[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 102 (Wednesday, June 21, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8821-S8824]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. HUTCHISON:
  S. 951. A bill to commemorate the service of First Ladies Jacqueline 
Kennedy and Patricia Nixon to improving and maintaining the Executive 
Residence of the President and to authorize grants to the White House 
Endowment Fund in their memory to continue their work; to the Committee 
on Energy and Natural Resources.


    the white house endowment fund memorial grant authorization act

 Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, throughout our history as a 
nation the White House has served as a public 
[[Page S 8822]] symbol of the President and the Federal Government. 
During countless wars and national crises, we have looked to the White 
House for leadership.
  The growth of our country, and the growth of its importance in the 
world, has caused the number of visitors and the demands on the 
Executive Residence of the President--the White House--to grow 
substantially. Over 1.5 million people visit the White House annually; 
it's the only Executive Residence in the world that is regularly open 
to the general public.
  Eventually the burden of constant use and the neglect of our 
historical treasures left the White House in disrepair. Until recently 
the White House was not maintained as a public building suitable for 
exhibiting our heritage and culture to the public.
  In 1961, First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy initiated the White House 
Historic Preservation Program. The program's goals were to restore the 
historic integrity of the public rooms of the White House; to establish 
a fine and decorative arts collection; and to establish the White House 
Historical Association to publish and distribute educational materials 
describing the White House and its history.
  Later that decade First Lady Pat Nixon provided new leadership by 
overseeing the most extensive acquisition of fine and decorative arts 
in the history of the White House. Her plan for refurbishment of the 
public rooms remains intact after more than 20 years.
  The fine and decorative arts donated to the White House during the 
leadership of Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Nixon, valued today at tens of 
millions of dollars, far exceed those received during all other modern 
Presidential administrations combined.
  With over 1.5 million visitors annually, the Executive Residence's 
public rooms need constant care and complete refurbishing every 8 to 10 
years. To maintain the collection of fine arts, historic pieces must be 
acquired, loaned works must be acquired, reproductions need to be 
replaced, and repairs need to be made.
  First Lady Barbara Bush established the White House Endowment Fund in 
1990 to create a permanent endowment of $25,000,000 to maintain the 
public rooms and collection of the White House. Although substantial 
contributions have been received from the public, additional funds are 
needed to complete the endowment.
  Over the past 2 years we have lost Jacqueline Kennedy and Patricia 
Nixon, who were among the finest First Ladies that have served our 
country. In recognition of their service in preserving and improving 
the White House, and in their memory following their recent deaths, 
today I am introducing legislation to authorize a memorial grant to the 
White House Endowment Fund to continue preservation activities at the 
White House.
  First Ladies Jacqueline Kennedy and Patricia Nixon devoted much of 
their service to preserving and improving the White House. They made it 
a national showplace of American history, fine arts, and decorative 
arts. Bestowing this honor on Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Nixon would be in 
accord with the well-established congressional precedent by which a 
grateful nation recognizes noteworthy and enduring contributions to the 
public interest with memorial gifts. I hope all Senators will join me 
in recognizing their work and in preserving it for the future by 
supporting this bill.
                                 ______

      By Mr. LIEBERMAN:
  S. 952. A bill to prohibit the taking of certain lands by the United 
States in trust for economically self-sufficient Indian tribes for 
commercial and gaming purposes, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Indian Affairs.


               the indian trust lands reform act of 1995

   Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation 
today to return some common sense to one aspect of the Federal 
Government's policies regarding Indian lands. My bill, the Indian Trust 
Lands Reform Act of 1995, arises out of a problem we have been 
struggling with in Connecticut for the last couple years, but which, 
given the explosive growth in Indian gaming, other States will soon 
likely face as well.
  The bill would amend the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 to 
reinforce its original purpose--helping Indian tribes and individual 
Indians hold on to or obtain land they need to survive economically and 
ultimately support themselves. Congress passed the 1934 act after the 
landholdings of some tribes had dwindled down to acres. Tribes and 
their members were selling and losing land to foreclosures, tax 
arrearages, and the like.
  The 1934 act gave the Secretary of the Interior the authority needed 
to help tribes hold on to or acquire land on which they could earn a 
living and, further, to hold those lands in trust for them so they 
would not be sold or otherwise lost. Once land is taken in trust by the 
United States for a tribe through this process, it becomes part of the 
tribe's sovereign lands and is no longer within the jurisdiction of 
State or local governments or subject to taxation or zoning controls.
  The 1934 act specifically provides the Secretary of the Interior with 
the authority, ``in his discretion, to acquire, through purchase, 
relinquishment, gift, exchange, or assignment, any interest in lands * 
* * for the purpose of providing land for Indians.'' The legislative 
history of the 1934 act and that specific provision makes clear that 
Congress' purpose was ``to provide for the acquisition, through 
purchase, of land for Indians, now landless, who are anxious to make a 
living on such land. * * *'' and ``to meet the needs of landless 
Indians and of Indian individuals whose landholdings are insufficient 
for self-support.'' Senate Report No. 1080, 73d Congress, 2d Session 1-
2 (1934).
  Economic conditions for most tribes have improved since 1934 through 
a variety of commercial, agricultural, and other enterprises, but many 
are still struggling. Few could be described as rich or even 
comfortable; far too many still live in poverty. The 1934 act should be 
available to help those tribes who still need assistance from the 
Federal Government in attaining economic self-sufficiency.
  Since the passage of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 1988, of 
course, many tribes have established casinos and gambling operations. 
Some have been very successful, others less so. One of the most 
successful gambling casinos in the country is located in eastern 
Connecticut and is owned and operated by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe. 
The success of the tribe's Foxwoods Casino has been well-chronicled. 
Established in 1992, the casino has been open 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-
week every since. Whatever one thinks about the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act or gambling, either morally or as a vehicle for economic 
growth, the Mashantucket Pequots seized the opportunity presented to 
them by the Indian Gaming Act. They have developed an extraordinarily 
successful, well-run casino in record time. In 1994, annual casino 
revenues for the 300-member tribe were said to exceed $800 million. By 
any measure, the tribe has become very wealthy.
  Given the tribe's financial success, it is not at all surprising that 
it has chosen to use some of those gambling revenues to buy more land 
near its
 reservation in order to expand upon its success. According to press 
accounts, the tribe owns over 3,500 acres outside of the boundaries of 
the reservation, in addition to the 1,229 acres that is held in trust 
on its behalf within the reservation, and is now the largest private 
landowner in southeastern Connecticut. Tribal leaders have at various 
times talked of building a massive theme park, golf courses, and hotels 
on the land it owns outside the reservation. The tribe owns that land 
in fee simple, like any other property owner and so is free to develop 
it like any other property owner might.

  Nevertheless, the tribe has chosen to apply to the Department of the 
Interior under the 1934 act to have some of that land taken in trust on 
their behalf. The 1934 act is on the books and available, with 
limitations, to all federally recognized tribes. The benefits are 
enormous--tax-free land that is not subject to any State or local 
zoning or land-use laws.
  Their efforts have paid off. In 1992, 27 acres in the neighboring 
towns of Ledyard and Preston were taken into trust by the Department of 
Interior for the tribe at its request. In January 1993, the tribe filed 
an application to have an additional 248 taken in trust. The legal and 
policy justifications for that request, as well as the earlier 1992 [[Page S 
8823]] trust acquisition, were immediately challenged by the affected 
towns of Ledyard, North Stonington, and Preston. Nevertheless, that 
request was granted this May by the Department of Interior, subject to 
certain conditions regarding the land's development and pending 
resolution of lawsuits filed by the towns and the Connecticut attorney 
general. In March 1993, the tribe applied to have 1,200 more acres 
taken in trust. That request was denied because of legal deficiencies 
in the application. Reapplication by the tribe is possible. Past 
statements by tribal leaders suggest that more applications may be 
filed.
  The effect of these decisions--by the tribe and the Department of the 
Interior--has been unsettling, to say the least, on the tribe's 
neighbors--the residents of the small towns that border the 
reservation. Once the United States takes land into trust on behalf of 
a tribe, as it has done here, boundaries change permanently. That land 
is no longer within the jurisdiction of the State or local governments. 
It is not subject to local zoning, land-use or environmental controls. 
Taxes cannot be collected on the land or on any business operated on 
the land. And State and local governments may exercise no police powers 
on the land unless invited by the tribe to do so.
  Given the vast financial resources of the tribe and the apparent 
willingness of the Department of Interior to take land into trust on 
their behalf regardless of any evidence that the tribe needs additional 
trust lands, many residents in the tribes wonder, as do I, where this 
will all end. I simply do not see any policy justification for the 
United States to change the boundaries of three Connecticut towns 
unilaterally so that an extraordinarily wealthy tribe--this one or any 
other--can expand its gaming or other business enterprises, free of 
taxes and local land-use controls, particularly when that tribe is 
perfectly capable of expanding its businesses on the thousands of trust 
and nontrust land it presently owns. It strains credulity to think that 
Congress intended in 1934 that the law would be used in this fashion.
  The authority for the Department of Interior to grant the tribe's 
request is now subject to review in the courts. The courts will have to 
decide whether the 1934 act even applies to this tribe and, if so, 
whether the Secretary acted properly. The courts will have to decide as 
well whether the 1983 Mashantucket Pequot Settlement Act independently 
prohibits trust acquisition by the tribe outside of reservation 
boundaries.
  To avoid future disputes and controversy, my bill would amend the 
Indian Reorganization Act to return to its original purpose. It would 
prohibit the Secretary of Interior from taking any lands located 
outside of the boundaries of an Indian reservation in trust on behalf 
of an economically self-sufficient Indian tribe, if those lands are to 
be used for gaming or any other commercial purpose. It directs the 
Secretary of Interior to determine, after providing opportunity for 
public comment, whether a tribe is economically self-sufficient and to 
develop regulations setting forth the criteria for making that 
determination generally. Among the criteria that the Secretary must 
include in those regulations to assess economic self-sufficiency are 
the income of the tribe, as allocated among members and compared to the 
per capita income of citizens of the United States, as well as the role 
that the lands at issue will play in the tribe's efforts to achieve 
economic self-sufficiency.
  My bill does not affect the ability of the Secretary to assist tribes 
that genuinely need additional land in order to move toward or attain 
economic self-sufficiency. Moreover, the bill contains explicit 
exemptions for the establishment of initial reservations for Indian 
tribes, whether accomplished through recognition by the Department of 
Interior or by an act of Congress, and
 in circumstances where tribes once recognized by the Federal 
Government are restored to recognition.

  Mr. President, many residents of Connecticut applaud the success that 
the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe has had with its Foxwoods Casino. The 
tribe employs thousands of Connecticut residents in an area of the 
State that was hard-hit by a lingering recession and cuts in defense 
spending. The tribe's plans for economic development of the region, 
while not universally liked, have many in the area genuinely excited 
about future opportunities.
  I have discovered though that even among residents cheered by the 
tribe's success and supportive of its plans, there is a strong sense of 
unfairness about how the ``land in trust'' process is being used. They 
believe there is absolutely no reason why this tribe, or any other in a 
similar situation, needs to have the U.S. Government take additional, 
essentially commercial land in trust on the tribe's behalf outside of 
its reservation boundaries. What is at stake here, afterall, is not 
preserving a culture or achieving self-sufficiency, but expansion of an 
already successful business on lands which are owned by the tribe and 
developable by them, as they would be by any other landowner. Extra 
help is simply not needed, and continuing to grant it is unjust and, in 
my view, ultimately counterproductive for all involved.
  It is time for Congress to make this common sense clarification in 
the law. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
legislation, and ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill appear 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 952

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Indian Trust Lands Reform 
     Act of 1995''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION AGAINST TAKING CERTAIN LANDS IN TRUST FOR 
                   AN INDIAN TRIBE.

       Section 5 of the Act of June 18, 1934 (commonly known as 
     the ``Indian Reorganization Act of 1934'') (48 Stat 935; 25 
     U.S.C. 465) is amended--
       (1) in the first undesignated paragraph, by striking ``The 
     Secretary of the Interior'' and inserting ``Except as 
     provided in the following paragraph, the Secretary of the 
     Interior''; and
       (2) by inserting after the first undesignated paragraph the 
     following new undesignated paragraphs:
       ``Except with respect to lands described in the following 
     paragraph, the Secretary of the Interior may not take, in the 
     name of the United States in trust for use for any commercial 
     purpose (including gaming, as that term is used in the Indian 
     Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.)) by an 
     economically self-sufficient Indian tribe, any land that is 
     located outside of the reservation of that Indian tribe as of 
     the date of enactment of the Indian Trust Lands Reform Act of 
     1995. The Secretary of the Interior shall, after providing 
     notice and an opportunity for public comment, determine 
     whether an Indian tribe is economically self-sufficient for 
     purposes of this paragraph. The Secretary of the Interior 
     shall promulgate regulations pursuant to section 553 of title 
     5, United States Code, to prescribe the criteria that shall 
     be used to determine the economic self-sufficiency of an 
     Indian tribe under this paragraph. The criteria described in 
     the preceding sentence shall include a comparison of the per 
     capita allocation of the gross annual income of an Indian 
     tribe (including the income of all tribal enterprises of the 
     tribe) among members of the tribe with the per capita annual 
     income of citizens of the United States, and shall include 
     the potential contribution of the lands at issue as trust 
     lands toward efforts of the tribe to achieve economic self-
     sufficiency.
       ``The immediately preceding paragraph shall not apply with 
     respect to any lands that are taken by the Secretary of the 
     Interior in the name of the United States in trust for the 
     establishment of an initial reservation for an Indian tribe 
     under applicable Federal law, including the establishment of 
     an initial reservation by the Secretary of the Interior in 
     accordance with an applicable procedure of acknowledgement of 
     that Indian tribe, or as otherwise prescribed by an Act of 
     Congress. Neither shall the immediately preceding paragraph 
     apply to any lands restored to an Indian tribe as the result 
     of the restoration of recognition of that Indian tribe by the 
     Federal Government.''.
  By Mr. CHAFEE (for himself, Ms. Moseley-Braun, Mr. Simon, Mr. 
Campbell, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Pell):
  S. 953. A bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins 
in commemoration of black Revolutionary War patriots; to the Committee 
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.


  THE BLACK REVOLUTIONARY WAR PATRIOTS COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT OF 1995

 Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senator 
Moseley-Braun, as well as Senators Simon, Campbell, Pell, and Thompson, 
I am introducing the black Revolutionary [[Page S 8824]] War patriots 
commemorative coin legislation.
  In 1986, Congress approved construction of a memorial celebrating the 
lives of more than 5,000 African-Americans who served, fought, and died 
during our Nation's Revolutionary War. Ironically, many of these brave 
Americans had never experienced the freedom and independence for which 
they fought.
  As a Rhode Islander, it gives me particular pleasure to sponsor this 
legislation. As few Americans know, of the estimated 5,000 African-
Americans who served in the Continental Army, the vast majority were 
from New England, and a great number were from my State of Rhode 
Island. In fact, in 1778, Rhode Island approved the first slave 
enlistment act and the Black Regiment of Rhode Island was formed. This 
was one of only two all black regiments. The other was the Bucks of 
America of Boston.
  Not only did these men serve our Nation, they served with 
distinction. Regrettably throughout our history, their valor has been 
overlooked. Men like Jack Sisson of Rhode Island, who expertly steered 
one of five boats involved in the daring capture of British Maj. Gen. 
Richard Prescott at Newport in 1777, are barely mentioned in historical 
reports of the incident.
  Jack Sisson went on to join a regiment of some 200 black soldiers 
from my State, who, at the battle of Rhode Island, held their ground 
against several fierce attacks by British-Hessian forces, thereby 
allowing six American brigades to retreat. With scant training, but 
abundant courage, the First Rhode Island Regiment inflicted casualties 
of six to one on the professional troops of the Redcoats.
  Like African-American soldiers throughout the colonies, however, the 
soldiers of Rhode Island's First Regiment faced tragedy as well as 
triumph. In May 1781, the unit suffered a surprise attack by the 
British cavalry at Pines Bridge, and 40 soldiers lost their lives. Two 
years later, the regiment was disbanded unceremoniously in Oswego, NY. 
According to the historian John Harmon, the soldiers were told to find 
their own way home, and many died while making the trip. Further, 
despite the promise of freedom which had been made in order to entice 
them to enlist, some of the soldiers were actually reenslaved after 
their return.
  Valor and fortitude in battle always are worthy of celebration, but 
they are especially inspiring when one takes into account the hostility 
and oppression that African-American soldiers faced from the Nation for 
which they fought. As Harriet Beecher Stowe observed,

       They served a nation which did not acknowledge them as 
     citizens and equals. . . It was not for their own land they 
     fought, but for a land that enslaved them. Bravery under such 
     circumstances, has particular beauty and merit.

  A portion of the proceeds from sales of the coin my legislation will 
authorize will help to pay for construction of the memorial. The 
Patriots Foundation already has raised $4 million for this purpose, and 
these additional funds are crucial if the memorial is to be completed.
  The design for the black Revolutionary War patriots memorial has been 
approved. It will be a 90-foot-long, 7-foot high, curved bronze wall 
located some 300 feet from the Vietnam Memorial in Constitution Gardens 
between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial. Figures of 
black soldiers will be sculpted in high and low relief and a black 
granite arch will be inscribed with historical information.
  Nancy Johnson has introduced companion legislation in the House of 
Representatives, and it is my hope that this proposal will receive 
speedy approval by both bodies.
                                 ______

      By Mr. HATFIELD (for himself and Mr. Moynihan):
  S. 954. A bill to authorize the Architect of the Capitol to establish 
a Capitol Visitor Center under the East Plaza of the United States 
Capitol, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.


          the capitol visitor center authorization act of 1995

 Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, it is my great pleasure to 
introduce a bill that will make the U.S. Capitol more accessible to the 
American people. Over the past 200 years the U.S. Capitol has become 
more than a mere monument or museum. It is a living space, housing both 
Chambers of Congress, and hosting hundreds of thousands of visitors 
from across the globe annually. Today the U.S. Capitol Building stands 
as a symbol of our American ideals of liberty and freedom as much as it 
did on September 18, 1793, when President Washington laid the first 
stone into the ground.
  Mr. President, the Capitol Visitor Center Authorization Act of 1995 
upholds our Nation's original commitment to citizen involvement in 
government by providing Americans with enhanced opportunities to 
witness their government at work. Located under the East Plaza of the 
U.S. Capitol, this new addition would ease visitor access to the 
Capitol, allowing the ever-increasing number of visitors to enter more 
quickly and efficiently. Visitors will also be treated to informative 
displays about the Capitol as they proceed underground to enter the 
building. And anyone who has ever visited Washington, DC in the summer 
or winter will greatly appreciate the importance of providing visitors 
with relief from the elements.
  In this period of scrutinizing government expenditures and balancing 
the budget, it is important to note that funding for the visitors 
center would come primarily from private gifts and donations. 
Contributions would be held in the U.S. Treasury under a separate 
account.
  Mr. President, above all, this historic legislation should be enacted 
because it fulfills the intent of the U.S. Capitol Building by further 
opening it up to the American people. The visitors center would be an 
educational facility to be enjoyed for many years to come. It is my 
pleasure to introduce this important legislation and I thank the senior 
Senator from New York, Senator Moynihan, for joining me as an original 
cosponsor.


                          ____________________