[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 101 (Friday, July 16, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1579]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2000

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. PATRICK J. KENNEDY

                            of rhode island

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 14, 1999

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2466) making 
     appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related 
     agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and 
     for other purposes:

  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong 
opposition to the amendment offered by Congressmen Weldon and Barr.
  This amendment would accomplish two goals.
  First, it would undermine the Constitutional responsibility that our 
government has towards Native American Tribes.
  Second, it would serve to stop so much of the positive work that is 
being accomplished in Indian Country.
  What my colleagues need to understand is that Tribal Gaming is not a 
private interest initiative. The proceeds from Tribal Gaming can only 
be used for governmental programs like education, health care and 
housing.
  Some Tribes that are looking to take lands into trust for the 
purposes of gaming currently have unemployment rates in excess of 50 
percent. Native Americans are simply looking for a way out of what is 
clearly third world poverty.
  This amendment would prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from 
promulgating Class III gaming procedures.
  The reason that the Department of Interior has published regulations 
on Class III gaming is because Congress, by enacting the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act, directed the Secretary to develop procedures for Class 
III gaming compacts.
  And lets be clear, Interior's regulations will apply in cases where 
tribes and states could not reach a Class III agreement but the state 
already allows Class III gaming activities, and when a state raises 
immunity as a defense from suit.
  Moreover, states could still protect themselves from Class III gaming 
if they choose by outlawing any kind of Class III gaming in the state. 
In this regard Tribes could not game under Class III. Examples of 
States that have no gaming include Utah and Hawaii.
  This rule is the result of an extensive public process that began 
more than three years ago and speaks to the fact that the vast majority 
of states and tribes have bargained in good faith with each other. In 
fact, in the ten years since the enactment of the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act, over 200 compacts have been signed in 24 states.
  Tribes deserve a fair opportunity. In many cases they have been 
denied that chance.
  I understand that the National Gambling Impact Study Commission has 
called for a ``pause'' in gaming but this amendment does nothing but 
unfairly discriminate against the only people that use gaming revenues 
for altruistic purposes.
  Moreover, it goes to the very heart of our nation's failure to defend 
what Tribal Governments are entitled to by virtue of their status as 
domestic dependent nations.
  Why is there no amendment to limit the growth of gaming in Atlantic 
City? How about state governments that use lotteries everyday?
  The reason is because you all feel that Indians are an easy target. 
Gaming opponents feel as though they need a quick fix to satisfy their 
agendas. Consequently the Tribes must bear the burden of the political 
expediency that is being demonstrated by this amendment.
  My colleagues, this amendment is not so much about gaming as it is 
about not respecting the trust responsibility that our government has 
towards the first Americans.
  Mr. Chairman, I find this particularly disturbing that we are 
considering this amendment offered by Republican members on a day that 
Speaker Hastert and the Republican leadership are meeting with several 
tribal leaders in support of Tribal sovereignty.
  This amendment has no place in this debate and I urge all who care 
for the sovereign rights of native Americans to oppose its passage.

                          ____________________