[House Report 108-535]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



108th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     108-535

======================================================================


AMENDING THE ACT OF NOVEMBER 2, 1966 (80 STAT. 1112), TO ALLOW BINDING 
ARBITRATION CLAUSES TO BE INCLUDED IN ALL CONTRACTS AFFECTING THE LAND 
         WITHIN THE SALT RIVER PIMA-MARICOPA INDIAN RESERVATION

                                _______
                                

  June 9, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Pombo, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 4115]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 4115) to amend the Act of November 2, 1966 (80 Stat. 
1112), to allow binding arbitration clauses to be included in 
all contracts affecting the land within the Salt River Pima-
Maricopa Indian Reservation, 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. 4115 is to amend the Act of November 2, 
1966 (80 Stat. 1112), to allow binding arbitration clauses to 
be included in all contracts affecting the land within the Salt 
River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    The Act of November 2, 1966, authorizes the Salt River 
Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, with the approval of the 
Secretary of the Interior, to lease its Indian lands for 
various purposes, including business purposes. Section 2(c) of 
the Act (25 U.S.C. 416a(c)) allows the tribe to include binding 
arbitration clauses in such leases. Without such binding 
arbitration clauses, many investors would not be interested in 
doing business with the tribe because there would be no means 
of enforcing contracts.
    An amendment to a related provision of law (25 U.S.C. 81) 
has made it unclear whether the tribe may put binding 
arbitration clauses into all of its contracts and leases.
    H.R. 4115 clarifies that the tribe may include binding 
arbitration clauses in all its contracts for business 
development on its reservation, pursuant to the Act of November 
2, 1966. In requesting introduction of the legislation, the 
tribe advises that unless it were authorized to include binding 
arbitration clauses in all contracts and leases for development 
projects on the reservation, it stands to lose significant new 
business investors. The tribe is located in a prime area for 
commercial development and it has been very aggressive in 
diversifying its economic portfolio.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 4115 was introduced on April 1, 2004, by Congressman 
J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources. On May 19, 2004, the Full Resources Committee met to 
consider the bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was 
ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by 
unanimous consent.

            Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII 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 this bill.

                    Compliance With House Rule XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) 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 this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) 
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 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) 
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does 
not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not 
apply.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII 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 this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 25, 2004.
Hon. Richard W. Pombo,
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. 4115, a bill to 
amend the act of November 2, 1966 (80 Stat. 1112), to allow 
binding arbitration clauses to be included in all contracts 
affecting the land within the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 
Reservation.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Lanette J. 
Walker.
            Sincerely,
                                      Elizabeth M. Robinson
                               (For Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 4115--To amend the act of November 2, 1966 (80 Stat. 1112), to 
        allow binding arbitration clauses to be included in all 
        contracts affecting the land within the Salt River Pima-
        Maricopa Indian Reservation

    H.R. 4115 would allow the Pima-Maricopa tribe to include 
binding arbitration clauses in all contracts affecting the land 
within the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation. Under 
current law, the tribe may not include such clauses in certain 
contracts including subleases, master leases, and tenant 
leases. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4115 would have no 
effect on the federal budget.
    H.R. 4115 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 
Enacting this legislation would benefit the Salt River Pima-
Maricopa Indian Community.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Lanette J. 
Walker. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) 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):

                SECTION 2 OF THE ACT OF NOVEMBER 2, 1966


 AN ACT To authorize long-term leases on the San Xavier and Salt River 
       Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservations, and for other purposes.

  Sec. 2. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) [Any lease entered into under this Act or the Act of 
August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539), as amended, or any contract 
entered into under section 2103 of the Revised Statutes, as 
amended, affecting land] Any contract, including a lease, 
affecting land within the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 
Reservation may contain a provision for the binding arbitration 
of disputes arising out of [such lease or contract. Such leases 
or contracts entered into pursuant to such Acts] such contract. 
Such contracts shall be considered within the meaning of 
``commerce'' as defined and subject to the provisions of 
section 1 of title 9, United States Code. Any refusal to submit 
to arbitration pursuant to a binding agreement for arbitration 
or the exercise of any right conferred by title 9 to abide by 
the outcome of arbitration pursuant to the provisions of 
chapter 1 of title 9, sections 1 through 14, United States 
Code, shall be deemed to be a civil action arising under the 
Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States within the 
meaning of section 1331 of title 28, United States Code.

                                  
