[House Report 105-571]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-571
_______________________________________________________________________


 
   ADVISORY COUNCIL ON CALIFORNIA INDIAN POLICY EXTENSION ACT OF 1997

                                _______
                                

  June 9, 1998.--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. 3069]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 3069) to extend the Advisory Council on California Indian 
Policy to allow the Advisory Council to advise Congress on the 
implementation of the proposals and recommendations of the 
Advisory Council, 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. 3069 is to extend the Advisory Council 
on California Indian Policy to allow the Advisory Council to 
advise Congress on the implementation of the proposals and 
recommendations of the Advisory Council.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    H.R. 3069, the proposed Advisory Council on California 
Indian Policy Extension Act of 1997, would extend the life of 
the Advisory Council on California Indian Policy (ACCIP) from 
April of 1998 until March 31, 2000. The ACCIP has issued eight 
reports on the topics of recognition, termination, health, 
education, culture, community services, economic development, 
and natural resources as well as an overview of California 
Indian history. H.R. 3069 would add various additional new 
duties to those provided for by Congress when the ACCIP was 
created in 1992.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 3069 was introduced on November 13, 1997, by 
Congressman George Miller (D-CA). The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Resources. On March 25, 1998, the Full Resources 
Committee met to consider H.R. 3069. No amendments were offered 
and 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.

                  Federal Advisory Committee Statement

    H.R. 3069 reauthorizes an existing advisory committee.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3 of the 
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority 
to enact H.R. 3069.

                        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. 3069. 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. 
3069 does not contain any new budget authority, credit 
authority, or an increase or decrease in tax expenditures. 
According to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of H.R. 
3069 could affect receipts to the federal government and 
authorize direct spending because the ACCIP can accept and 
spend private donations. However, any new collections of 
receipts would be ``insignificant.''
    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. 3069.
    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. 
3069 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 13, 1998.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3069, the Advisory 
Council on California Indian Policy Extension Act of 1997.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Victoria V. 
Heid.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 3069--Advisory Council on California Indian Policy Extension Act 
        of 1997

    Summary: H.R. 3069 would extend, until March 31, 2000, the 
authority of the Advisory Council on California Indian Policy 
(ACCIP). The bill also would expand the duties of the council.
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3069 would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget. Enacting the bill 
would affect direct spending and receipts; therefore, pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply, but we estimate that any such 
effects would be insignificant. The legislation contains no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) and would impose no 
costs on the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Current law 
authorizes the ACCIP to operate until 180 days after it has 
submitted a report, made recommendations, and provided certain 
information to the Congress and to the Secretaries of the 
Interior and Health and Human Services. Because the council 
completed these reporting requirements on September 30, 1997, 
its operating authority terminated under current law at the end 
of March 1998. H.R. 3069 would extend the authority of the 
ACCIP to operate until March 31, 2000, and expand the duties of 
the council.
    Current law authorizes the appropriation of $700,000 for 
the Advisory Council on California Indian Policy. H.R. 3069 
would not amend that authorization. The total amount authorized 
has already been appropriated for the council, and according to 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the council has spent 
nearly all of its allotted funds. Based on information from 
BIA, CBO estimates that continued operation of the ACCIP would 
cost an additional $100,000 per year for the next two years, 
subject to appropriation of the necessary amounts.
    The ACCIP can accept and spend private donations. Donations 
collected under this authority count as governmental receipts 
and their expenditure counts as direct spending. By extending 
the authority of the council to operate until March 31, 2000, 
H.R. 3069 also would extend the council's authority to accept 
and spend donations. CBO estimates that any new collections of 
receipts would be insignificant.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets up pay-
as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending 
or receipts. H.R. 3069 could affect both direct spending and 
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. CBO 
estimates, however, that any changes in receipts from donations 
to the ACCIP and consequent changes in direct spending would 
both be insignificant.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3069 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on the budgets of 
state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Victoria V. Heid.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 3069 contains no unfunded mandates.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

ADVISORY COUNCIL ON CALIFORNIA INDIAN POLICY ACT OF 1992

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 5. DUTIES OF THE COUNCIL.

    The Council shall--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (6) submit, by no later than the date that is 36 
        months after the date of the first meeting of the 
        Council, a report on the study conducted under 
        paragraph (3) together with the proposals and 
        recommendations developed under paragraphs (2) and (5) 
        and such other information obtained pursuant to this 
        section as the Council deems relevant, to the Congress, 
        the Secretary, and the Secretary of Health and Human 
        Services; [and]
          (7) make such report available to California Indian 
        tribes, tribal organizations, and the public[.]; and
          (8) work with Congress, the Secretary, the Secretary 
        of Health and Human Services, and the California Indian 
        tribes, to implement the Council's proposals and 
        recommendations contained in the report submitted made 
        under paragraph (6), including--
                  (A) consulting with Federal departments and 
                agencies to identify those recommendations that 
                can be implemented immediately, or in the very 
                near future, and those which will require long-
                term changes in law, regulations, or policy;
                  (B) working with Federal departments and 
                agencies to expedite to the greatest extent 
                possible the implementation of the Council's 
                recommendations;
                  (C) presenting draft legislation to Congress 
                for implementation of the recommendations 
                requiring legislative changes;
                  (D) initiating discussions with the State of 
                California and its agencies to identify 
                specific areas where State actions or tribal-
                State cooperation can complement actions by the 
                Federal Government to implement specific 
                recommendations;
                  (E) providing timely information to and 
                consulting with California Indian tribes on 
                discussions between the Council and Federal and 
                State agencies regarding implementation of the 
                recommendations; and
                  (F) providing annual progress reports to the 
                Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate and 
                the Committee on Resources of the House of 
                Representatives on the status of the 
                implementation of the recommendations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 8. TERMINATION.

    [The Council shall cease to exist on the date that is 180 
days after the date on which the Council submits the report 
required under section 5(6).] The Council shall cease to exist 
on March 31, 2000. All records, documents, and materials of the 
Council shall be transferred to the National Archives and 
Records Administration on the date on which the Council ceases 
to exist.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                
