[House Report 105-692]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-692
_______________________________________________________________________


 
                        NARRAGANSETT JUSTICE ACT

                                _______
                                

 September 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. 1983]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1983) to amend the Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement 
Act to conform that Act with the judgments of the United States 
Federal Courts regarding the rights and sovereign status of 
certain Indian Tribes, including the Narragansett Tribe, and 
for other purposes, 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. 1983 is to amend the Rhode Island 
Indian Claims Settlement Act to conform that Act with the 
judgments of the United States Federal Courts regarding the 
rights and sovereign status of certain Indian Tribes, including 
the Narragansett Tribe.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    H.R. 1983, the Narragansett Justice Act, would amend the 
Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement Act so as to apply the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (Public Law 100-497) to the 
Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island.
    In 1978, the Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island 
received 1800 acres of land, commonly referred to as 
``settlement lands,'' from the State of Rhode Island pursuant 
to the Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement Act, Public Law 
95-395. Section 9 of that Act provides: ``Except as otherwise 
provided in this Act, the settlement lands shall be subject to 
the civil and criminal laws and jurisdiction of the State of 
Rhode Island.''
    In 1988, Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. 
Section 11 of that Act provides, in part: ``An Indian tribe may 
engage in, or license and regulate, class II gaming on Indian 
lands within such tribe's jurisdiction. * * * Class III gaming 
activities shall be lawful on Indian lands. * * * ''
    In 1994, a U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Public Law 100-
497 took precedence over Public Law 95-395 and thereby allowed 
the Narragansett Tribe to conduct gaming which would not be 
subject to the laws and jurisdiction of the State so long as 
the Tribe complied with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
    In 1996, Congress passed the Omnibus Consolidated 
Appropriations Act (Public Law 104-208) which included an 
amendment to the 1978 Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement 
Act. That amendment provided in part that: ``For the purposes 
of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act * * * settlement lands 
shall not be treated as Indian lands.'' In effect, Public Law 
104-208 removed the ``settlement lands'' of the Narragansett 
Tribe from coverage by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Thus, 
the Narragansett Tribe is precluded from conducting gaming on 
its lands pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
    H.R. 1983 would restore the Narragansett Tribe's right to 
conduct gaming pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act by 
amending Public Law 104-208 to read: ``For the purposes of the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act * * * settlement lands shall be 
treated as Indian lands.''

                            Committee Action

    On May 1, 1997, the Committee on Resources held an 
oversight hearing on the subject of Indian gaming within the 
State of Rhode Island where the Narragansett Tribe, the 
National Congress of American Indians and the Administration 
testified in support of legislation which would restore the 
Narragansett Tribe's right to conduct gaming pursuant to the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Senator John Chafee (R-RI) and 
officials representing the State of Rhode Island testified 
against the restoration of gaming rights to the Tribe. The 
hearing is printed as Resources Committee Hearing 105-25.
    H.R. 1983 was introduced on June 19, 1997, by Congressman 
Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) and referred to the Committee on 
Resources. On June 17, 1998, the Committee met to consider H.R. 
1983. No amendments were offered, and the bill was then 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.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1983.

                        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. 1983. 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, the 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures. According to the Congressional 
Budget Office, enactment of H.R. 1983 would have no significant 
impact on the federal budget.
    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. 1983.
    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. 
1983 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, July 22, 1998.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1983, the 
Narragansett Justice Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Kristen 
Layman.
            Sincerely,
                                 June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1983--Narragansett Justice Act

    CBO estimates that H.R. 1983 would have no significant 
impact on the federal budget. H.R. 1983 contains no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    H.R. 1983 would amend the Rhode Island Indian Claims 
Settlement Act (25 U.S.C. 1708 (b)) to treat Indian settlement 
lands, particularly the lands of the Narragansett Tribe, as 
Indian lands for the purposes of the Indian Gaming Regulatory 
Act (IGRA). Under current law, such settlement lands are not 
considered Indian lands; therefore, gaming on these lands 
pursuant to the IGRA is not permitted. H.R. 1983 would classify 
Indian settlement lands as Indian lands, and thus would allow 
gaming on them.
    This bill would benefit the Narragansett tribe by alllowing 
operations on their lands under the terms of the IGRA. The 
state of Rhode Island and some local governments in the state 
would probably face some costs, and possibly some benefits, as 
result of gambling on tribal lands, but CBO cannot predict 
exactly how the budgets of these governments would be affected. 
Under IGRA, the tribe must negotiate a compact with the state 
before it can commence gambling on tribal lands.
    The CBO staff contact is Kristen Layman. This estimate was 
approved by Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget 
Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R.1983 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 and 
existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

       SECTION 9 OF THE RHODE ISLAND INDIAN CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT

SEC. 9. APPLICABILITY OF STATE LAW; TREATMENT OF SETTLEMENT LANDS UNDER 
                    THE INDIAN GAMING REGULATORY ACT.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Treatment of Settlement Lands Under the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act.--For purposes of the Indian Gaming Regulatory 
Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), settlement lands shall [not] be 
treated as Indian lands.

                                
