[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 141 (Friday, October 9, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12266-S12268]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    MISSISSIPPI SIOUX TRIBES JUDGMENT FUND DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 1998

  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar No. 708, S. 391.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 391) to provide for the disposition of certain 
     funds appropriated to pay judgment in favor of the 
     Mississippi Sioux Indians, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate 
consideration of the bill?
  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, 
which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs, with an 
amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu 
thereof the following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Mississippi Sioux Tribes 
     Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1998''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Covered indian tribe.--The term ``covered Indian 
     tribe'' means an Indian tribe listed in section 4(a).
       (2) Fund account.--The term ``Fund Account'' means the 
     consolidated account for tribal trust funds in the Treasury 
     of the United States that is managed by the Secretary--
       (A) through the Office of Trust Fund Management of the 
     Department of the Interior; and
       (B) in accordance with the American Indian Trust Fund 
     Management Reform Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.).
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (4) Tribal governing body.--The term ``tribal governing 
     body'' means the duly elected governing body of a covered 
     Indian tribe.

     SEC. 3. DISTRIBUTION TO, AND USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS BY, THE 
                   SISSETON AND WAHPETON TRIBES OF SIOUX INDIANS.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including 
     Public Law 92-555 (25 U.S.C. 1300d et seq.), any funds made 
     available by appropriations under chapter II of Public Law 
     90-352 (82 Stat. 239) to the Sisseton and Wahpeton Tribes of 
     Sioux Indians to pay a judgment in favor of those Indian 
     tribes in Indian Claims Commission dockets numbered 142 and 
     359, including interest, that, as of the date of enactment of 
     this Act, have not been distributed, shall be distributed and 
     used in accordance with this Act.

     SEC. 4. DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS TO TRIBES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Amount distributed.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to section 8(e) and if no action 
     is filed in a timely manner (as determined under section 
     8(d)) raising any claim identified in section 8(a), not 
     earlier than 365 days after the date of enactment of this Act 
     and not later than 415 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary shall transfer to the Fund Account to 
     be credited to accounts established in the Fund Account for 
     the benefit of the applicable governing bodies under 
     paragraph (2) an aggregate amount determined under 
     subparagraph (B).
       (B) Aggregate amount.--The aggregate amount referred to in 
     subparagraph (A) is an amount equal to the remainder of--
       (i) the funds described in section 3; minus
       (ii) an amount equal to 71.6005 percent of the funds 
     described in section 3.
       (2) Distribution of funds to accounts in the fund 
     account.--The Secretary shall ensure that the aggregate 
     amount transferred under paragraph (1) is allocated to the 
     accounts established in the Fund Account as follows:
       (A) 28.9276 percent of that amount shall be allocated to 
     the account established for the benefit of the tribal 
     governing body of the Spirit Lake Tribe of North Dakota.
       (B) 57.3145 percent of that amount, after payment of any 
     applicable attorneys' fees and expenses by the Secretary 
     under the contract numbered A00C14202991, approved by the 
     Secretary on August 16, 1988, shall be allocated to the 
     account established for the benefit of the tribal governing 
     body of the Sisseton and Wahpeton Sioux Tribe of South 
     Dakota.
       (C) 13.7579 percent of that amount shall be allocated to 
     the account established for the benefit of the tribal 
     governing body of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the 
     Fort Peck Reservation in Montana, as designated under 
     subsection (c).
       (b) Use.--Amounts distributed under this section to 
     accounts referred to in subsection (d) for the benefit of a 
     tribal governing body shall be distributed and used in a 
     manner consistent with section 5.
       (c) Tribal Governing Body of Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes 
     of Fort Peck Reservation.--For purposes of making 
     distributions of funds pursuant to this Act, the Sisseton and 
     Wahpeton Sioux Council of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes 
     shall act as the governing body of the Assiniboine and Sioux 
     Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation.
       (d) Tribal Trust Fund Accounts.--The Secretary of the 
     Treasury, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Interior, 
     acting through the Office of Trust Fund Management of the 
     Department of the Interior, shall ensure that such accounts 
     as are necessary are established in the Fund Account to 
     provide for the distribution of funds under subsection 
     (a)(2).

     SEC. 5. USE OF DISTRIBUTED FUNDS.

       (a) Prohibition.--No funds allocated for a covered Indian 
     tribe under section 4 may be used to make per capita payments 
     to members of the covered Indian tribe.
       (b) Purposes.--The funds allocated under section 4 may be 
     used, administered, and managed by a tribal governing body 
     referred to in section 4(a)(2) only for the purpose of making 
     investments or expenditures that the tribal governing body 
     determines to be reasonably related to--
       (1) economic development that is beneficial to the covered 
     Indian tribe;
       (2) the development of resources of the covered Indian 
     tribe;
       (3) the development of programs that are beneficial to 
     members of the covered Indian tribe, including educational 
     and social welfare programs;
       (4) the payment of any existing obligation or debt 
     (existing as of the date of the distribution of the funds) 
     arising out of any activity referred to in paragraph (1), 
     (2), or (3);
       (5)(A) the payment of attorneys' fees or expenses of any 
     covered Indian tribe referred to in subparagraph (A) or (C) 
     of section 4(a)(2) for litigation or other representation for 
     matters arising out of the enactment of Public Law 92-555 (25 
     U.S.C. 1300d et seq.); except that
       (B) the amount of attorneys' fees paid by a covered Indian 
     tribe under this paragraph with funds distributed under 
     section 4 shall not exceed 10 percent of the amount 
     distributed to that Indian tribe under that section;
       (6) the payment of attorneys' fees or expenses of the 
     covered Indian tribe referred to in section 4(a)(2)(B) for 
     litigation and other representation for matters arising out 
     of the enactment of Public Law 92-555 (25 U.S.C. 1300d et 
     seq.), in accordance, as applicable, with the contracts 
     numbered A00C14203382 and A00C14202991, that the Secretary 
     approved on February 10, 1978 and August 16, 1988, 
     respectively; or
       (7) the payment of attorneys' fees or expenses of any 
     covered Indian tribe referred to in section 4(a)(2) for 
     litigation or other representation with respect to matters 
     arising out of this Act.
       (c) Management.--Subject to subsections (a), (b), and (d), 
     any funds distributed to a covered Indian tribe pursuant to 
     sections 4 and 7 may be managed and invested by that Indian 
     tribe pursuant to the American Indian Trust Fund Management 
     Reform Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.).
       (d) Withdrawal of Funds by Covered Tribes.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), each covered 
     Indian tribe may, at the discretion of that Indian tribe, 
     withdraw all or any portion of the funds distributed to the 
     Indian tribe under sections 4 and 7 in accordance with the 
     American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act (25 U.S.C. 
     4001 et seq.).
       (2) Exemption.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the 
     requirements under subsections (a) and (b) of section 202 of 
     the American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act (25 
     U.S.C. 4022 (a) and (b)) and section 203 of such Act (25 
     U.S.C. 4023) shall not apply to a covered Indian tribe or the 
     Secretary.
       (3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in paragraph (2) may be 
     construed to limit the applicability of section 202(c) of the 
     American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act (25 U.S.C. 
     4022(c)).

     SEC. 6. EFFECT OF PAYMENTS TO COVERED INDIAN TRIBES ON 
                   BENEFITS.

       (a) In General.--A payment made to a covered Indian tribe 
     or an individual under this Act shall not--
       (1) for purposes of determining the eligibility for a 
     Federal service or program of a covered Indian tribe, 
     household, or individual, be treated as income or resources; 
     or
       (2) otherwise result in the reduction or denial of any 
     service or program to which, pursuant to Federal law 
     (including the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 301 et seq.)), 
     the covered Indian tribe, household, or individual would 
     otherwise be entitled.
       (b) Applicability.--Section 304 of Public Law 92-555 (25 
     U.S.C. 1300d-8) shall apply to any funds distributed under 
     this Act.

     SEC. 7. DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS TO LINEAL DESCENDANTS.

       (a) In General.--Subject to section 8(e), the Secretary 
     shall, in the manner prescribed in section 202(c) of Public 
     Law 92-555 (25 U.S.C. 1300d-4(c)), distribute to the lineal 
     descendants of the Sisseton and Wahpeton Tribes of Sioux 
     Indians an amount equal to 71.6005 percent of the funds 
     described in section 3, subject to any reduction determined 
     under subsection (b).
       (b) Adjustments.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to section 8(e), if the number of 
     individuals on the final roll of lineal descendants certified 
     by the Secretary under section 201(b) of Public Law 92-555 
     (25 U.S.C. 1300d-3(b)) is less than 2,588, the Secretary 
     shall distribute a reduced aggregate amount to the lineal 
     descendants referred to in subsection (a), determined by 
     decreasing--
       (A) the percentage specified in section 4(a)(B)(ii) by a 
     percentage amount equal to--
       (i) .0277; multiplied by
       (ii) the difference between 2,588 and the number of lineal 
     descendants on the final roll of lineal descendants, but not 
     to exceed 600; and
       (B) the percentage specified in subsection (a) by the 
     percentage amount determined under subparagraph (A).
       (2) Distribution.--If a reduction in the amount that 
     otherwise would be distributed under subsection (a) is made 
     under paragraph (1), an amount equal to that reduction shall 
     be added to the amount available for distribution under 
     section 4(a)(1), for distribution in accordance with section 
     4(a)(2).

[[Page S12267]]

       (c) Verification of Ancestry.--In seeking to verify the 
     Sisseton and Wahpeton Mississippi Sioux Tribe ancestry of any 
     person applying for enrollment on the roll of lineal 
     descendants after January 1, 1998, the Secretary shall 
     certify that each individual enrolled as a lineal descendant 
     can trace ancestry to a specific Sisseton or Wahpeton 
     Mississippi Sioux Tribe lineal ancestor who was listed on--
       (1) the 1909 Sisseton and Wahpeton annuity roll;
       (2) the list of Sisseton and Wahpeton Sioux prisoners 
     convicted for participating in the outbreak referred to as 
     the ``1862 Minnesota Outbreak'';
       (3) the list of Sioux scouts, soldiers, and heirs 
     identified as Sisseton and Wahpeton Sioux on the roll 
     prepared pursuant to the Act of March 3, 1891 (26 Stat. 989 
     et seq., chapter 543); or
       (4) any other Sisseton or Wahpeton payment or census roll 
     that preceded a roll referred to in paragraph (1), (2), or 
     (3).
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) In general.--Section 202(a) of Public Law 92-555 (25 
     U.S.C. 1300d-4(a)) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding the table--
       (i) by striking ``, plus accrued interest,''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``plus interest received (other than 
     funds otherwise distributed to the Sisseton and Wahpeton 
     Tribes of Sioux Indians in accordance with the Mississippi 
     Sioux Tribes Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1998),'' after 
     ``docket numbered 359,''; and
       (B) in the table contained in that subsection, by striking 
     the item relating to ``All other Sisseton and Wahpeton 
     Sioux''.
       (2) Roll.--Section 201(b) of Public Law 92-555 (25 U.S.C. 
     1300d-3(b)) is amended by striking ``The Secretary'' and 
     inserting ``Subject to the Mississippi Sioux Tribes Judgment 
     Fund Distribution Act of 1998, the Secretary''.

     SEC. 8. JURISDICTION; PROCEDURE.

       (a) Actions Authorized.--In any action brought by or on 
     behalf of a lineal descendant or any group or combination of 
     those lineal descendants to challenge the constitutionality 
     or validity of distributions under this Act to any covered 
     Indian tribe, any covered Indian tribe, separately, or 
     jointly with another covered Indian tribe, shall have the 
     right to intervene in that action to--
       (1) defend the validity of those distributions; or
       (2) assert any constitutional or other claim challenging 
     the distributions made to lineal descendants under this Act.
       (b) Jurisdiction and Venue.--
       (1) Exclusive original jurisdiction.--Subject to paragraph 
     (2), only the United States District Court for the District 
     of Columbia, and for the districts in North Dakota and South 
     Dakota, shall have original jurisdiction over any action 
     brought to contest the constitutionality or validity under 
     law of the distributions authorized under this Act.
       (2) Consolidation of actions.--After the filing of a first 
     action under subsection (a), all other actions subsequently 
     filed under that subsection shall be consolidated with that 
     first action.
       (3) Jurisdiction by the united states court of federal 
     claims.--If appropriate, the United States Court of Federal 
     Claims shall have jurisdiction over an action referred to in 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Notice to Covered Tribes.--In an action brought under 
     this section, not later than 30 days after the service of a 
     summons and complaint on the Secretary that raises a claim 
     identified in subsection (a), the Secretary shall send a copy 
     of that summons and complaint, together with any responsive 
     pleading, to each covered Indian tribe by certified mail with 
     return receipt requested.
       (d) Statute of Limitations.--No action raising a claim 
     referred to in subsection (a) may be filed after the date 
     that is 365 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (e) Special Rule.--
       (1) Final judgment for lineal descendants.--
       (A) In general.--If an action that raises a claim referred 
     to in subsection (a) is brought, and a final judgment is 
     entered in favor of 1 or more lineal descendants referred to 
     in that subsection, section 4(a) and subsections (a) and (b) 
     of section 7 shall not apply to the distribution of the funds 
     described in subparagraph (B).
       (B) Distribution of funds.--Upon the issuance of a final 
     judgment referred to in subparagraph (A) the Secretary shall 
     distribute 100 percent of the funds described in section 3 to 
     the lineal descendants in a manner consistent with--
       (i) section 202(c) of Public Law 92-555 (25 U.S.C. 1300d-
     4(c)); and
       (ii) section 202(a) of Public Law 92-555, as in effect on 
     the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Final judgment for covered indian tribes.--
       (A) In general.--If an action that raises a claim referred 
     to in subsection (a) is brought, and a final judgment is 
     entered in favor of 1 or more covered Indian tribes that 
     invalidates the distributions made under this Act to lineal 
     descendants, section 4(a), other than the percentages under 
     section 4(a)(2), and subsections (a) and (b) of section 7 
     shall not apply.
       (B) Distribution of funds.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the issuance of a final judgment referred to in 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall distribute 100 percent 
     of the funds described in section 3 to each covered Indian 
     tribe in accordance with the judgment and the percentages for 
     distribution contained in section 4(a)(2).
       (f) Limitation on Claims by a Covered Indian Tribe.--
       (1) In general.--If any covered Indian tribe receives any 
     portion of the aggregate amounts transferred by the Secretary 
     to a Fund Account or any other account under section 4, no 
     action may be brought by that covered Indian tribe in any 
     court for a claim arising from the distribution of funds 
     under Public Law 92-555 (25 U.S.C. 1300-d et seq.).
       (2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall 
     be construed to limit the right of a covered Indian tribe 
     to--
       (A) intervene in an action that raises a claim referred to 
     in subsection (a); or
       (B) limit the jurisdiction of any court referred to in 
     subsection (b), to hear and determine any such claims.

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, S. 391, the Mississippi Sioux Judgment 
Fund Distribution Act is a bill intended to resolve a longstanding 
problem with respect to a judgment fund distribution to Sisseton and 
Wahpeton tribes in the Dakotas and Montana. The bill would distribute 
an additional 7.1 percent of the funds, plus accrued interest, awarded 
by the Indian Claims Commission in 1967 to the Sisseton and Wahpeton 
Mississippi Sioux Tribes. This legislation is cosponsored by Senators 
Baucus, Burns, Conrad, Daschle, and Johnson.
  In 1972, Congress enacted legislation that authorized the Secretary 
of the Interior to distribute 75 percent of the $5.9 million judgment 
award to the Devils Lake Sioux Tribe of North Dakota (now known as the 
Spirit Lake Tribe), the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe of North and 
South Dakota, and the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Council of the 
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation in Montana. 
The remaining 25 percent was to be distributed to individuals who could 
trace their lineal ancestry to a member of the aboriginal Sisseton and 
Wahpeton Mississippi Sioux, the predecessor to the three modern-day 
tribal entities. The judgment was compensation for the 27 million acres 
of land taken from this aboriginal tribe in the 19th century.
  Congress made the decision to allocate 25 percent of the original 
judgment to the lineal descendants at the urging of the Department of 
the Interior. The Department, in 1972, felt that historical events 
warranted a departure from precedent which was to make awards to tribes 
and not to individuals. In fact, the 1967 Indian Claims Commission 
judgment awarded compensation only to the successor tribes to the 
aboriginal Sisseton and Wahpeton Mississippi Sioux tribe, not to 
individual lineal descendants.
  The three Sisseton and Wahpeton tribes received their respective 
shares of the judgment award by the mid-1970's. To date, though, the 
funds allocated for the lineal descendants have not been distributed. 
This has resulted in a situation where the accrued interest on the 
original principle of approximately $1.5 million has now grown to more 
than $15 million.
  If the 1,988 lineal descendants identified to date by the Department 
of the Interior receive the $15 million in per capita payments, they 
would receive more than 18 times what the 11,829 enrolled members 
received in the 1970's. Moreover, since these identified lineal 
descendants comprise only 14 percent of the total number of tribal and 
non-tribal member descendants, the 25 percent allocated for lineal 
descendants in the 1972 act would permit each lineal descendant to 
receive almost twice as much as did the enrolled tribal members who 
were compensated in the 1970's, not counting interest.
  In 1987, the three Sisseton and Wahpeton tribes filed suit in federal 
court to challenge the constitutionality of the lineal descendancy 
provisions of the 1972 Act. When this legislation failed, in 1997 the 
tribes filed a new suit in federal court challenging these provision on 
constitutional grounds. This second suit is currently on appeal. In 
1992, Congress enacted legislation which authorized the Attorney-
General to settle these cases on any terms agreed to by the parties 
involved. However, the Department of Justice has refused to proceed 
with any settlement negotiations and has taken the position that the 
1992 law did not authorize the Department to settle these cases on any 
terms other than those laid out in the original 1972 act. While I 
believe that this interpretation flies in the face of congressional 
intent, the Department has been unwilling to pursue the issue.
  S. 391 represents a reasonable solution to this matter and a 
substantial compromise on the part of the tribes. In the past, the 
tribes have sought complete repeal of the lineal descendancy provisions 
of the 1972 act.

[[Page S12268]]

In 1986, a bill was reported out by the Select Committee on Indian 
Affairs which would have achieved this goal. The Department of the 
Interior supported this bill, explaining in a letter to the then 
Chairman of the Select Committee: ``As a general rule, we believe that 
each distribution of the Indian judgment funds should benefit the 
aggrieved historic tribe for which the award was made. If the historic 
tribe is no longer in existence, we believe that judgment funds should 
be programmed, to the greatest extent possible, to the present-day 
successor tribe(s) to the historic tribe.''
  In this Congress, the tribes supported legislation that would have 
retained the undistributed principal for the lineal descendants and 
distributed the accrued interest to the three tribes. S. 391, as 
originally introduced, adopted this approach. H.R. 976, an identical 
bill introduced in the House, passed last year.
  After the House acted on this legislation, the Senate Committee on 
Indian Affairs held a hearing last October on H.R. 976 and another 
hearing last July on an S. 391 substitute. The bill before us today is 
the product of exhaustive negotiations between the parties involved and 
the subject of frequent consultations between congressional staff and 
representatives of the Departments of Interior and Justice that 
occurred in the past 12 months. Every effort has been made to consider 
and accommodate the concerns of these Departments while making sure 
that the tribes receive an additional distribution of at least 7.1 
percent of the judgment award.
  While I believe that this legislation is a fundamentally fair 
solution to a problem that has remained unsolved for 30 years and that 
would persist for many more years without congressional intervention, 
none of the parties is entirely satisfied with the legislation. The 
tribes accept the legislation for what it provides but continue to 
maintain that they have a constitutional right to all of the 
undistributed funds. Certain persons seeking lineal descendant status 
have alleged that this legislation deprives them of their property.
  Because it is in the best interests of the United States and the 
other parties to bring an end to this problem, the bill provides that 
if the lineal descendants do not challenge the constitutionality of the 
bill's distribution to the tribes within one year following enactment, 
they are barred from bringing such a challenge in the future. On the 
other hand, if the lineal descendants do bring a timely challenge to 
the tribal distribution, the bill provides that the tribes have a right 
to intervene to challenge the constitutionality of the distribution 
made to lineal descendants. This provision would enable a federal court 
to finally and conclusively determine on the merits the respective 
constitutional claims of these parties and permanently put to rest what 
has been an endless legal dispute.
  Even after these legal disputes are settled, the Department of the 
Interior will continue, pursuant to a federal court order, to identify 
new lineal descendants who did not receive adequate notice in the 
1970's of their right to participate in the judgment distribution. I am 
concerned about the determination of eligibility to participate of any 
newly identified lineal descendants. The 1972 act requires that 
eligibility be based on an individual's ability to trace ancestry to a 
lineal ancestor who was a member of the Sisseton and Wahpeton 
Mississippi Sioux Tribe. In their litigation the tribes alleged that 
only 65 of the 1,988 identified lineal descendants met this 
requirement. The government did not contradict this allegation but 
argued that the issue was irrelevant because the 1972 act allows the 
Secretary to identify ancestors on 20th century rolls. S. 391 changes 
this provision of the 1972 act to require the use of rolls as 
contemporaneous as possible to the existence of the aboriginal Sisseton 
and Wahpeton Mississippi Sioux Tribe in order to assure, consistent 
with the 1972 act, that a specific lineal ancestor from that tribe can 
be identified. Finally, it bears reemphasizing that the reason for this 
legislation is to correct an injustice suffered by the three tribes as 
a result of the 1972 act. The tribes, not individuals, were wronged by 
the taking of 27 million acres of treaty-protected lands owned by their 
aboriginal predecessor. In my view, in 1972 no amount of the judgment 
awarded for the taking of these lands should have been allocated to 
lineal descendants. Allocations to lineal descendants from Indian 
Claims Commission judgments long ago became a discredited policy and 
were generally abandoned. However, since 26 years have passed since the 
enactment of the 1972 act, I believe that the lineal descendants should 
receive a portion of the judgment. S. 391 would distribute about 30% of 
the undistributed funds to the tribes and about 70% to the unaffiliated 
lineal descendants.
  This split of the undistributed funds would equalize the distribution 
between tribal lineal descendants and the non-tribal member class of 
lineal descendants. Capping the non-tribal member class at 600 persons 
more than the 1,988 already identified lineal descendants was the 
method the Committee adopted for calculating the percent of the 
undistributed funds to be allocated to lineal descendants regardless of 
the final identified number. The split is not an attempt to achieve 
perfect parity among all lineal descendants, both tribal members and 
non-tribal members. I recognize that there is some chance that the 
final identified number of lineal descendants may exceed 2,588. 
Whatever the final number may be, those lineal descendants will equally 
share the 70% allocation.
  However, the distribution split is justified because the tribes 
should be the primary beneficiaries of the judgment they won after 17 
years of litigation before the Indian Claims Commission. They were 
under compensated in the 1972 act based on their numbers and it is 
important that these judgment funds, to the greatest extent possible, 
be used to support tribal government programs and services. Moreover, 
the split is based on actual identified lineal descendants plus a 
reasonable additional number who may be identified in the future and 
represents a reasonable and long overdue resolution of this issue.
  Finally, I want to clarify the intent of a portion of subsection (f) 
of section 8, a subsection added to S. 391 in the last few days. The 
reference in subparagraph (2)(B) of that subsection to ``any such 
claims'' includes any claim that may be brought in intervention by a 
covered Indian tribe.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt S. 391.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee 
substitute amendment be agreed to, bill as amended be considered read 
the third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table and that any statements relating to the bill appear at this point 
in the Record.
  The committee amendment was agreed to.
  The bill (S. 391), as amended, was considered read the third time, 
and passed.

                          ____________________