[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 146 (Wednesday, October 14, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S12589]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT AMENDMENTS

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I rise to speak in support of the passage of H.R. 
2000, a bill to amend the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to make 
certain clarifications to the land bank protection provisions, and for 
other purposes, and I hope it will be sent on its way to the President 
for his signature.
  A measure similar to H.R. 2000 was passed by the Senate Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee on September 24, of last year. S. 967 
contained the majority of the provisions in H.R. 2000.
  One of the most important provisions in H.R. 2000 is section 6 which 
implements a land exchange with the Calista Corporation, an Alaska 
Native regional corporation organized under the authority of the Alaska 
Native Claims Settlement Act. This exchange, originally authorized in 
1991, by P.L. 102-172, would provide for the United States to acquire 
more than 200,000 acres of Calista and village corporation lands and 
interests in lands within the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge in 
southwestern Alaska.
  The Refuge serves as an important habitat and as a breeding and 
nesting ground for a variety of fish and wildlife, including numerous 
species of migratory birds and waterfowl. As a result, the Calista 
exchange will enhance the conservation and protection of these vital 
habitats and thereby further the purpose of ANCSA and the Alaska 
National Interest Lands Conservation Act.
  In addition to conservation benefits, this exchange will also render 
much needed economic benefit to the Yupik Eskimo people of southwestern 
Alaska. The Calista region is burdened by some of the harshest economic 
and social conditions in the Nation. As a result of this exchange, the 
Calista Corporation will be better able to make the kind of investments 
that will improve the region's economy and the lives of the Yupik 
people. In this regard, this provision furthers and carries out the 
underlying purposes of ANCSA.
  This provision is, in part, the result of discussions by the various 
interested parties. As a result of those discussions, a number of 
modifications were made to the original package of lands offered for 
exchange.
  Mr. President, it is past time to move forward with this exchange.
  Another section of this bill I wanted to comment on is a provision 
that was not included in the technical amendments I introduced but that 
was added in the House.
  Section 12 of this bill expressly authorizes and confirms the 
original intent of ANCSA in 1971: that ANCSA corporations could provide 
health, education and welfare benefits for Alaska Natives, including 
those persons who were their shareholders.
  This provision is necessary because one recent Alaska Supreme Court 
case has concluded that an ANCSA corporation had liability to its 
shareholders under Alaska state law for a cash payment benefits 
program. The program at issue in that case was limited to the persons 
reached a certain age. Given the narrowness of this program, it was not 
consistent with the intent of ANCSA. Section 12 of this bill is not 
intended to alter the result in that case, or otherwise, with regard to 
that specific benefit program.
  However, in reaching its decision under Alaska state law, the court 
used language which suggests that any ANCSA corporate benefits program 
which does not provide equal pro rata benefits to all shareholders 
simultaneously is invalid. Such a conclusion goes too far and is 
inconsistent with the intent behind ANCSA.
  Thus, section 12 of this bill is intended to make clear that in 
evaluating the legality of health, education and welfare programs 
maintained by ANCSA corporations, federal law (ANCSA) is to preempt 
Alaska state law. Such programs have been established in good faith to 
provide health, education and/or welfare benefits for the ANCSA 
corporations' shareholders or their family members.
  To be valid under ANCSA, it is not necessary that benefits be 
provided on an equal pro rata basis simultaneously to all shareholders, 
or even that the program recipients be shareholders as long as they are 
family members of shareholders.
  Examples of the type of programs authorized include: scholarships, 
cultural activities, shareholder employment opportunities and related 
financial assistance, funeral benefits, meals for the elderly and other 
elders benefits including cash payments, and medical programs.
  I believe these programs represent an important part of the ANCSA 
corporations, and I hope they will continue long into the future.

                          ____________________