[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 61 (Monday, April 16, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2188-S2189]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       INDIAN AFFAIRS LEGISLATION

  Mr. UDALL. I thank the Presiding Officer for the recognition.
  Madam President, I rise today as the ranking member on the Senate 
Indian Affairs Committee. In our parlance on the committee, it is 
called the vice chair. Normally, our committee is very bipartisan. It 
was not so in this case today. In the debate, it was mentioned that 
this was a negotiated package. It was not. I was not asked for input as 
the vice chair of the committee. Nothing about this bill sent over from 
the House was negotiated with me.
  For the first time in 10 years, this body has just considered a bill 
from the Committee on Indian Affairs using a cloture filing and 
valuable floor time. Let me repeat that. For the first time in 10 
years, this Chamber just debated an Indian Affairs bill using valuable 
floor time and not unanimous consent.
  For a Senate majority, floor time and cloture filings are the coin of 
the realm, and this is the first time in 10 years that it is being 
spent on a Tribal issue.
  Over this decade, during which both Democrats and Republicans have 
held a majority, Indian Country has seen its priorities sidelined. 
Important legislation that touches the lives of Native veterans, Native 
families, and Native communities--from Maine to Hawaii, from Florida to 
Alaska--makes it out of the Indian Affairs Committee only to die 
waiting on the Senate legislative calendar, often due to objections by 
one or a small handful of Senators--legislation, for example, like the 
Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination 
Reauthorization Act, the Esther Martinez Native Languages Preservation 
Act, the PROGRESS for Indian Tribes Act, and the Indian Tribal Energy 
Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 2017.
  These are all broadly supported bipartisan bills that have gotten 
stuck in the legislative process for 5, 10, or even 15 years--all 
broadly supported bipartisan bills that Indian Country needs. They 
address pressing issues like homelessness, language loss, and economic 
development, and all of these broadly supported bipartisan bills are 
central to fulfilling our solemn trust and treaty responsibilities.
  My colleague, the senior Senator from Montana, tells the same story 
about his fight to gain Federal recognition for the Little Shell Tribe. 
This legislation is important to Montanans and Tribes he represents. 
This bill has been fighting for a day on the floor since 2008.
  My distinguished colleagues from Washington first took up the fight 
to get the Spokane Tribe settlement act signed into law back in 2003.
  I am honored to work with so many colleagues who dedicate themselves 
each and every day to fighting for Indian Country. But we can't do that 
if Indian Affairs legislation is not given equal weight to other bills.
  It is shameful that this full body does not consider and resolve 
these and other important issues facing Indian Country. It is shameful 
that when the Senate gives Indian Country its first shot in 10 years, 
Republicans closed the debate to prevent consideration of other 
pressing pieces of Indian Affairs legislation. I am amazed that there 
will be no time for amendments, that there will be no time for this 
body to do what it is supposed to do--deliberate, deliberate. That is 
what we are supposed to do here.
  Instead, the majority leader limits consideration to one issue, 
chosen specifically to amplify partisan rancor. We should be working 
together for Indian Country. The majority isn't doing that. It is using 
a wedge issue to pit people against each other in an attempt to score 
political points.
  When Republicans were in the minority, Senator McConnell lamented the 
lack of debate. He complained that legislation was ``dropped on the 
floor with little or no opportunities for members to participate in the 
amendment process, virtually guaranteeing a fight.''
  As the majority leader said, simply and eloquently:

       Bills should come to the floor and be thoroughly debated. . 
     . . This is the Senate. . . . Let the Senate work its will, 
     and that means

[[Page S2189]]

     bringing bills to the floor. It means having a free and open 
     amendment process. That is legislating.

  I couldn't agree more. We came here to craft legislation. We came 
here to take tough votes. That process may take more time, more work, 
and more cooperation, but it would lead to better outcomes for 
everyone, and, most importantly in this case, it would lead to better 
outcomes for Indian Country.
  Let there be no mistake. Indian Country loses when we give in to 
partisan rancor. We have seen this play out before. When the trillion-
dollar tax cut was rammed through this Chamber without any input from 
my Democratic colleagues, what happened? Indian Country and Indian 
Tribes were entirely left out in the cold. There was not a single 
provision for Indian Tribes in a trillion-dollar package.
  On the other hand, we know what happens when bipartisanship prevails. 
Senator Murkowski, my chairman on the Interior Appropriations 
Subcommittee, and I were able to deliver big wins for Indian Country in 
the fiscal year 2018 omnibus. We increased funding for the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs by $204 million, and we increased funding for the Indian 
health programs by another $500 million--that is almost three-quarters 
of a billion dollars--because Democrats and Republicans decided it was 
better to work for Indian Country instead of against each other.
  As anyone in Indian Country will tell you, Indian affairs issues 
transcend partisan politics. Native policy issues go to the core of the 
trust responsibility, to the government-to-government relationships 
enshrined in our Constitution and countless treaties. Sadly, that is 
not true today.
  I wanted a better deal for Indian Country. Indian Country had to wait 
10 years for today's vote. We should have had a full opportunity to 
bring other issues onto the table and to be added onto the bill in the 
form of amendments. Housing, public safety, self-determination, and 
self-governance are equally deserving of the Senate's consideration. We 
could have considered legislation that would do more to unite us than 
divide us, like the Native American Housing and Self-Determination Act, 
which expired in 2013. This important program benefits Native 
Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives.
  In my home State of New Mexico, as in most of Indian Country, NAHASDA 
is the primary source of funding for Tribal housing needs and 
development. For instance, in Isleta Pueblo, 44 percent of households 
are low-income. Without NAHASDA funding, the Pueblo would be unable to 
address this crippling need. Reauthorizing NAHASDA would provide Tribes 
like Isleta the certainty they require to meet current and future 
housing needs. Instead, we only voted on one Tribal priority, the 
Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act. I voted yes on cloture. As a longtime 
advocate for Indian Country, I understand and respect how integral 
Tribal sovereignty is to Tribal governance, and I am and always will be 
an unwavering supporter of Tribal sovereignty.
  I am also a supporter of strong labor protections and the working 
families they protect in New Mexico and around the country. I support 
collective bargaining and am against right-to-work laws that are being 
pushed around the country.
  The tough issue here is that for decades Tribes were treated as 
States and local governments and not subject to the National Labor 
Relations Board. Recent Board and court decisions have changed that in 
some parts of the country but not others, resulting in a patchwork of 
regulations. The previous administration proposed a compromise 
approach, but neither side embraced it. I hope that changes. But no 
matter the outcome today, I will continue to fight for Indian Country 
and seek new opportunities to enact longstanding Tribal legislative 
priorities.
  I close with past advice from my colleague, the majority leader: ``If 
you want fewer fights, give the other side a say.'' I couldn't agree 
more, and I urge the majority leader to give us and Indian Country a 
say.

                          ____________________