[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 203 (Monday, December 16, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H10298-H10300]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     SPOKANE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF THE SPOKANE RESERVATION EQUITABLE 
                            COMPENSATION ACT

  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (S. 216) to provide for equitable compensation to the Spokane 
Tribe of Indians of the Spokane Reservation for the use of tribal land 
for the production of hydropower by the Grand Coulee Dam, and for other 
purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                 S. 216

       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 ``Spokane Tribe of Indians of 
     the Spokane Reservation Equitable Compensation Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) from 1927 to 1931, at the direction of Congress, the 
     Corps of Engineers investigated the Columbia River and its 
     tributaries to determine sites at which power could be 
     produced at low cost;
       (2) under section 10(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 
     803(e)), when licenses are issued involving tribal land 
     within an Indian reservation, a reasonable annual charge 
     shall be fixed for the use of the land, subject to the 
     approval of the Indian tribe having jurisdiction over the 
     land;
       (3) in August 1933, the Columbia Basin Commission, an 
     agency of the State of Washington, received a preliminary 
     permit from the Federal Power Commission for water power 
     development at the Grand Coulee site;
       (4) had the Columbia Basin Commission or a private entity 
     developed the site, the Spokane Tribe would have been 
     entitled to a reasonable annual charge for the use of the 
     land of the Spokane Tribe;
       (5) in the mid-1930s, the Federal Government, which is not 
     subject to licensing under the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 
     792 et seq.)--
       (A) federalized the Grand Coulee Dam project; and
       (B) began construction of the Grand Coulee Dam;
       (6) when the Grand Coulee Dam project was federalized, the 
     Federal Government recognized that--
       (A) development of the project affected the interests of 
     the Spokane Tribe and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation; and
       (B) it would be appropriate for the Spokane and Colville 
     Tribes to receive a share of revenue from the disposition of 
     power produced at Grand Coulee Dam;
       (7) in the Act of June 29, 1940 (16 U.S.C. 835d et seq.), 
     Congress--
       (A) granted to the United States--
       (i) in aid of the construction, operation, and maintenance 
     of the Columbia Basin Project, all the right, title, and 
     interest of the Spokane Tribe and Colville Tribes in and to 
     the tribal and allotted land within the Spokane and Colville 
     Reservations, as designated by the Secretary of the Interior 
     from time to time; and
       (ii) other interests in that land as required and as 
     designated by the Secretary for certain construction 
     activities undertaken in connection with the project; and
       (B) provided that compensation for the land and other 
     interests was to be determined by the Secretary in such 
     amounts as the Secretary determined to be just and equitable;
       (8) pursuant to that Act, the Secretary paid--
       (A) to the Spokane Tribe, $4,700; and
       (B) to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, 
     $63,000;
       (9) in 1994, following litigation under the Act of August 
     13, 1946 (commonly known as the ``Indian Claims Commission 
     Act'' (60 Stat. 1049, chapter 959; former 25 U.S.C. 70 et 
     seq.)), Congress ratified the Colville Settlement Agreement, 
     which required--
       (A) for past use of the land of the Colville Tribes, a 
     payment of $53,000,000; and
       (B) for continued use of the land of the Colville Tribes, 
     annual payments of $15,250,000, adjusted annually based on 
     revenues from the sale of electric power from the Grand 
     Coulee Dam project and transmission of that power by the 
     Bonneville Power Administration;
       (10) the Spokane Tribe, having suffered harm similar to 
     that suffered by the Colville Tribes, did not file a claim 
     within the 5-year statute of limitations under the Indian 
     Claims Commission Act;
       (11) neither the Colville Tribes nor the Spokane Tribe 
     filed claims for compensation for use of the land of the 
     respective tribes with the Commission prior to August 13, 
     1951, but both tribes filed unrelated land claims prior to 
     August 13, 1951;
       (12) in 1976, over objections by the United States, the 
     Colville Tribes were successful in amending the 1951 Claims 
     Commission land claims to add the Grand Coulee claim of the 
     Colville Tribes;
       (13) the Spokane Tribe had no such claim to amend, having 
     settled the Claims Commission land claims of the Spokane 
     Tribe with the United States in 1967;
       (14) the Spokane Tribe has suffered significant harm from 
     the construction and operation of Grand Coulee Dam;
       (15) Spokane tribal acreage taken by the United States for 
     the construction of Grand Coulee Dam equaled approximately 39 
     percent of Colville tribal acreage taken for construction of 
     the dam;
       (16) the payments and delegation made pursuant to this Act 
     constitute fair and equitable compensation for the past and 
     continued use of Spokane tribal land for the production of 
     hydropower at Grand Coulee Dam; and
       (17) by vote of the Spokane tribal membership, the Spokane 
     Tribe has resolved that the payments and delegation made 
     pursuant to this Act constitute fair and equitable 
     compensation for the past and continued use of Spokane tribal 
     land for the production of hydropower at Grand Coulee Dam.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to provide fair and equitable 
     compensation to the Spokane Tribe for the use of the land of 
     the Spokane Tribe for the generation of hydropower by the 
     Grand Coulee Dam.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration or the 
     head of any successor agency, corporation, or entity that 
     markets power produced at Grand Coulee Dam.
       (2) Colville settlement agreement.--The term ``Colville 
     Settlement Agreement'' means the Settlement Agreement entered 
     into between the United States and the Colville Tribes, 
     signed by the United States on April 21, 1994, and by the 
     Colville Tribes on April 16, 1994, to settle the claims of 
     the Colville Tribes in Docket 181-D of the Indian Claims 
     Commission, which docket was transferred to the United States 
     Court of Federal Claims.
       (3) Colville tribes.--The term ``Colville Tribes'' means 
     the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation.
       (4) Computed annual payment.--The term ``Computed Annual 
     Payment'' means the payment calculated under paragraph 2.b. 
     of the Colville Settlement Agreement, without regard to any 
     increase or decrease in the payment under section 2.d. of the 
     agreement.
       (5) Confederated tribes act.--The term ``Confederated 
     Tribes Act'' means the Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation Grand Coulee Dam Settlement Act (Public Law 103-
     436; 108 Stat. 4577).
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (7) Spokane business council.--The term ``Spokane Business 
     Council'' means the governing body of the Spokane Tribe under 
     the constitution of the Spokane Tribe.
       (8) Spokane tribe.--The term ``Spokane Tribe'' means the 
     Spokane Tribe of Indians of the Spokane Reservation, 
     Washington.

     SEC. 5. PAYMENTS BY ADMINISTRATOR.

       (a) Initial Payment.--On March 1, 2022, the Administrator 
     shall pay to the Spokane Tribe an amount equal to 25 percent 
     of the Computed Annual Payment for fiscal year 2021.
       (b) Subsequent Payments.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than March 1, 2023, and March 1 
     of each year thereafter through March 1, 2029, the 
     Administrator shall pay the Spokane Tribe an amount equal to 
     25 percent of the Computed Annual Payment for the preceding 
     fiscal year.
       (2) March 1, 2030, and subsequent years.--Not later than 
     March 1, 2030, and March 1 of each year thereafter, the 
     Administrator shall pay the Spokane Tribe an amount equal to 
     32 percent of the Computed Annual Payment for the preceding 
     fiscal year.

     SEC. 6. TREATMENT AFTER AMOUNTS ARE PAID.

       (a) Use of Payments.--Payments made to the Spokane Business 
     Council or Spokane Tribe under section 5 may be used or 
     invested by the Spokane Business Council in the same manner 
     and for the same purposes as other Spokane Tribe governmental 
     amounts.
       (b) No Trust Responsibility of the Secretary.--Neither the 
     Secretary nor the Administrator shall have any trust 
     responsibility for the investment, supervision, 
     administration, or expenditure of any amounts after the date 
     on which the funds are paid to the Spokane Business Council 
     or Spokane Tribe under section 5.
       (c) Treatment of Funds for Certain Purposes.--The payments 
     of all amounts to the Spokane Business Council and Spokane 
     Tribe under section 5, and the interest and income generated 
     by those amounts, shall be treated in the same manner as 
     payments under section 6 of the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe 
     of Michigan Distribution of Judgment Funds Act (100 Stat. 
     677).
       (d) Tribal Audit.--After the date on which amounts are paid 
     to the Spokane Business Council or Spokane Tribe under 
     section 5, the amounts shall--

[[Page H10299]]

       (1) constitute Spokane Tribe governmental amounts; and
       (2) be subject to an annual tribal government audit.

     SEC. 7. REPAYMENT CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator shall deduct from the 
     interest payable to the Secretary of the Treasury from net 
     proceeds (as defined in section 13 of the Federal Columbia 
     River Transmission System Act (16 U.S.C. 838k))--
       (1) in fiscal year 2030, $2,700,000; and
       (2) in each subsequent fiscal year in which the 
     Administrator makes a payment under section 5, $2,700,000.
       (b) Crediting.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), each deduction made under this section for the fiscal 
     year shall be--
       (A) a credit to the interest payments otherwise payable by 
     the Administrator to the Secretary of the Treasury during the 
     fiscal year in which the deduction is made; and
       (B) allocated pro rata to all interest payments on debt 
     associated with the generation function of the Federal 
     Columbia River Power System that are due during the fiscal 
     year.
       (2) Deduction greater than amount of interest.--If, in an 
     applicable fiscal year under paragraph (1), the deduction is 
     greater than the amount of interest due on debt associated 
     with the generation function for the fiscal year, the amount 
     of the deduction that exceeds the interest due on debt 
     associated with the generation function shall be allocated 
     pro rata to all other interest payments due during the fiscal 
     year.
       (3) Credit.--To the extent that a deduction exceeds the 
     total amount of interest described in paragraphs (1) and (2), 
     the deduction shall be applied as a credit against any other 
     payments that the Administrator makes to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury.

     SEC. 8. EXTINGUISHMENT OF CLAIMS.

       On the date that payment under section 5(a) is made to the 
     Spokane Tribe, all monetary claims that the Spokane Tribe has 
     or may have against the United States to a fair share of the 
     annual hydropower revenues generated by the Grand Coulee Dam 
     project for the past and continued use of land of the Spokane 
     Tribe for the production of hydropower at Grand Coulee Dam 
     shall be extinguished.

     SEC. 9. ADMINISTRATION.

       Nothing in this Act establishes any precedent or is binding 
     on the Southwestern Power Administration, Western Area Power 
     Administration, or Southeastern Power Administration.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
New Mexico (Ms. Haaland) and the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Mexico.


                             General Leave

  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New Mexico?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 216, the Spokane Tribe of Indians of the Spokane 
Reservation Equitable Compensation Act, will finally compensate the 
Spokane Tribe of Indians for the flooding of their Tribal lands that 
occurred with the construction of the Grand Coulee Dam more than 75 
years ago.
  Located in Washington State, the Grand Coulee Dam was built in the 
1930s and 1940s. The reservoir it created flooded approximately 2,500 
acres of the Spokane Indian Reservation. These lands held great 
economic, cultural, and spiritual significance for the Spokane Tribal 
people and included the Tribe's historic salmon fishing sites.
  Around the time of the dam's completion, the Indian Claims Commission 
Act of 1946 was enacted, which gave Tribal nations 5 years to file all 
relevant land claims against the Federal Government. Although the 
Spokane Tribe filed a claim before this deadline, which was settled in 
1967, for around $4,700, lands related to the dam were not included.
  The end result is that, more than 75 years later, the Spokane Tribe 
has still not received just compensation for the seizure and 
destruction of their lands. This has severely impacted the ability of 
the Tribal government to provide for their people.
  This is also an issue of fairness and equity. The only other Tribe 
impacted by the construction of the Grand Coulee Dam, the Confederated 
Tribes of the Colville Reservation, successfully secured a settlement 
with the United States in 1994 and have been receiving compensation 
ever since.
  S. 216 will require the Bonneville Power Administration to make 
annual payments to the Tribe starting in 2022 to match the company's 
electricity sales, much in the same way the Colville Tribes are 
compensated.
  The legislation has the support of the surrounding counties and local 
entities.
  Additionally, BPA stated, at a recent subcommittee hearing on the 
bill, that the annual payments to the Tribe ``will not result in 
perceptible rate impacts to its utility customers.''
  The Grand Coulee Dam and the energy it produces has been a financial 
boon to the United States and the citizens of the Northwest. It is now 
time to make whole the Spokane Tribe for their sacrifice.
  I thank Senator Cantwell for her tireless work on this issue on 
behalf of the Spokane Tribal people, and I urge my colleagues to 
support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  During debate on this legislation in committee, a number of our 
Members expressed concerns on the merits of the settlement achieved 
under S. 216. Ultimately, this bill authorizes a settlement to the 
Spokane Tribe for damages as a result of the construction of the Grand 
Coulee Dam.
  As stated in the findings section of the legislation, after 
construction of the dam, the Federal Government recognized that the 
Colville and Spokane Tribes should be compensated for their losses. 
Negotiations commenced, and settlements were reached between the 
Federal Government and both Tribes independently. No further claims 
were brought forward by the Spokane Tribe, and, as a result, the 
Tribe's claims were deemed fully settled.
  Now, nearly 50 years later, Congress is granting a settlement to the 
Tribe that will entitle them to a share of revenues from hydropower 
sales by the Bonneville Power Administration in perpetuity.
  The main concern raised by our Members was the potential of this bill 
as precedence to resettle claims between an entity and the Federal 
Government that have already been deemed settled.
  In addition, concerns have been raised that this legislation leaves 
the door open to off-reservation gambling.

                              {time}  1715

  During the last 18 years, most House-passed bills addressing Tribal 
land use issues have contained express restrictions on off-reservation 
gambling. S. 216 seems to be one of the few that does not.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time and 
would inquire whether my colleague has any remaining speakers on his 
side.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I do have one more.
  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
  Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, this is an important bill, but there is something even 
much more important this week in Congress.
  In 2012, President Obama was caught on camera giving Russia's then-
President Medvedev a secret message to be given to his soon-to-be 
successor, Vladimir Putin. President Obama said: ``On all these issues, 
but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it is 
important for him to give me space. This is my last election. After my 
election, I have more flexibility.''
  In other words, President Obama's secret promise to reward Russia 
with flexibility on missile defense and other issues, to the detriment 
of U.S. national security, was if the Russians did not stir up trouble 
during his Presidential campaign.
  This exchange between President Obama and Russian President Medvedev 
is an actual quid pro quo. President Obama's offer was accepted and was 
acted upon by the Russians. Both sides exchanged something of value.
  President Obama's quid pro quo led to specific actions by his 
administration. He was weak against Russia in

[[Page H10300]]

many respects, he broke missile defense agreements with our beleaguered 
Eastern European allies, he tried to stop or delay nuclear parity with 
Russia, and he repeatedly blocked attempts by Republicans to provide 
lethal aid to Ukraine.
  By the way, under President Trump, we are finally strong against 
Russia. We are now building a more robust NATO, enhancing our missile 
defense agreements and troop presence in Eastern Europe, and finally 
sending the lethal aid to Ukraine that President Obama had refused to 
send.
  But President Obama engaged in an actual quid pro quo with Russia to 
give him political advantage. It came at the expense of Ukraine, an 
ally. It sounds a lot like what the Democrats are accusing President 
Trump of. Why were the Democrats silent back then?
  These two scenarios, that and the present-day impeachment 
proceedings, sound similar, but there is at least one big difference: 
the alleged quid pro quo between Presidents Trump and Zelensky never 
translated into even an understanding by the Ukrainians that they had 
to do something. In fact, they never did anything, such as announce a 
corruption investigation of the Bidens, which I believe was a situation 
crying out for an investigation.
  When you come right down to it, the real abuse of power was by 
President Obama. Was it a horrible judgment call to trade favors with 
the Russians? Yes. Was it impeachable? Republicans who were in control 
of the House then did not think so.
  That is the difference between Democrats and Republicans. Republicans 
may not always like what a President of the other party does, but we 
don't elevate policy differences into a nuclear war involving 
impeachment, a constitutional remedy that should be reserved for things 
like criminal acts and treason.
  This week's impeachment proceedings are nothing more than a political 
vendetta by the Democrats masquerading as a constitutional remedy. 
Let's stop this charade now and kill this impeachment.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. HAALAND. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to remind the House that 
this is an important bill that would bring equity to the Spokane Tribe 
of Indians, and I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Haaland) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, S. 216.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________