seven generations. In our case, we extend
gratitude and honor to our last seven generations for having kept the
faith, for focusing on the future, for teaching us the values that have
enabled us to endure, and for getting us to this moment in history when
we are so close to full Federal recognition from the United States.
I urge you to support our effort and to join us in this righteous
cause. Thank you Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and
members of this vitally important Committee for your consideration of
our situation and support of the Lumbee Fairness Act. I am happy to
answer any questions you or the committee members might have.
The Chairman. We will include that as part of the record.
Thank you, Chairman Lowery.
Ms. Locklear, welcome.
STATEMENT OF ARLINDA LOCKLEAR, ESQ., SPECIAL COUNSEL ON
RECOGNITION, LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Ms. Locklear. Thank you very much. We appreciate the
opportunity to speak again today. My name is Arlinda Locklear.
I have been an attorney working with the tribe on this effort
since 1988. So I have been at it for a few of those time that
the Chairman has referred to, as well as other witnesses today.
We have had multiple hearings and multiple opportunities to
act and to give justice to the Lumbee people since 1899, when
the first Federal legislation was introduced. All of those
bills have failed. And let me tell you, that has been a
heartbreaking process for the Lumbee people.
But we owe a vote of thanks to this Committee in
particular, because as a result of that process, you have
developed the richest record that exists for any non-federally
recognized tribe in this Country. We have a record that allows
you to proceed with the enactment of S. 107 with full
confidence that by doing so, you would extend full Federal
recognition to a tribe that truly exists as such.
The most important document that is in that long, rich
record is a report that was asked for, sought by this
Committee, and submitted in 1915 by Special Indian Agent O.M.
McPherson. We have particularly his record, which I have with
me today, as well as the testimony of multiple expert witness
over the last 100 years that give you the body of evidence to
prove tribal existence.
I think it is worth noting the quality of the experts and
the preeminence of their appearance here and the testimony that
they provided in support of Federal recognition. We are honored
to include among that group Dr. Jack Campisi, who has probably
authored more petitions in the administrative process than any
other expert. We include also Dr. Sturtevant, who was the
general editor for the authoritative Smithsonian Handbook of
North American Indians.
We include among that group Dr. Ray Fogelson, who is no
longer with us, but Dr. Fogelson was the editor for the
Southeast Volume in particular of the Smithsonian Handbook of
North American Indians. And we count among those experts Vine
Deloria, who spoke eloquently in 1988 to this Committee in
particular about political authority.
What I would like to do this afternoon is summarize very
briefly what the characteristics of tribal existence are, and
give you confidence in the record that you have already that
establishes those criteria. In a Supreme Court decision in 1901
called Montoya v. The United States, the Supreme Court gave us
guidance as to what an Indian tribe is. The Supreme Court
indicated that an Indian tribe consists of a body of Indians of
the same race, factor number one, who are united in a community
in a particular territory, factor number two, and who are
united under one leadership or government, factor number three.
A few years later, in 1913, the Supreme Court spoke in
United States v. Sandoval. And in that opinion, the Court went
to great lengths to confirm this body's penultimate authority
to make the decision on establishing a formal government-to-
government relationship with an Indian tribe. It noted that
that authority is limited only to those groups that are
``distinctly Indian communities.''
So we have some indication of what those criteria are. I
would like to speak very briefly to those with regard to
Lumbee.
First, a body of Indians. Your record, beginning with the
1915 McPherson report and continuing to today, establishes that
there is a single related body of Indians residing in Robeson
and adjoining counties who call themselves Lumbee, and I will
note for the record have done so informally, even before the
adoption of formal State recognition, since the early 1920s.
That has been the name we have chosen for ourselves.
Second, these folks are united in a community occupying a
particular territory. They are so united in a community that
even today more than 60 percent of modern day enrolled members
are married to other Lumbees. They attend all-Lumbee schools,
they attend all-Lumbee churches, and their primary interaction
is among other Lumbees.
They also occupy a territory that they have been in since
the time of first sustained white contact in the early 1700s.
And that is Robeson and adjoining counties. That is home. And
the record establishes, your record, that more than 50 percent
of the enrolled members of the tribe reside today in that
traditional territory.
Finally, leadership. Many of the events that the chairman
spoke about demonstrate the effectiveness and the repeated
assertion of independence that the long record of political
authority shows among the Lumbee people.
In this regard, let me highlight the testimony that you
received in 1988 from Vine Deloria, who spoke eloquently about
the form of leadership at Lumbee. He noted that more than any
other federally-recognized tribe the form of leadership at
Lumbee is more like the traditional form of leadership that
existed before the adoption of the IRA and before the formation
of formal tribal governments. That is what leadership among
indigenous communities looks like, and it still exists at
Lumbee today.
Finally, let me say a word about, very quickly, the
administrative process. These facts and criteria and evidence
that I have summarized for you indicate that under those
criteria, we have established what they refer to as high
evidence of tribal existence. The concentration of membership
within a defined territory, Robeson and adjoining counties, and
the high in-marriage rate themselves, those two factors are
considered to be conclusive evidence of tribal existence in
those regulations.
So you have the evidence before you. We urge you to act,
and we think you can do so, again, with full confidence that
you are recognizing a true Indian community.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Locklear follows:]
Prepared Statement of Arlinda Locklear, Esq., Special Counsel on
Recognition, Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina
Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice-Chairman Schatz, and members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear in support of S.107,
the Lumbee Fairness Act. My name is Arlinda Locklear. I have been
involved as an attorney for the Tribe in its effort to obtain federal
recognition since March 1988. I am also an enrolled member of the
Lumbee Tribe. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition to work on behalf of my own Tribe, it has been my
honor to represent other non-federally recognized tribes for decades in
the worthy work for federal recognition (before the Congress as well as
the Department of the Interior), including the Miami Nation of Indiana,
the Brothertown Nation of Wisconsin, the Gay Head Tribe of
Massachusetts, and the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe and United Houma Indian
Nation of Louisiana. The recognition work has been a major part of my
work throughout my career.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me start with explaining how I came to be the Tribe's attorney
in this effort. This story illustrates the strength of the Lumbee
community and the Lumbee people's insistence upon their independence as
a self-governing tribe. Robeson County is the heart of the Lumbee
community. Even though our community constitutes nearly 40 percent of
the population of the county, including a number of practicing
attorneys, our community had never had a Lumbee Superior Court Judge
before 1988. So when the State created a new superior court judge
position for the county, the Lumbee people were determined that one of
our own should be elected to that position. At that time, a prominent
member of the Tribe (and a good friend) named Julian Pierce was
Director of the Indian legal services office in the community. In that
capacity, Mr. Pierce had overseen the research relating to and
submission of a Lumbee petition for federal recognition under the
administrative acknowledgment process in 1987. Mr. Pierce then resigned
and ran for the newly created Superior Court judge position. To our
great sadness, Mr. Pierce was murdered after the nomination process had
closed but before the election. When the State of North Carolina
refused to reopen the nomination process for that judgeship, the Lumbee
people mobilized, resulting in Mr. Pierce's election to the judgeship
even though he could not serve. The Lumbee people kept the pressure on
an embarrassed State and, soon after the election, another new
judgeship was created and a Lumbee Indian was appointed to the
position. We have routinely elected Lumbees as judges in the county
ever since.
With the loss of Mr. Pierce, I was honored to step into Mr.
Pierce's shoes to continue the work on federal recognition. I speak to
you today based on forty years of experience with the issue since.
Lumbee history is a long and remarkable one, but I will focus on a few
features of our history and experience that demonstrate the Tribe's
unique claim to federal recognition and other circumstances that
reflect the simple justice of the Tribe's pursuit of equal treatment as
a self-governing native community.
Early Lumbee Efforts to Achieve Federal Recognition
The Lumbee Tribe began its effort to obtain federal recognition
soon after formal recognition of the Tribe by the State of North
Carolina in 1885. The 1885 state legislation recognized the Tribe under
the name Croatan Indians of Robeson County, \2\ authorized the Tribe to
establish separate schools for its children, provided a pro rata share
of county school funds for the Tribe's schools, and authorized the
Tribe to control hiring for the schools and eligibility of students to
attend the schools. \3\ North Carolina General Assembly 1885, chap. 51.
Two years later, tribal leaders sought and obtained State legislation
authorizing the creation of an Indian ``normal school'', i.e., a school
dedicated to training Indian teachers for the Lumbee schools. North
Carolina General Assembly 1887, chap, 254. But because the Indian
normal school was badly underfunded, the Lumbee Tribe petitioned
Congress in 1888 for Federal Indian education assistance. For the
Committee members' information, the Tribe has on display a picture
showing the Indian Normal School students around 1920.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Croatan name was offered up by Mr. McMillan, a member of
the State legislature who considered himself an amateur historian. It
was not a name sought by the Tribe.
\3\ The Tribe jealously defended its authority to control
enrollment into its schools. In 1913, the State Attorney General opined
that the Robeson County Board of Education could overrule enrollment
decisions made by the Tribe. The Tribe refused to accept this
limitation; it sought and obtained a special act from the North
Carolina Legislature overturning the Attorney General's opinion and
restoring tribal authority. North Carolina General Assembly 1919, chap.
211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1888 Lumbee petition to Congress was signed by fifty-four (54)
tribal leaders, including one of Chairman Lowery's ancestors. The
petition sought Federal assistance for the then-named Croatan Indians
in general and funding for the Tribe's schools in particular. A copy of
this petition is on display for the Committee members' information.
Congress referred the petition to the Department of the Interior, which
investigated the Tribe's history and relations with the State. Citing
the federal policy of encouraging states to assume responsibility for
educating Indian children and the shortage of funding, the Commissioner
of Indian Affairs denied the request for funding in 1890. Shortly
thereafter, the Tribe began its quest to receive federal recognition
more directly through federal legislation.
In 1899, the first bill was introduced in Congress to appropriate
funds to educate the Croatan Indian children. H.R.4009, 56th Cong., 1st
Sess. Similar bills were introduced in 1910 (H.R 4.19036, 61st Cong.,
2d Sess.) and 1911 (S. 3258, 62nd Cong., 1st Sess.) In 1913, the House
of Representatives Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing on
S.3258, where the Senate sponsor of the bill reviewed the history of
the Tribe and concluded that the Lumbees, still called Croatans, had
``maintained their race integrity and their tribal characteristics.''
Hearing before the Committee on Indian Affairs, House of
Representatives, on S. 3258, Feb. 14, 1913. In response to the same
bill, the Department of the Interior dispatched C.F. Pierce, Supervisor
of Indian Schools, to conduct an investigation of the Tribe. Pierce
reviewed the Tribe's history, acknowledged their Indian ancestry and
the strength of their community, but recommended against federal
assistance:
It is the avowed policy of the Government to require the
states having an Indian population to assume the burden &
responsibility for their education as soon as possible. North
Carolina, like the State of New York, has a well organized plan
for the education of Indians within her borders, and I can see
no justification for any interference or aid, on the part of
the Government in either case. Should an appropriation be made
for the Croatans, it would establish a precedent for the
Catawbas of S.C., the Alabamas of Texas, the Tuscaroras of
N.Y., as well as for other scattering tribes that are now cared
for by the various states.
All the other tribes mentioned by Pierce have since been
recognized by the United States.
In 1914, the Senate directed the Secretary of the Interior to
investigate the condition and tribal rights of the Lumbee Indians and
report thereon to Congress. S.Res. 410, 63d Cong., 2d Sess. The
Secretary assigned Special Indian Agent O.M. McPherson to conduct the
investigation. According to the Secretary's letter transmitting the
McPherson Report to the President of the Senate, McPherson conducted
``a careful investigation on the ground as well as extensive historical
research.'' The report covered all aspects of the Tribe's history and
condition, running 252 pages in length. Indians of North Carolina, 63rd
Cong., 3d Sess., Doc.No. 677. McPherson's report again confirmed the
tribal characteristics of the Lumbee Indians but Congress took no
action on the McPherson report.
In 1924, yet another bill was introduced in Congress to recognize
the Lumbee Indians now under the name of Cherokee Indians of Robeson
County, mimicking a name that had recently been applied to the Tribe
thought State legislation. H.R.8083, 68th Cong., 1st Sess. This bill
failed and in 1932 a very nearly identical bill was introduced in the
Senate. S. 4595, 72d Cong., 1st Sess. This bill failed as well.
In 1933, a federal bill was introduced that was nearly identical to
the prior two bills, except that it directed that the previously
designated Croatan Indians ``shall hereafter be designated Cheraw
Indians and shall be recognized and enrolled as such...'' H.R. 5365,
73d Cong., 1st Sess. In his statement at the hearing on the bill, the
Secretary of the Interior attached an opinion of the eminent Dr. John
Swanton, a specialist on southeastern Indians with the Smithsonian
Institution Bureau of Ethnology, which concluded that the previously
named Croatan Indians actually descended from Cheraw and other related
Siouan speaking tribes. The Secretary recommended that the broader
linguistic name of Siouan be used as the tribal designation for the
Tribe, but also recommended that Congress include termination language
because of the expense of providing Federal Indian services to the
Tribe. Rep.No. 1752, House of Representatives, 73d Cong., 2d Sess. The
committee adopted the change proposed by the Secretary and reported the
bill out favorably, but the bill was not enacted. The following year,
the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs took the same action on an
identical bill in the Senate, S. 1632, but there was no further action
on the bill. S. Rep.204, 73d Cong., 2d Sess.
These numerous federal bills between 1899 and 1934 to recognize the
Tribe under various name have a common and clear legislative purpose,
i.e., to recognize the Tribe on the same terms as the most recent State
legislation recognizing the Tribe. The 1899 federal bill would have
recognized the Tribe as Croatan, just as the State had done in 1885.
The 1911 federal bill would have recognized the Tribe as the Indians of
Robeson County, just as the State had done in a 1911 amendment to its
law. North Carolina General Assembly1911, chap. 215. The 1913 federal
bill would have recognized the Tribe as Cherokee, just as the State had
done in a 1913 amendment to its law. North Carolina General Assembly
1913, chap. 123. Indeed, a committee report on the 1913 federal bill
explicitly acknowledged that the federal bill was intended to extend
federal recognition on the same terms as the amended state law. Rep.No.
826, House of Representatives, 68th Cong., 1st Sess. Thus, the North
Carolina Congressional delegation consistently followed the lead of
North Carolina in its deliberations on the Tribe's status and clearly
intended to recognize the Tribe in the various bills.
In 1934, Congress inaugurated a new policy for Indian Country with
the enactment of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA). Among other
things, the IRA authorized half-blood Indians not then recognized to
organize and adopt a tribal constitution, thereby becoming federally
recognized. The Lumbee leadership wrote to the Commissioner of Indian
Affairs, inquiring whether the IRA applied to the Lumbees. The inquiry
was referred to the then Associate Solicitor Felix Cohen, who advised
that the Lumbees could organize under the IRA if some members of the
Tribe were certified as one-half or more Indian blood. The Tribe
immediately asked the Department to make that inquiry and the
Department dispatched Dr. Carl Seltzer, a physical anthropologist, to
Robeson County for that purpose. 209 Lumbees agreed to submit to
Seltzer's examination. Out of those examined, Dr. Seltzer certified 22
members as one-half or more Indian blood and eligible to organize under
the IRA. The science behind physical anthropology has since been
thoroughly discredited and the Lumbee experience bears out the wholly
unreliable nature of the alleged science. In several instances, for
example, full siblings were examined by Dr. Seltzer but with differing
outcomes--one sibling was designated as one half or more while the
other sibling was not. This effort by the Lumbee Tribe also failed
ultimately. \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ In the early 1970's, the survivors of the 22 certified half-
bloods asked for the services to which they were entitled under the
IRA. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) declined, interpreting the 1956
Lumbee Act as cutting off any rights that might arise under the IRA.
Ultimately, the D.C. Court of Appeals rejected this interpretation of
the 1956 Lumbee Act. Maynor v. Morton, 510 F.2d 1254 (D.C. Cir. 1975).
The surviving half-bloods then received BIA housing assistance but the
BIA declined to take land into trust for them, a necessary precondition
to organizing under the IRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While these legislative and administrative efforts failed to
achieve the Tribe's goal of federal recognition, they nonetheless
produced a remarkable and unique federal record documenting the Tribe
and its community. As of a consequence of the half dozen bills
introduced between 1899 and 1934 to recognize the Lumbee Tribe, four
substantial reports were conducted by federal Indian agents into the
Lumbee Tribe, its history, and community. All confirmed the tribal
ancestry and distinct community with strong leadership of the Lumbee
Tribe. But they also opposed the extension of federal Indian statutes
and services to the Tribe because of federal policy to insist that
states assume the responsibility for educating Indian children or
limited federal appropriations.
The 1956 Lumbee Act
Because of the mounting historical evidence compiled in Congress'
deliberations on its recognition bills, including the McPherson report
and the Swanton opinion, the Indians of Robeson County grew disgruntled
with their designation under State law as Cherokees of Robeson County.
Under pressure from the Tribe, the State of North Carolina conducted a
referendum among the tribal members in 1952 on the tribal name. The
choice was between adopting the name Lumbee \5\ or maintaining the
State designation as Cherokees of Robeson County. The results were
clear: 2,109 members chose to be known by their own name Lumbee and
only 35 members chose maintain the State designation as Cherokee. To
its credit, the State of North Carolina once again amended its law in
1953 to recognize the Tribe as Lumbee Indians of Robeson and adjoining
counties. North Carolina General Assembly 1953, chap. 874.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The name Lumbee had been informally used by the Tribe for
decades by this time. The earliest recorded use of the name is in a
1926 article referring to the Tribe as such in the Raleigh News and
Observer, a newspaper founded in 1865 with the widest distribution in
the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As it had always done, once again the Tribe prevailed upon its
congressional delegation to introduce the identical bill into Congress
to recognize the Tribe on the same terms as the State. The Federal bill
passed without amendment in the House of Representatives and was sent
to the Senate. There, the Department of the Interior objected again
based on its effort to avoid fedderal financial obligations:
We are therefore unable to recommend that the Congress take
any action which might ultimate result in the imposition of
additional obligations on the Federal Government or in placing
additional persons of Indian blood under the jurisdiction of
this Department. The persons who constitute this group of
Indians have been recognized and designated as Indians by the
State legislature. If they are not completely satisfied with
such recognition, they, as citizens of the State, may petition
the legislature to amend or otherwise to change that
recognition. . .if your committee should recommend the
enactment of the bill, it should be amended to indicate clearly
that it does not make these persons eligible for services
provided through the Bureau of Indian Affairs to other Indians.
(Emphasis added.) The Senate committee adopted the Secretary's
recommendation so that when the bill was enacted into law, it contained
classic termination language: ``Nothing in this Act shall make such
Indians eligible for any services performed by the United States for
Indians because of their status as Indians, and none of the statutes of
the United States which affect Indians because of their status as
Indian shall be applicable to the Lumbee Indians.'' Pub. L. 570, Act of
June 7, 1956, 70 Stat. 254.
The Impact of the 1956 Act--Confusion and Limbo
Since 1956, federal agencies and courts have construed the Lumbee
Act in different ways. In 1970, the Joint Economic Committee of
Congress described the Lumbee as having been officially recognized by
the act, although not granted federal services. American Indians: Facts
and Future, Toward Economic Development for Native American
Communities, p. 34 (GPO 1970). Also in 1970, the Legislative Reference
Service of the Library of Congress described the 1956 Lumbee Act as
legislative recognition of an Indian people. Memorandum, April 10,
1970, LRS, Library of Congress. And in 1979, the Comptroller General
ruled that the 1956 Act left the Lumbees' status unchanged, i.e., it
neither recognized the Tribe nor terminated the Tribe's eligibility for
services it might otherwise receive. The only court to construe the Act
concluded that it designated the group as Lumbee Indians but did not
take away individual rights that had been bestowed by previous
legislation such as the IRA. Maynor v. Morton, above.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) thoroughly reviewed the
history and various interpretations of the 1956 Lumbee Act in 1988. It
did so in response to a request from the Senate Select Committee on
Indian Affairs, which had H.R.1426 under consideration at the time, a
bill to provide federal recognition to the Tribe. The CRS concluded as
follows:
The 1956 Lumbee legislation clearly did not establish
entitlement of the Lumbee Indians for federal services. It also
clearly named the group and denominated them as Indians.
Without a court decision squarely confronting the issue of
whether the 1956 statute confers federal recognition on the
Lumbee, there is insufficient documentation to determine if the
statute effects federal recognition of the Lumbees. It is,
however, a step toward recognition and would be a factor that
either the Department of the Interior or a court would have to
weigh along with others to determine whether the Lumbees are
entitled to federal recognition.
Memorandum dated September 28, 1988, reprinted in S.Rep.No.100-579,
100th Cong., 2d Sess. Finally, the Solicitor's Office at the Department
of the Interior has also taken varying views on the Act, concluding in
1989 that the Act precluded the Tribe from participating in the
administrative acknowledgment process, but finding otherwise in 2016.
M-37040, Reconsideration of the Lumbee Act of 1956, Dec. 22, 2016.
Whatever its ambiguity and however it might be construed, the 1956
Lumbee Act is clearly ``a step toward recognition,'' one that Congress
took following repeated consideration of the Tribe, its history, and
its community. Yet, Congress has not completed the process of
recognition.
Congress imposed legislation like the 1956 Lumbee Act on only one
other occasion. In 1968, Congress enacted legislation for the state
recognized Tiwas of Texas, legislation that designated the Tiwas as
Indian, transferred any federal responsibility for the tribe to the
state, and included termination language. 82 Stat. 93. The Senate
Committee specifically noted in its report on the 1968 Tiwa Act that
the bill was ``modeled after the act of June 7, 1956 (70 Stat. 254),
which relates to the Lumbee Indians of North Carolina.'' S.Rep.No.1070,
99th Cong., 2d Sess. Because of this unique circumstance, Congress
enacted legislation in 1987 extending full federal recognition to the
Tiwas of Texas, recognized by Congress as the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo of
Texas. Pub.L. 100-89, 101 Stat. 667. Like Congress corrected the
historical injustice for the Tiwas in 1987, Congress should now correct
the same injustice for the Lumbee Tribe.
Modern Lumbee Efforts to Obtain Federal Recognition Legislation
It became clear to the Lumbee over time that the 1956 Lumbee Act
did not accomplish the Tribe's long-standing goal of federal
recognition. \6\ As a result, the Tribe resumed it efforts to achieve
federal recognition. As noted above, the Tribe prepared and submitted a
documented petition for federal acknowledgment under the administrative
process in 1987. When the Solicitor's Office opined in 1989 that the
1956 Lumbee Act precluded administrative action to clarify the Tribe's
status, the Tribe turned once again to federal legislation. \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The final evidence of this failure came in the 1970's when the
State of North Carolina was ordered by a federal court to dismantle its
racially segregated schools. Lumbee parents thought their children were
exempt from that federal court order but they were told otherwise by
the federal judge. According to the judge, the Tribe was not federally
recognized and its separate schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment
to the US Constitution. As a result, the Tribe lost control over
schools it had operated under state law since 1885.
\7\ The Tribe requested that the Department return the petition to
the Tribe, in light of it ineligibility for the process. The Department
declined to do so. Nonetheless, the Department has not proceeded to
process the Lumbee petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 1988, the Lumbee Tribe's Congressional delegation has
introduced more than a dozen bills to recognize the Tribe. \8\ During
this period, the bill passed the House of Representative six times but
failed in the Senate. Also during this period, multiple hearings were
held on the issue in both the House and the Senate, resulting in more
than a half dozen committee reports. Thus, Congress' modern day
deliberations on the issue have expanded the already voluminous
congressional record on the Lumbee Tribe's history and community. We
know of no comparable Congressional record on any other tribe-specific
federal legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See H.R. 5042, 100th Cong.; H.R. 2335 101st Cong.; H.R. 1426
(S. 1036, Senate companion), 102d Cong.; H.R. 334, 103d Cong.; H.R. 898
(S.420, Senate companion), 108th Cong.; H.R. 21 (S. 660, Senate
companion), 109th Cong.; S.H.R. 27 (S.333, Senate companion), 110th
Cong.; H.R.31 (S. 1735, Senate companion), 111th Cong.; H.R. 27 (S.
1218, Senate companion), 112th Cong.; H.R. 1803 (S. 1132, Senate
companion), 113th Cong.; H.R. 184 (S. 2285, Senate companion), 114th
Cong.; H.R. 2352 & 3650 (S. 1047, Senate companion), 115th Cong.; H.R.
1964 (S. 1368, Senate companion), 116th Cong.; H.R. 2758, 117th Cong.;
H.R. 1101 (S. 521, Senate companion), 118th Cong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Congressional Record on the Lumbee Tribe Shows High Evidence of
Tribal Existence
The Supreme Court has defined an Indian tribe as follows: ``By a
`tribe', we understand a body of Indians of the same or similar race,
united in a community under one leadership or government, and
inhabiting a particular though sometimes ill-defined territory. . .''
Montoya v. United States, 180 U.S. 261, 266 (1901). The Court has also
repeatedly acknowledged that Congress has authority to decide whether a
group of Indians constitutes an Indian tribe, so long as the group is a
``distinctly Indian community.'' See United States v. Sandoval, 231
U.S. 28, 46 (1913). Thus, there are three necessary components of
tribal existence: first, people of Indian ancestry, second, who reside
in sufficient proximity to constitute a community, and third, who are
united under some form of leadership or government. \9\ The
congressional record on the Lumbee Tribe shows that the Tribe exhibits
all three components of an Indian tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ These are also the essential components of a tribe in the
administrative acknowledgment regulations. The three substantive
mandatory criteria are descent from an historic tribe, the maintenance
of a community, and the presence of political leadership of some type.
25 CFR Part 83, 83.11(b), (c) & (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, Congress has known since 1933 that the Lumbees descend from
the Cheraw and related Siouan-speaking tribes. Dr. Swanton expressed
this view in an opinion provided to Congress at a hearing on a Lumbee
recognition bill at that time. Since then, other renowned
anthropologists and historians with PhDs in the field have reached the
same conclusion and so testified to Congress. These include: Dr. Jack
Campisi (author of the Lumbee petition submitted in 1987), who
testified in 1988 (as well as in multiple later hearings) in support of
the Lumbee recognition bill; Dr. Ray Fogelson (deceased), editor of the
Southeast Volume of the Smithsonian Handbook of North American Indians,
who testified in 1988 in support of Lumbee recognition; Dr. William
Sturtevant (deceased), general editor of the Smithsonian Handbook of
North American Indians, who testified in 1988 in support of Lumbee
recognition; and Dr. Fred Hoxie, Swanlund Professor of History at the
University of Illinois emeritus and member of the founding Board of
Directors, Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian, who
testified in 2019 and has submitted a statement again today in support
of Lumbee recognition. \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Eastern Band of Cherokee commissioned a report on Lumbee
ancestry by Ms. Jean Kelley, who has a masters degree from the
University of Arizona. Ms. Kelley concluded that the Lumbee Tribe
cannot prove a connection with a historic tribe. But she fails to
address the contrary view of eminent professionals, doctorate-level
professionals. She also ignores the historical record that corroborates
these experts' views.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a committee report on a Lumbee recognition bill in 2007, the
House Sub-Committee on Indian and Insular Affairs summarized the
historical record on Lumbee ancestry, which corroborates these experts'
views:
11The evidence establishes that the [Lumbee] Tribe descends
from the historic Cheraw and related Siouan-speaking tribes.
Historically, the Cheraw were located on Drowning Creek in
North Carolina. Drowning Creek was renamed the Lumber River by
the State of North Carolina in 1809. The ancestors of the
modern day Lumbee Tribe have been located around Drowning
Creek/Lumber River ever since the first contract with Europeans
in the early 1700's.
Congress' deliberations on the Tribe's history produced
authoritative reports by the Department of the Interior. In
1914, Special Indian Agent O.M. McPherson, sent to investigate
the history and condition of the tribe, concluded that the
tribe was descended from the Cheraw Tribe. In 1934, the
Department expressed to Congress, based upon a report by the
eminent John R. Swanton of the Bureau of Ethnology, that the
Lumbees descend from the Cheraw and related Siouan speaking
tribes of coastal North Carolina.
H.R. 110-164, 110th Cong., 1st Sess., at 3-4.
Second, Dr. Campisi has testified to this Committee on the nature
and strength of the Lumbee community. Dr. Campisi examined federal
census records dating back to 1850 to establish that the Lumbee and
their ancestors resided in close knit communities that were almost
exclusively Lumbee. S. Hrg. 100-881 on S. 2672, 100th Cong., 2d Sess.,
Aug. 12, 1988, at 63-64. Dr. Campisi updated his research for his
testimony in 2019. After examining a statistical sample of enrolled
members, Dr. Campisi concluded that as of that year approximately 60
percent of Lumbee members were married to other Lumbees. Hearing before
the House Sub-Committee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States, on
H.R.1964, Dec. 4, 2019. The Department of the Interior considers an in-
marriage rate this high to be conclusive proof of community; in other
words, no other proof is necessary according to the administrative
process. 25 CFR 83.11(b)(1)(I). \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Lumbees are also geographically concentrated in their
traditional territory of Robeson and adjoining counties, North
Carolina. Dr. Campisi testified at the same hearing that more than 50
percent of the enrolled tribal members live in exclusively or nearly
exclusive Lumbee areas in their traditional territory. The Department
considers this high level of geographic concentration to be conclusive
proof of both community and political authority. 25 CFR
83.11(b)(2)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the Lumbee Tribe has a long history of highly effective
political leadership. As the discussion above regarding relations with
the State of North Carolina demonstrates, the Tribe has always been
able to mobilize in support of the community goals and independence and
achieve those goals. Vine Deloria, Jr., testified before this Committee
in 1988 and spoke directly about political authority in the Lumbee
community:
If we wish to speak of the traditional Indian method of
government, what distinguished Indians from others who
constituted political entities, then we are basically speaking
of loose alliances of extended family groups, capable of acting
in concert with each other as the occasion demanded.
I stress this aspect of traditional life because, while I
believe the Lumbees to have satisfactorily proven that they
have maintain a continuous political existence, the committee
should note, now and in the future, that formal tribal
government is a creation of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and
not an Indian characteristic. A traditional Indian community
more closely resembles what we find in Robison (sic) County
among the Lumbees, large extended families who exert social and
political control over family members, and who see their family
as part of an extended people.
S. Hrg. 100-881, on S.2672, to provide federal recognition of the
Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, at 93. \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ As he noted in his testimony, Vine Deloria testified on the
Lumbee bill ``based on extensive and prolonged contact with numerous
people of the [Lumbee] tribe during most of my adult life.'' In
addition, Deloria's aunt Ella Deloria, a noted linguist, had worked in
the Lumbee community in the 1940's on a dictionary of Siouan languages
spoken in that part of North Carolina. S.Hrg.Rep. at 89.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make no mistake, the last 140 years of failed attempts by the
Lumbee Tribe have been frustrating, and, frankly heart-breaking, for
the Tribe. The only saving grace is that the protracted deliberations
have resulted in an extraordinary record that speaks eloquently to
Lumbee existence, identity, and persistence. This Committee can act
favorably upon the Lumbee Fairness Act with full confidence that, in
doing so, it recognizes a distinct and remarkable Indian community
within the meaning of Supreme Court authority.
The Lumbee Enrollment Criteria
The Lumbee Tribe has long been known as the largest non-federally
recognized tribe in the country. In 1977, the American Indian Policy
Review Commission, Final Report, Chap. XI, Nonrecognized Tribes, put
the enrollment then at 40,000. Because the Tribe was not historically
recognized by the United States, there were no federal rolls of
membership to which present members can be genealogically traced. But
there are important records that identify historic members of the
Tribe. These documents comprise what tribal law calls the source
documents and from which applicants for enrollment must trace descent.
The most important of these is school records. Enrollment in Lumbee
schools was historically the only service available exclusively to
Lumbees and, as discussed above, the Tribe controlled enrollment in
those schools. Initially, the state limited enrollment in the Indian
schools to Indians, then called Croatan, ``now living in Robeson County
and their descendants.'' North Carolina Assembly 1885, chap. 51. In
1889, the State amended its law to require proof of Indian ancestry to
qualify for enrollment ``to the fourth generation.'' North Carolina
General Assembly 1889, chap. 60. Each school had a committee to
determine that an enrolling child met this criteria. These so-called
``blood committees'' kept detailed records on their deliberations and
those records are the most important of the Tribe's source documents.
Other source documents include federal census records for the
tribal territory (Robeson and adjoining counties in North Carolina)
that identify Indians, church records, \13\ and historic lists of
tribal members such as the petitioners signed by tribal leaders and
submitted to the State and Federal governments. It is every applicant's
responsibility to prove a genealogical connection to an individual on
these source documents by birth or death certificates and similar vital
records. The roll, including these supporting documents, are now
digitized. \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The importance of the all-Indian churches in the Lumbee
community cannot be overstated. In 2019, Dr. Campisi estimated there
were more than 150 Indian churches in Lumbee territory, with an all
Indian congregation and in nearly every case an Indian minister. Dec.
4, 2019, Statement on H.R. 1964. In fact, there are so many Lumbee
churches that they have been organized in their own separate
conferences for more than 100 years. Like the schools, these tribal
institutions kept detailed records on their membership.
\14\ Because the roll and supporting documents have been digitized,
the Tribe is confident that the Secretary can verify the accuracy of
the roll within two years as required by section 5 of the Lumbee
Fairness Act, S. 107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Descent from a source document is only the first step to qualify
for enrollment in the Lumbee Tribe. The applicant must also demonstrate
that she or he has maintained tribal contact, either historic (such as
attendance at an Indian school or membership in an Indian church) or
present contact (such as visitation or knowledge of the community). For
most new applicants, tribal contact is determined in an interview
conducted by the Tribal Enrollment Office. In addition, enrolled
members under the age of 55 must update their enrollment every seven
years to maintain eligibility to vote in tribal elections and other
tribal rights. Because of this requirement of tribal contact, the Tribe
believes its enrollment process not only has integrity but also
reflects the historic reality of a strong community with close
connections among its members. There are now 62,000 enrolled members in
the Tribe.
Historically, the large number of enrolled Lumbee members has been
used against the Tribe by the Department of the Interior. Since 1890,
the Department has repeatedly complained about the size of the Tribe
and the associated cost of providing services to tribal members. But
this cannot be accepted as a principled basis for failure to recognize
the Tribe. Indeed, it means that the injustice done to an Indian
community is all the greater because of the large number of Indian
people harmed by Federal neglect.
Neither is fear of impacting other tribes' service budgets a
principled, or even factually accurate, basis for reluctance to
recognize a clearly legitimate Lumbee Tribe. The budget impact is not
as large as the usual per capita calculation of adding new members to
the Federal Indian service population might suggest. Because the Lumbee
Tribe is state recognized, it already receives Indian services from
many federal agencies, such as Housing and Urban Development,
Department of Education, and Department of Energy. These services
should be excluded from any calculation of budget impact. \15\ The new
fiscal impact would be limited to the BIA, Department of the Interior,
and Indian Health Service (IHS), Department of Health and Human
Services. The 2022 CBO estimate placed those costs, once fully
implemented, at $43 million per annum and $80 million per annum,
respectively. Those two agencies have a process that extends full
services to members of newly recognized or restored tribes only when
Congress appropriates money for that purpose. \16\ In addition, out of
the 574 federally recognized tribes, 567 of them receive their BIA and
IHS funding through either a self-determination contract or a
selfgovernance compact, and the Secretary is precluded from reducing
the amount of funding in both cases. \17\ 25 CFR 900.19 (self-
determination contracts), and 25 CFR 1000.501, 1000.671 (self-
governing compacts), mandating that the Secretary provide the full
funding contracted for with those tribes. As a result, federally
recognized tribes are protected from any diminution of their services
from bringing Lumbee tribal members on board for federal services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The most recent CBO cost estimate of Lumbee recognition 15 was
prepared in 2022. It acknowledged that the budget impact would be less
than one might expect because the Tribe currently receives Federal
Indian services from these agencies.
\16\ In the case of the BIA, it already has a 16 line item in each
year's budge for newly recognized tribes. Those tribes are allocated a
pro rata share of the new tribes appropriation; if the need exceeds the
appropriation, then the need goes unmet. Newly recognized tribes can
receive new tribes fund for three fiscal years, during which time the
tribe negotiates its own budget that is included in the
Administration's next budget request. Once that budget is appropriated,
that tribe's members receives the funded services. In the case of the
IHS, that agency's manual explicitly provides that newly recognized or
restored tribes receive services only when Congress appropriates
funding for that budget.
\17\ Staff Report, 2024 Oversight Hearing, House Committee on
Natural Resources. http://www.HHRG-118-1124-20240306-SD002.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simply stated, the large number of Indians who are enrolled with
the Lumbee Tribe and excluded from Federal Indian services makes it all
more urgent that Congress get on with the business of correcting this
long-standing injustice by extending full federal recognition to the
Lumbee Tribe.
Conclusion
In 1935, BIA Commissioner Collier sent Superintendent Fred Baker of
the Sisseton Agency to visit the Lumbee community as part of
deliberations on application of the IRA to the Tribe. Superintendent
Baker reported that he met with approximately 4,000 members of the
community and that they strongly supported the plan to acquire land for
and organize the Tribe. Superintendent Baker observed, ``It is clear to
my mind that sooner or later government action will have to be taken in
the name of justice and humanity to aid them.'' It did not happen
sooner. It is now much later and time for government action.
The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Locklear.
Next, we turn to Chief Hicks. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHELL HICKS, PRINCIPAL CHIEF, EASTERN BAND
OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
Mr. Hicks. [Greeting in Native tongue.] Chair Murkowski,
Vice Chairman Schatz, and members of the Committee, thank you
on behalf of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians.
I want to express my deep appreciation for convening this
substantive hearing, and for your willingness to examine the
facts. A careful, evidence-based review of this matter is long
overdue. Your commitment to that standard honors every
federally-recognized tribe and the integrity of this
Committee's work.
I speak today not to question anyone's personal identity,
or heritage. This is not about policing identity. It is about
evidence. It is about documentation and the integrity of the
Federal recognition process.
I stand here as Principal Chief and as the voice of
generations of Cherokees who safeguarded our identity,
safeguarded our language and our sovereignty, through centuries
of forced removal, division, boarding schools, and
unprecedented political pressures. This bill asks Congress to
recognize a group that has never demonstrated descent from any
historical tribe.
Let me be clear: for more than a century, this group has
cycled through claimed identities, the Croatan, Tuscarora,
Siouan, and Cheraw, and even the Cherokees, choosing whatever
labels seemed most advantageous at the time. Yet in all this
time, not one verifiable genealogy, historical roll, treaty or
historical document has demonstrated continuous tribal
existence or descent from a historical tribe. Their claims rest
on theories, speculation, and invented narratives.
Federal records show this clearly. In the late 1800s, only
223 individuals in their counties identified as Indian. Ten
years later, the number jumps to 4,000, a 1,700 percent spike.
What changed was not ancestry or history, it was access to a
separate school system for those willing to claim Indian
identity on paper.
But the deeper historical record is even more revealing.
For generations, before that moment, the families this group
now claims as ancestors appears in official records as free
British subjects, and later, American citizens. Not as Indians,
not as a tribe, not as a political community distinct from
others. They exercised their full civil rights. They did not
claim an Indian identity.
Only after the Civil War, when North Carolina rewrote its
constitution and imposed new racial restrictions on non-white
citizens did these families suddenly adopt an Indian identity,
calling themselves Croatan, to access the separate Indian
school and government resources.
And history, that was not the end of identity shifts. For
over 40 years, from 1913 to 1953, this group identified as
Cherokees and legally recognized by North Carolina as the
Cherokee Indians of Robeson County. Over the objections of the
Cherokee Nation and the Eastern Band of the Cherokee, their
members self-identified as Cherokee on Federal school
applications. And they petitioned Congress for recognition as
Cherokee.
Some individuals still assert Cherokee identity today. When
those claims were rejected because they could not be
substantiated, the group adopted yet another identity. This is
not a pattern of continuous tribal existence. It is a pattern
of shifting assertions, driven by circumstance, not historical
evidence.
If Congress passes this bill, this group would be the first
Americans in history to receive Federal recognition without
demonstrating any descent from a historical tribe. This is not
fairness, it is abandonment of every safeguard that protects
tribal sovereignty and identity.
The Office of Federal Acknowledgement exists to ensure
recognition decisions rely on proof, not assertion,
documentation, not desire, historical truth, not political
pressure. Recognition confirms a documented tribal reality. It
does not create one.
Congress has also been misled on the cost. Independent
analysis shows the real price is in the billions, diverting
treaty-based resources away from tribes with proven history and
legal rights.
I want to state this plainly and respectfully. There is no
tribal language, there is no treaty relationships, no
continuous tribal government, no documented lineage to a
historical tribe. We do not fear another tribe. I want to make
that clear. We fear falsehood becoming Federal law.
If there is evidence, let it be presented. If there is a
tribal origin, let the OFA confirm it. And if they meet the
same standard every other tribe meets, we will welcome them to
the group of federally-recognized tribes. But Congress must
legislate identity by replacing evidence with assertion.
In conclusion, thank you in advance for insisting that
proof matters, and that Federal recognition must remain
grounded in the truth.
On behalf of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians, I
urge you to hold the line, even though it is difficult, protect
the integrity of tribal sovereignty, protect the integrity of
Federal recognition, protect the principle that history and
evidence still matter in the United States Congress.
[Phrase in Native tongue.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hicks follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Michell Hicks, Principal Chief, Eastern Band
of Cherokee Indians
Chairman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and Members of the
Committee on Indian Affairs, I am honored to testify today to express
the views of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians on S. 107, the
``Lumbee Fairness Act.'' I am particularly grateful to the Committee
for holding a hearing that focused on the merits of Lumbee recognition,
which is important to my Tribe but and tribal nations across Indian
country.
Since before the arrival of Europeans on this continent, the
Cherokee have lived in the southeastern part of what is now the United
States, in the states of North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama,
Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Since
European contact, the Cherokee have faced unending threats to our very
existence-including the tragic Trail of Tears, where more than 15,000
Cherokee Indians were forcibly removed by the U.S. Army from our
ancestral homelands to the Indian Territory as part of the federal
government's American Indian Removal Policy. Thousands died. Our
Eastern Band people call this event ``Gay go whoa oh duh nuh ee,'' or
the ``Removal.'' We, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, are the
descendants of those Cherokees that resisted the Removal in the Great
Smoky Mountains and escaped the Trail of Tears, or who were able to
return to their homeland in the Smoky Mountains after enduring the
Trail of Tears. The Great Smoky Mountains wrapped its arms around us,
protected us, and helped us preserve our our lives and our culture. The
mountains continue to provide us refuge and resources today.
Through all of this, the Cherokee people have fiercely protected
our separate identity as Cherokees. There are three, and only three,
Cherokee Tribal Nations: the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
(``Eastern Band''), the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, and
the Cherokee Nation. Many of our Tribal members are fluent speakers of
the Cherokee language. We have a separate culture that makes us
different from any group of people in the world. The leadership of the
Cherokee, and the Cherokee people ourselves, have fought with tenacity
and determination for nearly 500 documented years to ensure that our
way of life, our beliefs, and our sovereignty will survive. For over a
century, Eastern Band Tribal leaders have been forced to actively
protect the separate political and cultural identity of the Cherokee
People from a multitude of groups that falsely claim to be Cherokee
tribes. The Lumbees are one of these groups.
Irrefutable Facts About the Lumbee Group
I want to begin by highlighting the following irrefutable facts
about the Lumbees:
For over 125 years, the group of people that now calls
themselves the ``Lumbee Tribe'' have sought federal recognition
as a tribe from Congress. For over 125 years, Congress has
rejected legislation that would federally acknowledge this
group as a tribe.
The group now indentifying as Lumbee has never had treaty
relations with the United States.
The group now identifying as Lumbee has sought federal
recognition under different names: Croatan, Cherokee, Siouan,
and Cheraw. One of these ``tribes,'' however, is not even a
historical tribe but an Indigenous language group (Siouan).
The group now calling itself Lumbee does not have a tribal
language or tribal culture, according to Lumbee expert
testimony before Congress. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Congressional Record-House (Oct. 28, 1993), at 26545, available
at https://www.congress.gov/103/crecb/1993/10/28/GPO-CRECB-1993-pt18-7-
1.pdf.
Independent experts Dr. Virginia DeMarce, the former Chair
of the National Genealogical Society, and Paul Heinegg, an
award-winning genealogist and author, have published detailed,
pre-1900 research that undermines Lumbee claims to having
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Native ancestry. \9\
Heinegg summarizes his conclusions concerning Lumbee identity,
referring to the Lumbee as ``an invented North Carolina Indian tribe.''
\10\
The ``Lumbee Fairness Act'' specifically prohibits the
Secretary of the Interior from reviewing the DeMarce and
Heinegg research when verifying Lumbee rolls.
For forty years, the State of North Carolina recognized the
Lumbee group as, and the Lumbees held themselves out to be,
``Cherokee'' Indians.
The name ``Lumbee'' does not come from a historic tribe--it
comes from the geographical name of the river that runs through
Robeson County, North Carolina, and was chosen by vote by this
group from a list of options as their most recent identity. \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Hearing on H.R. 898, To Provide For Recognition of the Lumbee
Tribe of North Carolina, Committee on Resources, House of
Representatives, Apr. 1, 2004, p. 66 (Statement of Dr. Jack Campisi).
The historical record surrounding the identity of the group
calling itself Lumbee is replete with falsehoods and
inconsistencies. For example, census records for Robeson County
from the year 1900 identified families as ``Croatan,'' but
never Lumbee. Confusingly, census records for Robeson County
from the year 1910 identified those same families as
``Cherokee,'' but with the word ``Croatan'' stamped over the
written word ``Cherokee.'' \3\ Exhibit 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Notably, Dr. Jack Campisi, the Lumbee group's expert who
authored the group's petition for federal recognition to the OFA, has
testified to this Committee that ``[t]he federal census records are by
far the best source of evidence concerning the Lumbee community.''
Testimony of Dr. Jack Campisi to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
on S. 420 (Sept. 17, 2003) p. 3.
Unlike the Cherokee, the Choctaw, the Creek, the Seminole,
the Shawnee, and many other established Tribal Nations with
aboriginal lands in the South and East, the United States never
identified the Lumbee as as a tribe or even Indian and never
sought to remove them from their claimed homelands when Indian
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
removal was U.S. policy.
The Lumbees submitted a petition for federal recognition to
what is now the Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) in 1987.
No determination has been made regarding the Lumbees' OFA
petition.
In accordance with the most recent Department of the
Interior Solicitor's M-Opinion on the matter, the Lumbees are
eligible to seek federal recognition through the OFA process.
Exhibit 2.
The foregoing facts are incontrovertible. Moreover, these facts (1)
cast doubt on the validity of the Lumbees' claim that they descend from
a historic tribe, and (2) illustrate why Congress should defer to the
OFA to determine the merits of the Lumbees' claims.
Defects in Lumbee Tribal Identity Claims
If Congress recognizes groups whose tribal and individual identity
as Indians is seriously in doubt, it will dilute the government-to-
government relationships that existing federally recognized tribes have
with the United States. Although the Lumbees have sought federal
recognition under the assumed identities of four different ``tribes,''
\4\ they have yet to produce evidence demonstrating descent from a
historic tribe. In 1955, a Lumbee leader testified to the House of
Representatives that the Lumbees are an ```admixture of seven different
tribes of Indians, including the Cherokee, Tuscarora, Hatteras, Pamli
and Croatan.''' \5\ To try to trace the Lumbees' claimed identities is
dizzying. We strongly believe that this bill would undermine the
integrity of existing federally recognized Indian tribes due to the
real problems the Lumbee group has in demonstrating that it is a tribe,
including its inability to trace the genealogy of its roughly 60,000
members to a historic tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ One such assumed identity is Siouan, which is an Indigenous
language group--not a historic tribe.
\5\ S. Rep. No. 110-409 (2008), p. 4 (quoting Statement of Rev.
D.F. Lowery of Pembroke, North Carolina before the Subcommittee on
Indian Affairs, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. House
of Representatives, Hrg. on H.R. 4656 Relating to the Lumbee Indians of
North Carolina, Jul. 22, 1955).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, even the Lumbees acknowledge that they cannot identify
their origins. In 1953, a Lumbee leader recognized that:
The first white settlers found a large tribe of Indians living
on the Lumbee River in what is now Robeson County-a mixture of
colonial blood with Indian blood, not only [Raleigh's] colony;
but, with other colonies following and with many tribes of
Indians; hence, we haven't any right to be called any one of
the various tribal names . . . . \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Congressional Record--House (Oct. 28, 1993), at 26544,
available at https://www.congress.gov/103/crecFb/1993/10/28/GPO-CRECB-
1993-pt18-7-1.pdf.
Although they have since changed their position, the historical
fact remains-Lumbee leaders seventy years ago acknowledged the group's
lack of descent from a historical tribe.
Lumbee's Self-Identification as ``Croatan'' Indians
In 2003, the Lumbees' own hired expert (Dr. Jack Campisi) stated in
his testimony before this Committee that the Lumbee sought federal
services from the Congress as ``Croatan Indians'' in the 1880s and
early 1900s. However, in 1993, the House Resources Committee's Report
regarding the then-pending Lumbee recognition bill contained the
following relating to the history of the Lumbee group and its
``Croatan'' origins:
The story of how the progenitors of the Lumbee came to live in
this area of North Carolina is a multifarious one. In fact,
there are almost as many theories as there are theorists. Up
until the 1920's, the most persistent tradition among the
Indians in Robeson County was that they were descended
primarily from an Iroquoian group called the Croatans. This
theory, though highly conjectural, is as follows. In 1585, Sir
Walter Raleigh established an English colony under Gov. John
White on Roanoke Island in what later became North Carolina. In
August of that year, White departed for England for supplies,
but was prevented from returning to Roanoke for 2 years by a
variety of circumstances. When he finally arrived at the
colony, however, he found the settlement deserted; no physical
trace of the colonists was found.
The only clue to their whereabouts were the letters ``C.R.O.''
and the word ``Croatoan'' carved in a tree. From this it was
surmised that the colonists fled Roanoke for some reason, and
removed to the nearby island of Croatoan which was inhabited by
a friendly Indian tribe. There, according to the theory, they
intermarried with the Indians, and the tribe eventually
migrated to the southwest to the area of present-day Robeson
County. The theory is lent some credence by reports of early
18th century settlers in the area of the Lumber River who noted
finding a large group of Indians-some with marked Caucasian
features such as grey-blue eyes ``speaking English, tilling the
soil,'' ``and practicing the arts of civilized life.'' In
addition, many of the surnames of Indians resident in the
county match those of Roanoke colonists. \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Id. at 26543.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lumbee's Self-Identification as ``Cherokee'' Indians
In 2015, the Secretary of the Interior informed this Committee that
``[l]ong before historians began to study the origin of these people
they claimed to be of Cherokee descent. In fact, they have always
claimed that they were originally a part of the Cherokee Tribe and that
they gave up their tribal relation after they had participated with the
white man in the war against the Tuscaroras.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Letter from the Secretary of the Interior Transmitting, in
Response to a Senate Resolution of June 30, 1914, a Report on the
Condition and Tribal Rights of the Indians of Robeson and Adjoining
Counties of North Carolina, S. Doc. No. 677, at 121 (1915).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lumbee group sought recognition from the North Carolina
Legislature in 1913 as the ``Cherokee Indians of Robeson County.'' This
legislation was passed, despite the Eastern Band's opposition, and the
group was recognized in North Carolina as ``Cherokee'' Indians. That
continued for 40 years until 1953 when the North Carolina Legislature,
at the Lumbee group's request, passed legislation recognizing them as
the ``Lumbee'' Indians instead of as the ``Cherokee'' Indians. Although
the Lumbee group now claims the Cherokee identity was pushed upon them,
there is significant evidence throughout history of the Lumbee group
and its ``members'' affirmatively asserting Cherokee identity.
As the Lumbee group's expert Dr. Campisi stated, after World War I,
this Lumbee group sought legislation in Congress for recognition as
``the Cherokee Indians of Robeson and adjoining counties.''
Specifically, in 1924, Dr. Campisi noted that the now-called Lumbee
group had legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate that would have
recognized them as ``Cherokee'' Indians. However, Commissioner of
Indian Affairs Charles H. Burke opposed the legislation and it failed
to pass. Dr. Campisi went on to state that the Lumbee group renewed
their efforts in 1932 and had a bill introduced in the Senate that
would have recognized them as ``the Cherokee Indians,'' but this effort
failed as well. \9\ The Eastern Band has, since the early 1900s when
the Lumbee group sought formal recognition as Cherokee, consistently
and strongly opposed these efforts of the Lumbees to be recognized as a
tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id. Ms. Arlinda Locklear, in her testimony before the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee in 2003, noted that the Lumbee group claimed
that they were Cherokee and sought federal legislation to be recognized
as Cherokees. ``Testimony of Arlinda Locklear, Patton Boggs LLP, Of
Counsel for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina in Support of S. 420
United States Senate Committee on Indian Affairs'' (Sept. 17, 2003) p.
4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, from 1914 to 1916, several Lumbee individuals
petitioned the United States Commissioner on Indian Affairs for
admittance to the Carlisle Indian School in Pennsylvania. W.H. Oxendine
claimed to be ``an Indian of the Cherokee Tribe of Eastern N.C. in
Robeson County.'' \10\ In James Oxendine's application to Carlisle, his
mother, Charity, listed herself as being 3/4 Cherokee. \11\ In his 1916
response to Lumbee applications to Carlisle, School Superintendent O.H.
Lipps wrote to the Commissioner on Indian Affairs:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Request for Enrollment from Robeson County Cherokee (Nov. 11,
1914), available at https://carlisleindian.dickinson.edu/sites/default/
files/docs-documents/NARA_RG75_CCF_b028_f06_119133.pdf.
\11\ James Oxendine Student File (1911), available at https://
carlisleindian.dickinson.edu/sites/default/files/docsephemera/
NARA_1327_b003_f0117.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These applications have been consistently turned down for the
reason that we have been advised by the office that the status of the
indians of Robeson County is undetermined and that it is a question to
be decided by Congress and, also, for the further reason that we
understand Supervisor Charles F. Pierce some years ago made a very
thorough investigation into the claims of these Indians for recognition
by the Government and it was his opinion that it would be a great
mistake for the Government to step in and assume guardianship over them
even to the extent of giving them school privileges in Government
schools. \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ View of Oscar H. Lipps on Pupils Attending Non-Government
School (Feb. 12, 1916), p. 1, available at https://
carlisleindian.dickinson.edu/sites/default/files/docs-documents/
NARA_RG75_CCF_b029_f013_16293.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions surrounding the Lumbee group's claims are not a recent
phenomenon. Even in 1916, it was openly discussed and understood that
the Lumbee group's claims of Indian ancestry were highly suspicious.
Lumbee's Self-Identification as ``Siouan'' Indians
According to the Lumbees, the Lumbee group sought federal
recognition as ``Siouan'' Indians in 1924. Further, in the 1930s, for
purposes of the Indian Reorganization Act, the Lumbees self-designated
themselves as the ``Siouan Indian Community of Lumber River.'' \13\ As
stated above, the term ``Siouan'' is a reference to a generic
linguistic classification that is spoken by many tribes in North
America and is not a term that describes a distinct historical tribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id. at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was not until 1952 that the Lumbees decided to refer to
themselves as ``Lumbee'' based upon their geographic location next to
the Lumber River. In 1956, Congress, at the request of the Lumbees,
passed legislation commemorating their name change. \14\ Absent from
this 1956 Act was any affirmation by Congress that recognized the
Lumbees as descendants of specific historic tribes, entitled to a
government-to-government relationship; rather, the Act refers to the
Lumbees as a group that relies ``on tribal legend'' to trace their
origin. \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id. at 9-10.
\15\ 70 Stat. 254.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lumbees' Tenuous Efforts to Link Themselves to the Cheraw Tribe
The federal recognition criteria require that the membership of a
petitioning group consist of ``individuals who descend from a
historical Indian tribe (or from historical Indian tribes that combined
and functioned as a single autonomous political entity).'' \16\ The
regulations define ``historical'' in this context as ``before 1900.''
\17\ The origin and ties of the Lumbee group to a historical tribe have
been the subject of uncertainty not only among experts in the area but
also among the Lumbee themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 25 C.F.R. 83.11(e).
\17\ Id. at 83.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experts at the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) have testified that
the Lumbee ties to the Cheraw Tribe are tenuous. On August 1, 1991,
Director of the Office of Tribal Services Ronal Eden testified on
behalf of the Administration regarding federal legislation that would
Congressionally recognize the Lumbee group. Regarding the Lumbee
group's petition for federal recognition, the Director testified to a
``major deficiency'' that ``the Lumbee have not documented their
descent from a historic tribe.'' \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Statement of Ronal Eden, Director, Office of Tribal Services,
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, Before the Joint
Hearing of the Select Committee on Indian Affairs, United States
Senate, and the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, United States
House of Representatives, On S. 1036 and H.R. 1426 (Aug. 1, 1991) p. 3-
5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Director also testified that the 18th century documents used by
the Lumbee group to support its claim that it primarily descends from a
community of Cheraws living on Drowning Creek in North Carolina in the
1730s needed extensive analysis corroborated by other documentation.
\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In his September 17, 2003 testimony before this Committee, Lumbee
expert Dr. Jack Campisi relied on a report by Dr. John R. Swanton of
the Bureau of Ethnology to conclude ``in the early 1930s that the
Lumbees are descended [from] predominantly Cheraw Indians.'' The House
Report specifically refutes this claim, stating that Swanton chose
``Cheraw'' rather than another tribal name he identified--
``Keyauwee''--because the Keyauwee name was not well known. ``In other
words, the choice of the Cheraw was apparently made for reasons of
academic ease rather than historical reality.'' \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Congressional Record-House (Oct. 28, 1993), at 26544,
available at https://www.congress.gov/103/crecb/1993/10/28/GPO-CRECB-
1993-pt18-7-1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, an Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs,
has questioned the adequacy of the underlying proof of Cheraw descent.
He testified in 1989 that:
The Lumbee petition . . . claims to link the group to the
Cheraw Indians. The documents presented in the petition do not
support [this] theory . . . . These documents have been
misinterpreted in the Lumbee petition. Their real meanings have
more to do with the colonial history of North and South
Carolina than with the existence of any specific tribal group
in the area in which the modern Lumbee live. \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ To Provide Federal Recognition for the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina: Hearing Before the House Committee on Interior and Insular
Affairs on H.R. 2335, 101st Cong. 25-27 (1989).
In her 2003 testimony before this Committee, legal counsel to the
Lumbee, Arlinda Locklear, admitted that these concerns continue today.
``Department staff that administers the administrative acknowledgment
process have expressed some concern about the absence of a genealogical
connection between the modern-day Lumbee Tribe and the historic Cheraw
Tribe.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ``Testimony of Arlinda Locklear, Patton Boggs LLP, Of Counsel
for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina in Support of S. 420 United
States Senate Committee on Indian Affairs'' (Sept. 17, 2003) p. 4 n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claimed Lumbee Membership Not Tied to Cheraw Individuals
The various documents on which the Lumbee membership list is based
similarly cast doubt as to the ability of the Lumbee group to meet the
recognition criteria. The Lumbee group claims more than 60,000 enrolled
members who are descended from anyone identifying as ``Indian'' in five
North Carolina counties and two South Carolina counties in either the
1900 or 1910 federal census. The Lumbee Constitution refers to these
census lists as the ``Source Documents.'' Yet, the individuals on these
lists cannot be specifically identified and verified as Cheraw Indians.
In fact, these individuals cannot be identified as belonging to any
tribe whatsoever. These are lists of people who self-identified or were
identified by census workers as ``Indian.''
House Resources Committee members have recognized the weaknesses
and complexities in the Lumbee group's claim to tribal recognition in
the past:
The Lumbee . . . have never had treaty relations with the
United States, a reservation, or a claim before the Indian
Claims Commission; they do not speak an Indian language; they
have had no formal political organization until recently; and
they possess no ``Indian'' customs or cultural appurtenance
such as dances, songs, or tribal religion. One of the groups
consultant anthropologists, Dr. Jack Campisi, noted this lack
of Indian cultural appurtenances in a hearing colloquy with
then--Congressman Ben Nighthorse Campbell:
Mr. Campbell: Do [the Lumbee] have a spoken language . . . ?
Dr. Campisi: No.
Mr. Campbell: Do they have distinct cultural characteristics
such as songs, dances and religious beliefs and so on? . . . Do
the Lumbees have that?
Dr. Campisi: No. Those things were gone before the end of the
18th Century.
This absence of cultural appurtenances in part identify the Lumbee
as part of what sociologist Brewton Berry has termed the ``marginal
Indian groups.'' As Berry notes:
These are communities that hold no reservation land, speak no
Indian language, and observe no distinctive Indian customs.
Although it is difficult to establish a firm historical Indian
ancestry for them, their members often display physical
features that are decidedly Indian. Because they bear no other
historic tribal names, they often emphasize a Cherokee
ancestry.
These characteristics . . . point out that this is a case replete
with out-of-the-ordinary complexities which require more than just a
simple one-page staff memo to understand fully. Needless to say, if
those [Members of Congress] charged with the day-to-day oversight of
Indian affairs do not have the necessary expertise--or even knowledge--
in this area, how will the balance of our Members appropriately
exercise those judgments as they will be called upon to do when this
legislation reaches the floor? \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Congressional Record-House (Oct. 28, 1993), at 26545,
available at https://www.congress.gov/103/crecb/1993/10/28/GPO-CRECB-
1993-pt18-7-1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It must also be noted that, due to the absence of their own
culture, the Lumbee group has and continues to engage in heavy
appropriation of cultures from legitimate Tribal Nations.
OFA's Unique and Exclusive Capability to Determine the Merits of
Lumbee's Claims
The government-to-government relationship between a Tribal Nation
and the United States begins at the point where each recognizes the
sovereignty of the other. For this reason, it is crucial that the
federal government have in place a credible, non-politicized process
for determining which Tribal Nations it recognizes. The National
Congress of American Indians (NCAI) expressed its support for such a
process by resolution in 1977. Exhibit 3. In Spring of 1978, NCAI
issued a Declaration of Principles on Tribal Recognition by the U.S.
Government. Exhibit 4. NCAI declared: ``There must be a valid and
consistent set of criteria applied to every group which petitions for
recognition. The criteria must be based on ethnoligical, historical,
legal and political evidence.'' Id. NCAI further declared that only
those tribes or groups who satisfy such criteria may be recognized. Id.
In large part due to pressure from NCAI, the Department of the Interior
established the OFA and the federal recognition process (known as the
``Part 83 process'') in Fall of 1978 to ensure that federal recognition
determinations are made with rigorous scrutiny and based on factual and
historical evidence, ``free from the eddies and currents of partisan
politics and influence.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ H.R. Rep. No. 103-621, at 17 (1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Part 83 process requires the OFA to apply and consider seven
mandatory criteria to evaluate a group's petition for federal
recognition. The purpose of these seven criteria is to prevent the
recognition--and the rights, benefits, and duties that come with it--of
groups that are not truly Tribal Nations entitled to government-to-
government relationships with the Untied States.
As former Congressman and Chair of the House Natural Resources
Committee George Miller has explained about the role of Congress and
tribal recognition,
Properly done, the process of recognition requires an
evaluation of complex and often ambiguous data and issues of
ethnohistory, cultural anthropology, and genealogy. Not only do
we lack that expertise, but there are precious few members of
this Committee with any more than the most superficial
knowledge on the subject at all. Such a decision is replete
with out-of-the-ordinary complexities which require more than
just a simple one-page staff memo to understand fully. Needless
to say, if those of us charged with the day-to-day oversight of
Indian affairs do not have the necessary expertise--or even
knowledge--in this area, how will the balance of our Members
appropriately exercise those judgments as they will be called
upon to do when this legislation reaches the floor? \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id. at 16-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress does not have the expertise to determine whether a modern
group descends from a historical tribe (or tribes), and whether the
group is comprised of persons of Indian ancestry from that historical
tribe (or tribes), and would base its recognition decision on politics
and emotions rather than merit. In fact, as was pointed out by a Member
of the House with respect to a previous Lumbee recognition bill, ``[a]
single, powerful member in the majority party is perfectly capable of
moving a recognition bill through this body with little reference to
its actual merits.'' \26\ The rights, benefits, and duties that
accompany federal recognition must not be conveyed lightly, as doing so
would have devastating consequences within and beyond Indian country.
This is why it is imperative that the claims of groups like the Lumbee
be vetted by the highly skilled, qualified, and experienced historians,
anthropologists, and genealogists at the OFA who have the dedicated
time and resources to properly evaluate them. There are simply too many
unknowns and inconsistencies resulting in too many looming questions
about the Lumbees' claims to leave determination of those claims to the
political whims of Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Id. at 17
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerns of Eastern Band and Other Legitimate, Federally Recognized
Indian Tribes
The integrity of the federal recognition process would be
jeopardized by allowing political motivations to substitute for
research and critical analysis of neutral, third-party experts if
Congress recognizes the Lumbee group by legislation. Furthermore, the
government-togovernment relationship legitimate tribes hold with the
United States would be diluted if groups that cannot demonstrate
descent from a historical tribe(s) are federally recognized and vested
with the sovereign rights of Tribal Nations. The OFA process protects
established Tribal Nations that have treaty and trust relations with
the United States and living languages and cultures from fraudulent or
unmerited claims of tribal identity.
As historican and genealogist Jean Kelly explains:
Allowing Federal recognition for a group without clear
antecedents of previous historical tribe(s) would dramatically
redefine the standards for receiving Federal recognition,
almost to the point of being meaningless. Such low standards
would pave the way for groups with little to no evidence of
Native ancestry to claim the cultures and identifies of
legitimate tribes and assume legal rights over their sacred
places and ancestral remains under the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Imbuing such groups
with the legal authorities to act as sovereigns would have
significant consequences for communities across America.'' \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Jean Kelley, M.A., ``Analysis of Lumbee Historical and
Genealogical Claims,'' 2024, at 17-18, attached as Exhibit 5.
Passage of the bill would set a dangerous precedent, encouraging
countless groups with entirely baseless claims to seek federal
recognition from Congress. As former Congressman Walter B. Jones stated
in a hearing on the 2004 iteration of the Lumbee recognition bill, ``if
we start passing private bills to recognize [the Lumbee group], then I
think we are creating a problem that is going to be uncontrollable,
because how can you say yes to one and no to 237 [other groups seeking
recognition]?'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ H.R. Hrg. 108-90 (2004), p. 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Eastern Band's opposition to this bill is driven by the threat
Congressional recognition of the Lumbee group would pose to tribal
sovereignty, the government-togovernment relationship between Tribal
Nations and the United States, Indigenous and tribal identity, and
access to vital federal resources intended for legitimate Tribal
Nations across Indian country--not the threat on the Eastern Band's
gaming operations. Robeson County, the Lumbees' claimed homelands, is
located approximately 225 miles away from the Eastern Band's casino in
Cherokee, North Carolina, and approximately 260 miles away from its
casino in Murphy, North Carolina, as the crow flies. It takes over five
and six hours, respectively, to drive from Pembroke, Robeson County, to
the Eastern Band's casinos. If the Lumbees were federally recognized
and permitted to engage in Indian gaming, impacts of such activity on
the Eastern Band's gaming enterprises would be nominal. The Lumbees
pose no threat to the Eastern Band from a gaming perspective, and
gaming revenues are irrelevant to the Eastern Band's opposition to this
bill.
Drastically Underestimated Cost of Lumbee Recognition- Harm to Existing
Tribes and Waste of Taxpayer Money
Congress has been egregiously misled regarding the cost of Lumbee
recognition. The most recent cost estimate prepared by the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for Lumbee recognition (Exhibit 6),
which was prepared in 2022 for H.R. 2758 (Lumbee Recognition Act),
glaringly underestimated the price tag for taxpayers on recognition of
the Lumbee. Specifically, the CBO cost estimate for H.R. 2758 contains
the following deficiencies:
Estimated BIA costs for H.R. 2758 ($116M) are 28 percent
lower than estimated BIA costs in the previously prepared CBO
cost estimate for Lumbee recognition ($160M), which was for the
period from 2012 to 2016. See Exhibit 7. That BIA costs would
have decreased by 28 percent over the roughly ten-year gap
between the two cost estimates, and following an increase in
the Lumbee population, defies all logic.
In 2018, the Government Accountability Office issued a
report demonstrating that Indian Health Service (IHS) spending
for 2017 amounted to $4,078 per user. \29\ This figure, $4,078,
was again used by IHS in a fact sheet based on 2022 data. \30\
However, the cost estimate for H.R. 2758 applies a per user
figure of just $1,700--which is even smaller than the per user
figure applied in the previously prepared CBO cost estimate for
Lumbee recognition for the 2012-2016 period. Again, for costs
to decrease over the course of a decade, while inflation and
the Lumbee population continued to grow, defies logic.
Moreover, there is no justification for the CBO using a smaller
per-user cost figure than IHS uses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ ``Indian Health Service: Spending Levels and Characteristics
of IHS and Three Other Federal Health Care Programs,'' GAO-19-74R,
available at https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-19-74r.
\30\ IHS Fact Sheet, available at https://www.ihs.gov/sites/
newsroom/themes/responsive2017/display_objects/documents/factsheets/
IHSProfile.pdf.
Although the cost estimate for H.R. 2758 indicates that it
is for the period 2023-2027 (a five-year period), it actually
only attributes costs to the bill for the years 2024-2027 (a
four-year period). Outlays for 2023 are estimated at $0.
Moreover, without explanation, outlays for 2024 are estimated
at roughly half of the amounts estimated for years 2025, 2026,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
and 2027. Exhibit 8.
Estimated IHS costs do not include the cost of developing
necessary healthcare infrastructure, such as hospitals and
clinics, to service the sizeable population of Lumbee service
recipients.
The CBO cost estimate accounts only for IHS and BIA costs.
However, if recognized, the Lumbees would become eligible for
significant funds from multitude of federal funding sources
outside of these two agencies. These other funds are not
accounted for in the H.R. 2758 CBO cost estimate. Estimated
costs for other agencies that would provide services or
benefits to the Lumbees as Indians, if recognized, must be
included for the CBO cost estimate to be accurate and
comprehensive. Exhibit 8.
The impact of Lumbee recognition on appropriations to other Indian
tribes would be unprecedented in the history of federal acknowledgment.
Accounting for the above--identified flaws with the previous CBO cost
estimate, the Eastern Band estimates the cost of Lumbee recognition to
be in the billions of dollars. Accordingly, this bill would have a
huge, negative impact on the budgets of BIA and IHS and would decrease
even further the sorely needed funds Indian people receive as a result
of treaties and trust obligations of the United States to Indians and
tribes. This Committee and the Congress should not support this
legislation for emotional or political reasons, particularly without
being absolutely certain that this group constitutes a recognizable
Indian tribe in accordance with the objective criteria at the OFA,
which it cannot.
Conclusion
If this Committee and the Congress choose to pass this legislation,
the consequences will be dramatic for existing federally recognized
tribes. First and foremost, politics will have won a decided victory
over sound policy. The notion of ``taking the politics out of federal
recognition'' will have suffered its most severe setback in history.
With federal recognition comes the ability of a group to engage in
serious activities associated with sovereign status, such as the
ability to tax and enjoy certain tax advantages, the ability to
exercise civil jurisdiction over non-Indians as well as Indians, and
the right to engage in gaming. Enacting legislation like this only arms
those who seek to erode sovereign rights with evidence that some groups
possessing such rights were haphazardly afforded them. That is, the
sovereign status of federally recognized tribes is currently under
attack, with opponents arguing that tribes should be treated as little
more than racial groups, devoid of treaty rights and a government-to-
government relationship with the United States. Accordingly, federal
recognition of tribes should be able to withstand the scrutiny of the
federal courts that are responsible for interpreting the laws that
uphold the United States' trust obligations.
*The attachment exhibits to this prepared statement have been
retained in the Committee files.
The Chairman. Chief Hicks, thank you very much.
Chief Barnes, welcome.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN BARNES, CHIEF, SHAWNEE TRIBE
Mr. Barnes. [Greeting in Native tongue.] Ben Barnes,
[phrase in Native tongue].
Senator Committee on Indian Affairs, Madam Chair Murkowski,
Vice Chairman Schatz, Senator Mullin, other Senators of the
Committee, niyaawe for inviting me.
My name is Ben Barnes, Chief of the Shawnee Tribe and Chair
of the United Indian Nations of Oklahoma, serving the 38
federally-recognized tribal nations in Oklahoma. I also serve
as the Chair of the National Native American Boarding School
Healing Coalition.
Let me begin with a truth that our elders teach us.
Sovereignty is the inheritance of tribal survival, not the
reward for claiming it. Our nations exist because our ancestors
endured forced removal, warfare, termination policies, and the
boarding school system.
Federal recognition does not make a tribe. It acknowledges
a people who never ceased to exist.
When the United States forced my people from Ohio, through
Kentucky and Missouri, to Kansas, and finally to Oklahoma, we
did not reinvent ourselves at each river we came to. We
remained Shawnee. We carried our ceremonies in secret. We kept
our language alive in whispers. Our government lived in the
hearts of our people, even when the United States wished it
would vanish.
Nationhood is not a label to be chosen, but an identity
carried through generations of removal, loss, and resistance. I
have seen what happens when identity becomes something someone
can simply declare.
Across every homeland we were forced through, Ohio,
Missouri, Kentucky, Kansas, there are now groups calling
themselves Shawnee who do not speak our language, they hold no
Shawnee ceremonies, they appear nowhere in our historical rolls
or records, and they have no documented Shawnee ancestors or
ties to our community.
The first time one of those groups opened a bank account
using the name ``Shawnee,'' I learned a hard lesson: if
identity becomes self-proclamation instead of a documented
history, sovereignty becomes a sand castle waiting for the
tide.
That is why we are here, to defend a sovereignty paid for
in blood, land, and the children.
Now, turning to the matter before this Committee. For
years, this group has moved from identity to identity, the Lost
Colony, Croatan, Cherokee, Cheraw, Siouan, Lumbee, changing
claims but never producing documentation to support any of
them. And so, the United Indian Nations of Oklahoma turned to a
respected historian and genealogist to examine the record.
That research did not attempt to define who the Lumbee are.
It simply asked a single question: can the Lumbee's tribal
claims be verified by historical and genealogical evidence? The
resounding answer was no.
The expert found no demonstrated descent from a historical
tribal nation, no continuous tribal government before the mid-
20th century, no ancestral indigenous language community, and
census records showing ancestors identified as free persons
under British and American law, but never as a tribal polity.
Those findings do not come from emotion or politics. They
come from archives, from documents, and history.
Now I must speak from a sacred place, the place where grief
and memory live in our communities. As chair of the National
Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition, I have
carried the names of Native children who never came home. I
have walked the ground where they lie without markers. I have
sat with survivors who still flinch when they hear their Native
languages because it only brought punishment.
The Lumbee have invoked Indian boarding school history to
claim indigeneity. But the record tells another story. Nine
individuals now held up in Lumbee narratives attempted to
enroll at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Carlisle
rejected them because they did not meet the Federal definition
of Indian. They were only admitted after claiming, falsely, to
be Cherokee.
An independent genealogical review shows not one of the
nine had Native ancestry. Yet their descendants now identify as
Lumbee, and Lumbee leadership presents that episode as proof of
tribal status. That is not survivorship. That is borrowing our
pan to manufacture political identity.
Our children's trauma is not a credential. Our unmarked
graves are not a strategy. Our ancestors' suffering is not a
political accessory. To allow trauma to be impersonated is to
betray the memory of the children and denigrate oneself.
There is a path established to Federal recognition, the
Office of Federal Acknowledgment. It exists to examine history,
continuity, and nationhood. It is open to the Lumbee. They have
been told they may use it. They refused.
The truth is simple. People confident in their history do
not avoid the place where history is examined.
So, I close where I began, with sovereignty. Tribal nations
pre-date the United States. Federal recognition does not create
us, it acknowledges us.
If Congress replaces documented history with political
momentum, if identity becomes a matter of assertion rather than
continuity, then this body will not be recognizing tribes, it
will be manufacturing them. And once that begins, sovereignty
will not be defined by history, but by votes.
Niyaawe, [phrase in Native tongue]. I welcome your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Barnes follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ben Barnes, Chief, Shawnee Tribe
Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice-Chairman Schatz, Members of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, niyaawe, thank you for inviting me to
testify on this important subject. My name is Ben Barnes. I serve as
Chief of the Shawnee Tribe and Chair of the United Indian Nations of
Oklahoma, representing the Tribal Nations now based in the state of
Oklahoma. I also serve as Chair of the Board of the National Native
American Boarding School Healing Coalition.
Let me begin with a truth our elders have taught us: Sovereignty is
the inheritance of tribal survival. The Shawnee Tribe and other
sovereign tribal nations from across Oklahoma and the United States
continue to exist today despite federal policies and actions intended
to end our existence as both humans and as separate sovereigns.
Important for the subject of this hearing today, federal recognition of
groups claiming to be tribes--sovereignty is not and cannot be created
by Congress as a reward for simply claiming to be a tribe.
The Shawnee Tribe and other tribal nations exist today because our
ancestors endured forced removal, warfare, termination policies, and
the boarding school system. We entered into treaties with the United
States as a consequence of these policies and actions. Federal
acknowledgment of a group cannot create a tribe. Federal recognition
does not make a tribe. It acknowledges a tribal sovereign that pre-
existed the creation of the United States.
To understand our perspective, it is essential to remember: In
Indian Country, tribal identity and individual identity as a tribal
citizen is not formed by modern circumstance--it is proven by history
and continuity. When the United States forced my Shawnee people from
Ohio, through Kentucky and Missouri, to Kansas, and finally to
Oklahoma, we did not reinvent ourselves at each river we came to. We
remained Shawnee. We carried our ceremonies in secret. We kept our
language alive in whispers. Our culture and our government lived in the
hearts of our people, even when the United States wished it would
vanish.
That is what nationhood looks like--not a label chosen to meet a
moment, but an identity carried through generations of removal, loss,
and resistance. I have seen what happens when identity becomes
something someone can simply declare. Across every homeland we were
forced through--Ohio, Kentucky, Missouri, and Kansas--there are now
groups calling themselves Shawnee who:
Do not speak our language,
Practice no Shawnee ceremonies,
Appear nowhere in our historical rolls or records, and
Have no documented Shawnee ancestors or ties to our
community. None.
The first time one of those groups opened a bank account using the
name ``Shawnee,'' I learned a hard lesson: If identity becomes self-
proclamation instead of documented history, tribal sovereignty becomes
a sandcastle waiting for the tide. That is why I am here--we are here--
to defend a sovereignty paid for in blood, land, and the lives of our
ancestors, not a construct of modern paperwork.
Now, turning to the matter before this Committee: For years, this
group claiming to be a tribal sovereign has shifted from one identity
to another--the Lost Colony of Roanoke, Croatan, Cherokee, Cheraw,
``Siouan,'' Lumbee--changing claims but never producing documentation
to support any of them. The so-titled ``Lumbee Fairness Act'' promotes
this shifting tribal identity, prohibiting the Department of the
Interior through the Office of Federal Acknowledgment from taking a
close look at the Lumbee group's vague claims of tribal and individual
identity.
Out of concern for the integrity of tribal recognition and
sovereignty, the United Indian Nations of Oklahoma turned to a
respected historian and genealogist to examine the record. That
research did not attempt to define who the Lumbee are. It simply asked
a single question: Can the Lumbee's tribal claims be verified by
historical and genealogical evidence?
The answer was a resounding no. The expert found:
No demonstrated descent from a historic tribal nation
No continuous tribal government before the mid-20th century
No ancestral Indigenous language
Census records showing ancestors identified as free persons
under British and American law, never as a tribal polity
Those findings do not come from emotion or politics. They come from
the Lumbee's own petition for federal acknowledgment before the Office
of Federal Acknowledgment, as well as archives, documents, and history.
I attach our expert's reports to this written testimony for your
review. *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The Executive Summary: Analysis of Lumbee Historical and
Genealogical Claims By Jean M. Kelley, M. A. has been retained in the
Committee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal nations based in Oklahoma care deeply about this issue, and
understandably so. Oklahoma is the final homeland for many tribal
nations that once occupied in lands across the country. It was the
destination for negotiated and forcible removal. Tribal pretendianism--
groups falsely claiming to tribal nations and falsely claiming
sovereignty and rights to bury our ancestors and practice religious
ceremonies that do not belong to them and claim lands and falsely
claiming to be Indian--is a modern phenomenon. Literally hundreds of
groups falsely claiming to be tribes, many of them treaty-based tribes
now based in Oklahoma, have sprung up across the country.
Now I must speak from a sacred place--the place where grief and
memory live in our communities. As Chair of the National Native
American Boarding School Healing Coalition, I have carried in my heart
the names of Shawnee and other Native children who never came home from
federal boarding schools. I have walked and prayed on the ground where
they lie without markers. I have been in rooms where Shawnee children
lived and slept in the Shawnee Indian Mission Manual Labor Boarding
School in Kansas and were prohibited from seeing their parents who came
to visit them. I have sat with Indian boarding school survivors who
still flinch when they hear their own language because it once brought
punishment.
The Lumbee have invoked Indian boarding school history to claim
Indigeneity. But the record tells another story. Nine individuals now
touted in Lumbee narratives attempted to enroll at the Carlisle Indian
Industrial School. Carlisle rejected them because they did not meet the
federal definition of Indian. They were only admitted after claiming--
falsely--to be Cherokee. And independent genealogical review shows not
one of the nine had Native ancestry. Yet their descendants now identify
as Lumbee, and Lumbee leadership presents that episode as proof of
tribal status.
That is not survivorship.
That is stealing our pain to manufacture political support.
Our children's trauma is not a credential.
Our unmarked graves are not a strategy.
Our ancestors' suffering is not a political accessory.
To allow trauma to be impersonated is to betray the memory of our
children and denigrate oneself.
There is an established path to federal recognition--the Office of
Federal Acknowledgment at the Department of the Interior. The OFA
protects my Tribe and other established tribes from false claims of
tribal and individual identity that, unfortunately, we have seen over
and over with the Lumbee. The OFA exists to examine history,
continuity, and nationhood. The Solicitor of the Interior has made
clear in a reasoned opinion that the OFA process is open to the Lumbee.
They have been told they may use it. They filed a petition for federal
acknowledgment in the OFA but now refuse to complete the process,
choosing politics and emotion over facts.
The truth is simple: People confident in their history and ancestry
do not avoid the place where history and genealogy are examined. So, I
close where I began--with sovereignty. Tribal nations pre-date the
United States. Federal recognition does not create us--it acknowledges
us. If Congress replaces documented history with politics, asking which
elected officials want it and abandoning the difficult merits questions
at issue here, if identity becomes a matter of assertion rather than
continuity, then this body will not be recognizing tribes--it will be
manufacturing them. And once that begins, sovereignty will be defined
not by history, but by votes.
Niyaawe. I welcome your questions.
The Chairman. Chief, thank you very much. Thank each of you
for your testimony here today, and for the opportunity to now
engage in a round of questions.
I am going to defer my questions to Senator Markwayne
Mullin from Oklahoma. You may begin.
Senator Mullin. Thank you so much.
Chief Barnes, how was the Shawnee Tribe recognized?
Mr. Barnes. We had a separation from the Cherokee Nation in
the year 2000. As I said, we were under the authority of
Cherokee Nation as citizens.
Senator Mullin. How were you recognized? Which path did you
choose for recognition?
Mr. Barnes. We had a path of recognition to separate us
from the Cherokee Nation. And that was established by an act of
Congress.
Senator Mullin. Act of Congress. How many paths of
recognition is there for a tribe to go through?
Mr. Barnes. You have an act of Congress, you have an OFA
process.
Senator Mullin. And you chose to go through Congress
because?
Mr. Barnes. We had an OFA review. We came down to a
document that was signed by Fred Huffman in the 1960s. And if
our continuity of government, it hinged upon that government
being continuous. So as part of our separation, our separation
was not identifying us as a tribe. It was separating our tribe
from the Cherokee Nation. We relate to the Oklahoma----
Senator Mullin. But you asked for recognition through
Congress, right?
Mr. Barnes. That was how our process happened, yes, sir.
Senator Mullin. Do you believe the Lumbees are Natives?
Mr. Barnes. It is not what I believe, sir. I have no belief
in the matter. My matter is in the OFA. I believe in the
process. I believe that the OFA process exists whenever the----
Senator Mullin. But isn't there two ways to be recognized,
right? Congress has the authority to recognize, right?
Mr. Barnes. I agree, yes.
Senator Mullin. Okay.
Chief Hicks, do you believe the Lumbees are Natives?
Mr. Hicks. I think there is potentially Native descent. It
doesn't make them a tribe.
Senator Mullin. Why did North Carolina recognize them,
then, in 1985?
Mr. Hicks. North Carolina, to my understanding, has
different standards for the recognition. I am not sure today
that the Lumbee could pass the standards that have been put in
place by the State of North Carolina.
Senator Mullin. Did the Federal Government recognize them
in 1956?
Mr. Hicks. To my understanding, and my conclusion of the
1956 Acts is, simply recognize the name of those who self-
proclaimed Indian in a five-county area in eastern North
Carolina.
Senator Mullin. Did the Federal Government recognize them
as a tribe in 1956? That is my question.
Mr. Hicks. I don't believe so, not in my conclusion.
Senator Mullin. So do you believe there are two paths for
recognition and Congress has a right to recognize them?
Mr. Hicks. I do agree with that, yes.
Senator Mullin. Now, you raise concerns that it was the
cost, is that correct?
Mr. Hicks. Yes, that was part of my testimony.
Senator Mullin. So if it is the cost, should the Federal
Government not recognize any more tribes coming in?
Mr. Hicks. That wasn't the point of the cost. I think it
needs to be----
Senator Mullin. Well, it is, because when you are raising
cost, you are raising the cost that it would be to recognize
the Lumbee Tribe. Because I do believe they are Native. I have
been accused of not being Native, and I always laugh, and I
say, I can't control who my ancestors loved. But I still live
on the same allotment of land where my family stopped walking.
Because I am Cherokee, and I am proud to be Cherokee, and my
family has been there since 1840. But yet I have been accused,
because I may not look full Native.
And I have a problem when someone starts saying that, I
actually take it a little personally. And Chief, there is
actually a split between Cherokee Nation and the Eastern Band,
would you agree?
Mr. Hicks. What is your question?
Senator Mullin. There was a split between Cherokee Nation
and the Eastern Band. Cherokee Nation, my ancestors, we walked,
and the Eastern Band stayed back. Correct?
Mr. Hicks. That is correct.
Senator Mullin. But you were federally recognized.
Shouldn't you be recognized underneath Cherokee Nation at that
point?
Mr. Hicks. I mean, if you look at----
Senator Mullin. Because we are all descendants, Cherokee
Nation.
Mr. Hicks. Do I get to respond?
Senator Mullin. Sure.
Mr. Hicks. So, if you look at the history of recognition,
obviously, the OFA was not established until 1978. The
government stopped doing treaties in 1871. The Cherokees,
without question, was an established government. If you look at
the----
Senator Mullin. I know the history of the recognition. I
get that. My point is that you are saying that the Lumbees,
that they are or aren't descendants of the Eastern Band or
Cherokee Nation, really, because Cherokee, so it would be your
descendants of Cherokee Nation, in my opinion. But you are
saying that they should be recognized because they should be
part of you, but you should be part of Cherokee Nation.
It doesn't make any sense to me, because you are
complaining about cost, you are complaining about their path to
recognition. You are complaining that they may or may not be
Native because they don't have the heritage behind it.
And I am saying, well, they were recognized in 1885. The
cost shouldn't matter, because if that is the cost, we
shouldn't allow any more tribes to come in, we should stop
enrollment, because we have a Federal obligation as Congress, a
treaty obligation, a Constitutional obligation to have
oversight of the tribes.
We have the authority to be able to recognize tribes,
without question. And it just seems like this argument
continues to go through because of, my opinion, of the
territory dispute. That is my opinion. Because you can't look
over there and say they are not Native. I mean, turn around,
look. And you are telling me they are not Native?
Mr. Hicks. I have seen the crowd.
Senator Mullin. Okay, and you are saying that that is not
Native faces?
Mr. Hicks. That is not for me to determine. That is for the
OFA process.
Senator Mullin. I know, but we are determining it.
Mr. Hicks. That is an OFA process.
Senator Mullin. And that is why I support recognizing them.
Because my fight up here has been always for Native Americans.
I was shocked, when I got up here, when I first got to
Congress, it was just Tom Cole and I were the only Natives in
Congress at the time. I am in the Senate, I am the only Native
American in the Senate now.
And I hate when we fight among ourselves. Because we should
all be in the same boat rowing the same direction. If we are
Native, then we were wronged a long time ago by the United
States. And we have been fighting for recognition for a long
time.
And when we have in-house fighting, it causes Congress
sometimes to have an impasse. I think you know that. This
happens all the time. Lot of times it has to do with gaming.
And all we are saying is, the Lumbees have a right to be
recognized just like you have the right to be recognized.
Mr. Hicks. We don't disagree with that, as long as it is
through the OFA process.
Senator Mullin. But if they have two options, why is it
your opinion that they choose the one to go through Congress?
Mr. Hicks. Because that is why this department is
established, is for evidence and----
Senator Mullin. But there is clearly two paths. And I
appreciate the paths they took.
Chair, thank you for the extra time. Thank you for allowing
me to go first. And for the record, that has already been
established by Interior, they do support this process and they
support the Lumbees becoming recognized. And I to also support
the Lumbees being recognized.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Mullin.
Senator Schatz?
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the
testifiers.
Just a couple of thoughts before I ask Professor Locklear a
couple of questions. I think it is really important to assume
good faith here. What I have heard is a kind of concerning
series of accusations about bad faith. And I am trying to go
back to 1888 and imagine that the Lumbee people, whatever they
were calling themselves, whatever language they were using at
the time, say, you know what, why don't we pretend we are a
Tribe and petition the Federal Government? If this is a
conspiracy, it is a longstanding kind of odd, counterintuitive
conspiracy.
The more likely explanation is what the Department of
Interior said about 90 years ago, 100 years ago, when they
explicitly said, we are not going to recognize this Tribe
because the census is too large. Because we can't afford to
absorb the cost of delivering services.
By the way, I think that is a valid concern for
Congressional appropriators, right, if we are to recognize
Lumbee, the rolls just increase, the total number of people in
Indian Country went up, which means IHS, BIE, BIA and all those
services are going to have to increase by the percentage that
the rolls increase.
That is a real issue. It is just not a reason not to grant
recognition.
The reason I am animated about this is that I don't know
whether Native Hawaiians are ever going to come back to this
Congress and seek recognition. But I remember, I was not here,
but I remember when Danny Akaka, Chairman of this Committee,
tried to get recognition. And the arguments were, do you know
how many people that is? Do you know how much that is going to
cost? And then, well, they are not Indians.
And so I don't take it as personally as Senator Mullin, but
I do take it personally.
And I will just say one other thing. You can go through the
administrative process or you can not. But the Constitution
vests not just the Congress but this Committee with this
authority.
So it may be that you think we should have gone, or these
folks should have gone through the administrative process. Fair
enough. But that is not a meaningful obstacle to consideration
of Lumbee recognition.
Professor Locklear, I want to give you an opportunity to
again, respectfully, rebut some of the claims made by opponents
of this legislation. Three things: Lumbee has used different
names for themselves; that they have no language; and that they
do not descend from an historic tribe. Could you address those
three assertions?
Ms. Locklear. With pleasure, Senator, and thank you for the
question.
First of all, with regard to the name, and why it came
about, the Lumbee children in 1884 were not able to go to
school. Our children could not read or write. We were not
allowed to attend either white or African American schools.
In 1885, our leaders sought recognition from the State of
North Carolina for the purpose of establishing schools for our
children. We prevailed, with the assistance of a Mr. McMillan
in the House, who deemed himself to be an amateur historian at
the time. Mr. McMillan chose the name Croatan for our people,
but in his legislation, he did important things. He established
a government-to-government relationship, he allowed the
creation of an independent school system run by the tribe,
limited to tribal children, and taught by members of the tribe.
To my knowledge, no other tribe in the United States can
claim that history. So, beginning in 1885, we controlled our
own school system until the 1970s, when a Federal district
court ruled that the State of North Carolina must desegregate
its school system.
We thought we were exempt from that, because after all, we
are an Indian tribe. But the judge told our parents, you must
bus your children, because this is a racial classification,
because you are not federally recognized.
Senator Schatz. Okay, and to the language?
Ms. Locklear. Yes. There is no requirement in either
Supreme Court or other Federal court authority or the
acknowledgement regulations that our opponents so warmly
embrace that require the presence of a language.
Senator Schatz. Yes, a lot of these things, it seems to me
are, they are historical facts, and they are, they happened
because of United States Federal Government policy. We lost
language because of Federal policy. People lost a land base
because of United States Federal Government policy.
And it is not surprising that the Department of Interior
repeatedly rejected the claims of the Lumbee people, because
the Department of Interior, the idea that we should accept the
precedent of the Department of Interior from generations back
when I think there is unanimous bipartisan agreement that the
whole purpose of this Committee is to reverse all of those
policies, termination and assimilation.
And to use that as a proof point against recognition I find
to be not compelling.
Now, there are criteria that we are to use to determine
whether or not to recognize Lumbee. But the idea that, well,
DOI didn't do it in 1930, or they don't have their own
language, well, there are, frankly, we work a fair amount on
language revitalization, and there are a lot of tribes that
have very few Native speakers left or none.
So none of this is disqualifying, because frankly, many,
many Native people across the Country have experienced that.
I did not expect to get so exercised, but I appreciate your
testimony.
Ms. Locklear. If I may?
Senator Schatz. With the Chair's permission.
The Chairman. Go ahead.
Ms. Locklear. Thank you. One final fact on the language
point that I think is important. Vine Deloria, when he
testified in 1988, made note of the fact that he had not only
personal knowledge of the Lumbee Tribe but also family
knowledge of the Lumbee Tribe, because his aunt, Ella Cara
Deloria, had gone down to the community, who was a noted
linguist, for the purpose of studying the remnants that
remained of tribal languages. And she made note in 1940 that
those remnants existed and her purpose was to establish a
dictionary.
She did not complete that work because she was not able to
get funding. They were not interested in our community, to do
so.
The Chairman. Thank you, Vice Chairman.
Chief Hicks, I want to direct this to you, because you have
made very clear that on behalf of the Eastern Band, that you
think that the Lumbee should go through the Office of Federal
Acknowledgement, through the administrative process rather than
come for recognition through Congress. Maybe it is accurate
that the administrative route is perhaps more costly, harder to
do, subjective. Maybe we need to look at that in terms of
whether greater oversight is needed there.
But as Senator Mullin has indicated, there are two tracks,
two routes that you can proceed through for recognition. I
almost find it curious that Federal recognition is ultimately
about a political relationship between a sovereign tribe and a
Federal Government. It just seems somewhat curious that we
actually set up a process where that decision can be delegated
entirely to administrative state.
But I am not going to ask you to resolve that question for
me. What I want to turn to is in your written testimony, you
claim that the Lumbee situation is uniquely beyond Congress'
capacity to understand and evaluate. Can you explain why you
feel it is unique in some ways, separate from other tribes that
have gained recognition through Congress? Because again, we
have this process, it has been repeatedly exercised in terms of
its Constitutional authority to gain tribes.
So if you can cite to what you feel are some of the unique
aspects as to why Congress should not be the avenue here.
Mr. Hicks. Thank you, Chairlady, for that question. I think
if you look at the gaps that have been clearly identified by
historians, by researchers, related to the history, these are
aspects that I feel need expertise. They need genealogists.
They need historians that do this on a daily basis.
Unfortunately, Congressional staff don't always have the
expertise to really dig into the subject matter documents or
the church records or court records, things of that nature, to
really relate back to what is necessary as we feel to prove
what you are saying is substantiation.
So again, I think as you look at that setup and that
structure, OFA is better suited to make these determinations.
The Chairman. How do you respond then to Ms. Locklear's
statement that she made early on that given the number of
Congressional hearings here in the Senate, in the House, that
this issue of Federal recognition that Lumbee is seeking has
not established quite a voluminous Congressional record with
which to be able to turn to?
Mr. Hicks. I truly believe that if the Lumbee group would
go through the OFA process, they would get the answer that they
are looking for, wherever that answer falls. As you think about
it, this issue of well over a century old. And it continues to
come back to the same conclusion: there are too many gaps in
the genealogy, there are too many gaps in the history, there is
no treaty relationships. Lumbee does not have a sister tribe in
Oklahoma.
There are so many things here that need to be evaluated.
That is the importance of why it needs to go through the OFA
process.
The Chairman. Ms. Locklear, let me turn to you. You have
testified that Congressional recognition is needed to correct
what you have termed an injustice. Beyond that, you have some
practical differences between recognition through Congress and
recognition from the Federal acknowledgement process. You have
the ability to take land into trust, particularly in the post-
Carcieri world here.
Can you speak to some of these practical differences
between the legislative and administrative recognition and
whether you think those are drivers for this legislation?
Ms. Locklear. Absolutely, they are. Let me summarize with
just a few points.
First of all, I think it is important to put this
controversy in some general history. As the Special Indian
Agent reported in 1915, in the O.M. McPherson report, there is
a history of 300 years of hostility between the Cherokees to
the west and the ancestors of the Lumbee people, including the
Cheraw, the Hatteras, and related Siouan-speaking people. I
think it is important to understand that context.
As to the other issue, so, as a practical matter, because
of that, only Congress could resolve it forever. We have been
at this for more than 100 years now. I guarantee you that were
the tribe to go through the acknowledgement process and
succeed, as I am confident we would, there would be a lawsuit
filed by the Eastern Band of Cherokee to try and set that
administrative agency decision aside.
That would not resolve it. There is only one way to finally
resolve it, and that is through a conclusive act of Congress
that extends full benefits and services.
As you also implied, there is a problem with the Carcieri
issue, which relates to eligibility of newly-recognized tribes
to receive land into trust and thereby we treat it like all
other federally-recognized tribes. Because of that 2009 Supreme
Court decision that we call Carcieri, the only way to resolve
the eligibility of the Lumbee for that process is through an
act of Congress. Only Congress can clearly indicate that it
considers the 1934 date to be insignificant, and whatever may
arise out of the Carcieri decision, notwithstanding those
terms, the tribe is nonetheless eligible for the land-into-
trust process.
Finally, if there is going to be a special addressing of
the cost factor, we don't think it is necessary, which I am
happy to expand on, but only Congress can do that as well.
Congress is the one who appropriate the money, and if there
needs to be more money for the Lumbee services, Congress can do
that.
We think the existing processes for appropriations will
protect the presently-recognized tribes. Both the BIA and IHS
processes provide that only through the appropriation of
additional funding that pays for those services will the Lumbee
members receive those services at the end of the day. So
federally-recognized tribes now are protected.
That being the case, if they believe there should be an
increase in Federal funding for the IHS and the BIA, again,
that is a political decision to be made by the Congress. So we
think for all of those factors, one final one, if I may.
Only one other time in history has the Congress put an
Indian tribe in the same position that it put the Lumbee Tribe
in 1956. And that was with the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo of Texas.
Congress passed a statute in 1968 for that tribe, which was at
the time federally recognized, which basically said, we
transfer any responsibility we have for this tribe to the State
of Texas, and we are going to impose termination language upon
the tribe.
In the legislative history of that act, it specifically
says that 1968 Act, which then referred to the Natives as Tiwas
of Texas, was modeled upon the 1956 Lumbee Act, the only other
time Congress has done that. And Congress fixed that problem in
1987, by passing legislation to recognize fully the Ysleta del
Sur Pueblo of Texas.
Now, if Congress does the same for us, there are no other
tribes in that position. And that is what makes it fair and
just, as well as the only appropriate and fully dispositive way
to finally and conclusively resolve these issues.
The Chairman. Senator Cortez Masto?
STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I appreciate the comments
from everyone, and the uniqueness of the hearing today.
Ms. Locklear, let me ask you this. There are two ways to
process, ways to get this recognition, we have talked about
that. One is through Congress, you have talked about that.
Ms. Locklear. Yes.
Senator Cortez Masto. And then the other is through the DOI
and the Office of Federal Acknowledgement.
Am I hearing today that we should eliminate the Office of
Federal Acknowledgement and just rely on Congress to do this in
the future?
Ms. Locklear. Not at all.
Senator Cortez Masto. So do you have any concerns with the
Office of Federal Acknowledgement and how the process plays
out?
Ms. Locklear. Historically, we have. And we have expressed
those, along with other non-federally-recognized tribes in
various forums.
Senator Cortez Masto. I am saying now, right now. Not
historically, now. We are here now, and we need to address
this. Are there any concerns that you have with the office
right now?
Ms. Locklear. It has greatly improved as a result of the
changed regulations in 2015.
Senator Cortez Masto. Okay, so can I just say, Chairman
Lowery, what is to stop you? It sounds like you have the
support of the administration, you have the support of DOI.
What is to stop you from going through that process now and
getting what you are seeking, to go through an evidence-based
process to address some of the concerns that we have heard from
the other tribe?
Mr. Lowery. Yes, ma'am. Although there have been changes to
the BIA process, we still do not know if it is going to take
20, 30 years just like it already does. I don't want my people
waiting another 30 years to go through the process. And then
once there has been a rendering done by BIA, there will be
opponents who can thing bring forth a lawsuit.
And I have no doubt that Eastern Band of Cherokee 30 years
from now would bring forth a lawsuit that would take us into
another 10 to 20 years. And then 50 years from now, my grandson
will be sitting here doing the same thing.
Senator Cortez Masto. So the concern is that there would be
a lawsuit to any decision that was made by OFA?
Mr. Lowery. Absolutely. And the concern is how many decades
is it going to take. So I think Congress really needs to take a
look at the BIA process. I don't know any other government
program that takes 20 to 30 years to come to a conclusion.
Senator Cortez Masto. Ms. Locklear, let me ask you, does
the process, is that part of the problem, do we need to look at
the OFA and say, this process is taking 30 years, that is too
long? Do we need to address this in Congress?
Ms. Locklear. Frankly, that may be the case, Senator.
Senator Cortez Masto. Is that true?
Ms. Locklear. At this point, we don't have enough
experience with how the new regulations will be administered to
give a full answer to that question.
Senator Cortez Masto. So there are new regulations now that
the tribe has not gone through, so you don't know how long it
would take, is that right?
Ms. Locklear. That is correct.
Senator Cortez Masto. So let me ask you both, Chief Hicks
and Chief Barnes, you talked about this. Let me just say, I
understand the two ways to do this. One is through Congress,
you have to get the votes, through the members of Congress. No
guarantee you are going to get that.
But there is also an evidence-based approach. I am not in a
position to look out into the audience and, like some of my
colleagues, to say who is a member and who isn't. Just like I
am not in a position, and I don't think I should be looking out
in my community and saying, just because you have brown skin,
you are undocumented.
So there has to be an evidence-based approach. That is why
it was created in Congress. But if it is not working, I would
want to know. Because that is not fair. But we need to hear
that conversation. So let me ask both Chief Barnes, as well as
Chief Hicks, talk to me about this evidence-based approach, and
why it is so important that the administration have a process
like this.
Mr. Barnes. If I may, Senator, and thank you for that
question. I will give you an example of one that did take a
considerably shorter time, Little Shell Tribe. Little Shell was
denied at OFA, and then they went through Congressional
process.
Indian Country decried that and said, no, you got this one
wrong. The Chippewas came together and said, no, you got this
one wrong, this one is a tribal nation, and historically,
because of a technicality on Little Shell, Little Shell is a
tribal nation.
So this is one of those instances where the OFA process,
even though it is flawed, and I don't know of any Federal
institution that is perfect at this time, even though the OFA
is not perfect, it still yielded some results on behalf of
Little Shell, which ultimately did tribal nations come together
and say, on their behalf, look at the evidence. And this
technicality should not keep Little Shell from being a tribe.
All we ask is they follow the same path as Little Shell. Go
through the OFA process.
Senator Cortez Masto. Okay. Chief Hicks, anything else to
add to the process?
Mr. Hicks. Yes, I do feel, as I responded earlier, is that
the OFA is without question, uniquely equipped to critically
evaluate all the related criteria. And there are several
criteria that come into play, based on the claims. Having
skilled, highly-skilled and professionally experienced folks to
do that I think is critical.
But I do want to just respond to the other question around
the OFA process. We have supported, openly supported, the
expedited approach for this group to go through this process.
And in more than one scenario.
And we still feel that there is an opportunity to not
extend this 20 or 30 years, that it is something well short of
that, to do this evaluation properly and to get the answer that
is being sought in a timely manner.
And again, publicly, we support that. And we think that it
is a good decision.
Senator Cortez Masto. So you would support, if they were to
go through that process, you would work with them to say, this
needs to be expedited by the administration, we want something
in a timely fashion?
Mr. Hicks. Without question.
Senator Cortez Masto. Let me stop there. I know my time is
up. Madam Chairwoman, thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
I just have a couple more questions here this afternoon. I
will probably direct this to you, Chairman Lowery.
It is pretty clear that a tribe's authority to basically
determine to define its membership is really central to its
existence as an independent political community. The
legislation that Senator Tillis has introduced directs the
Secretary of Interior to verify the Lumbee Tribe's roll for
service delivery purposes.
The verification is limited to confirming documentary proof
that members meet the criteria established in the Tribe's
constitution that was adopted November of 2001.
So a couple of questions for you this afternoon. Right now,
as it stands, what is required for enrollment in the Lumbee
Tribe?
Mr. Lowery. Yes, ma'am, thank you for the question,
Senator. We have a base roll, we have a couple of base rolls.
One is the 1900 census and one is the 1910 census. The reason
those are our base rolls is because this is the first time that
the Federal Government, in the standard census process,
actually identified American Indians.
So you have to be able to trace your lineage directly back
to the 1900 or the 1910 census. If you do not have an ancestor
that was documented by a Federal census as an American Indian,
you cannot be a member of our tribe.
Also, you have to maintain contact. We are very big on, if
you do not live at home, you have to come back home. You have
to come back to the homelands.
The Chairman. What does that mean, when you say maintain
contact? Come back for like an annual meeting, or what
specifically?
Mr. Lowery. Well, we have it where you have to come back
every seven to eight years. So you have to come back, you have
to visit, you have to maintain a relationship with your people.
You cannot become, you cannot go and get your citizenship and
then leave out and never come back home. We require our
citizens to come back and to maintain contact with their tribal
community.
The Chairman. And at this moment, how many do you currently
have enrolled?
Mr. Lowery. We have just over 60,000 enrolled citizens of
Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.
The Chairman. And then the source documents for enrollment
are the two that you have just described?
Mr. Lowery. Yes, ma'am.
The Chairman. You have to be able to trace back to just
those two?
Mr. Lowery. Yes, ma'am.
The Chairman. Okay. And then this one is probably directed
to you, Ms. Locklear. There has been a fair amount of
discussion today about the various names over the course of a
century. It wasn't until later that the Lumbee officially
adopted their name.
Because the point has been kind of disputed by witnesses
today, and made a little bit of an issue, can you state for the
Committee record today which historical tribe or tribes the
Lumbee Tribe descends from?
Ms. Locklear. I can, and I can do so based on the record
that has been developed by this Committee. There are two
principal sources for that, the O.M. McPherson report from
1915, which identifies the ancestry of the tribe as the Coastal
North Carolina Tribes, Siouan-speaking related tribes,
including the Cheraw, the Hatteras and others.
In addition, you had the testimony of John Swanton, the
preeminent anthropologist in the field, in 1934, who testified
that in his view, the tribe descended principally from the
Cheraw and related Siouan-speaking tribes. That has been the
consistent theory.
As a result of that theory, the Lumbee people became
dissatisfied with the name that the State of North Carolina had
imposed upon them in the various State laws that recognized the
tribe, first Croatan, then Indians of Robeson County, and then
Cherokees of Robeson County.
As a result of that pressure from the Lumbee Tribe, in 1952
the State of North Carolina conducted a referendum among our
member and said, which name do you choose to go by? And we
overwhelmingly, almost unanimously chose the name Lumbee, which
as I indicated earlier, we had used informally since at least
the 1920s.
That is important too, though, because it shows the link
between the current Lumbee Tribe and the Cheraw community. The
Lumbee Tribe resides around Lumber River. Lumber River was
named that in 1809 by the State of North Carolina. Previously,
it was known as Drowning Creek. And the first reported map of
the area, in 1724, by John Herbert, identifies the Cheraw
residing around Drowning Creek.
We have been there ever since. It is the same community,
regardless of the name.
Let me say in one final point, that again, the
administrative process that our opponents so embrace,
specifically provides that if there is an entity, a collective
entity that has existed for at least 50 years, which is plainly
the case at Lumbee, since 1885 and the school records and the
Federal census records that show it, that entity can be
recognized, and I am quoting here, ``notwithstanding any
absence of or changes in name.''
It is not the name. It is the Indian people that you are
recognizing.
The Chairman. Final question I will direct to you, Chief
Hicks. The issue of cost has also been raised here at this
hearing today. You noted that estimates from CBO are a little
bit all over the board, may not be entirely accurate here.
Can you clarify for the Committee what factors you think
might be contributing to these differing cost estimates? I
agree with my colleague from Oklahoma that, while cost should
not influence a level of recognition of tribal status, it is
something that, I am dual-hatted, I am not only chairman of the
authorizing committee, I am also chairman of the appropriating
committee. So I can't help but want to try to understand some
of the financial implications of this.
Can you, if you are able, try to clarify a little bit about
why we got such a broad range of estimates that are out there?
Mr. Hicks. I think, as was brought up by both Senators
around that question, we have had a third party take a look at
the prior CBO score. One of the things that was flawed in that
score was typically CBO does a five-year financial score. In
that particular scenario, they only included four years for
some reason.
In addition to, we are fairly certain that all of the
Federal agencies, whether it is IHS, whether it is BIA, BIE,
amongst others, were not adequately included in that number.
Because if you go back to the prior two CBO scores, one of
those was close to double in years prior to this prior CBO
score. I think it was around 21, 22, what I have in my notes.
But again, we think there were flaws in that particular
score. The estimates that we think over a five-year period is
probably in the range of $2 billion to $2.3 billion, over a
five-year period, if all agencies are included.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Schatz?
Senator Schatz. Thanks to everybody for testifying. I just
want to make one final point.
I know we have kind of gone around and around on this. But
I think I speak for every member of the Senate on this
particular question. You can think we should defer to the
administration, but we don't have to. Article 1, Section 1 of
the Constitution gives us this authority.
Now, there is a statute that also delegates this authority
to the administration. But it does not require that recognition
go through an administrative process. You can think we are
unwise for not kicking it to the administration. But you cannot
say that we are not permitted to recognize a Tribe. That is a
Constitutional obligation and authority of the Congress, but
specifically the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.
So if you want to make the argument that we need to build a
historical record and that you trust this agency within an
agency more than you trust us, that is fine. That is fair. But
this is still our authority. And we clearly intend to exercise
it.
Senator Cortez Masto. Madam Chair, can I respond to that,
as a member of the Senate?
The Chairman. Yes, go ahead.
Senator Cortez Masto. I am sorry, but I did not hear
anybody saying that we don't have that authority. I think it
was very clear that people recognize there is a dual track
here. And the question is, Lumbee has chosen one path, and they
are asking us as members of Congress to support that path.
And there is another side that is saying, no, there is an
evidence-based path. That is what is before us. I did not hear
from anybody, nor have I heard that somehow they are preventing
us as members of Congress from doing our jobs.
So I do, as a member, I don't want you speaking for me, I
do recognize both sides of that.
Senator Schatz. Senator Cortez Masto, I don't think anybody
said that directly today. But I will say that some of the
organizations that have been steadfastly opposed to Lumbee
recognition have actually made advertisements about
circumventing the administrative process and undermining the
Tribal recognition process by going to Congress.
So that is what I was speaking to. I know it was sort of
obliquely referred to, and you were suggesting that we were
going to, of that it would be better if we go through the
administrative process. My own view is that this is a
Congressional authority, that the DOI has screwed this up for
generation after generation, and that is time for us to make a
choice.
The Chairman. I want to thank the members of the Committee.
I want to thank those who have come to testify today. I
appreciate your helping us continue to build out this record.
Members may submit additional questions for the record, if
they choose. The hearing record will be kept open for two more
weeks.
I also want to thank those who have attended. We are a
pretty small committee on most days. And we don't have to go
into a big committee room like this. But I think those who have
joined today are evidence of the interest in this as an issue
and I think your presence is important to us as well.
Know that this Committee takes very seriously, as the Vice
Chairman has said, our role and our responsibility when it
comes to Federal recognition of our tribes, and ensuring that
the sovereignty that they have is recognized Congress, by the
administration and the responsibilities that we have.
I want to thank everyone for the testimony that you have
presented in a way that I think has been respectful, which is
very important to the debate, the dialogue, the discussion.
Because I know that it can be contentious. And I know that
oftentimes, issues like these pit neighbor-to-neighbor,
community against community. And that is hard, and particularly
when you have been living with it for decades, if not over a
century.
So, I respect the way that you have come to be before the
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs today, and your
contributions.
With that, the Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:58 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Dr. Frederick E. Hoxie
Good afternoon Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz and
members of the Committee on Indian Affairs. This statement is made not
as an expert in Lumbee history, but as a veteran historian who has
taught and written about Federal Indian law and policy for more than
four decades and who, through that activity, has had the opportunity to
work with and consult for a number of tribal nations, government
agencies and cultural institutions.
Among these are the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, the U.S. Department
of Justice, this very Committee, and the Smithsonian Institution. I
retired in 2016 from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign,
where I was Swanlund Professor of History, Law and American Indian
Studies. That wordy academic title underscores the breadth of my
background and experience. Over the past forty years I have taught
hundreds of undergraduates, law students and graduate students in
history, anthropology, and Native Studies, while publishing a dozen
books on Native History, and serving as a consultant to several
government agencies as well as tribes engaged in litigation over issues
of jurisdiction and treaty interpretation.
In 1990, the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution appointed me
a founding trustee of the National Museum of the American Indian--an
institution that existed only on paper when I first came aboard. In
2013 I was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. My
statement is informed by the specific research done on the Lumbee
Tribe's history and community by other notable experts in the field, in
particular that of Dr. Jack Campisi (author of the Lumbee Tribe's
petition for Federal acknowledgment), Dr. Karen Blue (author of the
Smithsonian Handbook of North American Indians chapter on the Lumbee
Tribe), Dr. Raymond Fogelson (deceased, editor of South East Volume,
Smithsonian Handbook of North American Indians), and the eminent Dr.
William Sturtevant (deceased, general editor of the Smithsonian
Handbook of North American Indians).
I ask you to consider three important aspects of the decision
before you with regard to this legislation. First, I want to explain
the importance and significance of extending Federal recognition to the
Lumbee Tribe. When Congress approves the Lumbee Fairness Act it will
finally place relations between this tribe and the United States on a
firm and fair footing. That is admirable and important--and long
overdue--but that is only part of the story. By approving S. 107
Congress will also be fulfilling once again its unique responsibility
as the architect of the modern legal edifice that reconciles Native
tribes and American democracy.
Second, I want to underscore the significance of the written case
the Lumbees have developed in their campaign to secure Federal
recognition, a case that conforms to the scholarly literature on the
tribe and which is beyond dispute in the academic community.
And third, I want to place the decision to recognize the Lumbee
Tribe in the broader context of recent Federal Indian policy--a policy,
I might add, that represents an island of bipartisanship in a
contentious political world.
It is important to understand why the passage of S. 107 is
significant in the long history of Federal Indian policy. The basic
foundation of this policy was framed in 1789 during the first session
of the first U.S. Congress. In that year--the first year of George
Washington's presidency--it was not clear what the official basis for
relations between indigenous people and the United States would be. The
recently-ratified Federal Constitution had provided that Congress would
``regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states,
and with the Indian tribes,'' but it had not indicated the form that
regulation would take. Similarly, the new charter had granted the
President the right to ``make treaties'' but had not specified if the
colonial tradition of Indian treaty-making would continue or, if that
tradition would be a Federal responsibility or somehow shared with the
states. The Constitution was also silent on the issue of whether or not
future Indian treaties would have the same status as agreements with
powers outside the nation's borders.
President Washington and Congress immediately addressed these
issues by proposing that a series of agreements recently reached with a
group of hostile Ohio tribes be ratified as international treaties. For
Washington, it was essential that the central government sanction and
guarantee these agreements. Washington understood that the delicate
situation in Ohio (British troops still occupied Detroit) required the
formation of a stable alliance between western Indians and the
Americans.
At the same time, the President knew that local politicians and
real estate developers were eager to destabilize the situation in Ohio
by making private deals with compliant chiefs and then encouraging
settlers to invade tribal lands. A weak Federal presence would
encourage instability (and weakness) on our borders while allowing
local disputes to proliferate and increase the chances of violence.
Washington and his Secretary of War, Henry Knox, urged Congress to
assert Federal supremacy over Indian treaty-making and to insist that
action by the Congress alone would determine U.S. Indian policy. The
President insisted that such an approach would ensure that ``our
national proceedings. . . [would] become uniform and directed by fixed
and stable principles.'' \1\ It seemed to Washington that our
government would be well served by a ``fixed and stable'' policy
overseen by Congress. Washington was a practical man, so ``fixed
principles'' appealed to his sense of order. But Washington was also
the hero of the Revolution, the leader of the world's first, most
ambitious constitutional democracy. So he urged Congress to act
according to ``fixed principles'' in order to make clear that our
democratic republic would be a place where stable justice trumped
opportunism and the rule of law took precedence over the arbitrary
exercise of brute power. ``The time has arrived,'' Henry Knox wrote,
``when it is highly expedient that a liberal system of justice should
be adopted for the various Indian tribes within the limits of the
United States.'' \2\ These arguments galvanized Congress. Within a
year, it had enacted Washington and Knox's program, ratifying treaties
with tribes, initiating new agreements, and passing the first Trade and
Intercourse Acts which established Federal ground rules for Indian-
white relations throughout the nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Linda Grant Depauw, Editor, Senate Executive Journal and
Related Documents (Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1974), I, p.41.
\2\ American State Papers: Indian Affairs, 13-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today it is commonplace that many treaties have been violated and
many Federal actions have been misguided or fallen short of their
goals. No one argues that U.S. policy has been perfect. But as we
reflect on our failings, we should not forget the significance of the
actions Congress took more than 230 years ago. Through its legislation,
Congress made clear that despite the fact that Indian people were for
the most part not citizens and had not been part of ``We the People,''
who established the United States Constitution, they would be included
within the new nation's emerging legal structure. Our legal structures
would not banish or consign them to the machinations of powerful land
speculators or ambitious state politicians.
Congress's decision to include Indian peoples in our national
governmental structure through Federal legislation was made to ensure
that indigenous people would be served, like all Americans, by a
``liberal system of justice.'' This fundamental commitment underlies
the entire history of our Indian policy. It is the principle that has
caused Congress and the courts to hear complaints arising from treaty
violations and, indeed, to authorize special tribunals to hear disputes
over unfair land seizures or to investigate a vast array of contentious
issues arising from relations between Native communities and their
American neighbors. It is also the basis on which Congress has acted to
repair the harm inflicted on Native groups by U.S. expansion and to
support tribal communities. You will recall that even the extension of
national citizenship to American Indians in 1924 provided that their
new status would not deprive Native Americans of any rights they had to
``tribal or other property.'' \3\ ``Fixed principles,'' and a ``liberal
system of justice'' have therefore been watchwords of Federal policy
from the days of our founding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 43 U.S. Statutes, 253.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Formal treaty making with Indian tribes ended in 1871, but the
Congress has not retreated from its central role in insuring that a
``liberal system of justice'' informs relations between tribes and the
United States. The issue of recognition offers an instance in which you
as legislators must act--as Washington urged your predecessors to act--
to link the Lumbee Tribe permanently to the United States through a
legal relationship based on mutual respect and Federal action. This
recognition legislation is completely congruent with the hundreds of
other decisions Congress has made over the past two centuries to
connect the United States to indigenous peoples by incorporating them
into a stable and just governmental structure.
Historically, recognition has been an idiosyncratic process. Tribes
such as those confronting American expansion in Ohio in 1789 were
instantly recognized by treaty or statute. Others, particularly smaller
groups living in isolated communities in the East, were frequently
bypassed and ignored. Many of those tribes later sought recognition
because that legal status would be a sign of their humanity and an act
of respect. Recognition was also welcome because it signaled that
federal power would be used to protect them from hostile outsiders and
ensure that they, like their neighbors, could enjoy life in America
under a ``liberal system of justice.''
By approving S. 107, the Congress will not only respond to more
than a century of formal petitions from the Lumbee Tribe, but it will
demonstrate once again that the United States is fulfilling
Washington's charge that the nation act according to ``fixed and stable
principles'' in its dealings with indigenous people.
I would also like to point out that the Lumbee's written petitions
filed over many years demonstrate that the tribe deserves this
congressional action that will formally connect it to the United States
and incorporate the tribe within the legal structure of Federal Indian
policy. This is firmly corroborated by the history written by Dr. Jack
Campisi appearing in the Tribe's petition for Federal acknowledgment
and the consistent and supportive view of other historians and
anthropologists. Dr. Campisi makes clear that Indian people, identified
early on as Cheraw, were present in what became Robeson County three
centuries ago. Moreover, despite the fact that the Tribe's indigenous
ancestors have been described by different names, there can be no doubt
that an Indian community has occupied this part of eastern North
Carolina continuously since John Herbert produced his map of the area
in 1725. The group has been undeniably present.
It has also been continuously present. Lumbee families can trace
their histories back to the Indians who lived along Drowning Creek at
the time of the American Revolution. The Lumbee Tribe has insisted on
its Native identity in the face of hostility and indifference,
petitioning when possible, rising up in armed resistance when
necessary, and always speaking with a Native voice and as members of an
ongoing Native entity.
The Tribe's recognition petitions and Dr. Campisi's history also
underscore that the Lumbees have been a self-governing community.
Obviously, because of the nature of their history they were never
called upon, like other tribes, to confront an advancing American
military column or treaty delegation. They were not commanded to
produce ``leaders'' as other groups were. Located in an isolated part
of one of the original thirteen colonies, the Lumbees faced myriad
local adversaries who encroached on their lands and resources but who
could be kept at bay by diplomacy, adaptation and, when necessary,
tactical retreat. Over the past two centuries, the community came to
organize its own extensive religious institutions, operate its own
school system (capped by the first Native American university in the
United States), and routinely represent itself before state and federal
legislatures.
Dr. Campisi's research on behalf of Lumbee recognition in the 1980s
and his history presented here have not been challenged. A large group
of Indians are permanent residents of Robeson County. They have been a
cohesive community for centuries and they have developed a series of
unique tribal institutions that have served their membership
brilliantly despite the constraints imposed by their unusual historical
experience. That history, as well as the petitions they have brought
the Congress today, present legislators with the task of reconciling
this indigenous community with our modern, democratic nation state. The
historical record is both clear and beyond reasonable dispute. Congress
has no honorable alternative but to act in response. The Lumbees'
petitions might be ignored--no one is forcing you to act--but even if
you fail to act positively on this legislation, the Lumbee history will
not be rewritten and the Lumbee Tribe will not surrender its identity.
It is also useful to consider S. 107 in the context of the history
of tribal recognition. In the past, the recognition of individual
tribes was a product of happenstance--tribes with diplomatic or
military dealings with the United States (usually in moments of
conflict) got ``recognized,'' while others who did not become the
objects of territorial expansion--such as those who were geographically
isolated (as in Alaska) or who inhabited isolated enclaves in
``settled'' areas--did not. Over time, these unrecognized groups,
particularly large ones like the Lumbees, became increasingly vocal,
demanding equal access to Federal assistance in the areas of education,
economic development and health care, as well as Federal protection
from hostile outsiders. The Lumbees gained state recognition in 1885
and began petitioning the Federal government for assistance three years
later. These petitions continued into the 1950s when first the state,
and then the Federal government acknowledged the Tribe under the name
``Lumbees,'' even though the Department of Interior opposed extending
services to it.
Nothing has changed in the historical record of the Tribe over the
past fifty years. The current legislation is not prompted by the
release of new documents or the discovery of new historical
information.
S. 107 is instead the product of Lumbee persistence--now a central
feature of their history--and shifting attitudes among the public and
Federal policymakers. As recently as the 1960s, tribes were viewed as
artifacts of the past, relics of a traditional way of life that would
soon disappear. For many in the Department of the Interior, tribes were
anachronistic institutions whose principal function was to receive
wasteful federal appropriations. In the 1950s, many politicians and
prominent officials in the Bureau of Indian Affairs came to embrace
this unfortunate idea and called for the adoption of a new policy goal:
the termination of the Federal government's relationship with tribes.
Led by Commissioner of Indian Affairs Dillon S. Meyer, and politicians
such as Utah Senator Arthur Watkins, the terminationists succeeded in
the 1950s and 1960s in winning passage of a congressional resolution
endorsing their goal. They also managed to secure legislation that
severed the Federal government's relationship with several tribes, most
prominently the Menominees of Wisconsin and the Klamath Tribe in
Oregon. This policy also found voice in the 1956 Lumbee Act with its
termination language, added at the request of the Department of the
Interior.
Opposition to termination arose quickly. Tribal leaders called to
arms by the leaders of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI)
were particularly outspoken. They argued that the new policy goal
represented a betrayal of the United States' commitment to the
``settled principles'' that had been the stated basis for federal
policy since 1789. The most effective protests occurred at
unprecedented inter-tribal gatherings in Washington, D.C. in 1954 and
in Chicago in 1961. Never before had so many tribal leaders gathered to
express themselves with one voice. As these protests proliferated, they
inspired the leaders of major tribes and the representatives of
unrecognized groups, to speak out. Among the latter were Lacey Maynor
of the Lumbees, and his daughter, Helen Schierbeck, both of whom became
leading opponents of termination.
While tribal protests blunted the momentum of termination during
the 1950s and 1960s, that policy goal was not entirely abandoned until
1970 when President Richard Nixon issued a ``Special Message on Indian
Affairs'' that called on Congress to ``break decisively with the past''
by adopting a policy of ``self-determination'' rooted in what the
President described as the ``solemn obligations which have been entered
into by the United States . . . [and] which carry immense moral and
legal force.'' Nixon's statement reflected a bipartisan commitment to
this new approach. His ``Special Message'' stated flatly that
termination was wrong and could not succeed. By focusing on ``self-
determination,'' Nixon declared, the United States would now turn
``from the question of whether the Federal government has a
responsibility to Indians to the question of how that responsibility
can best be fulfilled.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Richard
Nixon, 1970, 564-7; 575-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historians are often the first to point out that major ``turning
points'' are often little more than midpoints between other ``turning
points,'' but Nixon's 1970 declaration--which itself drew wide,
bipartisan support--marked the start of a period in which there was a
broad consensus that fulfilling the ``solemn obligations'' of the
United States to Native peoples should be carried out through policies
that were respectful of tribal traditions, supportive of tribal
governments, and sensitive to the vast diversity among Native tribes.
After 1970, tribes would no longer be viewed as inconvenient
anachronisms, but would become active partners in the administration of
Federal policy. Remarkably, despite political differences that have
continued over funding levels, the extent to which federal officials
should impose themselves in local conflicts, and how far the powers of
tribal governments might reach, there has been little dissent from the
idea that tribal governments should be central partners in the
administration of Federal policy, or from the expectation that tribes
will be permanent features of the governmental landscape. Tribes are
essential institutions in Indian education, health care, economic
development, social welfare and resource management. As Nixon
predicted, Federal agencies no longer debate whether to work in
partnership with tribes, but how to do so.
Lumbee recognition should be understood in the context of this
history of recent policy. The Lumbee Tribe seeks to link itself to the
United States through the ``settled principles'' of law and mutual
respect. The historical record provides a justification for this
linkage that is both persuasive and widely-accepted within the
scholarly community. And despite the deep political divisions of our
time, effective tribal governments are universally recognized as key to
the implementation of federal policy and the future of indigenous
peoples within the United States. This context makes a compelling case
for positive action on S. 107.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jim Owle, Chairman, Eastern Band of Cherokee
Indians Tribal Council
Chairman Murkowski, Vice Chair Schatz, and Members of the
Committee:
On behalf of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (Eastern Band), I
want to thank the Committee for holding a serious discussion on federal
recognition and for allowing the presentation of historical and
documentary evidence regarding the Lumbee group. I also want to
acknowledge the excellent testimony provided by Principal Chief Michell
Hicks, whose clear presentation of the issues reflects the gravity with
which the Eastern Band approaches this matter. I add my voice today in
full support of his testimony and to further underscore the principles
that guide our position.
For too long, this debate has been driven by political narratives,
assumptions about appearance, and misunderstandings about Cherokee
history--when what Indian Country deserves is clarity, accuracy, and
respect for tribal sovereignty.
The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians is one of the three federally
recognized Cherokee tribes, with a continuous documented history, a
land base, a government, and a treaty relationship with the United
States. I offer this testimony to reinforce the record and to ensure
that the Committee's understanding of our history and our concerns is
complete and firmly grounded in fact.
The Eastern Band's Responsibility in This Discussion
During the hearing, there were suggestions--implicitly and
explicitly--that the Eastern Band is somehow obstructing recognition or
casting ourselves as the antagonist in this debate. That portrayal is
simply false.
Our position is rooted in a principle every tribe depends on:
Federal recognition must be based on evidence.
The Eastern Band welcomes any group that can demonstrate, through
the same standards applied to every other tribe, that it meets the
criteria for federal acknowledgment. We do not oppose communities. We
oppose lowering the standards that protect all of Indian Country.
The record concerning the Lumbee is not ambiguous. The historical,
genealogical, and governmental documentation has been reviewed for
decades, and where evidence is required, the Lumbee claims are
inconsistent, unsupported, or directly contradicted.
Federal recognition is not an act of generosity. It is not a
political favor. It is one of the most significant legal determinations
the United States can make. Every tribal nation's sovereignty depends
on the integrity of that determination.
That is why the Eastern Band speaks--not in rivalry or animosity,
but in defense of a process that protects every tribal nation.
Cherokee History and the Status of the Eastern Band
Several comments during the hearing mischaracterized Cherokee
history and the relationship between our tribal nations. The Eastern
Band and the Cherokee Nation share ancestors, but we are distinct,
sovereign governments with separate and well-documented histories.
The Eastern Band did not break away from the Cherokee Nation. Our
ancestors remained in, returned to, or fought to stay in our homelands
after the Treaty of New Echota and the Trail of Tears. These families
reorganized under their own leadership, purchased land, and maintained
continuous political existence in the western region of present-day
North Carolina. Congress recognized the Eastern Band based on this
continuous history--because it existed, plainly and demonstrably, in
the record.
The Eastern Band is not subordinate to any other Cherokee tribe,
nor derivative of another tribe's recognition. We honor our shared
Cherokee origin while maintaining our own sovereignty, as the United
States has long acknowledged.
The Eastern Band takes care to represent Cherokee history
faithfully. We expect the same rigor when discussing the history of any
group seeking federal recognition.
Why Appearance Cannot Replace Evidence
One of the most alarming moments in the hearing occurred when a
Member of the Senate instructed tribal leaders to look at people seated
in the audience and judge whether they ``look Native.'' The Senator
then stated that he supports recognition because he sees ``Native
faces.''
That moment demonstrates precisely why the acknowledgment
regulations were created.
Indian identity is not determined by appearance.
It is not based on skin tone, facial features, or a lawmaker's
intuition.
The use of physical appearance to judge who is or is not Native is
a relic of ignorance and racial profiling in a period of deep bias
against non-white individuals. It has been proven to have no value in
determining tribal identity. Reducing Native identity to skin tone or
facial features would drag Indian Country back to an era when federal
agents and anthropologists measured noses, cheekbones, and skin color
in a misguided attempt to declare who was ``Indian enough.'' Those
practices were never grounded in truth, were thoroughly discredited
long ago, and have no place in modern federal decision-making.
The United States established a merit-based process at the strong
urging of the tribal nations through the National Congress of American
Indians because tribal identity must rest on continuous community,
continuous political authority, descent from a historical tribe, and
documentary evidence connecting the present to the past.
These are not technicalities. These are the safeguards that protect
every sovereign tribal nation from flawed decisions based on politics,
personal impressions, and stereotypes.
Requiring evidence is not disrespect. It is respect--respect for
all tribes, for the government-to-government relationship, for the law,
and for the truth.
Congressional Authority and the Question Before This Committee
Throughout the hearing, much emphasis was placed on Congress'
authority to recognize tribes. The Eastern Band does not and has never
disputed that authority. Congress has exercised it before and has the
power to do so again.
The question is not whether Congress can recognize a group. The
question is whether Congress should recognize a group when the evidence
does not support that conclusion.
The Lumbee have no identifiable historical tribe they can
demonstrate descent from, no continuous community, no continuous
political leadership across time, and a documentary record
overwhelmingly inconsistent with tribal existence.
Statements made in the hearing that the Lumbee were ``recognized''
in 1885 are also incorrect. The North Carolina legislature in 1885
acknowledged a name--''Croatan Indians''--based solely on self-
identification in a single county. State action of that kind cannot
create federal recognition, cannot establish tribal continuity, and
cannot substitute for historical documentation.
The Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) exists for precisely
these circumstances: when claims, documents, and histories must be
tested by experts with the training, methodology, and objective
standards. If a group meets those standards, it deserves recognition.
To legislate recognition in the absence of evidence would set a
precedent that risks the sovereignty of every federally recognized
tribe and undermines the credibility of the acknowledgment process that
Indian Country and the government-to-government relationship depend on.
The Cost Debate: The Issue Is Not Dollars--It Is Responsibility
During the hearing, some suggested that concerns raised by the
Eastern Band relate to how much it would cost to recognize another
tribe. That is not the issue.
The issue is not the cost of fulfilling the United States'
obligations to Tribal Nations. The issue is whether more than $2
billion in federal resources will be diverted away from legitimate
tribes still dealing with the generational consequences of federal
efforts to eradicate them--and instead sent to a group that has not
demonstrated Native ancestry, let alone descent from a historic tribe.
Trust obligations are not discretionary. They are rooted in
treaties, land cessions, removal, forced assimilation, and decades of
federal policy designed to destroy Native nations. Every dollar
appropriated for Indian Country exists because of those real,
documented histories.
And even today, those dollars are not enough. Tribes across the
country continue to struggle with the compounded impacts of those
historic harms--underfunded healthcare, chronic infrastructure
deficits, housing shortages, and the ongoing work of cultural and
language revitalization, among others. Redirecting billions in federal
Indian programs to a group that cannot meet the basic evidentiary
requirements of tribal existence is not a matter of compassion. It is a
matter of justice, responsibility, and the integrity of federal
obligations to tribes whose ancestors endured the full force of federal
policies aimed at their dispossession, destruction, and eradication.
If the Lumbee wish to access federal trust resources, they must
first demonstrate--through a merit-based process and evidentiary
criteria--that they are, in fact, a tribal nation.
Conclusion
The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians stands for truth, fairness,
and the protection of sovereignty across Indian Country. This debate is
not about emotion, rivalry, or political convenience. It is about
whether federal recognition remains grounded in evidence, history, and
law.
If any group believes it meets the federal criteria, the OFA
process is open to them. If they are a tribe, the process will show it.
If they meet the same criteria, we will welcome them wholeheartedly.
But Congress must not replace proof with politics. Native identity
is not a matter of appearance. It is not a matter of sympathy. It is
not a matter of state legislation. It is a matter of history, evidence,
and the sovereign-to-sovereign relationships that define tribal
nations.
Thank you for allowing me to submit this testimony. I am honored to
join Principal Chief Hicks in presenting the Eastern Band's unified
position, and we remain committed to working with all Members of this
Committee to defend tribal sovereignty, uphold the integrity of the
acknowledgment process, preserve the trust and treaty-based government-
to-government relationship between tribes and the United States, and
ensure that future generations inherit a system rooted in truth.
Sgi. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the U.S. Department of the Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this statement for the
record on S. 107, the Lumbee Fairness Act.
The Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, recognized by the State of
North Carolina since 1885, has sought federal recognition for more than
a century. In 1956, Congress enacted the Lumbee Act, which identified
the ``Lumbee Indians of North Carolina'' by name. The Act also
contained language regarding the Lumbee Tribe's eligibility for full
federal benefits and services that has been interpreted as creating a
statutory barrier to full participation in federal programs and
services benefitting a federally recognized Indian tribe, and as
precluding the Lumbee Tribe from pursuing federal acknowledgment
through the Department of the Interior's (Department) administrative
process under 25 C.F.R. Part 83.
On January 23, 2025, President Trump issued a Presidential
Memorandum to the Secretary of the Interior declaring that it is the
policy of the United States to support the full federal recognition of
the Lumbee Tribe, including the authority to access full federal
benefits and services. The Memorandum directed the Secretary of the
Interior to review all applicable authorities, in consultation with the
Lumbee Tribe, and submit to the President a plan to assist the Lumbee
Tribe in obtaining full federal recognition through legislation or
other available mechanisms. The Lumbee Tribe's leadership has continued
to express to the Department their strong preference for federal
recognition through an act of Congress over judicial action or the Part
83 process.
Federal recognition is a formal act by the United States government
confirming a tribe's existence as a distinct political entity and
establishing a government-to-government relationship between the tribe
and the federal government. Through federal recognition, the United
States recognizes tribal sovereignty with a tribe exercising its rights
of self-determination and self-governance over its peoples and
community.
Since 1978, the Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) has
administered the Part 83 process, and it has been recognized for being
thorough in its petition review. To date, the Department has granted
eighteen petitions and denied thirty-four petitions for federal
acknowledgment. Courts have unanimously upheld the Department's
authority to acknowledge tribes through the Part 83 process. In the
past, Congress has legislated federal recognition of Indian tribes in
unique statutory circumstances without undermining OFA's regulatory
role. For example, Congress has legislated to restore federal
recognition to tribes previously subject to legislation terminating
their relationship with the federal government. Legislative recognition
of the Lumbee Tribe would not alter the availability or integrity of
the Part 83 process for other groups. S. 107 is a case-specific
resolution that addresses the unique statutory circumstances created by
the 1956 Lumbee Act.
S. 107 would amend the 1956 Lumbee Act to extend federal
recognition to the Lumbee Tribe and make the members of Lumbee Tribe
eligible for all services and benefits provided by the federal
government to Indian tribes. Recognition of the Lumbee Tribe through S.
107 does not diminish the rights or status of currently federally
recognized Indian tribes. The bill also authorizes the Department to
acquire trust land for the benefit of the Lumbee Tribe within Robeson
County, North Carolina under 25 C.F.R. Part 151, designates a service
area for delivery of federal services and benefits, and clarifies the
extent of the State of North Carolina's criminal and civil jurisdiction
over lands occupied by the Lumbee Tribe. These latter provisions would
not be addressed in any Part 83 determination by the Department.
The Department is committed to upholding its trust and treaty
responsibilities to all Indian tribes and continues to strengthen
tribal sovereignty across Indian Country. The Department supports S.
107 as the most direct means to resolve ambiguities in the 1956 Lumbee
Act and federally recognize the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.
The Department appreciates the opportunity to provide this
statement for the record on S. 107, the Lumbee Fairness Act, and would
welcome the opportunity to work with the Sponsor and Committee on
ensuring effective implementation of the bill.
______
Shawnee Tribe
November 19, 2025
Hon. Lisa Murkowski, Chairman;
Hon. Brian Schatz,Vice Chairman,
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Re: History of the Recognition of the Shawnee Tribe
Dear Chairman Murkowski and Vice Chairman Shatz,
On behalf of the Shawnee Tribe, thank you once again for holding a
substantive hearing to examine S. 107, the ``Lumbee Fairness Act.'' I
write to supplement the record for the hearing conducted on November 5,
2025 hearing and to provide a fuller response to Senator Mullin's
question regarding the Shawnee Tribe's federal recognition and why
legislation was the appropriate--and only--path in our case, but not in
the case of the Lumbee group.
The Shawnee Tribe's path to federal recognition differs
fundamentally from the Lumbee situation for one simple reason: there
was--and still is--no process at the Office of Federal Acknowledgment
(OFA) for separating one federally recognized tribe from another. This
gap in federal law arose from unique historical circumstances created
by federal policy--not from any uncertainty about the Shawnee Tribe's
identity or existence. Because the OFA lacked jurisdiction to address a
situation in which a long-recognized Tribal Nation had been placed
within another Nation's federal framework, legislation was the only
lawful way to correct that structural problem.
Even so, Congress did not act without scrutiny. The Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs (SCIA) reviewed the Shawnee Tribe's history
using the same seven mandatory criteria that the OFA applies, including
the requirement for a 1960s-era document demonstrating continuity of
political authority. This Committee examined Shawnee treaties, federal
correspondence, agency reports, and internal governance records. The
conclusion was unequivocal: the Shawnee Tribe had always existed as a
distinct Tribal Nation with continuous leadership, community, and
political life.
The roots of this situation lie in the removal policies of the 19th
century. The Shawnee people were forced from their eastern homelands
through Ohio, Missouri, and Kansas. The ancestors of today's Shawnee
Tribe--known historically as the ``Loyal Shawnee'' or ``Cherokee
Shawnee''--entered the 1869 Shawnee-Cherokee Agreement, approved by
President Grant under the 1866 Cherokee Treaty. That agreement
relocated the Shawnee onto unoccupied lands within Cherokee Nation
territory, but it did not dissolve the Shawnee Tribe. Our people
maintained their own government, language, religious and ceremonial
life, and membership rolls. At no point did the United States question
who the Shawnee were or whether our treaties remained binding.
Congress formally recognized these truths in the year 2000 when it
passed the Shawnee Tribe Status Act (S. 3019), ``[t]o clarify the
Federal relationship to the Shawnee Tribe as a distinct Indian tribe,
to clarify the status of the members of the Shawnee Tribe, and for
other purposes.'' This was not a ``federal acknowledgment,'' as that
term is used in the law, but a clarification of a fact that had been
true since long before the Shawnee moved onto Cherokee Nation lands in
1869. There was never any question that the citizens of the Shawnee
Tribe were Indians descended from the historic Shawnee Tribe, whose
treaties with the United States remain in effect. Congress simply
expressed in statute the continued existence of the historic Shawnee
Tribe through its present citizens.
This history stands in stark contrast to the Lumbee situation. The
Shawnee case required legislation because OFA had no authority to
address a unique federal anomaly involving two already-recognized
Tribal Nations. The Lumbee case requires the opposite: a full
evidentiary review by OFA, because their historical, genealogical, and
political claims contain unresolved questions that only the federal
acknowledgment process can answer.
For the Shawnee, legislation corrected a federal structural
problem. For the Lumbee, legislation would bypass the only process
capable of establishing the truth.
Niyaawe.
Hon. Ben Barnes, Chief
______
November 10, 2025
Dear Senator(s)
My name is Celestine Wilson, and I am from Brooklyn, New York. I am
a descendant of the first-contact tribes of Cherokee, Catawba,
Rappahannock and Arawak peoples. I also have family connections to
relatives who have descended from the Lumbee people. Because of these
ties, I have witnessed firsthand how the Lumbee story stretches far
beyond North Carolina's borders and into communities in South Carolina,
Tennessee, and across the country.
The Lumbee are Urban American Indians with a continuous verifiable
heritage: their land ties, their families, their language, and their
lineal descendants remain intact. They deserve the opportunity to honor
their ancestry and identity without being marginalized or
disenfranchised.
Despite President Trump's directive on January 23, 2025, calling
for the advancement of Lumbee recognition, the Lumbee people continue
to face unequal and disparaging treatment. I respectfully ask that this
Committee fully support the Lumbee Fairness Act and ensure that the
Lumbee receive the recognition and rights they have long been owed.
Thank you,
Celestine Wilson
______
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of myself, Claudia Anderson, I submit this testimony in
strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full federal
recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President Donald J.
Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the need to
advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained-
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
My own Mattaponi grandmothers, Sarah Veney, and her daughter Rachel
Veney, sued for their freedom and won. My Veney ancestors exemplify the
deep historical continuity, kinship networks, and enduring survival of
our people through centuries of systemic misclassification and
exclusion. The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not only justice long
delayed but a necessary step toward correcting decades of inequity in
access to health, education, and sovereignty protections. I urge
Congress to act without delay to pass this legislation, thereby
honoring both the promise of federal trust responsibility and the self-
determination of the Lumbee people.
Respectfully submitted,
Claudia Anderson
______
Coalition of Large Tribes (COLT)
November 4, 2025
Hon. Lisa Murkowski, Chairman;
Hon. Brian Schatz,Vice Chairman,
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Chairman Murkowski and Vice Chairman Schatz:
I am writing this letter as Chairman of the Coalition of Large
Tribes (COLT). As you know, for a Tribe to be a member of COLT, the
tribe must govern a land base of 100,000 acres or more. Of the 574
Federally recognized tribes, only 52 Tribes meet these criteria and
those 52 tribes govern 95 percent of the land and resources. Simply
put, COLT is the leading voice for Large Land Base tribes nationwide.
I write to respectfully urge you carefully consider funding
additional Indian Country appropriations if the Committee advances the
Lumbee Fairness Act (S.107), which would extend federal acknowledgment
as a tribal nation to the Lumbee group in North Carolina and circumvent
the Office of Federal Acknowledgment administrative process at the U.S.
Department of the Interior. See Resolution: 08-16-2022, # 01-2022 (NN-
Twin Arrows), ``Resolution in Opposition to Federal or State
Recognition of the `Lumbee Tribe,' `MOWA Band of Choctaw,' or Any Other
Group Claiming to be a Tribal Nation that Seeks to Circumvent of the
Department of the Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA)
Process.''
We would also like to remind the Committee that Senator Tillis
grotesquely maligned tribal leaders in his November 21, 2024 floor
remarks with respect to S. 2088/H.R. 3371--Wounded Knee Massacre
Memorial and Sacred Site Act, which he blocked, creating significant
tensions between COLT tribes and Lumbee leaders. \1\ Senator Tillis'
statement on the floor expressing his disagreement with Lakota tribal
leaders as grounds to block dignity for Wounded Knee families was
wholly inappropriate. Likewise, Lumbees' subsequent support for his
behavior is repellent. That is simply not how tribes behave--
countenancing a massacre and withholding justice for women and children
as political convenience. Even knowing this, and while COLT's supports
the longstanding policy and clear rules implemented by OFA, we also
understand the specific history of the Lumbees, including that their
state recognition since 1885, the 1956 Lumbee Act (enacted at the
height of the Termination Era), and their longtime operation of tribal
services, such as education from 1885, make them uniquely positioned
for consideration for recognition by Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Wounded Knee is a stain on the dignity of Congress and a point
of extreme dishonor for the United States. On December 29, 1890,
unarmed men, women and children were massacred at Wounded Knee. In the
words of General Nelson Miles, on whose orders the Seventh Cavalry
pursued ailing Chief Spotted Elk and his people across the frozen
Plains and Badlands, his soldiers' actions constituted: ``the most
abominable criminal military blunder and a horrible massacre of women
and children.'' [DeMontravel, 1998, pp. 211-212]. Miles acknowledged,
``Every day we hear of poor women, little girls and boys and children
found dead and frozen to the ground, or crawling over the prairie, for
a distance of one hundred miles north and south.'' [p. 206]. Testifying
before the Commission on Indian Affairs in 1920, Miles said he
``regarded the whole affair as most unjustifiable and worthy of the
severest condemnation.'' [National Park Service].--Less than a year
after the Massacre, General Miles wrote in a letter dated November 20,
1891: ``Wholesale massacre occurred and I have never heard of a more
brutal, cold-blooded massacre than that at Wounded Knee. About two
hundred women and children were killed and wounded with little children
on their backs, and small children powder-burned by the men who killed
them being so near as to burn the flesh and clothing with the powder of
their guns and nursing babes with five bullet holes through them .''
[Letter to Baird]--Nonetheless, 20 U.S. soldiers were awarded Medals of
Honor for their murderous, terrorist actions at Wounded Knee. Medals of
Honor are awarded in the name of Congress. For a decade, COLT and
sister tribal organizations have been pursuing legislation to remove
the stain the Wounded Knee Medals of Honor visit on America, as well as
last Congress' S.2088/H.R. 3371--Wounded Knee Massacre Memorial and
Sacred Site Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
COLT requests that you closely analyze the cost of Lumbee
recognition to taxpayers, and if you vote affirmatively on S. 107, that
you also recommend appropriate funding additions to accompany what
would become the fifth or sixth largest tribe in the country by
population, rather than leaving such findings to the next
Appropriations cycle.
We have seen evidence that the cost of Lumbee recognition has been
underestimated by approximately $2 billion by the Congressional Budget
Office, including significant departures from CBO scores done
contemporaneously for Little Shell and the Virginia tribes. This
includes the CBO score going down while the Lumbee population has gone
up. But we have also seen evidence that underestimate may not be
accurate, inasmuch as the Lumbees already receive Indian Education, HUD
and LIHEAP funds and would not need new appropriations for those
programs. We also understand that the Lumbees' need for BIA services
might be much more limited because they do not have a reservation or
trust lands to administer. Further, we recognize that a newly-
recognized Tribe is not eligible for many programs until Congress
appropriates funding.
Yet, while some of the differences in CBO scoring may be explained
by the Lumbees' unique circumstances and their successful efforts to
inform the CBO, that is cold comfort to COLT member tribes' citizens to
whom the United States already grossly underfunds its solemn Treaty
obligations including healthcare, food and nutrition, and economic
development and who see the potential for a new tribe of perhaps 60,000
or more citizens to strain those scarce resources even more, with a
current CBO score of $1,275,000,000 for just BIA and IHS over five
years. These numbers are simply staggering to COLT tribes' citizens
when our tribes govern land bases the size of some states with far
fewer resources in very rural places. We look to the Committee to check
all the math and ensure that our Treaty obligations are fulfilled
irrespective of what other policy choices Congress might make with
respect to recognition of a new and very large tribe.
Very respectfully,
J. Garret Renville, Chairman
______
House Committee on Appropriations
November 5, 2025
Hon. Lisa Murkowski, Chairman;
Hon. Brian Schatz,Vice Chairman,
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Chairman Murkowski and Vice Chairman Schatz,
I wish to express my strong opposition to legislation that would
allow the Lumbee group in North Carolina to bypass the established
federal recognition process through the U.S. Department of the
Interior.
I am honored to represent North Carolina's 11th District, which
includes the aboriginal and modern-day homeland of the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians. This Tribal Nation is a cornerstone of our state's
heritage, rich with culture, language, and sovereignty that is a
treasure to the State of North Carolina and the United States. The
Eastern Band Cherokees are the descendants of those who courageously
fought to remain in their ancestral homeland when the federal
government sought to forcibly relocate them along the Trail of Tears.
The story of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians is a profoundly
American story, one of resilience, perseverance, and hope. It is out of
respect for their legacy and for all federally recognized tribes, that
I oppose efforts to circumvent the fair and rigorous process
established for federal recognition.
Today, a number of groups, such as the Lumbees, with no verifiable
indigenous ancestry falsely claim Cherokee history, language, and
culture as their own. The Lumbee group has sought federal
acknowledgment for over a century, and Congress has repeatedly chosen
not to act on Lumbee recognition due to concerns about the merits of
their claims. The Lumbee Tribe does not identify with any specific
historical tribe from which it claims descent and has not provided
genealogical evidence to substantiate such lineage. Additionally, they
do not have reservation land, a tribal language, or a single treaty
with the United States.
For nearly half a century, the Department of the Interior has
carried out a merit-based process sanctioned by Congress to make these
recognition determinations. The Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA)
process exists to safeguard both Indian country and the public by
ensuring that groups seeking this recognition can demonstrate verified
descent and meet historical criteria.
As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, we have funded
the Indian Health Service and other essential priorities for our tribal
communities in the recently approved FY26 bill. However, if the overall
tribal population eligible for these services were to expand by more
than 55,000 individuals, many of whom lack verified Native ancestry, it
would place an unsustainable strain on already limited resources. I am
deeply concerned that such an expansion would dilute the critical
support intended for federally recognized tribes and make it
increasingly difficult for appropriations to keep pace with genuine
need.
If the Lumbee group's case for federal recognition had merit, they
would follow the established OF A process, as required by law. Instead,
they have repeatedly sought special consideration from Congress and the
Administration, despite credible opposition by dozens of federally
recognized tribes.
I urge this Committee to ensure that the Lumbee group's claims are
evaluated by qualified experts through the proper administrative
process. Granting federal recognition to any group without rigorous
scrutiny undermines the integrity of the recognition process and the
responsibility owed to federally recognized tribes. We must keep
politics out of tribal recognition and ensure that such decisions are
based on merit and evidence, not political pressure or unverified
ancestry claims.
Sincerely,
Chuck Edwards, Member of Congress
______
District Heights, MD.
Dear Members of The Senate on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in Support of The Lumbee Fairness Act and the full Federal
Recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President Donald J.
Trump signed an Executive Order on November 12, 2020, in support of the
recognition for The Lumbee Indians, acknowledging their continuous
historical presence, cultural Identity, fairness, deca, education, and
have access to their OK Heritage and Governmental Organization. This
Executive action reinforced what scholars, state officials, and
generations of Lumbee descendants have a long maintained that The
Lumbees are an Indigenous Nation whose Heritage, language and
Governance merit the same Federal rights and protections as other
Federally Recognized Tribes.
I have Lumbee Ancestors Locklear, Cox, Cumbo, Revel to name a few
Surnames that are kin to the Lumbees and Tuscarora Ancestors.
Historical kinship of the Lumbee people Systematic Misclassification
and exclusion from Federal Protection and Recognition. The Lumbee
Fairness Act is justice for a decades long of inaccessibility to Indian
health, education and have access to their artifacts. Many
Misclassified American Indians like myself have inaccessibility to
Healthcare. We are asking at Urban Indian Heritage Society, that The
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and Congress pass this legislation.
Thank you for your Consideration,
Davita M. Carter
______
Greetings to the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
My name is Dr. Nolan L. Fontaine. This testimony is in regard to S.
107--the Lumbee Fairness Act. I am requesting that this be sent to
Congress for immediate action.
The Lumbee only continue to flourish and grow in numbers and
representation across state lines. They have the land and lineage and
they deserve all the liberties and privileges that other tribes
receive. In the past, and even currently, the Lumbee experience paper
genocide and misclassification. This must end full stop.
Specifically, the Lumbee should be able to partake in Indian Health
Service, Indian Education and any other federally-protected activities
whenever and wherever they are in these United States. We applaud
Senator Tillis for his steadfastness with advancing this bill for
Lumbees in North Carolina.
However, we know that as the traditional Cheraw people, they were
transient. They lived within the enclaves of both North and South
Carolina. It is imperative, now that the Lumbee inhabit all fifty (50)
states and DC, as Urban Indians, that they have accessibility to
aforementioned federal programs with no bureaucratic red-tape to delay
their progress. This needs to be resolved this 119th Congress.
Thank you for your attention to this serious matter within Indian
Country.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dr. Nolan L. Fontaine
______
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
I submit this testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness
Act and the full federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina. President Donald J. Trump's Executive Order of November 12,
2020, underscored the importance of advancing recognition for the
Lumbee people, affirming their enduring historical presence, cultural
identity, and organized governance. This action reaffirmed what
scholars, state leaders, and generations of Lumbee descendants have
consistently upheld--that the Lumbee are a sovereign Indigenous nation
whose heritage, language, and government warrant the same federal
acknowledgment, rights, and protections as those afforded to other
federally recognized tribes.
Thank you,
Francine Anderson
______
State of North Carolina--Office of the Governor
October 31, 2025
Hon. John Thune, Majority Leader;
Hon. Charles Schumer, Minority Leader,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Majority Leader Thune and Minority Leader Schumer:
I am writing to express my support for full federal recognition of
the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. Full federal recognition would
allow members access to the health care, education, housing, child
care, and disaster relief benefits afforded other tribes. These
benefits would in turn create economic opportunities for the tribe and
the surrounding community.
The history of the Lumbee Tribe in North Carolina long predates the
history of the State of North Carolina itself. The State of North
Carolina granted the Lumbee Tribe official recognition in 1885, and the
tribe began seeking federal recognition shortly thereafter. However,
the Lumbee Act of 1956 specifically denied the Lumbee the services and
benefits that every other federally recognized tribe receives,
hindering the tribe's efforts.
Some form of legislation to provide federal recognition to the
Lumbee has passed the House of Representatives nine times since 1974
but has never succeeded in the Senate, including the most recent
legislation, which the House passed on September 9, 2025. The history
of the Lumbee Tribe and of the State of North Carolina are intertwined;
so, too, are our futures. Therefore, I request that the Senate pass
legislation to confer the benefits of full federal recognition to the
Lumbee Tribe.
Sincerely,
Hon. Josh Stein, Governor
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society/First Tribe
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society/First Tribe, I
respectfully submit this testimony in strong support of the Lumbee
Fairness Act and the full federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of
North Carolina.
President Donald J. Trump's Executive Order reaffirmed the need to
advance recognition of the Lumbee people as a federally recognized
tribe, meeting the established Congressional standards and criteria for
approval.
As a registered Urban Indian of Mvskoke, Cherokee, and Seminole
lineage, I and we recognize that the Lumbee have endured centuries of
historical misclassification and administrative neglect. In my capacity
as an Elder of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, we have also
submitted a petition bearing over 10,000 verified signatures, many of
which are from individuals of Lumbee descent.
The Lumbee Fairness Act represents a long-overdue step toward
restoring justice and rightful recognition. We respectfully urge
Congress to act decisively and grant the Lumbee Nation the federal
acknowledgment they have long deserved.
Respectfully submitted,
Ishmael A. Bey
______
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained-
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
Respectfully submitted,
Jasmine ``Gator'' Humphries
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained--
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
Respectfully submitted,
Joshuah Grant
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee of Indian Affairs,
On the behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the Full Federal
Recognition of the Lumbee tribe of North Carolina. President Donald J
Trump signed an executive order on November 12th, 2020 in support of
the recognition for the Lumbee Indians, acknowledging their continuous
historical presence, cultural identity, and government organizations.
This executive action reinforced what scholars,State officials and
generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained that the Lumbee
are n Indigenous Nation whose Heritage, language and governance merit
the same Federal rights and protections as other Federally recognized
tribes.
In addition to my testimony a I would like to add that many other
Indigenous descendants where misclassified just like the Lumbee. My
Powhatan family was affected by Walter Pleckers 1929 Racial Integrity
Act which indicated that my family had to become Negro or colored
instead of Identifying as American Indian. I kindly urge you to allow
the Lumbees of their much overdue justice they deserve.
The Lumbee Fairness Act is justice for a decades long
inaccessability to lto Federal Recognition and Protections. The
Lumbeees need access to health services, education, and protections as
a Sovereign Nation. We are asking at Urban Indian Heritage Society,
that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and Congress Pass this
Legislation. Many misclassified American Indians like myself have
inaccessability to healthcare. We hope and pray that you consider this,
and pass this Act.
Thank you for your consideration,
Kenneth Brown II
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained-
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
My own Lumbee grandfather, ThomasTaylor, and our Tuscarora-Lumbee
ancestors, exemplify the deep historical continuity, kinship networks,
and enduring survival of our people through centuries of systemic
misclassification and exclusion. The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not
only justice long delayed but a necessary step toward correcting
decades of inequity in access to health, education, and sovereignty
protections. The Urban Indian Heritage Society urges Congress to act
without delay to pass this legislation, thereby honoring both the
promise of federal trust responsibility and the self-determination of
the Lumbee people.
Respectfully submitted,
Kyrus ``LeftfootedBlackwolf'' Fuller Williams
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained-
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not only justice long delayed
but a necessary step toward correcting decades of inequity in access to
health, education, and sovereignty protections. The Urban Indian
Heritage Society urges Congress to act without delay to pass this
legislation, thereby honoring both the promise of federal trust
responsibility and the self-determination of the Lumbee people.
Respectfully submitted,
Lloyd A Carty
______
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
I submit this testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness
Act and the full federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina. President Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12,
2020, affirmed the need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people,
acknowledging their continuous historical presence, cultural identity,
and governmental organization. This executive action reinforced what
scholars, state officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have
long maintained-that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose
heritage, language, and governance merit the same federal rights and
protections as other recognized tribes.
My own Mattaponi grandmothers, Sarah Veney, and her daughter Rachel
Veney, sued for their freedom and won. My Veney ancestors exemplify the
deep historical continuity, kinship networks, and enduring survival of
our people through centuries of systemic misclassification and
exclusion. The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not only justice long
delayed but a necessary step toward correcting decades of inequity in
access to health, education, and sovereignty protections. I urge
Congress to act without delay to pass this legislation, thereby
honoring both the promise of federal trust responsibility and the self-
determination of the Lumbee people.
Respectfully submitted,
Martia Anderson
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full federal
recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President Donald
Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the need to
advance recognition for the Lumbee, acknowledging their continuous
historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental organization.
This executive action reinforced what scholars, state officials, and
generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained- that the Lumbee
are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and governance merit
the same federal rights and protections as other recognized tribes.
The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not only justice long delayed
but a necessary step toward correcting decades of inequity in access to
health, education, and sovereignty protections. The Urban Indian
Heritage Society urges Congress to act without delay to pass this
legislation, thereby honoring both the promise of federal trust
responsibility and the self-determination of the Lumbee people.
Sincerely,
Nekeisha ``Indigo Sunflower'' Stanfield
______
Dear Honorable Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
My name is Pamela, and I am writing to express my full support for
the Lumbee Fairness Act and the long-overdue federal recognition of the
Lumbee people. This issue is deeply personal to my family. My uncle,
Johnny Chavis, is Lumbee and Catawba Indian, and our bloodline reflects
generations of Indigenous identity that has survived despite
misclassification, political neglect, and systemic erasure. I am also a
granddaughter of Powhatan ancestry, a reminder that our Indigenous
roots run deep across the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic.
For more than a century, the Lumbee people have been denied full
rights, resources, and recognition that other tribes receive as a
matter of fairness and law. Federal recognition would not only
strengthen one of the largest American Indian communities in the United
States but would also correct a longstanding injustice that has harmed
Lumbee families for decades. My relatives, my ancestors, and countless
Lumbee descendants deserve the same respect, protections, and
opportunities afforded to all federally recognized tribes.
I ask the Committee to support and advance the Lumbee Fairness Act
without delay. Recognition is not a gift; it is a rightful
acknowledgment of a people who have always existed, endured, and
contributed to this nation.
Thank you for your attention and your continued service.
Respectfully,
Pamela Hall
______
Good Afternoon,
I'm writing to you today to share my testimony to appeal the Lumbee
Fairness Act. I am Chief Robert Wayne Brooks, the son of Paul Brooks,
one of the Original 22 descendants of Tuscarora Indians determined to
be one-half degree or more blood quantum by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs in 1936. Under the Reorganization Act from 1934, we are listed
as the Siouan Indian Community of Lumber River. During this time the
state of NC voted against the act due to political friction without all
parties present. In 2006, a petition was filed with the Department of
Interior for land to be placed in Trust for the Original 22.
The Siouan Indians of Lumber River were incorporated in September
2013 and organized with by-laws in place.
At this time, we ask that you consider the below information prior
to making a decision on the Lumbee Fairness Act:
The Lumbees have attempted numerous times to self-identify
and claim ties to multiple tribes in the past.
The Lumbees lack the genelocial ties to indigenous
individuals in North Carolina
The Lumbees are attempting to acquire Tuscarora land that is
placed in a Trust back in mid 1930s
Let me know if you have additional questions.
Thank you,
Chief Robert Wayne Brooks
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained--
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
My own Lumbee grandfather, Aaron Locklear, and our Tuscarora-Lumbee
ancestors, exemplify the deep historical continuity, kinship networks,
and enduring survival of our people through centuries of systemic
misclassification and exclusion. The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not
only justice long delayed but a necessary step toward correcting
decades of inequity in access to health, education, and sovereignty
protections. The Urban Indian Heritage Society urges Congress to act
without delay to pass this legislation, thereby honoring both the
promise of federal trust responsibility and the self-determination of
the Lumbee people.
Respectfully submitted,
Tanisha ``Phoenix Moon'' West
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained--
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
My own Lumbee and our Tuscarora-Lumbee ancestors, the Harper's,
Spruill's and Browns of Kinston, Snow Hill and little Washington, NC
exemplify the deep historical continuity, kinship networks, and
enduring survival of our people through centuries of systemic
misclassification and exclusion. The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not
only justice long delayed but a necessary step toward correcting
decades of inequity in access to health, education, and sovereignty
protections. The Urban Indian Heritage Society urges Congress to act
without delay to pass this legislation, thereby honoring both the
promise of federal trust responsibility and the self-determination of
the Lumbee people.
Respectfully submitted,
Taryn Venisha Spruiell-Adkins
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Greetings to Chair Murkowski and Vice-Chair Schatz,
From the traditional Eastern Woodlands, we send ancestral
greetings. On behalf of the Lumbee Tribe, we are writing this
communique to express the direct action to move the Lumbee Fairness Act
to legislation within THIS 119th Congress.
We are Urban Indian Heritage Society. We are an organization that
researches and documents the epistemologies of American Indians and
their lineal descendants.
We are avid observers of U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.
Alas, even after President Trump's Executive Memorandum, the Lumbee
continue to face disparate treatment and institutional inter-tribal
retribution rooted in disenfranchisement. We demand that this changes
immediately and that all benefits & fairness be extended to the Lumbee
and their families.
Sen. Cortez-Masto discussed during the hearing two (2) pathways
forward--the administrative path through the Office of Federal
Acknowledgment or the legislative path where this committee refers this
senate bill to Congress. The Lumbee deserve a quick redress of their
grievances. Let's spare the bureaucratic rigmarole & get this done!
Be on the right side of history.
Happy America 250!
______
Urban Indian Heritage Society
Dear Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
On behalf of the Urban Indian Heritage Society, I submit this
testimony in strong support of the Lumbee Fairness Act and the full
federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. President
Donald J. Trump's Executive Order on November 12, 2020, affirmed the
need to advance recognition for the Lumbee people, acknowledging their
continuous historical presence, cultural identity, and governmental
organization. This executive action reinforced what scholars, state
officials, and generations of Lumbee descendants have long maintained--
that the Lumbee are an Indigenous nation whose heritage, language, and
governance merit the same federal rights and protections as other
recognized tribes.
My own cherokee grandfather Sam Hendrix passed down history about
our ancestors some to have been Lumbee and to always stay connected,
exemplify the deep historical continuity, kinship networks, and
enduring survival of our people through centuries of systemic
misclassification and exclusion. The Lumbee Fairness Act represents not
only justice long delayed but a necessary step toward correcting
decades of inequity in access to health, education, and sovereignty
protections. The Urban Indian Heritage Society urges Congress to act
without delay to pass this legislation, thereby honoring both the
promise of federal trust responsibility and the self-determination of
the Lumbee people.
Submitted by,
William Anderson
______
UTE INDIAN TRIBE
November 26, 2025
Hon. Lisa Murkowski, Chairwoman,
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Re: Opposition to S. 107, the Lumbee Fairness Act
Dear Chairwoman Murkowski:
We are duly elected officials of federally recognized large land-
based treaty tribes of the United States. As such we are independent
sovereign Nations with inherent sovereign authority: each of which can
prove a unique government-to-government relationship with the United
States.
For decades now this status and this government-to-government
relationship have been challenged. and we have withstood and defeated
those challenges at great and often painful cost. We have done so under
the closest scrutiny as a group of Indians can face in the federal
courts. from each of the three branches of state government, from the
various agencies of the United States, and from private entities. Some
of us have faced challenges to our sovereign status and legal rights.
from foreign governmental powers. Yet again, we have prevailed because
we can unquestionably prove who we are, what our legal and factual
status is, and what our relationship with the United States of America
is based upon. Even this Committee has faced questions as to why we are
much more than racial groups of Indians, and why we are entitled to a
unique status and receive unique preferences under federal law.
In short, we have all been able to prove, without doubt, that we
are not only the direct descendants of treaty signers, but we are also
individual tribal nations whose members have continued to interact both
socially and politically as citizens of a single independent, sovereign
tribal nation from treaty times until the present.
I write to you and your colleagues on the Senate Committee on
Indian Affairs on behalf of my Tribe to voice my concerns and
opposition to S. 107, also known as the Lumbee Fairness Act (``Act'').
Tribal recognition is the inherent right of tribes to self-govern, to
establish their own laws that govern membership. laws, religion, and
community. To be a federally recognized tribe inherently includes
tribal sovereignty and creates a federal trust responsibility, which
must be guarded at all costs.
Given the significance of federal recognition, my Tribe must oppose
the Lumbee Fairness Act. The recognition oflndian tribes, and thus
tribal sovereignty, is one of the United States' most solemn and
important obligations. Federal recognition of a tribe establishes a
special and unique government-to-government relationship between the
Federal government and an Indian tribe and creates significant legal
rights, responsibilities, and commitments.
To begin, the Tribe supports the federal recognition of Indian
tribes. However, the Tribe does not believe that federal recognition
should be subject to the legislative process and Congressional
politics. Partisan politics can prevent a deserving tribe from being
recognized or it can recognize an undeserving group with no indigenous
ties as a federally recognized tribe. Congress can create problems when
it tries to act on federal acknowledgement and tribal membership.
In one example, in 1954, Congress passed the Ute Partition Act
(UPA), which authorized 490 Tribal members known as ``mixed-bloods'' to
vote to terminate their Tribal status and relationship with the federal
government. In the UPA, Congress took action attempting to determine
Tribal membership of the ``mixed-bloods,'' and the problems are still
being dealt with by the Ute Indian Tribe as the unrecognized
descendants of these members still attempt to interfere with Tribal
governance. These problems were wholly preventable problems. The Lumbee
Fairness Act has no standards or minimum requirements for federal
recognition, and it requires the Secretary of Interior to acquire trust
lands without any explanation. Congress does not have the staff,
expertise, resources, or equipment to manage the recognition of Indian
tribes equitably.
Congress recognized this problem in 1975 when it created the
American Indian Policy Review Commission (``Commission'') to bring
fairness and legitimacy to the federal recognition process. Created
from the recommendations of the Commission. Congress delegated the
DOI--Office of Federal Acknowled gement (OFA) the management and
regulation of federal recognition. OFA uses expert anthropologists,
genealogists, historians, and attorneys to evaluate whether a
petitioning group comprises descendants from a historical Indian tribe
that has maintained existence to earn federal recognition. This
structured process shields decisions from political influence or undue
pressure and ensures equity, transparency, and consistency.
Similar to the UPA experience, the Lumbee Fairness Act attempts to
circumvent the OFA process and politicize tribal, federal recognition.
The Act simply amends the Lumbee Act, Pub. L. 84-570, to grant the
Tribe full Federal recognition without having gone through the
extensive findings that the OFA process would entail. The Lumbee Act
relied on ``tribal legend'' and that ``these people'' are ``proud of
their heritage'' as the basis of its findings to acknowledge the Lumbee
Tribe. These findings are not up to the same rigor and analysis that
the OFA process would analyze the Lumbee Tribe under.
It is our fear that the moment any group of Indians, claiming to be
a ``Tribe,'' cannot meet these standards under that level of scrutiny,
every other federally recognized tribe in the United States is
endangered. For this reason, we are forced to oppose the Congressional
and/or Executive Order recognition of the group calling itself the
Lumbee Indian Tribe.
The processes employed by the Office of Federal Acknowledgement are
far superior to anything that Congress can offer at this time. The
assertions made by the group calling itself the Lumbee Indian Tribe
must be scrutinized by experts and not automatically be taken at face
value by the Members of this Committee or by the Congress as a whole.
To do otherwise endangers us and every other federally recognized tribe
in the United States.
On Behalf of the Ute Tribal Business Committee:
Shaun Chapoose, Business Committee Chairman
______
*The following list of resolutions and letters from Federally
Recognized Tribes and Tribal entities that support Lumbee recognition
have been retained in the Committee files.*
Catawba Indian Nation
Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana
Oneida Nation of Wisconsin
Pascua Yaqui Tribe
Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
Chief Kevin Brown of the Pamunkey Indian Tribe
Rappahannok Tribe of Virginia
Chickahominy Indian Tribe of Virginia
Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy's Reservation
The Blackfoot Confederacy Chiefs
Hopi Tribe Chairman: Timothy L. Nuvangyaoma-
The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe
The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head Aquinnah
Chief of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma
The Narragansett Indian Tribe
A resolution from the Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes
The Native American Indian Association of Tennessee
The Native American House Alliance
Baltimore American Indian Center
Prominent NCAA Men's Basketball Head Coaches--Kelvin Sampson
and John Calapari
*The following list of additional resolutions and letters have been
retained in the Committee files.*
Kenaitze Indian Tribe--Resolution No. 2025-37--Opposing Federal
legislation that would circumvent the Department of the Interior's
Office of Federal Acknowledgement (OFA) process
2022 Winter Convention--Tulalip, Washington--RESOLUTION #2022 46--
Opposition to Federal or State Recognition of the Groups Claiming to be
a Tribal Nations that Seek to Circumvent the Department of the
Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) Process
INTER-TRIBAL COUNCIL OF NORTH EASTERN OKLAHOMA#2022-5--Opposition
to federal or state recognition of the ``Lumbee Tribe,'' ``MOWA Band of
Choctaw,'' or any other group claiming to be a tribal nation that seeks
to circumvent of the Department of the Interior's Office of Federal
Acknowledgment (OFA) process
Coalition of Large Tribes (COLT)--Resolution No. 08-16-2022
RESOLUTION #01-2022 Resolution in support of the ``Opposition to
federal or state recognition of the `Lumbee Tribe,' `MOWA Band of
Choctaw,' or any other group claiming to be a tribal nation that seeks
to circumvent of the Department of the Interior's Office of Federal
Acknowledgment (OFAl process'' and COLT opposition letter to ``Lumbee
Fairness Act,'' S. 521 and H.R. 1101 (Dec. 14, 2024
The INTER-TRIBAL COUNCIL of the FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES--A Resolution
Opposing Federal or State Recognition of Groups that Claim to be Tribal
Nations by Circumventing the Office of Federal Acknowledgement
Resolution No. 22-14
TRI-COUNCIL OF THE UNITED KEETOOWAH BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS THE
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS AND CHEROKEE NATION--Resolution # 3-
22--A RESOLUTION OPPOSING FEDERAL OR STATE RECOGNITION OF GROUPS THAT
CLAIM TO BE TRIBAL NATIONS AND SEEK TO AVOID OR CIRCUMVENT THE
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR'S OFFICE OF FEDERAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PROCESS
BLACKFEET NATION--Resolution No. 133-2023--Resolution in support of
the ``Opposition to federal or state recognition of the ``Lumbee
Tribe,'' ``MOW A Band of Choctaw,'' or any other group claiming to be a
tribal nation that seeks to circumvent the Department of the Interior's
Office of Federal Recognition Process.
GREAT PLAINS TRIBAL CHAIRMAN'S ASSOCIATION March 8, 2022 letter to
Please Preserve the Integrity of the Federal Acknowledgement Process
Opposition to the ``Lumbee Recognition Act'' (S. 1364) letter on
behalf of the United Indian Nations of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Texas
(UINOKT) 12/16/2021
GREAT PLAINS TRIBAL ASSOCIATION, INC.--letter asking acknowledgment
as a Tribal Nation to the Lumbees in North Carolina and circumvent the
Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) administrative process at the
U.S. Department of the Interior. December 4, 2020
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians/Shawnee Tribe letter requesting
that you defer consideration of groups seeking federal acknowledgment
to the Department of the Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgment
(OFA). March 10, 2022
FORT SILL--CHIRICAHUA--WARM SPRING--APACHE TRIBE letter Opposing
the ``Lumbee Recognition Act'' (S. 1364) January 5, 2022
Fort Belknap Indian Community--letter Opposing the ``Lumbee
Recognition Act'' (S. 1364) December 16, 2021
[all]