[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 8, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3683-S3684]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                         ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS

                                 ______


                             INDIAN ISSUES

 Mr. CAIN. Mr. President, last November's election signaled the end of 
business as usual on the part of the Federal Government. With the 
postelection talk of welfare reform and block grants, Indian country 
has been swept up by concern that the unique needs of Indian tribes 
will be ignored during the debate on block grants and welfare reform. 
Indeed, in the dozens of meetings I have had with tribal leaders over 
the past month, they have expressed concern that current block grant 
proposals in the Congress will diminish the already inadequate level of 
welfare and social service resources available to tribes and their 
members. I understand these concerns because, as a practical matter, 
tribal governments have been routinely shut out of the policy debates 
and kept away from the table when major policy decisions are made.
  What is most frustrating, however, is that during the past 2 months I 
have heard statements that are premised solely on the notion that 
promoting block grants implies that the new majority in Congress 
intends to diminish the trust responsibility that the Congress and the 
administration have toward American Indians and Alaska Natives, and 
that the majority intends to use reform to undermine tribal sovereignty 
and the government-to-government relationship between the United States 
and Indian tribes. I find it unfortunate that there are those who would 
choose to spread this message of impending doom rather than work 
constructively and creatively to find ways to include tribal 
governments in the current debate.
  Mr. President, let me set the record straight. I do not believe any 
Member of this body, Republican or Democrat, would deliberately and 
purposefully seek to diminish the benefits that various Federal 
programs have provided for individual Indians and Indian tribes. In 
fact, I believe that the new Congress has the potential for offering a 
rare opportunity for Indian tribes to reshape how the Federal 
Government has dealt with them. The primary reason we are undertaking 
welfare and block grant reform is to enhance the control of local 
governments over these programs. This rationale is quite similar to the 
Federal-Indian policies I have continuously promoted for Indian tribal 
governments since the beginning of my tenure on the Senate Committee on 
Indian Affairs.
  As the chairman of the committee, I will continue to advance Federal 
policies that are intended to enhance the control of tribal governments 
over Federal programs. Therefore, I intend to do everything I can to 
ensure two 
[[Page S3684]] things--first, that tribes are not swept aside as we 
reform the welfare system. And second, that any block grants support, 
rather than undermine, the unique role that tribal governments have in 
the Federal system.
  In order to accomplish these goals I intend to advocate for the 
provision of direct Federal funding to Indian tribes for programs 
otherwise under consideration for consolidation into Federal block 
grants. I will promote direct funding for tribal governments through 
tribal block grants. To do otherwise would be inconsistent with the 
Federal Government's legal and fiduciary obligations to Indian tribes. 
Direct Federal grants to tribes, bypassing the State governments, is 
consistent with the government-to-government relationship between the 
Indian tribes and the Federal Government.
  At present, in most Federal welfare programs, more often than not, 
State governments use Indian population figures to justify higher 
levels of Federal funding. But no matter how much Federal money a State 
gets, tribal members continue to experience inequity in the quality and 
quantity of services available under State administered programs. What 
is most shocking is the fact that, despite the piles upon piles of 
existing Federal regulations requiring State government accountability 
in operating welfare programs, there are literally no requirements to 
ensure that tribal populations receive an equitable share of these 
Federal funds. The only excuse given by State government administrators 
for this inequity is that administering programs for tribal populations 
is problematic and more costly because of the remoteness of many tribal 
communities. If this is indeed the case, States should embrace, not 
oppose, a new approach that vests in tribal governments the Federal 
funds and flexible authorities necessary to carry out these 
responsibilities.
  I know that there are some tribal and State governments which have 
established cooperative working relationships under the present 
Federal-State arrangement despite the legal and structural impediments 
to such relationships. There are also many tribal governments which are 
either too small or unable to administer specific federally funded 
programs. Many of these tribes have to
 rely on State governments to administer these programs for their 
tribal members. In these instances, Indian tribal governments should 
have the opportunity to use the Federal funding to contract with a 
State government to administer programs for tribal members.

  Many tribal governments have the ability to administer these and many 
other federally funded programs. Many are eager to do so. As with State 
governments, excessive Federal regulations have hindered tribal 
governments in their efforts to administer these programs to serve 
their communities. For this reason, in the current legislative efforts 
to reform welfare and other social service programs, tribal governments 
seek changes that will provide direct Federal funding to them along 
with reductions in regulatory burdens so that administrative costs are 
diminished and tribal innovation and flexible authority is increased.
  Indian tribal members have long received direct services from a 
variety of State administered programs. More than 1.1 percent of all 
Indian people have received State-administered Aid to Families With 
Dependent Children [AFDC]. The Head Start Program has had a successful 
track record of serving Indian children and families living in 
proverty. The Job Opportunity Basic Skills [JOBS] and Job Training 
Partnership Act [JTPA] programs have helped to improve the lives of 
thousands of Indians by providing training and employment opportunities 
both on and off reservation communities. Therefore, I believe it is 
imperative that the Congress outline a clear role for tribal 
governments in the block grant and welfare reform debates. Consider, 
for a moment, the certain result of failure if we do not include tribal 
governments as part of the solution.
  Mr. President, under the Constitution, Congress has plenary power to 
prescribe the Nation's Indian policy. Over the past 2 centuries 
Congress has poorly exercised that power, developing inconsistent or 
contradictory policies which over time have wasted or misdirected 
millions upon millions of scarce Federal dollars. More importantly, the 
periodic contortions in Federal Indian policy have had grave 
consequences for American Indian people.
  I believe Congress has finally begun to make significant strides in 
improving its dealings with the Indian tribes. Last year, by passing 
the Indian Self-Determination Act amendments and making the Tribal 
Self-Governance Demonstration project permanent, Congress clearly set a 
new course. This new direction offers two key principles that should 
likewise guide all welfare reform and block grant efforts: (1) Provide 
direct Federal funding to tribes, in recognition of the government-to-
government relationship; and (2) affirm the right of tribes to choose 
to administer their own programs or to use their funds to contract with 
States to administer programs according to tribal design.
  I am convinced that these principles must be the cornerstone of a 
viable and fiscally sound Federal policy that will prove to be 
beneficial to individual Indians and Alaska Natives who have been so 
critically underserved by Federal-State arrangements. I firmly believe 
that this policy is wholly consistent with the goal of shifting funds, 
power, responsibility, and accountability for such programs to local 
governments, like Indian tribes, which are closest to the people to be 
served. In addition, I am sure that many tribal leaders will agree with 
me that all programs currently claiming to serve Indian people should 
be scrutinized to find ways to cut administrative waste and enhance 
local tribal government control and flexible tribal administration.
  Finally, Mr. President, I must remind those who spread fear that the 
conditions of Native Americans and their tribal governments will 
greatly suffer under a Republican-controlled Congress: Indian issues 
are neither Republican nor Democratic. They are unique, human issues 
which call for understanding and cooperation on both sides of the 
aisle. I believe it both wrong-minded and counterproductive to suggest 
that the new majority party intends to place Native American tribes in 
some new or greater peril. The far more constructive approach would be 
to work, in a nonpartisan manner, to adapt the new directions being 
discussed in the Congress to the unique needs and arrangements that 
have characterized the best Federal-Indian relations, and that uphold 
the unique moral and constitutional relationship we have with Indian 
tribes--that of direct, government-to-government dealings between each 
tribe and the United States.


                          ____________________