[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Page 13572]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           S.J. RESOLUTION 37

  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today in support of S.J. 
Resolution 37, a resolution to acknowledge a long history of official 
depredations and ill-conceived policies by the United States Government 
regarding Indian tribes and offer an apology to all native peoples on 
behalf of the United States.
  A formal apology is the first appropriate step in reconciling 
relationships with Indian tribes and native peoples. However, an 
apology by itself is not enough to heal the wounds inflicted by some of 
the devastating policies adopted by our government. To really make 
amends with Indian tribes and native peoples, our government needs to 
return to the original understanding of the Federal-tribal 
relationship. The foundation of the Federal-tribal relationship is 
rooted in our great Constitution and the Indian treaties ratified 
pursuant to it. When a person reads the Founder's words pertaining to 
the sovereignty of Indian tribes, in conjunction with the early laws 
and treaties ratified by our government, he or she quickly realizes 
that the underpinnings of the Federal-tribal relationship is based upon 
mutual respect, trust responsibility, and the idea that our government 
must obtain consent from Indian tribes and native peoples before any 
Federal action can be taken.
  Almost every Indian treaty recognizes that Indian tribes have control 
over their lands and that our government could not assert authority or 
take lands away from tribes unless there is an articulation of tribal 
consent. The first treaty our government signed with an Indian Nation 
was the 1778 Treaty of Fort Pitt. During the American Revolutionary 
War, our government signed this treaty to obtain permission from the 
Delaware Nation to allow General Washington's army to cross through 
their territory. If the Delaware Nation would not have permitted this 
crossing, the history of our United States might have turned out 
drastically differently.
  As history teaches, when our government swayed away from the 
foundation of the Federal-tribal relationship, Indian tribes and native 
peoples suffered. For example, in 1830, Congress narrowly passed the 
Removal Act to remove all Native Americans west of the Mississippi 
River. However, the text and legislative history of the Removal Act 
clearly demonstrates that removal would not occur unless there was 
tribal consent. Because many Cherokee did not consent to being removed, 
in 1838, our government forced their removal, thus resulting in the 
Trail of Tears tragedy.
  Chairman J.C. Crawford of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Tribe wrote to remind 
me that in 1862 nearly 400 Dakota Indians were tried by a military 
court without legal representation following a conflict arising out of 
our government not adhering to its treaty obligations. Eventually, on 
December 26, 1862, 38 Dakota men were hanged. To date, this has been 
the largest mass execution in American history.
  Our government violated the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. Under the Fort 
Laramie Treaty, our government agreed that if any land is to be taken 
from the Lakota Nation, three-fourths of all adult males must agree to 
any cession. Because our government failed to obtain Lakota consent, 
three prominent historical tragedies occurred, the Battle of Little Big 
Horn, the Wounded Knee Massacre, and the taking of the Black Hills.
  Additionally, in the late 1800s, our government violated numerous 
treaties and embarked upon a harsh assimilationist policy that ignored 
the foundations of the Federal-tribal relationship. For example, in 
1887 our government enacted the General Allotment Act. Under the 
General Allotment Act, tribal lands were broken up, thus reducing 
tribal lands from 138 million acres in 1887 to 48 million acres in 
1934. Although our government ended the harsh policies contained in the 
General Allotment by enacting the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act, by 
the 1950s our government quickly reversed course and implemented 
legislation that terminated the Federal-tribal relationship with some 
Indian tribes. Although many Indian tribes have been successful with 
regaining federal recognition status, some have not been as successful.
  Currently, our government is committed to tribal self-determination 
and empowering tribal governments. However, to make this apology 
complete and to demonstrate that our government is sincere in 
apologizing to Indian tribes and native peoples, our government needs 
to allocate more resources to Indian tribes and native peoples and 
fulfill its trust obligation found in treaties and concurrent 
legislation.
  Our government has adopted numerous laws and policies that undermined 
and adversely impacted the Federal-tribal relationship. For those 
reasons, I strongly support the apology articulated in S.J. Resolution 
37. I urge my colleagues to similarly support this resolution and 
reflect on the meaning of the Federal-tribal relationship.

                          ____________________