[House Report 104-584]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     104-584
_______________________________________________________________________


 
                    PRAIRIE ISLAND INDIAN COMMUNITY

                                _______


  May 20, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3068]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 3068) to accept the request of the Prairie Island Indian 
Community to revoke their charter of incorporation issued under 
the Indian Reorganization Act, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that 
the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 3068 is to accept the request of the 
Prairie Island Indian Community to revoke their charter of 
incorporation issued under the Indian Reorganization Act.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    H.R. 3068 would revoke the charter of incorporation issued 
to the Prairie Island Indian Community of Minnesota in 1937. 
This Federal charter of incorporation was issued by Congress 
containing a provision, Amendment 10, which provides that it 
can only be revoked by an Act of Congress.
    This revocation has been requested by the Community because 
the Community has never used it in the management of its 
enterprises. The Community finds the charter to be outdated, 
ineffective and cumbersome. Years ago the Community determined 
that the provisions of the charter can not be applied to the 
sound management of the Community's enterprises and, instead, 
decided to operate its enterprises pursuant to various 
provisions of its Constitution.
    The revocation of charters of incorporation issued to 
tribes is a common practice by Congress. A similar revocation 
relating to the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe was included in Public 
Law 104-109.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 3068 was introduced on March 12, 1996, by Congressman 
Gil Gutknecht (R-MN). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on 
Native American and Insular Affairs. On May 16, 1996, the 
Subcommittee was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 
3068 when the Full Committee on Resources met to consider H.R. 
3068. The bill was ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of Rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause 
2(b)(1) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                     INFLATIONARY IMPACT STATEMENT

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that the 
enactment of H.R. 3068 will have no significant inflationary 
impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national 
economy.

                        COST OF THE LEGISLATION

    Clause 7(a) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 3068. However, clause 7(d) of that Rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                     COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XI

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of 
Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R. 
3068 does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of 
Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 3068.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of 
Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 
3068 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 17, 1996.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives, Washington, 
        DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed H.R. 3068, a bill to accept the request of the Prairie 
Island Indian Community to revoke their charter of 
incorporation issued under the Indian Reorganization Act, as 
ordered reported by the House Committee on Resources on May 16, 
1996. CBO estimates that enacting this bill would result in no 
cost to the federal government. Because enacting H.R. 3068 
would not affect direct spending or receipts, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would not apply.
    H.R. 3068 would revoke the charter of incorporation issued 
to the Prairie Island Indian Community of Minnesota in 1937. 
Revoking the charter does not deny federal recognition to the 
tribe; instead, this action will make tribal management of its 
enterprises less cumbersome.
    The bill contains no intergovernmental or private sector 
mandates as defined in Public Law 104-4, and would impose no 
direct costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel 
Robertson.
            Sincerely,
                                           June E. O'Neill,
                                                          Director.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    H.R. 3068 contains no unfunded mandates.

                          DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS

    The Committee has received no departmental reports on H.R. 
3068.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    If enacted, H.R. 3068 would make no changes in existing 
law.