[Senate Hearing 107-360]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 107-360
FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST FOR INDIAN PROGRAMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
__________
MARCH 5, 2002
WASHINGTON, DC
-------
77-881 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2002
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Vice Chairman
FRANK MURKOWSKI, Alaska KENT CONRAD, North Dakota
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, HARRY REID, Nevada
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming PAUL WELLSTONE, Minnesota
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
Patricia M. Zell, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel
Paul Moorehead, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
March 5, 2002
Statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs................. 2
Carter, Clarence, director, Office of Community Services,
Department of Health and Human Services.................... 10
Corwin, Tom, deputy assistant secretary, Office of Elementary
and Secondary Education, Department of Education........... 17
DeLuca, James C., chief, Division of Indian and native
American Programs, Department of Labor..................... 3
Dye, David, deputy assistant secretary, Employment and
Training, Department of Labor.............................. 3
Henke, Tracy A., Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General,
Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.......... 25
Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, chairman,
Committee on Indian Affairs................................ 1
Martin, Cathie, acting director, Office of Indian Education,
Department of Education.................................... 17
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs................. 31
Carter, Clarence............................................. 45
Corwin, Tom.................................................. 59
Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota........ 32
Dye, David (with attachments)................................ 34
Henke, Tracy A. (with attachments)........................... 69
Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from South Dakota............ 32
March 7, 2002
Statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs................. 235
Hartz, Gary, acting director, Office of Public Health,
Department of Health and Human Services.................... 236
Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, chairman,
Committee on Indian Affairs................................ 234
Lincoln, Michel, deputy director, Indian Health Service,
Department of Health and Human Services.................... 236
Liu, Michael, assistant secretary, Office of Public and
Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development 255
Trujillo, Michael, M.D, director, Indian Health Service,
Department of Health and Human Services.................... 236
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Bird, Michael, executive director, National Native American
Aids Prevention Center (with Attachments).................. 276
Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator from New Mexico......... 263
Liu, Michael (with attachments).............................. 264
National Congress of American Indians (with attachments)..... 272
Sarris, Greg, chairperson, Federated Indians of Graton
Rancheria.................................................. 269
Trujillo, Michael, M.D....................................... 269
Additional material submitted for the record:
Sioux Funeral Home Thrives On Chronic Ills of Local
Reservation, article by Jonathan Eig, staff reporter, Wall
Street Journal............................................. 300
Tables....................................................... 324
Trends in Racial and Ethnic-Specific Rates for the Health
Status Indicators: United States, 1990-98, study by the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of
Health and Human Services.................................. 308
March 14, 2002
Statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs................. 361
Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota............ 364
Deer, Montie, chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission.... 380
Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator from New Mexico......... 365
Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota........ 364
Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, chairman,
Committee on indian Affairs................................ 360
McCaleb, Neal, assistant secretary, BIA, Department of the
Interior................................................... 362
Regas, Diane C., acting assistant administrator, Office of
Water, Environmental Protection Agency..................... 376
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado,
vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs................. 387
Deer, Montie (with attachments).............................. 394
Kindle, William H., president, Rosebud Sioux Tribe........... 388
McCaleb, Neal................................................ 440
Murkowski, Hon. Frank H., U.S. Senator from Alaska........... 388
Regas, Diane C. (with attachment)............................ 449
Additional material submitted for the record:
Responses to questions submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye,
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 391
Note: Other material submitted for the record will be retained in
committee files.
FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 2002
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m. in room
485, Senate Russell Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye (Chairman
of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Inouye, Conrad, and Campbell.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII,
CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. The committee meets this morning for the
first in a series of three hearings on the President's budget
request for Indian programs for fiscal year 2003. This first
hearing will focus on Indian programs administered by the
Departments of Justice, Labor, and Education.
In addition, those Indian programs administered by the
Department of Health and Human Services that are outside the
Indian Health Service will be addressed today. On Thursday of
this week the committee will receive testimony from the
Department of Housing and Urban Development and Indian Health
Service.
On Thursday of next week, March 14, the committee will
receive testimony on the President's budget request for the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, the National Indian Gaming
Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency. In those
coming hearings, the committee will be exploring how the United
States trust responsibility for Indian lands and resources
would be maintained if the President's proposals to privatize
the administration of Federal programs are approved by the
Congress.
Today, however, we look forward to hearing from the Federal
agencies as to the objectives that the President's budget
request for Indian programs under the respective jurisdiction
seeks to accomplish in fiscal year 2003.
With that, I would like to call upon the first witness, the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Employment and Training
Administration, David Dye. Before I recognize Mr. Dye, may I
call upon the vice chairman?
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will hear
from a number of agencies today, as you mentioned. There are a
number of important issues that we have to face up to on Indian
reservations: Law enforcement, policing, education, drug
treatment, elder care, and the Administration for Native
Americans. They are all extremely important.
Safe and stable communities provide safety for their
members and also attract business activity, which is so
important to native people nationwide. I might mention, I don't
know if you saw the Wall Street Journal this morning, Mr.
Chairman, but there was an article on the front page that
indicated that one of the most successful forms of business on
reservations now are funeral homes. To me that is a terrible,
sad commentary about what is happening on Indian reservations.
But if you are out there as much as I am, you know that the
death rate is just incredible.
Given the demands placed on the Department of Justice to
fight terrorism, I have to tell you, I am generally encouraged
by the request for Indian law enforcement with a few
exceptions. One is the lack of tribal detention center funds.
Another is the reduction in the COPS funding for tribes and the
third is static funding for tribal courts.
I think in the hearings we have done in the past we have
stressed that strengthening tribal courts is really one of the
pillars, one of the foundations, of making sure that homelands
for Indian tribes are safe. I am hopeful that we can find the
kind of resources that we need for those important services.
I commend the President for his dramatic increase in funds
for substance abuse and mental health treatment. We know that
these problems continue to ravage Indian communities and I am
certainly glad to see the increase. The problem is that even
though we have an increase in the funds, the demand grows
faster than the increase.
We have some reservations, in fact, where 50 percent of the
whole tribe is under 25 years old. So, clearly, we have not
been keeping up with the demands.
I have several questions I would like to ask this morning,
but in the interest of time, let me just close by saying one
agency I am particularly interested in and that is the ANA. The
ANA, the Administration for Native Americans, provides seed
capital for Indian businesses, language preservation and
environmental protection and does it in a way that reduces
dependence.
I certainly urge the department to study the ANA and find
out why it works so well when some other programs are not
working so well.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to
introduce my complete statement in the record.
The Chairman. Without objection, it is so ordered.
[Prepared statement of Senator Campbell appears in
appendix.]
The Chairman. With that, may I recognize Mr. Dye.
STATEMENT OF DAVID DYE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ACCOMPANIED BY
JAMES C. DeLUCA, CHIEF, DIVISION OF INDIAN AND NATIVE AMERICAN
PROGRAMS
Mr. Dye. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and members
of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the
Department of Labor's Employment and Training Programs for
Indian and Native Americans in Program Years 2002 and 2003.
I am please to have with me today James C. DeLuca, who
heads the Division of Indian and Native American Programs of
the Department of Labor. ETA's primary strategy for Indian and
Native American programs focuses on the continuation of our
partnership initiatives and support for the President's
commitment to work with tribal governments on a sovereign to
sovereign basis to provide Native Americans with new economic
and educational opportunities.
The Department of Labor is a partner not only with other
Federal agencies including the Department of the Interior, but
also tribal governments and other Native American organizations
that deliver job training services. Our partners include the
186 Indian and Native American Workforce Investment Act section
166 grantees. These partnerships are based on shared
responsibility for program accountability and improved program
outcomes along with a commitment to leverage resources outside
of BIA.
For its part, ETA has worked cooperatively with Indian
grantees to improve the program and maximize the impact of
these funds. The partnerships ensures that Native people and
Native communities have the opportunity to be active
participants in the American economy.
Under WIA there are two distinct Indian programs. One is a
year-round program for both youth and adults and the other is a
supplemental summer youth program.
The year-round program authorized under section 166 of the
statute was designed to improve the economic well being of
Native Americans. It provides training, work experience, and
other employment-related services and opportunities. The
program serves approximately 22,000 Native people annually in
all areas of the United States, including those participating
in the demonstration program under Public Law 102-477, the
Indian Employment Training and Related Services Demonstration
Act of 1992.
This demonstration program allows the combining of funds
for employment and training activities from several Federal
departments to be administered under a single grant by the BIA
and coordinated at the tribal level. Currently, 48 tribal and
Alaska Native entities participate in the demonstration
program, 44 of which receive WIA section 166 funds. These 48
entities represent about 250 federally recognized tribes and
Native Alaskan villages.
Because of a reduced administrative workload and the
flexibility the single grant provides, some of these grantees
have more than doubled the number of participants they serve.
The other main ETA program is the Supplemental Youth
Services Employment and Training Program also authorized under
section 166 of WIA. The law reserves funds specifically for
services to Native American youth in reservation areas and in
Alaska, Oklahoma and Hawaii. The program serves about 10,000
Native American youth each year.
These two programs represent the main source of support for
employment and training services for Indians and Native
Americans for which the President's fiscal year 2003 budget
requests a total of $70 million. Of this, $55 million is for
the WIA section 166 Indian and Native American Program. About
$15 million is for the Native American Indian Supplemental
Youth Services Program, which represents 1.5 percent of the
total WIA youth formula-grant request as mandated by law.
In addition, the Department of Labor supports a variety of
other initiatives. ETA has awarded six competitive grants
totally $29 million to American Indian and Alaska Native
grantees for youth programs. These are the so-called Youth
Opportunity Grants.
Under the Senior Community Service Employment Program, the
department provides over $6 million to subsidize part-time
community service jobs for about 700 low-income Native
Americans, aged 55 years and older, on reservations and other
areas. Participants serve their communities in positions such
as nurse's aids, teacher's aids, clerical workers, while
gaining skills to move into unsubsidized employment.
The department has also awarded National Meeting Grants to
Native American entities to serve dislocated workers. For
example, the Lummi Tribe of Washington State is receiving up to
$1.5 million to assist dislocated fishermen and the Salish-
Kootenai Tribe in Montana has received about $2.8 million to
assist workers dislocated during wild fires and now includes
funding for the downturn in the timber industry.
Although the authorization to make grants for Indian and
Native American Welfare-to-Work programs has expired, the
department has issued regulations and procedures that enable
those tribal grantees with remaining Welfare-to-Work moneys to
expend them within the recently extended time period on those
participants who can best benefit from that effort.
The funds requested in the President's budget will help
greatly in assisting tribes and Indian organizations to meet
the employment and training needs of their communities.
However, we must also continue our partnership efforts to
strengthen the program and involve other areas of society such
as the private sector and community and faith-based
organizations if the overall effort is to be successful.
In concert with our partners, we have many significant
accomplishments thus far in program year 2001, which ends July
30 of this year. We have, among other things, streamlined
regulations, increased the capacity of grantees to manage
grants, implemented an information technology project that puts
over 120 grantees on to the information super highway and
enables them to report on line.
We have increased peer-to-peer technical assistance and
training and we have improved the hourly wage rate for
participants placed in unsubsidized jobs. Now, the most recent
Indian and Native American employment and training data
available are for the program year that ended June 30, 2001.
That was program year 2000. During that program year, the
section 166 adult programs had an overall entered employment
rate of 54.1 percent and a positive termination rate of 83.4
percent.
A positive termination occurs when a participant begins to
work, earns a diploma or completes training. Participants
placed in unsubsidized employment at an average hourly wage of
$7.70 per hour, which was significantly higher than the average
pre-program wage of $5.47 per hour.
Mr. Chairman, before concluding, I wish to address two
concerns that I know that you probably have. The first one
relates to filling the vacancies on the Native American
Employment and Training Council and the second one concerns the
Solicitation for Grant Applications WIA section 166 program
funds.
The Native American Employment and Training Council
currently has nine vacancies. I want to assure you that we are
working to fill those vacancies as quickly as possible. I
personally have been involved in that. We had some slippage in
appointing members to all of our advisory councils at the
department. I could give you a long litany of excuses; some of
it has to do with the terrorist attacks that occured on
September 11. But we are moving ahead now and we think we will
accomplish that very soon.
In addition, I would mention the Solicitation for Grant
Applications. As you know, that is generally published in the
fall. We are a little bit late on that, though that has not
imperiled any grantees funding. It is always out with plenty of
time to cover contingencies.
I am happy to announce that it has been approved and likely
to be published later this week.
Mr. Chairman, our investment in Indian and Native American
employment and training programs will allow many of the most
disadvantaged Americans to acquire the skills they need for
productive careers. It is our strong belief that this is a
worthwhile investment.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would
be happy to answer any questions that the committee has. Thank
you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Dye.
According to the President's budget request, the Youth
Opportunity Grant Program will be severely cut. As a result,
six tribes, a tribal consortia, and Alaska Native organizations
that are now providing comprehensive services to Native youth
in very high poverty areas may have to terminate their
activities. What will be the reduction in these grants?
Mr. Dye. Well, unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, I think there
has been some misinformation, particularly in the press. Under
the Youth Opportunity Grant Program we funded 36 sites, six of
which are Native American grants. There were plans, but not yet
funded, to add additional sites.
The President's budget this year did not include funding
for additional grants, but it did continue the existing grants.
From the beginning the existing grants were funded on a
declining scale over a period of 5 years dropping to 75
percent, in the third year to 50 percent of their original
amount in year 5.
We are still intending, and the President's budget
contemplates, keeping that funding schedule although there
might be a small shortfall. We are looking at ways we might
reprogram money to meet any shortfall. At the very worst it
would amount to a decrease of, I think, about at the most
$200,000 for the largest grants.
So, the good new is, Mr. Chairman, that those grants will
continue for the five years as originally planned. They are
demonstration grants, which means that they were not intended
to run forever. They were seed money for a five-year period and
it was intended that the funds should be picked up by other
sources eventually.
The Chairman. It will continue for five more years but with
much less funding?
Mr. Dye. Yes; at the rate originally contemplated in the
grant, yes. The third year would go for another two beyond the
current year.
The Chairman. Twenty-five percent of the original grant?
Mr. Dye. Well, eventually now it is 75 percent. It declines
in the fifth year to 50 percent.
The Chairman. Do you think you can carryout the purposes of
this program with such reductions in funding?
Mr. Dye. Well, yes. I think that was certainly the plan
when the original grant was contemplated that they would
operate on that funding schedule.
The Chairman. Well, we will be monitoring this to see how
it turns out.
Mr. Dye. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The administration has requested the minimum
amount authorized under the Workforce Investment Act for the
Indian Comprehensive Service Program, which is $55 million. Has
the department made any attempt to calculate the need of these
services based on the size of the population, the employment
barriers, et cetera?
Mr. Dye. Well, the existing program is based on a formula
that takes population into consideration. It is pretty much
level funding. It has been over the past several years. So,
with the funding available, we do, by formula, restrict it by
population.
The Chairman. Don't you believe that if you study the size
of the population and the barriers to their employment, the
minimum amount would not suffice?
Mr. Dye. Well, we do the best we can with what we have,
sir. I think we do look at the population statistics on a
regular basis.
Mr. DeLuca. We do, but we work basically on a formula that
is census-based and that formula will not change until the 2000
census figures are given to us in a usable fashion. The program
has been essentially constant for a number of years at $55
million. It has gone up and down a little bit.
The Chairman. The procedure for designating tribes and
organizations as grantees for the Indian Workforce Investment
Act Program should have started last September, but I gather
that you just began last week. Is this delay the events of
September 11?
Mr. Dye. Partially, yes.
The Chairman. Do you mean 9/11 delayed it this long?
Mr. Dye. No; I don't want to use that to explain away
everything. But those events did put a lot of strain on the
department in a variety of ways, though I won't offer that as a
totally exculpatory excuse for everything.
The Chairman. With this delay, can you assure that Section
166 Supplemental funds will be available by April first?
Mr. Dye. Yes; we are very confident of that.
The Chairman. I presume they will be available to all
grantees by that time?
Mr. Dye. Yes.
The Chairman. I have several other questions that we will
be submitting to you for your consideration.
Mr. Dye. We will be happy to answer them promptly, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. Vice Chairman Campbell?
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dye, it is
nice to see you here. You had a long, extensive and very good
career with the Senate Energy Committee and in the House before
that. You bring an awful lot to this job and I am very happy
top see you there.
Mr. Dye. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. I wanted to ask you several questions
dealing with employment. You probably know as well as I do that
much of the poverty on Indian reservations is related to the
lack of jobs.
I don't think it is out of the question to assume that any
place, the inner cities, the barrios, whatever, when you have
high unemployment you have some real social problems that go
along with it. So, I have always tried to emphasize job
creation and education.
Let me ask you first of all, do you track unemployment
training needs for individual Indians themselves, but also the
needs of the employers that are looking for people to work in
your department?
Mr. Dye. Well, I don't think we have done as much of that
as we probably ought to have. My boss, Assistant Secretary
Emily de Rocco, is placing a very strong emphasis now on trying
to forge better partnerships with business. After all, those
are the entities, the engines of job creation. We want to move
away from the past where we may have trained people sort of not
completely cognizant of the real opportunities out there or
worked with employers to create more opportunities.
We need to train people for jobs, jobs that exist or jobs
that are going to be created in time for people to get them.
So, we have a lot stronger emphasis now on working with
businesses.
Senator Campbell. Well, I certainly would encourage you to
do both of those kinds of tracking. It doesn't do any good to
train somebody for a job if there is no job, especially when
there are some industries in America that need people. I am a
big supporter of any kind of education, but clearly a lot of
the job sector is not in an academic education.
If a young person wants to become a doctor or a can you
professor, I certainly support that. Even if he wants to become
an attorney I would probably support it, although we have
nothing against your profession, we have so darn many of them
now, that is probably a field that we don't need to put so much
emphasis on.
But, vocational training, I think we are really missing the
boat somewhere with the Labor Department in trying to hook up
opportunities with needy Indian people. Let me give you just
one example, and I would hope that you would put it in your
think cap.
I have a bill in that will create Labor Department grants
for training people who want to drive trucks. That sounds a
little bit crazy, I guess, but if you track the needs of the
trucking industry, last year they were short 200,000 drivers.
In fact, they are talking about importing people from foreign
countries just to teach them to drive because there is such a
shortage of drivers.
If a person gets out of college with a B.A. and goes into
teaching, he can probably get $35,000 a year as a beginning
teacher. But some of these truck drivers are making $50,000 to
$60,000 a year. If they are what they call team drivers,
husband and wife, some of them are doing over $100,000 a year.
It is really a good paying profession. In a vocational sense,
it is a lot of money.
I know a number of Indian people in Montana, not a number,
but a few that are working for one trucking company that I
think is out of Billings called Dick Simon. I talked to them.
They tell me it is great. They don't get home as often as they
would like, but they are home almost every weekend for two
days. But the pay really makes a difference because they can
live on the reservation and still make a good income.
Well, it would seem to me that we have to make some way to
hook people up that need those jobs when we know the trucking
industry needs those drivers. I noted some of the things that
come across my desk, the Mid-America Truck Conference is in
Louisville, Kentucky the week after next. They expect 75,000
people to come to that thing. That is how big that industry is.
In there there will be over two dozen recruiters, recruiters
from every major trucking company in the United States,
Mayflower, Werner and all these big guys. They have full-time
people trying to recruit.
If you go to a truck driving school, when you get out of
that school you probably get ten calls from trucking companies
around that will even reimburse the cost of going to the truck
driving school if you will sign a contract to go to work for
them.
Somehow, we have got to find opportunities like that for
Indian people. I know they are there. I just mentioned the
truck industry because I am pretty close to it. But there are
other industries that must have an equal amount of opportunity
and we are going like this. The Indians need the job and we
have the industry that needs the people and we can't seem to
hook them up.
Well, it seems to me that part of the Labor Department's
obligation is to try to hook them up, particularly if they are
as interested in job creation for Indian people as I am. Would
you maybe look at that bill I introduced and give me some
feedback on how we can do that, how we can create that, at
least in that one industry where we know that there is that
many jobs available?
Mr. Dye. Yes, I would be happy to look at the bill, but I
would like to say I couldn't agree with you more. We do need to
look at a number of our vocational offerings. One thing, the
President has stated a very clear preference to work more
closely with community colleges, including tribal colleges and
try to look at a number of these vocational offerings.
I know there are plenty of truck driving jobs that go
begging, not just in long haul jobs, but for instance I know in
the oil and gas industry they are begging for people in some
places. Also in the oil and gas industry, for instance, and
this is something I happen to know a little bit about because
of my former life, there is a real shortage of platform workers
in exploration and work-over drilling. They can't find people
to do that. Well, that is another job that would be real good
for folks that are in Indian country because it is another kind
of job where you can leave for a time and come back. It doesn't
require permanent relocation.
It is a decent paying job, hard outdoor work, but I think
it is the kind of thing that people are willing to do. I know,
for instance, we are looking at the Southwest. There is some
work being done in that area. San Juan College in Farmington,
New Mexico, for instance, is looking at jobs in the oil and gas
industry. They have a couple of industry champions there and I
have been told that the Navaho Nation, they have been so good
at actually getting jobs, real jobs, for Native Americans that
the Navaho Nation now has kicked in some money in this effort.
Just last Friday I was talking to labor officials from New
Mexico. We are interested in talking about that program and
similar programs.
Senator Campbell. Well, it has been my experience that
Indian people are not afraid of hard work, not afraid of even
dangerous work. What they want is an honest day's pay for an
honest day's work. You will find in some places they are
exceptional.
Firefighters, more and more firefighters in the summer are
coming from Indian Reservations, as you probably know, smoke
jumpers and the people that really are in danger. They excel at
that. They excel at high-rise steel working in New York City,
as you probably know, too.
There are a lot of jobs out there. We just are not making
the connection. But it would seem to me the Labor Department's
responsibility is to try to make that connection.
Let me, before I run out of time here, I am encouraged by
your participation in this tribal economic development forum.
Let me ask you a couple of things. Has the forum resulted in
regulatory changes to encourage businesses on reservations, do
you know?
Mr. Dye. Not yet, but we are working on it, I am told.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Then you might have the same answer
if I asked you if you identified opportunities on Indian lands?
Mr. Dye. I will have to talk to somebody who has been a
participant in that meeting.
Senator Campbell. Well, it might be a little premature.
Mr. Dye. The answer is we are working on it. But if you
would like us to give a little better answer for the record, we
will be glad to do that.
Senator Campbell. I would. If you could give us at least a
progress report on what you have done to encourage on- the-
reservation job creation, on the ground job creation. If you
could provide that for the committee, yet, I would appreciate
it.
Mr. Dye. I do think, getting back to your earlier point,
that is very, very important, because you can train people
until the cows come home, but if there aren't jobs there, you
are not really going to get very far.
Senator Campbell. Give some thought to training drivers,
too, and get back to me with that, too, would you?
Mr. Dye. Yes.
The Chairman. I just have one question, since you brought
up the Native American Employment and Training Council, I
gather there are nine council member vacancies?
Mr. Dye. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What do you propose to do with these
vacancies?
Mr. Dye. We propose to fill them as soon as possible.
The Chairman. How long will that be?
Mr. Dye. Well, I would like to do it tomorrow but the
Secretary has to do that and there is a certain amount of
vetting that goes on. I am putting my personal attention to it,
as is my boss. As soon as we can get that in front of the
Secretary and do it, we will do it as quickly as we can, sir.
The Chairman. In the selection process, do you consult with
Indian Country?
Mr. Dye. Yes, we do. In fact the nominations come from
tribes and other Native American entities. So, they are
involved and the council is involved. I would just say one
thing about the council. It is down to about half strength but
it continues to function. We have several working groups, in
fact I met with one of them a week ago, just a week ago, and
work is getting done.
Obviously, with some people not appointed it is not
represented quite as broadly as it is now, but we are still
seeking its advice and it is a strong and functioning
committee. Actually, they do work and I do rely on them
heavily. Mr. DeLuca is in charge of those meetings. We are
chugging along and we are talking to people in Indian Country.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Mr. Dye.
Mr. Dye. You are welcome.
The Chairman. Our next witness is the Director of the
Office of Community Services, United States Department of
Health and Human Services, Mr. Clarence Carter.
Mr. Carter, welcome to the committee, sir, and you may
begin.
STATEMENT OF CLARENCE CARTER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF COMMUNITY
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members of the
committee, thank you for providing me the opportunity to
testify today. As director of the office that administers the
Tribal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, Tribal
TANF, and the Native Employment Works Program, acronym NEW, I
am pleased to discuss with you these important Native American
programs as we look to reauthorization of welfare reform.
While I do not administer the Administration for Native
Americans, I know that the social and economic development
strategies, environmental quality and National languages
preservations program under the Native American Programs Act
play a vital role in supporting Indian and Native American
self-determination and the development of economic, social and
governance capacities of Native American communities.
My written testimony includes information on the important
work of these programs. I would like to use my time this
morning sharing information on the current status of the Tribal
TANF and the Native Employment Works programs and then turn to
what we see as the next steps, including aspects of TANF-free
authorization that will impact tribal programs.
The Tribal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families was part
of welfare reform in 1996. Welfare reform gave tribes the
opportunity to operate their own TANF programs in order to meet
the unique needs of tribal families and move them toward self-
sufficiency.
Tribes have the option to receive direct Federal funding to
design and operate TANF programs or they may choose to rely
upon States to provide TANF services to tribal families.
Although States operated family assistance programs for 60
years, operating TANF is a new responsibility for tribes.
Tribal, Federal and State governments have worked in
partnership as tribes have taken on this major new
responsibility.
HHS has provided assistance to tribes through conferences
and meetings, technical assistance and information exchange as
tribes consider whether to administer TANF programs themselves
and as they operate their own tribal TANF programs. The number
of tribal TANF programs continues to increase each year.
The first two tribal TANF programs began in July 1997.
Currently, there are 36 approved tribal TANF programs in 15
States, encompassing 174 tribes and Alaska Native villages.
These programs serve a combined caseload of approximately
23,000 families with an estimated 65,000 individuals.
An additional eight tribal TANF plans are currently pending
involving 12 tribes with an estimated caseload of 6,000
families and as many as 20,000 individuals.
There is no separate funding source for tribal TANF
programs. Each tribe's TANF funding is taken from the
appropriate State's TANF block grant, based on fiscal year 1994
AFDC caseloads for Indian families residing in the service area
identified by the tribe.
In addition, most of the 15 States in which tribes are
administering their own TANF programs have chosen to provide
funding and/or in kind supports to further tribal efforts.
Thirteen of the States in which tribes are administering
their own TANF programs including Alaska, Arizona, Minnesota,
New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming are
providing additional funding assistance to tribes and are
claiming these expenditures to meet their TANF maintenance of
effort requirements.
Several of them also are providing additional resources
such as computers, staff training, reporting support and access
to the State's reporting systems. Many of them are working in
collaboration with tribal TANF programs in referrals,
information exchange, and eligibility assessment and
determination for other programs such as Food Stamps and
Medicaid.
Some States collocate and out-station State employees with
tribal programs to provide intake and assessments in a current
one-stop operation. Tribes have broad flexibility in designing
their programs and, like States, are making varied choices to
meet their own unique circumstances.
Time limits on receipt of benefits vary. Under the work
requirements, participation rates and the number of hours of
work required per week also vary from plan to plan. Like work
activities and benefits, support services vary greatly from one
tribe to another, with tribes tailoring them to fit the unique
needs of their service populations.
Also, I would like to talk for just 1 minute about the
Native Employment Works Program. The NEW program replaced the
Tribal Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program and
provides funding for tribes and inter-tribal consortia to
design and provide work activities to meet the unique
employment and training needs of their populations to help
tribal service populations become self-sufficient.
The statute restricts eligibility for the Native Employment
Works Program to tribes and Alaska Native organizations that
operated a JOBS Program in fiscal year 1995. Currently, all 79
eligible tribes and organizations receive new program funding.
Tribal TANF and Native Employment Works Programs are
addressing the needs of tribal service populations and have
enabled thousands of clients to move to unsubsidized
employment. However, tribal members, especially those in rural
areas, continue to face major barriers to self-sufficiency.
Unemployment is high in most tribal communities and those
employed often earn poverty level incomes. Tribal members often
have low levels of education and job skills and lack
transportation and child care. Helping these families leave
welfare for work requires that special attention be given to
providing effective job preparation and supportive services and
realistically addressing the prospect for job opportunities on
the reservation.
As part of eight TANF reauthorization discussions held
throughout the country, Health and Human Services held a tribal
TANF listening session in San Francisco in October 2001 where
tribes shared their experiences and perspectives on TANF
programs.
The tribal listening session and other tribal input showed
that tribes see the tribal TANF and the Native Employment Works
Programs as valuable resources to help meet tribal needs and
support self-sufficiency for tribal families.
Tribal TANF programs will benefit from the changes proposed
in the administration's plan for reauthorizing the TANF
program. For example, tribes would be the beneficiaries of
technical assistance provided under proposed new research,
demonstration and technical assistance funds.
Additionally, tribes will benefit from the proposed
demonstration research projects that are intended to promote
family formation and healthy marriages and they also can
benefit from the administration's matching grant program to
promote healthy marriages and reduce out-of-wedlock births.
Tribal TANF and Native Employment Works Programs also will
have the added flexibility granted to States to use reserve
funds for more basic assistance needs.
Finally, tribes can take advantage of the administration's
proposed approach for maximizing self-sufficiency through work
and additional constructive activities. As you know, our
proposal for TANF reauthorization includes the creation of a
new universal engagement requirement that includes planning
activities and services and monitoring participation and
progress.
We know that it is especially important to tribes with
significant challenges to combine services with work programs
in creative ways. Tribes will continue to have the flexibility
to negotiate customized programs that are compatible with our
proposals on case management, work and services to meet the
needs and challenges of their communities and economic
circumstances.
We look forward to working with Congress in reauthorizing
these programs. If you have any questions, I would be happy to
try to answer them at this time.
The Chairman. Well thank you very much, Mr. Carter. May I
begin by asking, what is the unemployment figure for this
Nation?
Mr. Carter. I think the most recent figure is some place in
the mid-4 percent. Did you say for the country?
The Chairman. For the whole country.
Mr. Carter. I think it is some place in the mid four
percent, the unemployment rate, yes. You asked me what was the
unemployment rate for the Nation, correct?
The Chairman. What is the unemployment rate for the Nation,
for all peoples?
Mr. Carter. It is my guess, I think it is some place in
about the mid 4-percent range.
The Chairman. What is the unemployment rate in Indian
country?
Mr. Carter. We have looked at unemployment figures on
reservations. In some instances those unemployment rates are as
high as 50 percent.
The Chairman. What is it for Indians residing outside the
reservation in urban areas?
Mr. Carter. I am sorry; I don't have that figure
specifically.
The Chairman. Are individual Indians eligible for State-
operated TANF Programs or is it just for non-Indian families?
Mr. Carter. No, sir; individuals would also be eligible.
Individuals who are parents of children in an eligible family
may receive employment and training services.
The Chairman. How many are served by State-operated
programs? Do you have any idea?
Mr. Carter. I don't have a direct figure for how many
Native Americans are served specifically by State TANF
programs, but I can attempt to find that information and
provide it for you.
The Chairman. I would appreciate that.
Mr. Carter. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Under the welfare reform law, States are
required to provide equitable access to Indians under the State
TANF programs, but there is no enforcement mechanism. How will
the administration use the fiscal year 2003 funds to ensure
that Indians are provided equitable access?
We have received complaints that Indians are being denied
service.
Mr. Carter. Mr. Chairman, I have not been privy to that
information. I would like to be able to look into it and report
back to you on it.
The Chairman. I would appreciate that. If you feel that we
should have some enforcement mechanism, I would be most pleased
to receive your recommendation.
Mr. Carter. We will look into it and share that information
with you.
The Chairman. Unlike States which have received Federal
support for infrastructure building over 60 years, tribal TANF
programs do not receive support costs or start-up money from
the Federal Government. This, I believe, places tribes in
financial risk as many lack the infrastructure needed to
administer TANF programs.
Is there any mechanism in existing law which would allow
the department to provide infrastructure funds to tribal TANF
programs?
Mr. Carter. There is no mechanism in the existing TANF
structure. There are some opportunities in the President's
proposed 2003 budget that would provide for additional
technical assistance for tribes and States as they put in place
TANF programs, but there is no existing mechanism for
infrastructure support specifically for tribes.
The Chairman. Without that, can they be assured of equal
access?
Mr. Carter. I think in the first 6 years of experience that
we have with tribal TANF we have seen a number of tribal
organizations and consortia be able to put in place TANF
structures that are, I would say in some instances, the rival
of State organizations. So, there does exist the opportunity
now to construct tribal TANF programs that work well with the
current construction; that doesn't suggest that the issue of
infrastructure should be ignored.
The Chairman. The President's summary included numerous
proposals for States including a contingency fund and
supplemental grants.
My question is: Will Indian tribes have access to the same
kinds of moneys as States supplemental grants and contingency
funds or will those funds be limited to States?
Mr. Carter. In order to speak on that, I am going to need
to get some clarification, it is my understanding that those
are being made available to States, but I want to make sure.
The Chairman. I would hope you would look into that because
I gather that the policy is equal access. If that is the
policy, then Indian country should have access to those
resources as well.
Does your department coordinate its Administration for
Native American grants with other programs such as the TANF
program or consult with other agencies such as the Commerce
Department in order to assure the most efficient use of funds?
Mr. Carter. Prior to my arrival, I would tell you that I
don't believe that our coordination in our approach to
providing services to Native Americans was as coordinated as it
could be. We have aggressively, I mean during my short tenure,
attempted to build some of those relationships, built some new
relationships and repaired some existing ones.
For instance, we are currently in conversation with the
Administration for Native Americans to make available through
Community Economic Development funds some projects on Indian
reservations to deal with economic development on reservations.
It is those kinds of new relationships which we think we
can forge across department lines which will help us strengthen
our approach to strengthen Indian country.
The Chairman. I believe all witnesses will agree that there
is a great need for employment and training opportunities. Yet,
I know that this budget request reduces funding for the
Administration for Native Americans, ANA given rates of
inflation. This is the agency that provides seed money to bring
about employment and training opportunities in Indian country.
Would you object if we added a few dollars to this?
Mr. Carter. Mr. Chairman, no, I don't think, on behalf of
Indian country, I don't think Indian country would object at
all: However, our budget proposes only a small reduction in ANA
funding, of less than three-quarters of $1 million.
The Chairman. I have many other questions. I will submit
them to you for your consideration.
But I have just one more question.
Mr. Carter. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The authorization for ANA, the Administration
for Native Americans, will expire on September 30 of this year.
Although the president requests funding for the administration
for fiscal year 2003, will the president request
reauthorization of the Native American Programs Act?
Mr. Carter. Mr. Chairman, it is not my position to be out
in front of the President on his objectives. But my suspicion
is that there is funding proposed for 2003. We have, in fact,
requested a straight line reauthorization of this program.
The Chairman. You are not in the loop on the authorization?
Mr. Carter. No, sir; I am not.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Mr. Carter.
Mr. Vice Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Carter, you heard the chairman mention unemployment and
you responded with what you thought the national unemployment
rate was and the unemployment rate on Indian reservations. I
have to tell you that there are many people in Indian
reservations that are permanently unemployed and it has been so
long since they have had a job, they gave up. This fact is
hidden when we look at Indian unemployment rates. You find that
in some inner cities, too, as you probably know. They don't
reflect on the unemployment roles because they just gave up.
But as I understand it, if you look at, say, inner city
unemployment it hovers between 25 and 30 percent in the worst
places. There are Indian reservations in the United States
right now that have 80 percent, 80 percent, in North and South
Dakota.
I see the Senator from North Dakota is here and he can
verify that. I don't know of any place in the world, other than
Bangladesh and Afghanistan that have unemployment that high,
very frankly. I think it is a national disgrace that we can't
do better in providing jobs for Indian people in the richest
nation in the whole darn world. We still have that kind of
unemployment with all the social problems that go with us,
whether it is suicide or alcohol abuse or all the stuff that
seems to spawn from not having a productive job. That is what
we face on Indian reservations.
But let me talk to you a little bit about the ANA funding
since the chairman focused on that, too. I think it is good,
but what is the rationale for reducing the funds for ANA in
2003 since we know that it has helped in language preservation,
economic development, a number of other things.
Mr. Carter. I'm sorry, Mr. Vice Chairman, that was a
reduction in----
Senator Campbell. Oh, excuse me. That is ANA.
Mr. Carter. There is no reduction in tribal TANF.
Senator Campbell. What was the rationale for reducing the
funds in ANA, do you know?
Mr. Carter. No, sir; I do not.
Senator Campbell. Okay, let me get back to TANF funding if
you don't know that. We are going to be dealing with the
welfare reform bill, the reauthorization, very shortly. We are
going to be reauthorizing that. You noted that there is no
separate funding source for TANF and that it sometimes is taken
from the State's allocation. I know how that works. That is,
tribes don't get it or they are kind of on the back end. It is
like getting water from an irrigation system where there are 10
guys in front of you and you are the last one in the ditch. You
kind of get what is left over.
Unfortunately, Indian tribes, a lot of times, that is what
they face when they have to go through the State bureaucracy to
get money that is filtered to the State.
My question is, wouldn't it be more efficient to provide
TANF funds directly to the tribes?
Mr. Carter. Mr. Vice Chairman, I understand your analogy,
but I would tell you that the way that this works is that, by
the 1994 caseload data that States provided to the Federal
Government which sets the baseline for their funding, outlined
in that data is the amount that the State expended for Indian
country.
So, as the service population has declined, those dollars
are cut right out, at the Federal level, they are cut right out
of the State's allocation. So, we do that carving at the
Federal level and then subtract that from the State's
allocation.
Senator Campbell. Do you mean they don't go through the
State at all; they go directly to the tribe from the Federal
level?
Mr. Carter. They do go directly to the tribe, if they are
cut out from the State's overall allocation.
Senator Campbell. Okay, maybe one last question. That is on
the 477 program that authorizes integration and coordination of
Job Programs. It is my understanding the department has been a
little bit slow to implement the amendments that we passed in
2000.
Would you care to comment on that?
Mr. Carter. Mr. Vice Chairman, when I arrived at the Office
of Community Services there were some issues brought to my
attention about the way that we operated Public Law 102-477 and
we did not have in place an appropriate mechanism to ensure
that we were properly protecting the responsibilities and the
funding sources of the Department of Health and Human Services.
We have entered into negotiation with the tribes and the
Bureau of Indian Affairs and we have worked out all of the
challenges that we had laid out for us, I think, in a very
collaborative way. The funding never stopped during that time.
It was simply rerouted. But I think that all parties would
concede that we have worked all the difficulties out of it.
Public Law 102-477 will work just as Congress intended it
to work, as allowing tribes to take a very integrated approach
to making themselves more healthy.
Senator Campbell. You probably know that there are a few
very successful tribes now. Some have done very well through
gaming and natural resources. Most have not, but a few have.
Some of the tribes that have had successes are using their own
funds to either supplement or replace some of the Federal
funds.
They found that going through the bureaucracy is just too
much trouble. It is easy for them to use their own money. Have
you seen any reduction in the demand for Federal programs under
TANF for services in the communities that have had, say, gaming
interests?
Mr. Carter. No, sir, Mr. Vice Chairman. In fact since 1996
when welfare reform passed and we had the first two tribes to
make application to run tribal TANF, we have actually increased
over the intervening years to 36. We currently have eight
applications pending.
I will tell you that it is an arduous discussion among the
tribes to determine whether or not operating the program is in
their best interests. There are times when consortia are
necessary because a tribe may be too small to operate the
program on their own. But we see an increasing interest on the
part of tribes to take this opportunity to help put this
program in place that would benefit their health and welfare.
We see it as our responsibility at the Department of Health
and Human Services to provide all the information and technical
assistance so a tribe can make a determination in their own
best interest.
Senator Campbell. I see. Thank you, Mr. Carter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. I thank you very much.
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Carter appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Our next witness is the deputy assistant
secretary, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education,
Department of Education, Tom Corwin, accompanied by Cathie
Martin, acting director, Office of Indian Education.
Mr. Corwin.
STATEMENT OF TOM CORWIN, ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, ACCOMPANIED BY CATHIE MARTIN, ACTING DIRECTOR,
OFFICE OF INDIAN EDUCATION
Mr. Corwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am accompanied this
morning by Cathie Martin. Cathie is our acting director in the
Office of Indian Education. I am actually an acting deputy
assistant secretary. Cathie and I are pleased to appear before
you this morning to discuss the fiscal year 2003 budget request
for major Department of Education programs that serve American
Indians, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiians.
With the chairman's permission, I would like to summarize
the remainder of my testimony and ask that the full text be
placed in the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
Mr. Corwin. Mr. Chairman, the Bush administration is
strongly committed to ensuring that American Indians, Alaska
Natives, and Native Hawaiians receive every opportunity to
achieve to high academic standards.
The recently enacted ``No Child Left Behind'' Act focuses
on improving academic achievement by ensuring that all children
can read by the end of the third grade, improving teacher
quantity through high-quality professional development and
innovative teacher recruitment and retention practices,
increasing accountability for student achievement and placing a
stronger emphasis on teaching methods grounded in
scientifically-based research.
Native American students will benefit from these
initiatives and many programs at the Department of Education
help to ensure that Indian students have full access to these
and other reforms to improve education.
The 2003 budget request includes a number of programs and
initiatives that focus specifically on helping Indian students
achieve. In my remaining time I would like to highlight just a
few of these programs.
Our request for the department's Indian Education Programs
is $122.4 million, an increase of $2 million over the 2002
level. These programs include formula grants to school
districts, competitive programs, and national activities to
further research and evaluation on the educational needs and
status of the Indian population.
We are requesting $97.1 million for the Indian Education
formula grants. This program is the Department's principal
vehicle for addressing the unique educational and culturally
related needs of Indian children.
Grants supplement the regular school program, helping
Indian children improve their academic skills, raise their
self-confidence, and participate in enrichment programs and
activities that would otherwise be unavailable.
Our request for special programs for Indian children is $20
million, the same as the 2000 level. These funds will be used
for three activities. Approximately $12.3 million will support
an estimated 43 demonstration grants that promote school
readiness for Indian preschool and increase the potential for
learning among American Indian and Alaska Native students.
In addition, the 2003 request will provide approximately
$7.2 million to continue the American Indian Teacher Corps
initiative which trains Indian college students to become
teachers, places them in schools with concentrations of Indian
students, and provides professional development and in-service
support as they begin teaching.
We are also requesting funds to continue the companion
American Indian Administrator Corps. Grantees funded under this
activity recruit, train, and provide in-service professional
development to American Indians to become effective school
administrators in schools with high concentrations of Indian
students.
We are requesting $5.2 million for research, evaluation and
data collection activities related to Indian education. This is
a $2-million increase.
The Department has used the National Activities
appropriation to craft a comprehensive research agenda for
Indian education. We completed and publicly released that
agenda last November and would now use the 2003 funding for the
first major initiatives in implementing that agenda.
The agenda responds to the major national need for better
information on the educational status and needs of Indian
students and for scientifically based research on what works
most effectively in meeting the educational needs of this
population.
In addition to our Indian Education programs, the
Department also supports the education of Indians through many
other, broader programs. I will just mention a few of those.
The remainder are discussed in my written statement.
Title I provides supplemental education funding to local
educational agencies and schools, especially in high-poverty
areas to help some 15 million students, including an estimated
237,000 Indian children and youth, learn to high academic
standards. With title I, these students have the benefit of,
for example, extra instruction at all grade levels, extended-
day kindergarten programs, learning laboratories in math and
science, and intensive summer programs.
The Department has requested a $1-billion increase for
title I in 2003 for a total of $11.4 billion. The BIA share of
the appropriation would be approximately $76 million, a 10-
percent increase. These funds will serve more than 50,000
Indian children in addition to those served in regular public
schools.
We have a new program called Reading First. Reading First
is a comprehensive effort to implement the findings of high-
quality, scientifically based research on reading and reading
instruction. It is one of the Administration's highest
priorities for education. Providing consistent support for
reading success from the earliest age has critically important
benefits.
Under this formula program the BIA will receive one-half of
1 percent of the State grants appropriation. Our 2003 request
of $1 billion would provide approximately $5 million to BIA
schools for this important new program.
The Strengthening Tribally-Controlled Colleges and
Universities or TCCUs program authorizes 1-year planning and 5-
year development grants that enable these institutions to
improve and expand their capacity to serve Indian students.
Under the budget request, the Department would award $18.1
million for activities to strengthen TCCU's, an increase of 3.6
percent over the current level. In the past 2 years, a portion
of funds has supported construction and renovation activities
and the fiscal year 2003 request would provide funds for an
estimated six construction projects.
The companion Strengthening Alaska Native and Native
Hawaiian-Serving Institutions program authorizes 1-year
planning and 5-year development grants that enable these
institutions to improve and expand their capacity to serve
Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian students. The Department's
budget includes $6.7 million, a 3.6-percent increase over the
current level, for this program.
Finally, a mention of Special Education. The Special
Education Grants to States program provides formula grants to
meet the excess costs of providing special education and
related services to children with disabilities. From the total
appropriation, a little more than one percent is allocated to
the BIA.
Under the budget request of $8.5 billion, a $1-billion
increase, 13.3 percent, the Department would provide
approximately $81.2 million to BIA to serve approximately 8,500
Indian students.
In conclusion, the 2003 budget request for Department of
Education programs serving Indians supports the President's
overall goal of ensuring educational opportunities for all
students including American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native
Hawaiians.
My colleague and I would be happy to respond to any
questions.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Mr. Corwin. The
Department of the Interior has proposed privatizing the
administration of schools operated by BIA if an Indian tribe
does not elect to operate the school as a grant school. Does
your department have any experience with private organizations
that operate schools?
Mr. Corwin. This is an issue that we are well aware of, but
we don't have direct experience. Unlike the BIA, we don't
operate schools ourselves, so we wouldn't have any opportunity
to enter into that sort of privatization. It has become a
serious option for some of the cities and some of the States
across the country in the last few years, particularly those
that are running out of patience and throwing up their hands at
the failure of some of their schools to provide an adequate
education.
It is being debated actively right now in Philadelphia. It
has been tested in Hartford. We have had some experience in
Baltimore, San Francisco, and it is a live debate in a lot of
places around the country. Some of the private firms frankly do
offer some exciting ideas for revitalizing the schools, and
State Governors, mayors, and schools boards are looking at that
carefully. We are watching that, but, as I said, we don't have
direct experience.
The Chairman. Is there any system of reporting or rating
these private organizations?
Mr. Corwin. I am not aware of any sort of national rating
system or of any national reports that really attempt to assess
the extent to which they are working. I think the whole
phenomenon may be a little too new to have that sort of
national data at this point. It is possible there are some
reports we could look for for the committee that look at the
experience in some localities, but I think at this point it is
fairly anecdotal.
The Chairman. Don't you think that since we are dealing
with the sensitive minds of young children that something like
this should be done? I ask this in light of a most recent
scandal--involving nursing homes. It appears that we have no
system to monitor or to rate them. As a result, old folks who
are helpless get beaten, sometimes to death.
I would like to be certain that moneys we spend would
provide a good and quality education for these young children.
Mr. Corwin. I think this would be an important area we
might want to invest some of our research funds on. I don't
know if we could bring it to quite the stage of having a
national or Federal rating. We don't, at the Federal level,
certify or approve schools or school districts. But I think,
yes, we could be helpful in providing better information in
this area as it begins to develop.
The Chairman. As you know, there is a 5-percent limitation
on amounts that can be used for administrative purposes under
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Now, we are having
complaints that that is not enough. What is your solution?
Mr. Corwin. Well, we are hearing those complaints as well.
I might like to have Cathie speak about it a little. It is in
the law, however. Our statutes allow for waivers of statutory
requirements in cases where there is an impediment to operating
a program or the statutory requirement presents a hardship.
So, the sort of lead option we have come up with is to
permit waivers of that requirement.
Cathie, do you want to say a little more?
Ms. Martin. We are currently providing or preparing
guidance to go in the application packages to inform the
potential grantees on how they can request that waiver. We will
process it with their application.
The Chairman. Will that be the rule instead of the
exception once this waiver is granted?
Ms. Martin. It would become a standard practice within the
program to grant these waivers.
The Chairman. Would there be another limit if there is a
waiver? It is now 5 percent. If you grant a waiver, would you
say another five percent or is it unlimited?
Ms. Martin. They could ask for the entire 5-percent to be
waived.
Mr. Corwin. We would probably have to review the waiver
requests to determine what is an appropriate amount of funding.
Some of these grants are quite small, down to a few thousand
dollars, and 5 percent basically doesn't allow for any
administration. But, of course, you make a good point, you
don't want the entire or the majority of the grant to be used
just for administration rather than services.
The Chairman. In the fiscal year 2003 budget Alaskan and
Native Hawaiian programs were cut. Is there any justification
for that?
Mr. Corwin. Frankly, coming up with the budget that would
fit within our ceilings was difficult for the Secretary and
difficult for the Administration. We are supportive of those
programs, but in order to fit within the ceiling we had to cut
back to a point where we would be able to continue all the
current grants including the new ones that will start in fiscal
year 2002, but would not be able to make any new grants in
2003.
The Chairman. The so-called ``No Child Left Behind Act''
includes authorizations for funding for tribal education
departments, adult education, Indian fellowships, gifted and
talented programs, but there is no funding for these programs.
Is there any reason for that?
Mr. Corwin. Well, these are programs that have not been
funded in several years, going back to about 1995 and in some
cases have never been funded. As I said, in response to the
last question, budget decisions are always very difficult.
The Administration elected to put funding and serious
funding increases behind the programs that were very central to
the mission of the Department and that already were
established, some that I mentioned in my testimony, title I,
Special Education. One very important one that I didn't
mention, Pell Grants, is recommended for a very sizeable
increase, and our reading initiative.
To at least some extent as well these unfunded authorities,
and we have a lot of them on the books, not just in Indian
education, to some extent they overlap with some of the broader
programs in gifted and talented or adult education. We think
the needs could be met by and large through those broader
programs.
The Chairman. Over the last 5 years the National Advisory
Council on Indian Education has been funded at about $50,000.
How much are you requesting for fiscal year 2003?
Mr. Corwin. Mr. Chairman, I don't have a number for you. I
can get you something for the record. The Advisory Council no
longer receives a line item in the budget or in the
appropriation. That change occurred four or five years ago when
Indian education was transferred from the Interior
Appropriation Subcommittees to Labor, HHS and Education. The
funding for NACIE, that committee, was absorbed within our
regular salaries and expenses.
So, I assume somewhere back in the budget documents there
is a number for NACIE. My expectation is that it is probably
not too much higher than last year. But I will provide a
precise number for the record.
The Chairman. Your department is proposing funds for the
Adult Education State Grant and there is a great need for adult
education funds at the tribal colleges and universities. Are
you going to make funds available to them?
Mr. Corwin. The adult education State grants flow through
the States and then at the States level there is--I am trying
to think of the technical name for it--sort of equal
opportunity for different types of entities to apply for sub-
grants from the States, be they school districts, community
colleges or tribal colleges. The Administration is very
supportive of the tribal colleges.
I believe the President may reissue an executive order on
tribal colleges to strengthen the Federal commitment and
reenergize the Federal agencies in their support of the tribal
colleges.
I am not aware of a specific authorization in adult
education. That is in a different office. To the best of my
knowledge, no, we have not put in a specific budget item for
tribal colleges and adult education. I say to the best of my
awareness; if I go back and find that there is something, with
your permission I will correct the record on that.
The Chairman. Do you really believe that tribal colleges
are getting equal access and a fair share of the resources
Mr. Corwin. I don't know the specific situation in adult
education. As I said, it is in a different office. There may be
a tradition in the States where out of habit grants tend to go
out to the secondary schools. But as I mentioned, the
Administration is definitely committed to promoting those
colleges and getting the word out and doing whatever we can,
not just in the Department of Education, but in all the Federal
agencies to ensure that they always get fair treatment and get
a fair share of the funds.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, sir.
Mr. Vice Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You just mentioned the possibility of private schools and
reservations, first of all. I am really concerned about that.
It might present some real possibilities, but I think that I
share the chairman's concern. There are a lot of unanswered
questions about the whole idea.
First of all, as you probably know, there are only two
educational systems in the United States where the Federal
Government is totally responsible for students. One is the
military and the other is with Native Americans. You probably
know that. It is our responsibility.
Those schools, they don't have a real mill-levy tax base.
They can't pass it on to the taxpayers. They don't get ``ADA''
funds from the States in most cases, none, I don't think. The
average daily attendance that the State pays all schools, the
Indian schools don't get that. Their total lifeblood comes from
this body here in Washington.
When we talk about private corporations running the
schools, I would say there might be some possibilities, but
maybe some real dangers, too, because, first of all, I don't
know if that option has ever been tried before. I don't know if
they have done it with Department of Defense schools, for
instance. I don't know what the track record is, what they
would bring in terms of the systems reply about operators.
All that really needs to be looked at, as well as, I think,
the tribal concern about whether somehow it would erode the
trust responsibility of the Federal Government. It is something
that we probably really have to deal with, too, before we move
along too far down that path.
I didn't want to question you about that. I just wanted to
pass that on to you.
To hear your testimony, I think the casual observer would
assume that there had been great strides in assuring
educational opportunities to Native Americans. But I have to
tell you, it is my understanding according to the National
Education Assessment Study, only 17 percent of our Indian kids
read proficiently. That means 83 percent couldn't have read the
testimony that you read into the record. If they could have
read it, they wouldn't have understood it. Functional
illiteracy is a big problem. It is not just a matter of not
being able to read the words, but not being able to understand
what they say. You know as well as I do, illiteracy literally
prevents them from filling out things like job applications,
which is one of the big concerns of this committee.
I don't know how we can frankly justify some of the cuts.
Senator Inouye mentioned the $10-million decrease in funding
for the Native Alaskans. That is roughly a 41-percent decrease
just since 2002. What is going to be the practical effect of
that cut?
Mr. Corwin. As I mentioned to Senator Inouye, we will not
be able to make new awards for the Alaska Natives Program, but
we will be able to continue the current grants, including
grants that we are going to make during fiscal 2002.
I should mention though that that cut is dwarfed by the
increases the President is proposing for the larger programs
like title I and the new Reading First initiative. The
President has strongly, in particular, embraced the notion that
all children need to learn to read and has cited the kind of
data you were talking about from the national assessment.
Secretary Page believes that reading instruction doesn't
always reflect what science has now shown works and that we
have to do everything that we can to bring these reading
programs along.
Senator Campbell. I missed that again. You said reading
does not reflect----
Mr. Corwin. Reading instruction in too many schools is not
effective. It is effective for some kids, but too many of them
are being left behind, which is why you get these 17 percent
statistics. So, rather than funding some of the smaller
programs, the President is really focusing in on reading
instruction and the title I program which has been
comprehensively revised in the last Congress, or this Congress,
I guess, to focus more on what works and to hold schools
accountable for the achievement of all children.
Senator Campbell. Well, I think his initiatives and
certainly Mrs. Bush's interest and effort on the Reading First
programs are commendable and great. I happen to think that
libraries and schools, I mean they are inseparable. I don't
know you can have one good program without having the other
program, too.
Maybe I have my numbers wrong, but as I understand it,
there is only $62,000 provided through the Literacy Through
School Libraries Program. Is there something wrong with the
information I am getting or is that really the amount of money?
It is like saying libraries don't count or you shouldn't have
them at all if that is all the money that is in there.
Mr. Corwin. That is a new program just put in in fiscal
year 2002 by the Congress. The total appropriation is $12.5
million. The amount going to the BIA is $62,500. That
appropriation would be maintained in our budget.
Senator Campbell. $62,000 for the BIA schools?
Senator Campbell. You might as well not give them anything
if we can't add more money to that program.
I don't think I have any more questions, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
The Chairman. I have a question. I don't think that you are
in a position to respond to this, but you maybe able to lead me
to someone who can. We are presently involved in a conflict in
Afghanistan. Everyone tells us that it will take much more than
a war to resolve this matter; that a time will come when we
will have to provide assistance in restoring their
infrastructure, setting up their educational system, their
health system, their communication system, et cetera, et
cetera.
Has your department been called upon to provide an input in
planning for this future which is so important?
Mr. Corwin. I am pretty certain that we have. I am not
personally involved in it, but I think there are some people in
the Secretary's office or elsewhere who have begun work on
that. If it is okay, I can try and provide more for the record.
The Chairman. If you could provide names for the record, I
would appreciate that. I thank you very much.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Corwin appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Our next witness is the Principal Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs,
Department of Justice, Tracy A. Henke. Ms. Henke, welcome to
the committee.
STATEMENT OF TRACY A. HENKE, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE
Ms. Henke. Thank you. First, I would like to ask that my
formal written statement be submitted for the record.
The Chairman. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. Henke. Chairman Inouye, Senator Campbell, I appreciate
the opportunity to discuss the Justice Department's fiscal year
2003 budget priorities for Indian country. As the committee is
aware, for far too long, the needs of Indian tribal governments
in combating crime and violence have been ignored.
This administration is committed to addressing the most
serious law enforcement problems in Indian country, including
substance abuse, domestic violence, and other violent crimes
and to ensuring that Indian tribes are full partners in this
effort.
Part of our effort toward meeting these goals is to ensure
that the Justice Department's workforce reflects the rich
diversity of our nation. We currently have over 900 Native
American men and women serving in the department in many
capacities. They include U.S. Attorneys, FBI agents, Victim-
Witness Coordinators, Federal Indian Law Specialists and others
in virtually every Justice Department component.
We also recognize the Federal Government's unique
relationship with tribal governments and special obligations to
Native Americans. At the beginning of our Nation's history, the
founding fathers established a working principle for
interacting with Indian tribes. Enacted in 1789, the Northwest
Ordinance pledges:
That the utmost good faith shall always be observed toward
the Indians. Laws founded in justice and humanity shall from
time to time be made for preventing wrongs to them.
The Justice Department is committed to honoring that
historical commitment by serving as the trustee for tribal
resources and the protector of treaty rights and by preventing,
investigating and prosecuting serious crimes in Indian country.
As I am sure you are aware, Mr. Chairman, violent crime
rates in Indian country are disproportionately high. A Bureau
of Justice Statistics study found that American Indians are
victims of violent crime at rates more than twice the national
average, far exceeding any other ethnic group in the country.
And a survey by our National Institute of Justice revealed that
one in three Native American women reported being raped in her
lifetime.
Like all Americans, Native Americans deserve to live in
safe communities and the Department of Justice is committed to
sustained efforts to reach that goal. The Department's
strategic plan calls for significant improvement in the crime
fighting and criminal justice administration capabilities of
tribal governments.
As Attorney General Ashcroft has stated, we will accomplish
this goal in several ways, including focusing our resources
efficiently and comprehensively to improve criminal justice and
public safety in Indian country.
Our commitment to American Indian communities is reflected
in the President's fiscal year 2003 budget request of $202
million for Indian country related activities for the
Department of Justice. This plan will allow us to continue most
of our tribal programs at or near fiscal year 2002 levels.
Our fiscal year 2003 request includes almost $20 million
for programs to reduce violence against Native American women,
$3 million for programs to improve the investigation,
prosecution, and handling of child abuse cases in Indian
country, $5 million for the Indian alcohol and substance abuse
demonstration program, a new effort to improve the enforcement
of alcohol and drug laws in tribal lands and provide treatments
and other services.
Almost $12.5 million for the tribal youth program which
supports accountability based sanctions, training for juvenile
court judges, strengthening family bonds, substance abuse
counseling and other efforts to improve Justice operations in
Indian country.
Almost $8 million is requested for the Tribal Courts
Assistance Program which assists tribes in the development and
enhancement and continuing operation of tribal judicial systems
and $2 million in the Bureau of Justice Statistics for the
Tribal Justice Statistics Assistance Center and other
activities to help tribes make better policy decisions, share
information with the broader criminal justice community and
participate in national criminal justice data-gathering
efforts.
In addition to these Office of Justice programs
initiatives, the administration is also requesting $30 million
for the Indian country programs administered by the Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS.
But sustained criminal justice improvements require much
more than just additional resources. Perhaps the most important
factor in combating crime is the will of the community. For
this reason, a core principle of our tribal program is to
empower the tribes themselves to implement and sustain
successful crime fighting initiatives.
One example is the Comprehensive Indian Resources for
Community and Law Enforcement Projects otherwise known as
CIRCLE. CIRCLE recognizes that the most effective solutions to
the problems experienced by tribal communities come from the
tribes themselves. The three tribes that participate in the
CIRCLE pilot project are the Oglala Sioux, the Northern
Cheyenne, and the Pueblo of Zuni. They have each undertaken
comprehensive, coordinated, multidisciplinary efforts to combat
crime and violence.
These tribes design their own strategy while the department
provides its support through direct funding, training and
technical assistance. As a result of this tribal commitment, we
have already seen some promising results from the three CIRCLE
projects, in reducing gang-related crime, in reducing domestic
violence, and improving tribal justice system operations.
Throughout these and other initiatives, the Department of
Justice will continue working with Native American tribes,
government to government, to build safer communities in Indian
country. I want to assure you that I and other members of the
current Justice Department leadership stand ready to work with
the Congress to meet this goal.
Thank you for the opportunity to be here. I would be happy
to respond to any questions you might have.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Ms. Henke.
In its ``Jails in Indian Country 2000'' report, which was
issued last July by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, it was
reported that Indian detention facilities held 1,775 inmates in
2000, a 6-percent increase. They also reported that they were
operating at 118 percent capacity. Yes, in your written
testimony it is indicated that there is no funding for
facilities.
Ms. Henke. Sir, the Tribal Prison Construction Program, I
believe, is what is being referenced. The Department has not
requested funding for fiscal year 2003 for this program. The
reason is that the Department and the Administration believe
that the program has been a success. Currently, according to
the most recent statistics that we have, our tribal prison
entities are currently operating at about 86 percent capacity.
In addition to that, by July 2003, according to our
estimates, another 1,000 beds will be made available. On top of
that, for the current fiscal year, fiscal year 2002, the
Department has $35 million that we will also be distributing
which will further increase the capacity.
The Chairman. So, you believe that it is adequate?
Ms. Henke. According to the statistics that we have, yes.
The Chairman. The numbers that we received indicated that
they were 118 percent. Something is wrong here.
Ms. Henke. One of the things that we are working on, sir,
is improving the statistics that we are able to gather from
Indian country. So, we will continue to do that.
The Chairman. A few years ago the Department of Justice and
the Department of the Interior estimated that 4,300 sworn law
enforcement officers were needed in Indian country. At that
time there were only 1,600. Yet we still have less than 2,500
serving Indian country. Why aren't we doing much more in trying
to get law enforcement officers when we know that the crime
rate is high?
Ms. Henke. Sir, the Department is working on that overall.
As you know, our primary focus, of course, is law enforcement.
That is one of the things that working with the CIRCLE project
and others that we are trying to improve law enforcement
services and the number of law enforcement officers in Indian
country. Not only is money made available through the COPS
program, but tribes are also eligible through the current Byrne
Formula Program and discretionary program as well as the local
law enforcement program.
The Chairman. According to the BIA, there are 35 tribes
with jurisdiction over lands adjacent to the Canadian or
Mexican borders and jurisdiction over waters directly
accessible by boat from Canada or Mexico. These lands comprise
260 miles of the total of 7,400 miles of international borders.
Does the Department propose to include Indian tribes in any of
the border security initiatives?
Ms. Henke. Sir, the jurisdiction for that falls under
another component within the Justice Department. I am happy to
get back to you with an answer for the record.
The Chairman. I would appreciate that.
Ms. Henke. I can assure you that the Department, though, is
committed to our border and to protecting the border.
The Chairman. I would appreciate this.
Ms. Henke. Certainly, sir.
The Chairman. The Indian Tribal Justice Act was enacted in
1993 and authorizes base support funding for tribal justice
systems, yet there is no funding requested for programs
authorized in this act. Is there any reason for that?
Ms. Henke. Sir, the program funding levels that we have
asked for for fiscal year 2003 are consistent with those that
were funded and supported in fiscal year 2002. We have a number
of tribal courts and judicial assistance programs within the
Office of Justice Programs, but I am happy to talk to you
further about that specific program.
There are, we believe, a number of programs that currently
exist, have been funded in the past and that the President
proposed for funding in fiscal year 2003 that will assist in
those efforts.
The Chairman. This is one of the sad and tragic areas of
life. A few years ago I visited one of the little villages in
northern Alaska to look over a brand new prison facility. It
was brand new and they showed me the room where the intoxicated
would cool off. They were piled body to body. Every square foot
was filled. They were just dumped in there like animals. As a
result, we had a beautiful building with almost no personnel.
Is that the situation in Indian country?
Ms. Henke. Sir, we know that there are serious problems in
Indian country, especially as it relates to alcohol and
substance abuse. We are working and using our CIRCLE tribes,
the Oglala Sioux, the Northern Cheyenne, and the Pueblo of
Zuni, as a pilot program to assist the Department in
identifying strategic ways to address the problems in Indian
country, but in partnership with the tribes themselves, not by
a mandate from Washington.
We believe that the CIRCLE project will result in success
and will not only help the Department, but will also have the
tribes participating sharing their information with the rest of
the tribes in the country. That will help us address the issues
that exist pertaining to overcrowding in jails, specific to
areas related to substance abuse, alcohol abuse, et cetera.
I have also had the fortune, sir, of visiting a number of
small areas in the State of Alaska, as well as in the State of
Hawaii and will soon be visiting, as I informed Senator
Campbell earlier, the Northern Cheyenne.
I believe it is important for us to see first hand what
exists and to talk to the tribes themselves to figure out how
we can work together to address the issues.
The Chairman. I commend you on your CIRCLE program. It has
great potential.
Ms. Henke. Thank you.
The Chairman. I just hope it works all over Indian country
because you have the right solution. Oftentimes the best
solutions come from Indian country. As you pointed out, it is
not dictated from Washington.
Ms. Henke. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. With that I thank you very much.
Mr. Vice Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Tracy, I also
commend you on the CIRCLE program. I am very familiar with the
one in Northern Cheyenne because I am up there a lot. That is
where my ancestral home is. I think it is doing a good job.
You have been in your job about 2 or 3 months now?
Ms. Henke. Actually, sir, almost 7 months.
Senator Campbell. Almost 7 months? Time flies, right?
Ms. Henke. It does fly, sir.
Senator Campbell. Well, I commend you for going out there
and trying to get first-hand information from the tribes
because very often you might be aware that they come in here
and say:
Nobody asked us. These are implemented by the
administration. They are passing things and nobody asked us.
Senator Inouye and I have always tried to make sure that
they are well informed and they are a party to it, there is
some negotiated rule-making going on and so on. But you
probably also recognize, at least on my part, a little bit of
frustration because Senator Inouye and I have been here a long
time.
Year after year we face the same problems. In fact, I was
teasing my staff a little while ago that there must be
something in my coffee when I come in here because I am always
in a fight it seems like and I don't mean to be. But we owe so
much and we are paying so little on what we owe to Indian
tribes and what we promised.
I just want to ask you a couple of questions. Senator
Inouye already dealt with the border issues for one. I am on
the Treasury Appropriations Subcommittee. I was the chairman
for a number of years. Now I am ranking on that. We have
provided a great deal of money through law enforcement, as you
know, to work with tribes that run from the northern border of
North Dakota, to the O'odham in Arizona. How do we encourage
more Federal-tribal cooperation because I know some of those
tribal areas are just like sieves? There is a fence with a
bunch of holes cut in it, basically.
Ms. Henke. Sir, like you, I am a firm believer and luckily
I work for both the Attorney General and the President who are
firm believers in seeing the situation first-hand, in talking
to the people on the ground.
I am from a very small town in the State of Missouri, and I
know often the perception of the people back home and if
nothing else from my parents. What is the Federal Government
doing now? So, it is important for us to go see first-hand. It
is important for us to have programs like CIRCLE that encourage
cooperation.
It is important for us to work not just within the
Department of Justice and across components within the
Department of Justice, but for us to work across the Federal
Government with the other Federal agencies to address issues
comprehensively to ensure that the taxpayer resources are being
utilized to meet the needs and not used to overlap or duplicate
or at cross purposes.
Those are all things that specifically the Office of
Justice Programs, are working on at the direction of the
Attorney General.
As relates to the border, that is something that once again
through funding provided through the Office of Justice Programs
to the tribes through a variety of different mechanisms that we
have, plus working with those entities within the department
who are responsible for security along the border, that
cooperation will exist and we will continue to improve upon it.
Senator Campbell. Well, I admire you enough to tell you
that you may have already found out, particularly on our
southern border, those reservations that border Mexico, it is
really complicated because there are relatives living on both
sides of the line, on both sides of the fence, I mean cousins,
brothers and sisters and so on. It really complicates our
problem of trying to have secure borders at the same time when
we know that there are people that are related living on both
sides.
Maybe just one last thing. That deals with substance abuse.
I really appreciate your emphasis on that. It is a huge problem
and I don't mean sophisticated drugs like cocaine and so on. I
mean stuff like canned heat, huffing paint in paper bags. That
is what we deal with much more on reservations when we talk
about substance abuse. It is real, degrading, terrible stuff
that just burns your brain out. The kids sniffing glue, that
kind of thing is what we deal with on reservations.
I introduced S. 210 which authorized the tribes to
integrate programs for many agencies. Would you review that
legislation? One of the problems we have now, I think, is that
the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the
Indian Health Service, they all have a vested interest in this
kind of thing. They are all interested.
But I think on many occasions they are duplicating or they
are going by each other a little bit. Basically, what S. 210
does is it tries to integrate some of those programs. Would you
look at that and give the committee your views on it?
Ms. Henke. Sir, we certainly will.
Senator Campbell. I thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no further questions.
Ms. Henke. Thank you.
The Chairman. Our mission seems impossible.
Ms. Henke. I hope not, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Our funds are never adequate. The problems
are depressing, but we would like to work with you to resolve
these matters. It may take eons, but we will do it.
Ms. Henke. Sir, we hope it doesn't take eons, but we look
forward to working with you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Ms. Henke. Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Henke appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. With that, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:52 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to
reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, U.S. Senator from
Colorado, Vice Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs
Good morning, and thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this important
hearing.
In future hearings we will hear from the Indian Health Service
[IHS] and the Bureau of Indian Affairs [BIA] on the request as it
affects them.
Today will we hear from other agencies that provide key services to
tribes and Indians on a variety of important fronts such as:
--Law enforcement and policing;
--education;
--drug treatment, elder care; and
--the Administration for Native Americans.
Safe and stable communities provide safety to their members and
attract business activity which is so important to Native communities
nationwide.
Given the incredible demands placed on the Department of Justice to
fight terrorism I am generally encouraged by the request for Indian law
enforcement with a few exceptions:
--The lack of tribal detention center funds;
--the reduction in ``COPS'' funds for tribes; and
--the static funding for tribal courts.
Nevertheless, I am hopeful we will find the kind of resources we
need for these important services.
I commend the President for his dramatic proposal to increase funds
for substance abuse and mental health treatment. We all know that these
problems continue to ravage Indian communities and I am glad to see the
increase.
I will have several questions for our witnesses, Mr. Chairman, but
I do want to take the opportunity to convey what I believe is one of
the most successful Federal programs ever devised: the ``Administration
for Native Americans'' or ``ANA'' as we know it.
The ANA provides seed capital for Indian businesses, language
preservation, and environmental protection . . . and does it in a way
that reduces dependence. I urge the Department to study the ANA and
find out why it works and replicate its success.
Mr. Chairman, there are many other things I'd like to mention but I
will reserve my time for the question and answer period.
With that, I ask unanimous consent that my formal statement be
included in the record.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Tim Johnson, U.S. Senator from South Dakota
Chairman Inouye, Vice Chairman Campbell, members of the committee,
I am pleased that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs is holding a
series of hearings on the President's Fiscal Year 2003 Budget on Indian
Programs. All Federal agencies have a tie in some way to Native people,
tribes, and villages. In this current national climate, I was pleased
that Indian programs have not received too much of a decrease. However,
I am concerned over the lack of prioritization this Administration is
focusing on several programs.
My main concerns are decreases for tribal colleges, and Indian
health service facility construction. Both of these programs are
vitally needed on South Dakota's nine Indian reservations.
South Dakota is home to four tribal colleges, with one nearby in
North Dakota serving South Dakota Native Americans. These colleges are
Since Gleska, Si Tanka/Huron, Oglala Lakota, Sitting Bull, and
Sisseton-Wahpeton Community College. All of these colleges have
contributed to the overall health and welfare of the tribal college
system. For numerous years, I have advocated increases of the meager
funding they receive to provide for the education of our First
Americans.
This is not a luxury, this is a treaty responsibility. The Federal
Government is obligated to provide educational opportunities for tribal
members. Last year, I, along with a number of my colleagues, was
successful at obtaining $41 million for core operating funding for the
colleges. These schools do not posses large endowments or a significant
donor base they can pull from. The over thirty colleges are forced to
share just over $41 million for operations. I am hopeful that Congress
will at least be able to restore the Colleges back to the appropriated
level from fiscal year 2002.
Additionally, the budget decreases also effect construction for our
nation's Indian health service facilities. Health care is basic
necessity for all Americans. In Indian country not only do we see a
lack of physicians and nurses, but we find several outdated and
overcrowded facilities. Many of these do not even meet safety code
standards. At the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation, the health care
facility cannot even support baby delivery. Mothers have to travel
approximately 100 miles south to Pierre, SD to deliver their babies.
This presents major health and safety concerns when there,
unfortunately, are complications.
At the Sisseton-Whapeton Indian Reservation, health care personnel
are working in trailers that should have been torn down due to safety
concerns. These are dilapidated trailers housed in the back of the
facility which itself is over crowded with both patients and documents.
There is no in-patient care at either of these facilities. We can
and need to do better. It must no longer be the norm to treat our First
Americans as third class citizens. I look forward to working with this
committee, the Budget Committee and the Appropriations Committee to try
to increase these inadequate funding levels. I thank the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs for holding this series of budget oversight
hearings and I look forward to hearing the testimony today.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Byron L. Dorgan, U.S. Senator from North
Dakota
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for convening this hearing on the
President's fiscal year 2003 budget request for certain Indian programs
and services.
The need for more funding for Indian health, education, housing,
justice and other programs is well documented. Just this past Sunday,
there was an article in the Salt Lake Tribune about a little boy named
Tyler who has cereal palsy today because of inadequate care he received
at an Indian Health Service hospital. Another baby boy was sent home
from an IHS hospital emergency room after the nurse misdiagnosed him
with chicken pox. Two days later he was dead. Now, I understand that
the IHS is making due with inadequate funding and that is my point. The
IHS currently has a health services budget of $3 billion, and needs
about $12 billion more. That underfunding has life and death
consequences for Native Americans every day. Unfortunately, the
President's budget request for the IHS recommends only a $68-million,
or 2.2 percent, increase for fiscal year 2003. Likewise, the budget for
the Bureau of Indian Affairs receives only a 1-percent increase,
despite the needs that exist with respect to housing, education, law
enforcement, social services, and other areas.
Regrettably, the President's budget comes nowhere close to meeting
the need for funding that exists in Indian country, and the fiscal
situation will make it very difficult for the Congress to make room for
additional spending. I want to explain the difficult dilemma the
President's budget creates for Indian programs, as well as for other
domestic programs that Native Americans and other Americans depend
upon.
Quite frankly, the President's budget request simply does not add
up. The President's budget talks about surpluses, but there are no
budget surpluses without Social Security and Medicare funds. The
President is proposing to use $2.2 trillion in Social Security and
Medicare trust funds to pay for tax cuts and defense and domestic
programs.
Even using this much of the Social Security and Medicare trust
funds, the budget outlook is bleak for programs other than defense and
homeland security. The President's budget requests an increase of 6.8
percent in discretionary programs--programs for which funding is
allocated annually through the appropriations process. Factor in
inflation and the increase is only 3.7 percent. Then consider that the
President proposes substantial increases of 10 percent for defense and
23 percent for homeland security, and I fully expect the Congress to
support these increases. The result is that the real purchasing power
for other domestic programs--including health care, education, the
environment, and Indian services--is actually cut by an average of 6.2
percent.
I explain this not because I want to provide excuses for Congress
but to challenge all of us to strive to do better when it comes to
Indian programs that the Federal Government has a trust responsibility
to provide.
The cuts in the President's budget are not just theoretical ones--
they come at the expense of programs that are vitally important and
needed. For instance, within the Department of Justice budget, the $35
million in funding for construction of detention facilities is
eliminated, and funding for the Community Oriented Policing Services
[COPS] program is cut by $5 million. The other DOJ tribal justice
programs are level funded, meaning that in real terms, the purchasing
power of those programs will be eroded. Are these cuts because the need
for these programs has been reduced? Absolutely not. While the violent
crime rate nationally has been declining, Native Americans are still
more than twice as likely to be the victims of violence than the
general population. More than half of jails in Indian country are
operating above capacity, and nearly a quarter are operating above 150
percent capacity. To me, it just doesn't make sense to suggest cuts for
detention facilities and law enforcement officers when they are so
clearly necessary.
I will give more examples at later budget hearings of cuts in the
areas of education, housing and health care that are not warranted and
will cause hardship for Native Americans. I hope the Congress can and
will do better in meeting our obligations to Indian people than the
President's budget does.
______
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.159
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.160
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.161
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.162
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.164
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.165
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.166
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.167
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.168
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.169
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.170
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.171
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.172
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.173
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.174
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.175
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.176
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.177
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.178
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.179
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.180
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.181
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.182
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.183
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.184
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.185
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.186
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.187
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.188
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.189
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.190
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.191
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.192
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.193
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.194
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.195
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.196
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.197
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.198
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.199
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.200
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.201
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.202
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.203
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.204
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.205
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.206
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.207
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.208
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.209
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.210
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.211
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.212
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.213
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.214
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.215
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.216
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.217
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.218
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.219
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.220
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.221
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.222
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.223
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.224
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.225
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.226
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.227
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.228
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.229
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.230
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.231
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.232
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.233
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.234
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.235
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.236
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.237
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.238
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.239
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.240
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.241
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.242
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.243
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.244
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.245
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.246
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.247
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.248
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.249
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.250
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.251
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.252
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.253
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.254
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.255
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.256
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.257
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.258
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.259
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.260
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.261
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.262
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.263
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.264
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.265
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.266
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.267
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.268
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.269
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.270
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.271
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.272
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.273
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.274
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.275
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.276
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.277
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.278
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.279
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.280
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.281
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.282
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.283
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.284
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.285
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.286
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.287
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.288
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.289
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.290
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.291
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.292
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.293
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.294
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.295
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.296
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.297
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.298
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.299
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.300
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.301
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.302
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.303
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.304
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.305
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.306
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.307
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.308
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.309
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.310
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.311
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.312
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.313
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.314
FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 2002
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in
room 485, Senate Russell Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Inouye, Campbell, and Domenici.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII,
CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. The committee meets this morning to receive
testimony on the President's budget request for fiscal year
2003 for Indian programs administered by the Indian Health
Service and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs [BIA] reports that as of 1999,
43 percent of all adults living on or near Indian reservations
were unemployed, and 33 percent of those who are employed were
still living in poverty.
The Indian Health Service [IHS] data indicates that
compared to the general U.S. population, American Indians and
Alaskan Natives have a mortality rate that is six times higher
for alcoholism; four times higher for tuberculosis; three times
higher for diabetes, and twice as high for unintentional
injuries.
Most Indian Health Service hospitals are more than 32 years
old, and in the area of housing, recent studies indicate that
the highest rate of overcrowding and inadequate housing in the
United States can be found in Indian country.
These are just some of the statistics that we must keep in
mind as we examine the President's budget for Indian programs,
and as we call upon Federal agencies to help us understand
whether we will be able to adequately address the overwhelming
needs in Indian country with the funding that is proposed for
fiscal year 2003.
In exchange for the cession of more than 500 million acres
of land by the Indian nations, the United States has assumed a
trust responsibility for Indian lands and resources, as well
for the provision of health care, education, and housing.
These legal responsibilities have their origins in treaties
and the United States' course of dealings with tribal
governments and their citizens. So we must examine the
initiatives outlined in the President's budget with these legal
responsibilities in mind.
Today, we will ask the agencies to advise us whether we are
falling further behind in carrying out our responsibilities,
and inquire what resources are needed to fulfill our
commitments as a Nation to the sovereign governments of Indian
country and the people they serve.
With that, may I call upon my vice chairman.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Twenty-six years after the Indian Health Care Improvement
Act was enacted, the health of Indian people is still the worst
in the Nation in many respects. Diabetes, amputations,
tuberculosis, heart disease, substance abuse, and so on are
many times the national average, and you have mentioned the
figures.
I can tell you that this is not an abstract number for most
Indian people, because every Native American person I know has
someone in his family who suffers one of those things that we
have spoken about.
Just last month, Secretary Thompson released a study by the
CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, showing that in
the categories such as breast cancer, stroke, lung cancer and
suicide, Native Americans are also doing worse than most other
Americans.
Mr. Chairman, when we had our last hearing, I did reference
a recent article that was in the ``Wall Street Journal,'' which
referred to the funeral home business as the most successful
business on the Oglala Sioux Reservation in Pine Ridge, SD.
I think that is really an unacceptable commentary, when in
a community where over 90 percent of the inhabitants are Indian
people, that the most active enterprise is burying Indians. We
have got to do a lot better than that.
With your permission, I would like to introduce that
article in the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
[Referenced document appears in appendix.]
Senator Campbell. I do commend the President for his
request of some $2.514 billion, which is about a 2.6-percent
increase over enacted levels, and a $72-million increase for
health facilities; although it will still fall short of
providing the Indian health care funds needed to bring Native
American people in parity with non-Indians in the health
sector.
I am particularly interested in working to improve key
areas of Indian health that I believe are disproportionately
responsible, that bring misery and ruin to many Native American
families: Diabetes prevention and care, alcohol and drug abuse,
and mental health problems, as well as substance abuse.
As the urban Indian population steadily but surely
increases, we must do more to refocus attention on the needs of
urban Indian people, too. For Indian housing and community
development, the request includes some $650 million for NAHASDA
block grants, and additional funds for the CDBG grants, as
well.
I look forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses
today, Mr. Chairman; thank you.
The Chairman. I thank you very much.
Our first witness is the director of the Indian Health
Service, Department of Health and Human Services, Dr. Michael
Trujillo.
The Doctor will be accompanied by Michel Lincoln, deputy
director, Indian Health; and Gary Hartz, acting director,
Office of Public Health.
Dr. Trujillo, it is always good to see you, sir.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL TRUJILLO, DIRECTOR, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ACCOMPANIED BY MICHEL
LINCOLN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE AND GARY HARTZ,
ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Dr. Trujillo. Good morning, Senator, it is good to see you,
too. I am very honored to be before you and Senator Campbell
this morning in regards to the Indian Health Service budget and
programs. To my right is Mike Lincoln, and to my left, Gary
Hartz.
We are honored to come here this morning and discuss with
you the President's fiscal year 2003 budget for the Indian
Health Service.
For the 5th year now, the development of the health and
budget priorities supporting the agency's request originated at
the service delivery level, and with tribal leadership and
urban program involvement. We participate in formulating the
budget request and the annual performance plan of the agency.
Further, I would like to add that the department held two
tribal budget consultation sessions in June. One was hosted by
the deputy secretary, and covered all HHS agencies. The other
focused solely on the needs and programs of Indian health care
systems. Both these sessions were detailed and were very
productive, and a very constructive dialog with tribal
leadership.
These budget consultation sessions are only one effort of
many that Secretary Thompson has made to consult with tribal
leadership. He and Deputy Secretary Claude Allen have already
visited Indian country, and have also planned additional
visits.
Secretary Thompson has spoken of his commitment to the
Indian Health Service, and his support of our services and
resources. He is committed to consultation and collaboration,
and to continue to have American Indians and Alaska Native
leadership involved in policy and have their input.
I believe the Secretary's efforts of increasing the amount
of collaboration across all agencies within the department, as
well as the incentives and initiatives for the department will
benefit all American Indians and Alaska Native health care and
social service programs.
All programs within the department will have an increasing
role to assist American Indians and Alaska Natives in their
programs, in their resources, and also program infrastructure
development.
As I enter my 8th year as director of the Indian Health
Service, I have had the honor to work closely in a
collaborative and open manner with tribal leadership and urban
program directors from across the Nation. Together, we have
overcome difficulties and impediments, and I truly believe we
have made significant strides to improve the agency's
effectiveness, efficiency, and responsiveness to those we all
serve.
Those very important improvements and positive changes,
unfortunately, get lost in the negative events, sometimes the
negative data, and the inaccurate stories that are sometimes
portrayed.
At this time, I do wish to thank tribal leadership and the
urban program directors for their commitment, their dedication,
and certainly their sincere professionalism and guidance. I
believe together, Congress, the Administration, the Department,
and tribes, will continue to make positive strides in health
care for all American Indians and Alaska Natives.
I also wish to thank this committee and staff for keeping
in mind the long-term goals to improve American Indians and
Alaska Native health care, and to strengthening the special
government-to-government relationship.
Tragically, on September 11, many things changed. The
history of our country is being written on how the country has
responded to the terrorist attacks, and the responses of many
of us, directly or indirectly. Lives and priorities were
changed. Now we must all play our part in those changed
priorities of the Administration, of Congress, and of the
Nation.
We must assess our respective roles and responsibilities in
light of the aftermath of September 11, and in the wider
national priorities. In this it is our respective roles to
improve health care services for American Indians and Alaska
Natives across the country, and address the growing needs
together.
I want to thank you sincerely and personally for all that
you have done and what the committee has done to improve that
health care. Now I will discuss questions you may have
regarding the President's budget of an overall increase of $6.1
million, a 2-percent increase.
The budget not only reflects needs increases for American
Indians and Alaska Native health care, but also the
Administration's and the Nation's emphasis on national
security, the war on terrorism, and the management efficiency
and effectiveness and accountability initiatives of the
President.
Thank you. We have submitted a written statement for the
record.
[Prepared statement of Dr. Trujillo appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Dr. Trujillo. As you
know, Doctor, there are three major Federal agencies that
provide health care services. The largest is the Department of
Defense, and then the Department of Veteran's Affairs, and the
Indian Health Service. Doctors graduate from the same medical
schools. They provide the same medical care.
How does your doctor compare with the doctor at Walter
Reed?
Dr. Trujillo. In regards to the physicians that enter the
Federal service, and more specifically the Indian Health
Service, we have graduates from all universities, medical
schools, and academic medical centers, from all categories from
the United States.
Physicians enter the Indian Health Service in two primary
employment systems. One is a civil service clinician, or
through the USPHS Commissioned Corps, such as myself.
In both of those, in order to enter as a clinician to
practice and provide clinical care, one has to go through the
initial appointment process of review on the civil service
employment system, or the Commissioned Corps.
Secondarily, one has to also verify and have documentation
for undergraduate and graduate work in medical education; must
all have references and documentation from the appropriate
residencies or internship that that individual has completed;
and also have a full and unrestricted license from a State, if
one is in the Commissioned Corps.
If one is in the civil service, the individual has to have
a license from the State that he she has duty in or has been
assigned to for clinical care.
All our hospitals and clinics, including tribal programs,
also have to meet the JCHO, or the Ambulatory Care
Accreditation Committee's program for verification, medical
staff bylaws, privileging, and re-credentialling by the medical
staff.
Approximately 3 or 4 years ago, the Office of Inspector
General also did a review of the agency's credentialling and
medical staff bylaws and privileging. At that time, the review
found that the policies and procedures were appropriate.
There were some concerns in regards to some oversight and
to strengthen our interaction with tribal programs, so that we
all had and were working from the same database to verify
individual past histories of individual clinicians.
That has been incorporated and, in fact, just in recent
discussions with the Office of Inspector General, we are also
enlarging the other new databases that have also become
available this recent year.
The Chairman. What is the pay differential?
Dr. Trujillo. The pay differential varies in localities. If
one enters the Commissioned Corps, there is a specific pay
scale.
The Chairman. Well, let us just put it this way. A person
of equal education, both of them thoracic surgeons, what is the
difference in pay?
Dr. Trujillo. I wish we had a thoracic surgeon in the
service. Unfortunately, we do not. But let us say in
orthopedics.
The Chairman. An orthopedic surgeon.
Dr. Trujillo. We do have those individuals. They can come
in, in two ways: one, as a Commissioned Corps Officer, at the
level of their full training, in which they have completed
their residency and surgery residency, and placed in a hospital
setting.
The Chairman. What is the pay?
Dr. Trujillo. They would be paid a Commissioned Corps
salary and special pays, because of their specialty and
locality. Because of that, they can most likely attain a salary
of around $140,000/$120,000, plus special pays in their
category in the Commissioned Corps.
The Chairman. That is the highest you can get?
Dr. Trujillo. In the civil service system, we also have
availability of some additional special pay categories, such as
Title 38, which is also available for the VA program.
The Chairman. What I want to get, Doctor, is who gets
better pay: VA, Defense, or Indian Health Service?
Dr. Trujillo. In the initial phase of an individual coming
into the program, with the special pays that are available to
the civil service employee, a civil service new clinician, in a
specialty area such as orthopedic surgeon, would receive the
higher pay; versus the Commissioned Corps physician, with the
same training, the same level, and the same location.
We have to, however, compete with the private sector, in
many metropolitan areas, where an orthopedic surgeon may be
located. In that case, an individual coming out of training,
residency, and then going into the private sector, may earn two
to three times or four times more than in the IHS. This may
also include bonuses to sign on for that particular health care
organization.
The Chairman. I just want a simple answer. On the whole,
who gets better pay: Indian Health Service, VA Hospital, or
Defense?
Dr. Trujillo. The Department of Defense and the Indian
Health Service Commissioned Corps officers receive the same
respective pay. The VA has availability of the title 38 in
their specialty care, as well as the Indian Health Service.
However, I would have to look at this a little bit more
closely. I would think the VA program may have more options for
increased pay and benefits for the individual. We can also send
you some written information regarding the pay scales on
respective agencies and programs.
The Chairman. Dr. Trujillo, you are well aware that the
elderly population in Indian country is growing in size, and
nursing homes are required to be licensed if they are to be
eligible for reimbursement from Medicare and Medicaid programs.
Tribal governments have repeatedly expressed frustration in
securing adequate long-term care in their communities.
Does the Indian Health Service currently provide health
care to elderly Indians and Alaska Natives?
Dr. Trujillo. Senator, yes, we do provide medical care and
services, and contract health service to individuals who are
eligible for services. Because we do not have funding nor
authority to manage and administer skilled nursing home care
facilities, we have to rely on outside sources. Tribes also
have to rely on that availability. However, some tribes have
built their own skilled nursing home care centers.
The emphasis of the agency, as well as with tribes, has
been, how do you keep an elderly individual at home? So a lot
of our concentration is on the aspects of out-patient, out-
sourcing in regards to making sure that they have availability
of resources, and the availability of support services, such as
meals, so that the individual can be at home.
The Chairman. Would it be feasible for your health service
to maintain nursing home care facilities?
Dr. Trujillo. We have discussed this at various periods of
time within the agency and also with the involvement of tribes.
The difficulty of instituting skilled nursing home care
services, is that it is terribly expensive and labor intensive.
The Chairman. How much?
Dr. Trujillo. It is much more expensive than we would be
able to run, let us say, in a locality such as Pine Ridge. Such
a facility would require staffing and equipment that is quite
enormous as well as the large amount of resources that are
needed for skilled nursing home care.
The Chairman. Can you share those numbers with us?
Dr. Trujillo. We will be able to share those. We also have
to work with State licensure and accreditation procedures and
building capabilities for such nursing home care.
One of the efforts of the department is looking at elderly
care. In fact, in about 2 weeks, I have a meeting with the
Director of the Office of Aging, so we can discuss some of the
specifics of how we can better coordinate the department's
effort on elderly health care programs.
The Chairman. Can you provide for the record the size of
the population you serve, and the number of physicians and
staffers serving them, as compared to the population that is
served by the Department of Denfense and their doctors and
staffs; and the same thing with VA?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes; we will.
The Chairman. I have a few more questions; but Mr. Vice
Chairman, please proceed.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me ask a
few, too, and then I will pass to Senator Domenici.
First, Dr. Trujillo, you know, I understand you have really
made a commitment to recruitment and retention for Indian
people in the medical profession, and I certainly appreciate
that.
Can you tell the committee how many Indian doctors there
are in the IHS, and perhaps how many Indian medical students
there are in training?
Dr. Trujillo. I do not know exactly how many Indian medical
students are in training at the present time. I know there has
been a tremendous increase in the number of Indian physicians
over the past several years.
Senator Campbell. Well, give me a ball park figure. Does
``tremendous increase'' mean 2 or 10 or 100, or what?
Dr. Trujillo. The figure I am more familiar with regarding
Indian students and medical school approaches around about 200.
Senator Campbell. Could you try to find out that number;
not only of the doctors, but of the ones in training?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes.
Senator Campbell. I think the committee would be interested
in knowing that.
Dr. Trujillo. It changes up and down, but we have seen a
trend across the Nation.
Senator Campbell. I thank you.
Let me ask you a couple of medical questions about dialysis
machines. How many people can use a machine in a day? I do not
know a single thing about them, other than they are mighty
expensive and mighty necessary.
Dr. Trujillo. The dialysis machines that corporations and
health facilities now maintain have a little faster rate of
dialysis than in the past. However, an individual still must be
on the machine at least 2 to 4 hours, depending upon the blood
chemistries that they have and the intensity of care. Most
individuals are on, I would say, an average of 3 to 4 hours.
Senator Campbell. If you ran that day and night, you would
get maybe six people.
Dr. Trujillo. Yes; on one machine.
Senator Campbell. On one machine?
Dr. Trujillo. And that individual also has to be dialyzed,
on the average, three times a week.
Senator Campbell. Yes, I knew that; thank you.
A couple of years ago, the Northern Cheyenne built a new
clinic.
Dr. Trujillo. Right.
Senator Campbell. It was opened, I think, about 1 year or
1\1/2\ years ago. In fact, I went up and visited it. It was a
very, very nice facility.
At that time, I asked you if they could get a dialysis
machine up there, and you will remember me asking that.
The problem was, the machine stayed awhile, and then it was
moved out, from what I understand, from the tribe, due to lack
of operational funds. I tried to track that down a little bit,
and found out they had the machine, but they did not have
anybody that could run it, and so they moved the machine.
Well, there are people up there, and I mean dozens, not one
or two, but dozens have to make a 180-mile round trip, three
times a week in the wintertime over black ice, and even in the
summertime through often congested traffic, to get dialysis in
Billings.
It takes 8 or 10 hours to do that for them, or more. So
staying alive has become a full-time job for the people that
have to go all the way to Billings and back, three times a
week.
It just seems to me that it would have been a lot easier
and maybe a lot less expensive to train somebody to run that
machine, when you think in terms of manpower to drive people
over there, the cost of gasoline and renting a van three times
a week, or probably every day. The people have to go three
times a week, so they probably do it every day.
Why do we not put that machine back? In fact, that is what
I want you to do. Get that machine back up there, and get
somebody up here to train on it.
The community colleges came in to see me, and I am sure
they visited with other members on the committee, too, not long
ago. Some of them feel that they could do some of the training
for the people to operate the machines.
So first, can I get your commitment to get that machine
back up there, and get somebody to operate it? Second, would
you give me your opinion on having community colleges train
some of the dialysis operators?
Dr. Trujillo. In regards to dialysis, the Indian Health
Service does not maintain any dialysis programs. The tribes, or
Indian Health Service, contracts with a dialysis program. In
this particular case, I believe the dialysis program for Lame
Deer was contracted from Deaconess Hospital out of Billings.
The difficulty we had in regards to maintain dialysis, in
this particular case, was having to have a nephrologist, having
to have the certification for the program to maintain and run
and administer the dialysis program, and also having to have
trained nursing care and dialysis technicians, including the
maintenance of the dialysis machines at that location.
Senator Campbell. Let me see if I understand this then. IHS
provides the machines, but you do not even provide the
machines?
Dr. Trujillo. We do not provide the machines. In fact, the
corporations that tribes and Indian Health Service contract
with provide all that, including the certification, the
nephrologists, the technicians, the nursing care, and all the
operational programs for the dialysis center.
Perhaps, some tribal colleges may be able to train
individuals as dialysis technicians; but the complexity and the
technology is usually very specialized training program, after
having some basic training at a medical center or in a dialysis
program.
One must have a certified nephrologist, who is trained in
dialysis, to be the administrator and medical director, and
must be able to have certification as a dialysis program; and,
in that case, receive reimbursement from Medicare.
Senator Campbell. This is getting too complicated for me.
Give me a simple answer, if you can. What can you do to get a
machine back up here, and to get somebody trained to operate it
up here?
Dr. Trujillo. We have been working with the Billings area
office and Lame Deer, and well as with Crow, because Crow does
have machines, and some patients from Lame Deer do go down to
Crow, which is approximately halfway in between Billings and
Lame Deer.
We will commit to work with you and get you some respective
answers of our plans, and also the followup and some options of
how we might be able to provide services there. I would provide
that to you within the next 2 weeks.
Senator Campbell. Would you do that?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes.
Senator Campbell. Okay, thank you, I appreciate that.
Maybe I have one other question, and then I will come back
for another round, Mr. Chairman. That question concerns
something that I think was really distressing. Perhaps you are
not aware, or maybe you are, Doctor, but I would like your view
on this.
In December 2001, an incident occurred on the Cheyenne
River Sioux Tribe, where an IHS doctor by the name of Reid
apparently, because there are several stories, including the
ambulance driver, but the doctor told the ambulance driver to
deliver the body of a deceased Lakota man by the name of
Leonard Fiddler, to the IHS Hospital.
It is reported that Dr. Reid told the ambulance driver:
Whatever you do, do not bring the body to the IHS. I do not
care if you take it back or throw it on the side of the road;
just do not bring it here.
Are you familiar with that at all?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes, I am, Senator, unfortunately.
Senator Campbell. Could you tell the committee what you did
about that, or what policies you have in place; or if it is
true, if Dr. Reid is still working there?
Dr. Trujillo. First of all, the incident occurred with Mr.
Fiddler, who also was an elder tribal leader in the Cheyenne
River Tribe.
Senator Campbell. I know his family well, by the way.
Dr. Trujillo. Yes; and he went to bed early in the evening.
He was a diabetic. His wife was unable to wake him up several
hours later. Because of the circumstances, the wife called the
police and an ambulance service was requested from the
locality.
The ambulance arrived. The technicians detected no life
signs, including pulse or responsiveness or eye reflexes, and
then called the Indian Health Service local facility at Eagle
Butte Hospital.
The nurses responded and called the on-call physician, who
was a contract temporary physician, not an Indian Health
Service physician, who was contracted to work in the evenings
and on weekends.
Because of policy that was developed locally, in which
deceased individuals were to be transported to the local
mortuary or the morgue that the family designated, the
clinicians said that that was supposed to be the route of the
deceased individual on the ambulance.
There was confusion as to why not just take the individual
to the hospital, because the family had not made up their mind
as to where to go. Because of the location of Eagle Butte, and
having encountered the death very quickly and unexpectedly,
they did not have that in place.
Unfortunately, and this is very tragic, my understanding of
the situation was, the clinician made some very uncalled for
remarks.
Senator Campbell. Where is he now?
Dr. Trujillo. The physician was terminated, and we no
longer have that individual on contract any place within Indian
Health Service. We also contacted the organization that we work
with to hire the temporary physicians in, and told them the
circumstances, and the necessity not to have clinicians in our
service such as this.
When I found out about this, I also called on two of our
clinical clinicians, who have expertise in emergency care, and
one was a former medical examiner, and they had national
experience. They did an immediate review of the situation.
I also called the Office of Inspector General, so that we
could have an independent review. They did an independent
review of the situation and forwarded me the results.
Just recently, I also met with Chairman Greg Borland and
his health care committee. We went through the circumstances of
the death policies, and how we will be working together, to not
only overcome this particular situation, but also look at some
of the other concerns that we both have regarding the delivery
of services and the possibility of looking at and developing
the plans for a future hospital at Eagle View.
We have agreed and will work positively and constructively
on this particular issue. In addition, because of the
circumstances that I felt were unwarranted by this temporary
clinician, I personally sent a letter of regrets and apology to
the chairman and the tribal council.
I also contacted the family, and also wrote a personal
letter to them.
Senator Campbell. Well, thank you for doing that. Any
doctor that has that kind of a calloused attitude toward anyone
that is deceased and their family I think needs to get a
different profession. That is just my personal view. But I know
the Fiddler family well. I know Greg Bourland well, as the
Chairman does, and we do thank you for that.
I will ask some further questions when it is my turn,
again, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Trujillo. Thank you, very much.
The Chairman. Senator Domenici.
Senator Domenici. Mr. Chairman, let me just take a few
minutes. Might I first ask, do we have on record how much the
President's budget is for IHS? Has that already been inquired?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes, Senator Domenici; I also submitted a
written statement for the committee, as well as outlining in
that discussion the budgets proposed for fiscal year 2003.
Senator Domenici. Let me then move to some specifics within
your operation. I understand that reports and analysis from you
indicate that there is 13 percent vacancy rate among
professionals in the Indian Health Service.
I know there are vacancies in every health delivery service
in the country, and their shortages of different professionals
in different regions; nursing being one that is getting very
close to being everywhere.
But might I ask, are you doing something exceptional to try
to fill these vacancies? It seems to me, you are going to have
to work very hard, with some innovative ways, some ways of
attracting people that are new and exciting or different. Are
you doing those kinds of things in an effort to get some
professionals to fill these vacancies?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes, Senator; unfortunately, as you have
mentioned, the health care systems across the country are
facing some shortages, especially in some professions. We are
seeing that happening in the Indian Health Care System and
tribal programs.
In nursing, for example, across the country, you have about
an 11-percent vacancy rate. In our dental category, in regards
to dentists, we see a high vacancy rate in tribal urban
programs, and that is around about 20 or 22 percent, in all
cases.
In pharmacy, we also see this in and outside the Federal
services and Federal programs. The pharmacy vacancy rates are
running about 14 to 15 percent nationwide, within the Indian
Health Service.
In comparison to that, the physician vacancy rate is around
about 8 or 9 percent. We are feeling the crunch in nursing,
pharmacy, and dentists. Not only have we attempted at enhancing
our program for recruitment and retention of individuals in
those categories, we have also had recent authority for special
pay in dentistry, and also special pay for oncoming
pharmacists. We also have obtained some special pay for the
nursing staff.
Unfortunately, within the Indian Health Service, we are
seeing a number of our nurses are eligible for retirement. So
not only are we planning for new people coming in, but also for
replacement, because we see that.
We are also working in concert with the department, with
some of the Secretary's initiatives on recruitment retention,
so that we are going across the department as a whole, not only
developing plans for recruitment and retention, but also seeing
where we can strengthen each other.
Since ours are very diverse localities in our situation,
with tribes and urban programs and Indian Health Service, we
are also getting assistance from the department as a whole.
We have also received additional dollars in the budget to
recruit individuals from the military and the VA, in which
cases there has been some downsizing in their medical
facilities. That will help in the recruitment, retention, loan
repayment, and special pay category.
Senator Domenici. Well, thank you very much, and I hope
your efforts are successful.
I have two parochial New Mexico questions. But let me first
talk about two illnesses: Severe mental illnesses,
schizophrenia, manic depression, and the like. Currently, the
medical practice in the United States, are the beneficiaries of
some new medicines that are stabilizing, or the first time, for
schizophrenics and even manic depressants, and certainly those
who have depression.
I just want to ask whether or not, in your pharmacy
delivery system for Indian Health, are you providing the most
modern drugs and medications for the mentally ill; or are you
unable to pay for some, thereby denying them the same good new
kinds of drugs that they might get, if they were not at an
Indian treatment facility?
Dr. Trujillo. In regards to the medications that we have
for mental health illnesses, and the new medications that you
are referencing, a number of those, unfortunately, are very
high cost drugs. We also see this in the medications that treat
diabetes.
We attempt, as well as the tribal programs attempt, to have
appropriate pharmaceuticals and medications on board; or, if
necessary, having to order them particularly for a particular
patient.
Unfortunately, as we look across the country, in tribal
programs, Indian Health Services, as well as the urban
programs, one of the highest rising cost areas in all of our
budgets, delivery systems, have been the pharmaceuticals. In
some cases, we have seen a 31-percent rise in the cost of
providing the same medications.
So when we take a look at how we provided the formularies
that we can specify within our facilities, and ordering special
medications, we also encounter the rising costs of drugs.
We are working with the department at the present time on
the overall cost of pharmaceuticals. We are also hopeful that
we will be able to get some relief from other resources that
will flow into the Indian Health Service, because of the
overall department's plans.
Senator Domenici. Mr. Chairman, what I would like to do,
with your permission, I would like to submit, as part of this
record, a list of the kind of medication that is currently
being used to treat the severely mentally ill in the non-arena;
and to ask them to inform us whether they are making that
available to our Indian people or not.
I do not have the names today, but frankly, there are some
people whose family members are going from a catatonic state,
with schizophrenia, to being an able-bodied citizen and a
relative who has almost come back to life, so to speak. But you
have to have medicines to do that.
You and I had to intervene one time, because they were not
giving the medicine to the young man who had been very sick for
8 or 10 years. I think I told you, once they gave him the
medicine, the young man was well.
In fact, his mother greeted me at an event, and I did not
even know why she was there to thank me. The medicine was too
expensive for their pharmaceutical acquisition list. I think we
ought to help the severely mentally ill in a very special way,
and make sure they are getting as good a medicine as non-
Indians. That is why I want to do this exchange, if you would
permit it.
The Chairman. Most certainly, you may do that, sir.
Without objection, so ordered.
Senator Domenici. I have two New Mexico questions.
Dr. Trujillo. Yes.
Senator Domenici. I want to give them to you, and ask my
staff to get answers for them. I have on the Hickory and one on
the Albuquerque health care facility.
Now I want to close by telling you that the Indian people
are the beneficiaries of a very, very major effort in diabetes.
We started this program when we put together the balanced
budget of 1979, with $30 million for a special fund for
diabetes among the Indian people. It is now $100 million per
year.
I think it is time that some results show from such a major
effort. I wonder if you might supply us, for the record, with
some kind of analysis of how far you have come with diabetes
treatment, and where you plan to go, now that there is going to
be $100 million a year.
I think we do not need to burden this record with the
facts, again. But if there is a population of Americans that
are in serious jeopardy because of an illness, it is the Indian
people and diabetes.
Frankly, we had one expert tell us, if we did not rectify
the situation, that there would be no Navajo Indians left,
demographically speaking, in a period of 30 to 40 years,
because diabetes is such a killer, in terms of Indian people.
Are you satisfied with the way the program is being
conducted, and could you supply us with information which might
indicate to us whether the program is doing well or not,
Doctor?
Dr. Trujillo. Senator, I also want to personally thank you,
and also for the agency, for your efforts in regards to
obtaining and assisting with the special diabetes funding. That
has been of great help, not only to the Indian Health Service,
but tribal programs.
Yes, we would be very willing and able to provide the
committee and others with appropriate information, followup and
also examples of what has been done with these special diabetes
dollars, including a lot of concentration on the preventive
aspect and the educational aspect.
Unfortunately, for American Indian individuals, this is the
scourge and the epidemic that we see before us, because it also
goes into cardiovascular disease and, as you know, dialysis and
problems down the road.
We also are aware that the special diabetes funding, I
believe, has one more year for the Indian Health Care Programs.
The department, tribes, and Indian Health Service, will be
working with the Congress on how we might be able to address
the continuation of such funding, because it has been of such
great help in Indian country.
Senator Domenici. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
The President's budget request has an increase of about $64
million for fiscal year 2002. While at the same time, health
care for the American citizen was about $3,800 per year. Indian
Health Service will $1,300 per year for the patients they
serve. Will the $64 million increase bring expenditures closer
parity, with that expended an all other all other Americans?
Dr. Trujillo. Senator, as you well know, the Indian Health
Service, for many, many years, has had very challenging work
always laid out before us. The issues of available resources,
the increasing inflation for health care costs, the population
growth of American Indian/Alaska Natives we see across the
Nation, continues to be very challenging for us.
I believe that our programs, tribal programs and urban
programs, have been quite creative, and have created some
programs that despite always the needed resources that we could
use, have developed good programs.
We have conducted work groups with tribal leadership to
identify direct service costs for patients, in which we serve.
It is called the level of need funding for direct services,
where we compare programs and their respective costs, to that
of the Federal employee benefits package. The cost that we have
identified for direct services from that particular work group
has been around about $4 billion or $5 billion.
The direct services that we can identify with Indian health
service amounts to about $2 billion. We are looking at the
preventive, the public health, the facilities, what we call the
wrap-around services. We are also identifying those costs, too.
The budget, I believe, for this year, while it is
constrained, will go toward some specific components of high
need, in the services, as well as facilities, construction, and
directly to tribes.
Mr. Lincoln, would you like to expand a little bit on our
level of need and our cost per patient?
Mr. Lincoln. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the
increase in this budget cannot make up the difference between
what this Nation pays for in personal medical services, which
is in excess of $3,000 per individual, and what the Indian
Health Service has available to it for those same personal
medical services, $1,300. This budget will not make up that
difference.
The Chairman. How much more would we need?
Mr. Lincoln. Based upon this level of funded need study
that Dr. Trujillo referred to, if you look at the number of
users, Indian people that use the system, whether it is
Federally operated, tribally operated programs, there are
approximately 1.4 million to 1.5 million Indian people who use
the system.
If the average, just in terms of round numbers, is $3,000
per individual, therefore, there would be a need of about $4.5
billion, in order to meet this need.
The Chairman. So the President's budget is short $4.5
billion?
Mr. Lincoln. We currently have approximately $2 billion for
personal medical services. So if we were to meet the difference
between $4.5 billion and $2 billion, there would be a need of
$2.5 billion.
The Chairman. The 2000 Census indicates that 57 percent of
American Indians and Alaska Natives now reside in urban areas.
However, the President's budget request includes only a
$581,000 increase in funding for urban Indians. Is that amount
proportionate to the increase in the urban Indian populations?
Dr. Trujillo. There has and continues to be a shifting of
the Native American population into more metropolitan areas. We
have been working with the urban programs, as well as with
tribes, to identify some of the high priority issues.
Over the past several years, we have developed a program
for epidemiology, to obtain statistics, resources, and health
care data, so that we can verify and assist the tribal programs
in resources.
We have also attempted to build the infrastructure for
administration training, as well as data programs, among all
the urban programs over the past years, including this
particular year.
The other areas that we are working on, with the department
as a whole, especially through SAMSA, HRSA, and CDC, are
availability of funds from their particular programs, that can
flow into local governments, city governments, community health
centers, migrant health centers, the cooperation between those
respective agencies, and working with them, with the urban
health care programs.
So what you see in the budget in the Indian Health Service
is not all the dollars that go to urban programs. We also are
able to hopefully access now, and in the future even more,
resources from especially the community health center programs.
We also have collaborative efforts in the increased amount
of dollars that are going to build back the national health
service core and the clinicians that come out of that. Those
individuals will then also be coming not only to tribal
programs, but also urban programs.
We also have the diabetes funding, that has gone into urban
programs and are part of the overall effort for education and
direct services and prevention.
The Chairman. These funds are available, but are they being
used?
Dr. Trujillo. Yes; they are being used. They are also being
leveraged by many of the urban programs. The Indian Health
Service, in some programs, is not the only source of dollars.
They have also been very fruitful in their collaborative
efforts, being able to obtain outside grants; being able to
obtain programs that are available for them, either through
Federal or State programs, university or other health care
corporations. So our Indian Health Service dollars are also
leveraged with that facility.
The Chairman. The budget request submitted by the President
involves a restructuring proposal.
For example, it proposes a consolidation of public affairs,
legislative, human resources, staff functions, and funding from
the departmental agencies where they are currently located, to
the Office of the Secretary.
In addition, the budget request proposes further
consolidation of facilities construction, and that is
hospitals, management and maintenance staff, functions and
funding, in fiscal year 2004, to the Secretary.
Now with that type of consolidation, do you believe that
the United States' trust responsibility for the health care of
American Indians and Alaska Natives will be hurt? Put another
way, in a much plainer way, if a hospital building in Indian
country comes up in contest with a building in NIH, which will
be accorded the higher priority?
Dr. Trujillo. Senator, the question is very thoughtful, and
I believe it is an issue that the department, the Secretary,
and the agency, and tribes are now working on.
I do believe that the initiatives of the Secretary and his
efforts in a one department collaboration, with collaborative
support, will bring about additional resources to Indian
country from other agencies within the department. I believe
they also will have an increased responsibility for delivery of
that care, and that the Indian Health Service is not the sole
responsible party; but other agencies are.
At the present time, we are studying the efforts for
consolidation, especially when you mentioned facilities. The
department is now gathering information, the data specifics of
how this consolidation might occur, if it were to occur in the
future.
I believe that if we have a priority system, and I would
have to say here, the department continues to be very impressed
with the priority system of the Indian Health Service, and have
also us to explain that in more detail as we go through the
consolidation.
I believe, given the special relationship of the
government-to-government belief in the Secretary and his
concern of consultation and involvement, that certainly the
highest need of Indian health care facilities will be right
there on the desk for the priorities of the department.
The Chairman. That is your personal view?
Dr. Trujillo. That is my personal view.
The Chairman. And your priorities will be consolidated or
merged with those of the Department?
Dr. Trujillo. I believe the Indian Health Service will also
have a primary role to perhaps access additional dollars from
other resources.
This particular effort is now being steadied by the
department right now. We have also involved tribal leadership
in a restructuring committee, to look at the options and look
at the recommendations that have come from the department, so
that they too will have an input directly not only to the
agency, but also to the department.
In addition, the Office of General Counsel is also looking
at some of the specifics, as it relates to the special
relationship between tribes and the Federal Government, and the
department, as well as the new legislation regarding title 5
and title 6.
The Chairman. My interpretation of history would suggest
that whenever functions are consolidated, the priorities of
Indian country always seems to fall to the bottom of the list.
Otherwise, how can we continually have situations where the
average American health care expenditure is $3,800, and the
average Indian health care expenditure is $1,300 or less than a
one-third of the average expenditure for all other Americans?
I mean, this is not parity, and I am afraid that this
consolidation will further exacerbate the situation. I know
that you have great faith in the Secretary, but Secretaries
come and go. We have no idea who the next Secretary will be,
but we know what the law will be.
The attitude of the people of the United States, history
shows this. We have enacted all kinds of laws, hoping that we
could correct this.
The President's budget request, for example, has an
increase of 83 full-time equivalents to staff new facilities,
when you know that you need 183. Now how have they done this?
They gave you 83 full-time, and they take away 100 Fte's from
other areas. Is that not correct?
Dr. Trujillo. When we construct new facilities, staffing is
usually at the level of 80 percent, and we do not staff,
unfortunately, facilities at the 100 percent level. The funding
that we have in the budget at the present time is for the
completion of hospitals that are now ongoing, that is, at
Winnebego, NE, Parker, CO, and Fort Defiance, AZ.
The initiatives, I believe, with the involvement of tribal
leadership, and I believe the department and the Secretary, as
well as this agency, certainly has brought tribal leadership in
the consultation and the development of policy, and the options
available.
As long as I certainly am the Director, I will commit to
the involvement of tribal leadership in the development of
policy, changes, and structure for the agency, because I know
it directly affects the patients we care for, and it affects
the people that I will go home to.
The Chairman. Well, I personally feel it is rather tragic,
when you announce with great flair that we are going to have 83
new full-time equivalent positions to staff facilities, and
then in fine print elsewhere, you will find that we have
reduced 100 in other areas.
Dr. Trujillo. In regards to the reduction, there are
efforts by the department, the agencies across the department,
as well as the President's initiative, to assure that there is
increased effectiveness and efficiency. We will not be
decreasing service.
The Chairman. I would like to see this efficiency exercise
carried out in all other agencies. Apparently, the only one who
gets the efficiency exercise is Indian Health Service. I am
trying to defend you, you know. I am not fighting you.
[Laughter.]
Dr. Trujillo. In fact, we will become more efficient across
all the agencies.
The Chairman. So you will be much more efficient with less
people?
Dr. Trujillo. Senator, there are pluses and minuses in any
restructuring effort. However, I do believe that changes are
always necessary in a re-examination of any Federal agency or
program, to make sure that the dollars are there, that the
effectiveness is there, that the changing conditions that we
deal with, including the changes in the needs of people that we
serve are reflected in our we do business.
I believe we can always do better. But it is also necessary
to make sure that the people we serve and the communities we
serve have input into that process.
The Chairman. I have one final question, sir, and I would
like to submit the rest to you. There seems to be a trend, if
one looks at the budget request, where the Government of the
United States is very deliberately transferring activities that
they were responsible for, to private agencies such as
education. It would appear that this may go into health care,
also.
Does this mean that the U.S. Government is slowly washing
its hands of the United States' trust responsibility?
Dr. Trujillo. Again, I believe that is a very thoughtful
question, and a very excellent question. I do not believe, in
this particular case, that we are devolving the Federal
responsibility of health care programs.
In fact, at the present time, we have many localities in
particular situations, where we do outsource or contract with
private programs to provide services, radiology, laboratory. It
depends upon the circumstances.
We also have divulged the Federal direct responsibilities
in one respect, and transferred them to tribal nations, in
which they now administer and manage Federal programs. Over 52
percent of the Indian Health Service budget is now managed and
administered by tribal programs. That also is reflective, in
part, of the budget proposals, and we will continue to have
emphasis upon that self-determination.
There are some localities where tribes and Indian Health
Service do not find it effective and cost effective to contract
out particular services. However, there are some cases and some
services where it may prove to be more cost effective and
beneficial in particular localities.
The Chairman. At this moment how many men and women are
under your command?
Dr. Trujillo. We have approximately 14,000, plus or minus.
The Chairman. With the new President's budget, how many men
and women will be under your command?
Dr. Trujillo. It will remain approximately the same. The
shift has been in our restructuring, a downsizing of our
headquarters and area offices, to such an extent, when I first
came in as the Director, there were headquarters personnel of
over 900. We now have a little over 300. Those positions have
shifted out to the field, especially to service units, to
provide increased services.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Trujillo.
Senator Campbell. I have maybe a couple more questions, Mr.
Chairman, and thank you.
I have been listening very intently. I think when you talk
about reducing your FTEs, that causes some alarm; but on the
other hand, I understand that some of it is because of the
tribes picking up the responsibilities underIndian Self-
Determination Act agreements, and the manpower goes up there,
as it goes down at the Federal level. I assume that is where
the disparity comes in.
Dr. Trujillo. Yes.
Senator Campbell. My big concern is to obviously make sure
that the services are provided, and that the Indian people are
not being denied.
Let me just reflect for a minute on the comments of Senator
Domenici and Senator Inouye, too. When the question of the
census came up, you know, I tell you, raw numbers are always
kind of suspect to me.
Because as I understand it, between 1990 and the year 2000,
literally every American Indian woman in the country would have
had to had about five children per year, to make up the
difference in what the 2000 Census said of the number of Indian
people in the country, over what 1990 said. Somehow, I do not
think that happened.
I think more likely, it was what I sometimes refer to as
the ``Dances with Wolves Syndrome.'' It got awfully popular
after Dances with Wolves to be an Indian. So a lot of people in
the census, since they do not have to prove anything, they just
can say they are. I think we get this hugely inflated number,
but probably a lot of it is not really valid.
Let me just maybe mention something along the lines of what
Senator Domenici said. You know, I never heard Indian people
who say, 200 year ago or 150 years ago, I never read of it in
any historical documents, where they suffered high diabetes.
Dr. Trujillo. That is right.
Senator Campbell. They had a very simple food source. It
was natural foods, right from the earth. Now they have probably
the highest diabetes of any ethnic group in the Nation, or at
least that is my understanding. That means it has got to be
something to do with lifestyle and diet, that has changed over
the last 100 to 150 years, or something of that nature.
If you asked the average guy in the street if he knows what
the word ``commodity'' means, they would go blank. But I see
the expression on your face. You know what it means, and I know
what it means, and every Indian person knows what it means. It
means starchy processed foods that come often from Government
surplus stores, in cans without labels or just white labels
that say, ``beans,'' or something of that nature.
So I am convinced, and I am sure medical science would
testify to it, that it has to do with diet and lifestyle. It is
not just genetic. It has to do with the changes.
So I guess when I think of what we are trying to do to
improve the health of Indian people, my gosh, there has got to
be a limit of how many dialysis machines we can buy. It does
not get to the root problem.
I guess my question to you, Doctor, is what are we doing
about the root problem? Are we trying, through the IHS, to I do
not know, have seminars or something about better diets? I know
some of that is our problem, too, as appropriators. Senator
Inouye is aware of this, and I am too. I mean, sometimes we are
not providing the amount of funds we need.
But it seems to me we ought to be looking a lot more at
prevention, rather than just more and more machines, and more
and more doctors, and more and more hospitals and all that. It
does not get to the root of what health is all about, to my way
of thinking.
Would you reflect on that, just for 1 moment?
Dr. Trujillo. I fully agree with the emphasis on the
commitment and the necessity of personal health care and
responsibility.
One of the areas that the special diabetes funds have been
utilized in, is in that particular area of health education,
early detection, and awareness. We have grants to communities,
tribal programs, and urban centers, which a lot of those
dollars have been utilized in that particular effort,
especially working with the youth or those individuals who are
high risk individuals, to make them aware of what their
consequences and their choices may lead to.
In addition, we have also been working with other outside
agencies. For example, just recently, a contingent of teenage
individuals came into Washington, DC from Ft. Peck. At the end
of last year, they boycotted the school lunch program, because
there were fats, there were sweets. Because of that, they were
able to change the diet of that particular school.
They met with the director of the Department of
Agriculture, and we asked questions of how to do this, what
they can do. We have also been working with youth in other
areas.
You mentioned that you and I are familiar with commodities.
Unfortunately, I still have pangs for a craving for Spam, every
once in awhile. [Laughter.]
Senator Campbell. Yes; that is what happens when you are
raised on it. I know.
Dr. Trujillo. But on a recent occasion, I happened to visit
a community in the Southwest. I will not mention where. A small
school bus came up that had Headstart kids in it.
They came into the restaurant, which was a fast food
restaurant. Some of the children were overweight, and some of
the sponsors were overweight. They lined up. They got large
cokes. They got fatty foods with the Egg McMuffins, or other
things similar to that. They got the fried potatoes, and all of
them sat to eat that for their breakfast meal.
When we do that, or our teachers do that, what types of
messages are being sent to the children? That is where we are
attempting to make the inroads, such as these kids that came
from Ft. Peck.
Senator Campbell. Oh, I understand that. I mean, I like
fried bread probably as much as the next guy. It is probably
the worst thing in the world you can eat, from the standpoint
of health.
May I recommend, when you have time, the next time you are
in the Southwest, that you visit the Southern Ute facility that
was just built. That happens to be my hometown, and that is why
I know about it.
They built a really marvelous kind of health complex. It
has a gymnasium and it has a swimming pool. But in addition to
that, they offer healthy living classes and even offer cooking
classes. They just opened it a couple of months ago. One-third
of the whole tribe has already signed up to use that facility.
They have the same problems as every tribe, with diabetes,
and being overweight, and so on. I think that things like that
could be a role model of what we ought to be doing; not just
from the standpoint of weights and cardiovascular machines and
treadmills and all that; but with the emphasis put on healthy
living and diet and cooking. So I would recommend you visit
that, if you can.
Just let me ask you one last little question, and that is
this. I understand that when young Indian physicians graduate,
that current policy prevents them from serving in their own
tribal community.
I find that kind of strange, because if there is anything
that Indian kids need, it is role models of people that have
been successful, that happen to be their uncles or their
cousins, or somebody that they know.
Do you know if that policy is in effect or not?
Dr. Trujillo. No; I am not aware of that policy. In fact,
when I finished my medical residency training, I went back home
in the Public Health Service and the Indian Health Service.
The Chairman. You did?
Dr. Trujillo. I was expecting to stay 2 years for my
commitment. However, I have now stayed over 20 years.
No, if there are available positions; if a tribe or that
clinic is available, and if they do have open vacancies, yes,
they can be hired at that facilities.
I also believe that strong role models are essential, and
the necessity for young Indian physicians to be out in the
field, to go to schools, to be there, and to live there, is
critical.
I just came from the University of Seattle, where I gave a
lecture to young Indian clinicians, medical students. In the
room were practicing clinicians in the Northwest, who are of
Indian heritage.
They had come to the University of Washington Indian
Program early on. They went to the medical school. They went to
the residency, and now they were sitting in the chairs on the
other side, as practicing clinicians, and they were practicing
in Tribal and Indian Health Service programs. What better model
and mentoring can they do?
Senator Campbell. Well, we are in agreement on that.
Dr. Trujillo. And I hope we can provide that support.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
submit the rest of my questions in writing to Dr. Trujillo.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Trujillo. As
indicated, we would like to submit to your office several
questions to be answered.
Dr. Trujillo. Yes; thank you, sir.
Senator can I just interrupt? Senator Campbell asked a
question about mentoring of Indian students. In fact, in the
audience we have here a young Indian physician, who is a public
health service co-step, Mike Bartholomew, who is in medical
school at Dartmouth.
Senator Campbell. He is in medical school now?
Dr. Trujillo. In Dartmouth.
Senator Campbell. And where is he?
Dr. Trujillo. Stand up, Mike.
Senator Campbell. Good, great, thank you.
Dr. Trujillo. He is one of many.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Dr. Trujillo. Thank you.
The Chairman. Our next witness is the assistant secretary
of the Office of Public and Indian Housing, United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Michael Liu.
Secretary Liu, it is always good to have with us.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL LIU, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, OFFICE OF PUBLIC
AND INDIAN HOUSING, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Liu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. Thank you for inviting me to provide comments on
President Bush's budget for HUD's Indian Housing and Community
Development programs for fiscal year 2003.
My name is Michael Liu, and I am the Assistant Secretary
for Public and Indian Housing. I am responsible for the
management, operation, and oversight of HUD's Native American
programs. These programs are available to over 550 federally-
recognized and a limited number of State-recognized Indian
tribes.
We serve these tribes directly, or through Tribally
Designated Housing Entities, by providing grants and loan
guarantees designed to support affordable housing and viable
community and economic development.
Our clientele in diverse. They are located on Indian
reservations, in Alaska Native villages, and in other
traditional Indian areas. More recently, this list has grown to
include Native Hawaiians.
It is a pleasure to again appear before you, and I would
like to express my appreciation for your continuing efforts to
improve the housing conditions of American Indian and Alaska
Native peoples.
As you have heard in the tribal testimony at the recently
held NAHASDA hearing, much progress is being made, and tribes
are taking advantage of the improvements to the law in housing
conditions of the Native American families residing on Indian
reservations, on trust or restricted Indian lands, and in
Alaska Native villages, and are moving ahead in the right
direction.
This momentum needs to be sustained, as we continue to work
together toward creating a better living environment across
Indian country.
At the outset, let me reaffirm the Department of Housing
and Urban Development's support for the principle of
government-to-government relations with Indian tribes. HUD is
committed to honoring this fundamental precept in our work with
American Indians and Alaska Natives.
You may recall that when I testified before you last month,
I confirmed that the department was searching for a deputy
assistant secretary for Native American programs. Tribal
representatives and members of this committee spoke in support
of setting the level for that position to Senior Executive
Service.
In the spirit of cooperation, Secretary Martinez has agreed
to re-advertise for the position as an SES. All approvals have
been received and granted, and I am looking toward having that
advertisement on the web toward the later part of next week,
sir.
For fiscal year 2003, the President's budget proposes a
total of $740.5 million, specifically for Native Americans and
Native Hawaiian housing, community and economic development,
and education programs.
Of that amount, approximately $639 million is for direct,
formula allocations under the Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Acts Indian Housing Block
Grant Program; $71 million is for grants under the Indian
Community Development Block Grant Program; and $7 million is
for the Native American Section 184 and Title VI loan
guarantees. That loan authority will leverage $214 million in
loan guarantees.
The Native Hawaiian community will receive, through the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, $10 million for the Native
Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program, and $1 million for the
Section 184A, Native Hawaiian Loan Guarantee Fund, which will
leverage approximately $40 million in loan guarantees. There is
$5.6 million available for training and technical assistance to
support these programs.
Finally, the department requests $5.4 million to support
American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian-oriented
higher education institutions.
Next I will address the Indian Housing Block Grant Program.
Adjustments to the IHBG program have been made to allow for
more funds to be available for tribal use. The fiscal year 2003
budget includes $646.6 million for the IHBG program. Although
this is a decrease of $2 million from fiscal year 2002, by
reducing set-asides, there will actually be allowed $6.4
million more in grant dollars available to the tribes. The
decreases in set-asides are from the training and technical
assistance category, Title VI Program, and Working Capital
Fund.
The training and technical assistance component of this
program has been reduced to $3 million, down from $5 million in
the previous year. This action was taken in recognition that
several years have passed since implementation of this program,
and most tribes have been provided with the initial and in
depth training and technical assistance necessary to implement
most of the new and sweeping changes in the way in which we now
do business.
Training and technical assistance remains a critical
component of the program, and we propose that a portion of it
be accomplished in partnership with the National American
Indian Housing Council. The President's budget includes a $2.2
million set-aside from the IHBG program, to continue the same
level of support as provided in last year's budget to the
NAIHC.
These funds, as in the past, will be made available under a
contract to the organization, in return for their training and
technical assistance services to NAHASDA grantees.
I would encourage the HAIHC to work with the department to
ensure that these funds are obligated expeditiously, and that
the training and technical assistance occur as soon as is
feasible.
In fiscal year 2000, HUD executed a $2-million training and
technical assistance contract with NAIHC. As of December 2001,
less than $500,000 of those funds had been expended.
The Title VI Loan Guarantee Fund is also a set-aside under
the IHBG Program. This budget recognizes that until the program
is more fully subscribed, it is more effective to use available
funds in the IHBG program, and allocate it by formula directly
to IHBG grantees.
There is sufficient carryover of unused guarantee authority
which, when combined with this year's budget request, will
support anticipated future program needs. This allows $4
million to be added back to the IHBG formula.
As for the working capital fund in the department's fiscal
year 2002 IHBG appropriation, not less than $3 million was
allocated.
In attempt to better prorate the amount required from each
program, it was determined that the amount allocated from the
fiscal year 2003 IHBG account could be reduced by $600,000.
This $2.4 million reduction from the fiscal year 2002
appropriation is included in a direct appropriation to the
working capital fund.
Last year, the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee
Fund received its first annual credit subsidy re-estimate, as
required by the Credit Reform Act. The re-estimate resulted in
a reduced subsidy rate, which tripled loan amounts available
for guarantee when holding budget authority constant during
fiscal year 2002.
The subsidy rate declined due in part to the low number of
defaults. The $1 million reduction in the fiscal year 2003
budget request reflects the impact of that recalculation,
adjusted by anticipated utilization, so that, in fact, the $5
million in fiscal year 2003 will provide $197.24 million in
loan guarantee authority.
The President's fiscal year 2003 budget request for the
Indian Community Development Block Grant Program is $72.5
million. This budget will provide an increase of $2.5 million
over the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2002, and $1.5
million was allocated to the operation of the Native American
Economic Development Access Center, Native Edge.
Native Edge, which began as a pilot project within the
department, is now an inter-agency initiative, linking 18
Federal agencies, through a single economic development access
center, so that tribes, Native Americans, lending institutions,
non-profit foundations, and private businesses can collaborate
to promote economic growth and find innovative solutions to
chronic economic development problems in Indian country.
The President's budget requests that $1.5 million be set
aside from the ICDBG allocation to continue support of this
award-winning and much needed initiative.
For fiscal year 2003, the department is requesting $10
million for the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program.
This budget recognizes the unique housing needs of Native
Hawaiian families, eligible to reside on Hawaiian homelands,
and the department is now beginning to meet those needs.
A further acknowledgment is the establishment of a separate
program account for the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant
Program. It is anticipated that an interim regulation
implementing the new Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant
Program will be published in the Federal Register within the
next 2 months.
This action will facilitate immediate distribution of funds
and implementation of the program, while public comments are
being received toward publication of final regulations.
The budget also requests that $1 million be allocated to
the Section 184(a) Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund.
At that level of funding, this new loan guarantee program,
modeled after the section 184 program, will provide up to $40
million in loan guarantee authority, to guarantee market rate
mortgage loans to income eligible Native Hawaiian families, who
choose to reside on Hawaiian Homelands.
The Department of Hawaiian Homelands, a State agency, is
the programs partner. DHHL is the agency responsible for
allocation of leasehold interests on the Hawaiian Homelands.
Program procedures will mirror the section 184 program as
closely as is appropriate.
Until direct endorsement lenders are approved, ONAP will
work closely with DHHL and individual borrowers to review,
underwrite, and issue guarantee certificates for all loans.
The President's budget also requests, under the Community
Development Fund, $3 million for competitive grants to tribal
colleges and universities, to provide resources to build,
expand, renovate and equip their facilities; and $2.4 million
to assist Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving
institutions, as they are defined under the Higher Education
Act, as amended.
In conclusion, let me state for the record that the
President's budget request for HUD's Indian housing, community
development, and education programs supports the progress being
made by tribes in providing housing and housing-related
endeavors in Indian country.
This concludes my remarks, Mr. Chairman, and I would be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Liu appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Liu. Thank you.
The Chairman. First, I would like to commend you for
responding to and resolving the so-called downgrading problem
that we discussed 3 weeks ago.
Mr. Liu. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. I can assure you that the tribal leaders are
most pleased with the responsiveness of your agency. I hope
that this will be a hallmark for future consultation with
tribes.
I am certain you are aware that tribal leaders have
requested the establishment of a 58 member negotiated
rulemaking committee. What is the status of that now?
Mr. Liu. We have had at least two meetings with tribal
leaders to discuss the issue of consultation, negotiated
rulemaking, Mr. Chairman.
I believe that it will take a number of other meetings for
us to define further the issues of concern, to look at the size
of the committees that are being discussed, to consider what
type of processes we have involved, as I mentioned last time,
so that we can balance the need to respect the request for
government-to-government relationships and consultation, as
well as to be able to get the job done and making our programs
workable.
I think they have been very fruitful, and I am very hopeful
that before the summer, we can get this issue resolved in a
manner which is satisfactory, both to them and to us.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, and I hope it will be
settled.
Mr. Liu. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The committee is advised that the level of
need for Indian housing is $1,075,000. Does this estimate jive
with yours?
Mr. Liu. Well, we have some questions about the assumptions
and the analysis involved in that report, Mr. Chairman. We do
not argue with the fact that there is need. From that, we are
all on the same page.
Without getting into the specifics of where there may be
some differences about the $1.75 billion, we believe that the
$646 million or $647 million in our budget will adequately take
care of the needs in fiscal year 2003.
We look at the hold-over budget authority under the 184
program and the Title 6 programs, both of which approximate
about $246 million. We added that to the actual request within
our budget.
In addition, when you look at the resources being provided
to the rural housing services and USDA, the new tax credit
programs, the new market venture tax credits, renewal community
tax credit programs, and new private sector endorsements and
commitments from the GSEs to even do more on Indian lands, we
think that for fiscal year 2003, that there are adequate
resources to deal with the housing needs.
The Chairman. Would the department support or oppose an
attempt by the Congress to increase the $646 million?
Mr. Liu. Mr. Chairman, the department will, of course, work
with Congress in developing our budget as a whole, as well as
it deals with Indian country. Whatever obviously is put into
law by the end of this fall, we will work very closely with the
committee and others to implement in the manner which, of
course, would be intended.
The Chairman. As you know, Indian country has been
concerned about staffing of field offices. Are you satisfied
that is moving along?
Mr. Liu. I think I am satisfied. That is something that I
am personally taking a very active role in, in making sure they
are going forward as the department, as a whole, goes through
some realignment, and that our Office of Native American
Programs is a net gainer in that process. We are, so far, and I
would like to see that occur even more.
The Chairman. I am certain you are aware that Indian
country is concerned about black mold in their housing. Is your
organization doing anything about this?
Mr. Liu. Well, as you know, sir, we have moved ahead to
implement the set-aside, which was provided for last year. I
also understand there has been some additional moneys accessed
through our CDBG program, to work in that arena.
This is to confirm this question, at the last hearing, in
regards to the availability of our lead-based paint program, a
healthy homes program, that might address some of the black
mould issues, also. The answer is definitely, yes. There is the
chance for tribes to access those funds through the grant
process.
The Chairman. Would your agency oppose an increase by line
item for lead paint?
Mr. Liu. Mr. Chairman, I think, again, as per the whole
issue of increased allocations we, of course, will work with
the tribes, with the agencies, to address the needs with
resources available.
I think one of the issues that would have to be looked at
would be how targeted are the dollars; will it go to a wider
array of tribes than was done last year? I think on those
issues, certainly, we are open to discuss this with the
Chairman.
The Chairman. On Native Hawaiian housing, have you selected
a staff to serve in Hawaii?
Mr. Liu. We have started to jump start the process. Yes, I
have selected an individual who would be there before the end
of the month, who will start on an interim basis, at least up
to 6 months, because then we are going to have to go through
the advertisement process for a permanent person. So, yes, a
person has been identified.
The Chairman. When do you think the first block grant will
be issued?
Mr. Liu. Two months; but I am hoping we can shave a few
weeks off of that. I have been personally involved in the
finalization of the interim regulation, and I am hopeful that
we can shorten up that timeframe a lot. But I think, at this
point, 2 months is a safe guess.
I have been in touch with the director of the Department of
Hawaiian Homelands. I have met with him twice within the last 2
weeks. I have been very pleased with the cooperation that we
have had with the State.
The Chairman. It is my understanding that when the Drug
Elimination Program was discontinued from the department's
budget in 2001, the public housing operating fund was increased
by $150 million, to be used for anti-drug activities.
But as you know, the tribes do not qualify for such public
housing operating subsidies, so they have no replacement
funding for their drug elimination activities.
Is something going to be done about this?
Mr. Liu. Well, Mr. Chairman, the position of the
Administration in the elimination of the Drug Elimination
Program was based on the premise that the program, as designed,
had a lot of flaws. We saw an array of dollars being utilized
for purposes that were tenuous, at best, in terms of their
connection to drug elimination.
Our increase in request for the operating subsidy was based
on our continued concern for the need to deal with public
safety issues as a whole. To the extent that the tribes can
utilize their block grant dollars for public safety issues, we
certainly will encourage that, if those public safety programs
make sense.
To the extent that we can bring to the table other Federal
resources, and work with the Department of Justice in linking
them with the tribes, we are working to do that.
Finally, we will be aggressively working with local
leaders, whose jurisdictions, counties, towns, cities, and
villages, might incorporate at least part of the regions where
Native Americans reside; if not on tribal lands themselves, but
to emphasize that Native Americans are citizens of their
communities also, and deserve the same type of public services
that other residents do.
The Chairman. As you know, in certain areas, the problem of
drugs may be worse than in the city.
Mr. Liu. Yes.
The Chairman. I most respectfully suggest that your office
sit down with tribal leaders to work out some sort of effective
program to combat drugs, because it is a very, very serious
problem.
The President's budget cuts Rural Housing and Economic
Development Programs. As you know, there were tribes who were
using the Rural Housing and Economic Development Program funds
for capacity building, which is essential for self-governance.
Now the Administration has said that they support Indian
self-determination and tribal self-governance. If that is the
case, what is the justification for eliminating this program?
Mr. Liu. The primary justification, sir, was that we
thought that we saw duplication, with services being provided
by the Department of Agriculture, through its rural development
agency; specifically, its rural housing services, as well as
its business and cooperative services arena.
With the long history, and much of it is successful, under
USDA, we felt that they would be the more effective entity to
develop the type of capacity building, the type of housing
assistance, which we were attempting to get involved in.
So primarily, to avoid duplication and leave it to the
agency which is doing an effective job, that was the motivation
and the underlying policy reason for the elimination of the
program here at HUD.
The Chairman. Did you discuss this and explain it to the
tribal leaders involved?
Mr. Liu. The position and the policy decision was discussed
at meetings, I understand, by staff, and not by myself,
personally. To the extent, if there is need to do more and to
better explain that issue, we can do that.
I have been asked by the Secretary, as well as by Secretary
Veneman, to act as the liaison between the two departments on
housing issues, and I can certainly work in that role to do a
better job.
The Chairman. It is my understanding that the department
maintains a Public Housing Disaster Fund to address unexpected
emergencies. How much was allocated to this emergency fund in
fiscal year 2002?
Mr. Liu. There is, in Indian housing, apart from public
housing, a $2-million set-aside, operationally, that we have
had for a number of years that is available to tribes, at
$350,000 maximum per incident, per application, that has been
available.
This is separate from what we do in public housing, where
out of its capital fund program, there is a special set-aside
for the public housing authorities.
The Chairman. But it will not reduce the Block Grant
Program?
Mr. Liu. No.
The Chairman. Well, Mr. Secretary, I thank you once again
for your participation in this hearing. We appreciate your
wisdom and your testimony, and we look forward to continue our
working with you. Just keep up the consultation with the
tribes. They appreciate it.
Mr. Liu. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to
reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of Hon. Pete V. Domenici, U.S. Senator from New
Mexico
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for holding this hearing
today with the Indian Health Service [IHS] and the Department of
Housing and Urban Development [HUD], which provide key services to
Indian Nations.
I know that the Indian Health Care system continues to face
competing priorities, escalating costs, and an increase in patient
demand for not only more services in acute and urgent care treatment,
but for better access to basic health services.
We all know that the Nation is facing a nursing shortage. Well, IHS
has an even greater burden of filling professional vacancies. In fact,
IHS reports an overall vacancy rate for health professionals of
approximately 13 percent. IHS is attempting to address this issue by
recruiting former military health professionals to work for IHS. But
more help in this area is needed. Not only for recruitment, but we must
address how to retain the qualified personnel. Even qualified American
Indians are leaving IHS facilities, because they are afforded better
working conditions, the latest medical equipment and let's face it,
higher salaries than what IHS has to offer.
In my State of New Mexico there are numerous funding issues with
tribal, Federal and urban Indian health care. In order for IHS to
maximize their alternate resource dollars, estimated at $508.8 million
dollars, there must be a commitment toward providing and improving
information systems that will assist in efficient billing and
collection.
The age-adjusted death rates are alarming. American Indians and
Alaska Natives score higher in almost all health categories:
alcoholism, diabetes, tuberculosis, cancer, obesity and sadly, the
number of young people impacted are escalating as well.
I am proud to see a number of diabetes prevention activities and
diabetes care programs now taking place within Indian Country.
Hopefully, the prevention efforts will start revealing lower numbers in
the cases of diabetes for the American Indian/ Alaska Native
populations.
The Department of Housing and Development administers important
housing programs such as: The Indian Community Block Grant, The Native
American Housing Block Grant, The Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund.
Further, the Native American Housing and Self-Determination Act
(NAHASDA) is scheduled to be re-authorized this year. NAHASDA is one of
the more successful pieces of legislation in Indian Country. This
legislation is very important to Indian country resulting in placing
thousands of needy Indian families into new homes. Yet, there is more
work to be done. I look forward to working with the Administration,
other Members of Congress, and Indian Nations in getting NAHASDA re-
authorized.
With regards to the fiscal year 2003 budget request, I commend the
President for: The $3 million increase in the Indian Community Block
Grant program. The $55 million for the Resident Opportunity and Self-
Sufficiency [ROSS] program. The $5.4 million for tribal colleges and
Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-oriented higher education
institutions.
With that, I do have several concerns regarding the budget request.
Chief among my concerns is that there is no request for the Rural and
Economic Development Grant program. The program provides much needed
economic development assistance in Indian country.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from the witnesses today
and I have several questions to submit.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Liu, Assistant Secretary Public and
Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members of the committee,
thank you for inviting me to provide comments on President Bush's
budget for HUD's Indian Housing and Community Development programs for
fiscal year 2003.
My name is Michael Liu, and I am the Assistant Secretary for Public
and Indian Housing. I am responsible for the management, operation and
oversight of HUD's Native American programs. These programs are
available to over 550 federally recognized and a limited number of
state-recognized Indian tribes. We serve these tribes directly, or
through tribally designated housing entities (TDHE), by providing
grants and loan guarantees designed to support affordable housing
activities and viable community and economic development. Our clientele
is diverse; they are located on Indian reservations, in Alaska Native
Villages, and in other traditional Indian areas.
In addition to those duties, my jurisdiction encompasses the public
housing program, which aids the nation's 3,000-plus public housing
agencies in providing housing and housing-related assistance to low-
income families.
It is a pleasure to again appear before you, and I would like to
express my appreciation for your continuing efforts to improve the
housing conditions of American Indian and Alaska Native peoples. As you
have heard in the tribal testimony at the recent NAHASDA hearing, much
progress is being made and tribes are taking advantage of new
opportunities to improve the housing conditions of the Native American
families residing on Indian reservations, on trust or restricted Indian
lands and in Alaska Native Villages. This momentum needs to be
sustained as we continue to work together toward creating a better
living environment across Indian country.
At the outset, let me reaffirm the Department of Housing and Urban
Development's support for the principle of government-to-government
relations with Indian tribes. HUD is committed to honoring this
fundamental precept in our work with American Indians and Alaska
Natives.
You may recall that when I testified before you last month, I
confirmed that the Department was searching for a Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Native American Programs. Tribal representatives and
Members of this Committee spoke in support of setting the level for
that position to Senior Executive Service (SES). In the spirit of
cooperation, Secretary Martinez has agreed to re-advertise for the
position as an SES.
For fiscal year 2003, the President's budget proposes a total of
$740.5 million, specifically for Native American and Native Hawaiian
housing, community and economic development, and education programs. Of
that amount, approximately $639 million is for direct, formula
allocations under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act's (NAHASDA) Indian Housing Block Grant Program, $71
million is for grants under the Indian Community Development Block
Grant Program, and $7 million is for the Native American Section 184
and Title VI loan guarantees. That loan authority will leverage $214
million in loan guarantees.
The Native Hawaiian community will receive, through the Department
of Hawaiian Home Lands, $10 million for the Native Hawaiian Housing
Block Grant Program and $1 million for the Section 184A Native Hawaiian
Home Loan Guarantee Fund, which will leverage approximately $40 million
in loan guarantees.
There is $5.6 million available for training and technical
assistance to support these programs.
Finally, the Department requests $5.4 million to support American
Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian-oriented higher education
institutions.
Adjustments in the Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG) program have
been made to allow for more funds to be available for tribal use. The
fiscal year 2003 budget includes $646.6 million for the IHBG program.
Although this is a decrease of $2 million from fiscal year 2002,
reducing set-asides will actually allow for a $6.4 million increase in
grant dollars available to tribes.
The decreases in set-asides are from the Training and Technical
Assistance category, Title VI Program, and Working Capital Fund.
The Training and Technical Assistance component of this program has
been reduced to $3 million, down from $5 million the previous year.
This action was taken in recognition that several years have passed
since implementation of this program, and most tribes have been
provided with the initial and in-depth training and technical
assistance necessary to implement such a new and sweeping change in the
way we do business. Training and Technical Assistance remains a
critical component of the program, and we propose that a portion of it
be accomplished in partnership with the National American Indian
Housing Council.
The President's Budget includes a $2.2-million set-aside from the
IHBG Program to continue the same level of support as provided in last
year's budget to the National American Indian Housing Council. These
funds, as in the past, will be made available under a contract to the
organization in return for their training and technical assistance
services to NAHASDA grantees. I would encourage the NAIHC to work with
the Department to ensure that these funds are obligated expeditiously,
and that the training and technical assistance activities occur as soon
as is feasible. In fiscal year 2000, HUD executed a $2-million training
and technical assistance contract with NAIHC. As of December, 2001,
less than $500,000 of those funds had been expended.
The Title VI Tribal Housing Activities Loan Guarantee Fund (Title
VI) is also a set-aside under the IHBG Program. This budget recognizes
that until the program is more fully subscribed, it is more effective
to use available funds in the IHBG Program and allocate it by formula
directly to IHBG grantees. There is sufficient carry-over of unused
guarantee authority which, when combined with this year's budget
request, will support anticipated future program needs. This allows $4
million to be added back into the IHBG formula.
In the Department's fiscal year 2002 IHBG appropriation, not less
than $3 million was allocated to the Working Capital Fund for internal
information technology improvements. In an attempt to better prorate
the amount required from each program it was determined that the amount
allocated from the fiscal year 2003 IHBG account should be reduced to
$600,000. This $2.4 million reduction from the fiscal year 2002
appropriation is included in a direct appropriation to the Working
Capital Fund.
Last year, the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund
received its first annual credit subsidy re-estimate, as required by
the Credit Reform Act. The re-estimate resulted in a reduced subsidy
rate, which tripled loan amounts available for guarantee when holding
Budget Authority constant during fiscal year 2002. The subsidy rate
declined due in part to the low number of defaults. The $1 million
reduction in the fiscal year 2003 budget request reflects the impact of
that recalculation adjusted by anticipated utilization. The $5 million
in fiscal year 2003 provides to $197.24 million in loan guarantee
authority.
The President's fiscal year 2003 Budget request for the Indian
Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) Program is $72.5 million.
This budget will provide an increase of $2.5 million over the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 2002. $1.5 million is allocated to the
operation of the Native American Economic Development Access Center
(Native eDGE).
Native eDGE, which began as a pilot project within the Department,
is now an interagency initiative linking 18 Federal agencies through a
single economic development access center so that tribes, Native
Americans, lending institutions, non-profits, foundations and private
businesses can collaborate to promote economic growth and find
innovative solutions to chronic economic development problems in Indian
country. The President's Budget requests that $1.5 million be set-aside
from the ICDBG allocation to continue support of this award winning and
much needed initiative.
For fiscal year 2003, the Department is requesting $10 million.
This budget recognizes the unique housing needs of Native Hawaiian
families eligible to reside on the Hawaiian Home Lands, and the
Department is now beginning to meet those needs. A further
acknowledgement is the establishment of a separate program account for
the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program. It is anticipated that
an Interim Regulation implementing the new Native Hawaiian Housing
Block Grant Program will be published in the Federal Register within
the next 2 months. This action will facilitate immediate distribution
of funds and implementation of the program while public comments are
being received toward publication of final regulations.
The Budget requests that $1 million be allocated to the Section
184A Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund. At that level of
funding, this new loan guarantee program, modeled after the Section 184
Program, will provide up to $40 million in loan guarantee authority to
guarantee market-rate mortgage loans to income-eligible Native Hawaiian
families who choose to reside on the Hawaiian Home Lands. The
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), a State agency, is the
primary program partner. DHHL is the agency responsible for allocation
of leasehold interests on the Hawaiian Home Lands. Program procedures
and activities will mirror the Section 184 Program as closely as is
appropriate. Until direct-endorsement lenders are approved, the ONAP
National Programs Office will work closely with DHHL and individual
borrowers to review, underwrite and issue guarantee certificates for
all loans.
The President's budget request includes, under the Community
Development Fund, $3 million for competitive grants to tribal colleges
and universities to provide resources to build, expand, renovate and
equip their facilities, and $2.4 million to assist Alaska Native and
Native Hawaiian serving institutions, as they are defined under the
Higher Education Act, as amended.
Finally, let me state for the record that the President's budget
request for HUD's Indian housing, community development and education
programs supports the progress being made by tribes in providing
housing and housing-related activities in Indian country.
This concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any
questions you may have.
______
Questions From Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Title VI Tribal Housing Activities Loan Guarantee Fund
``The fiscal year 2003 budget request does not include funds for
the title VI loan guarantee program, but I understand that the reason
for this is that there is $15 million in unused funds from past years
that have been carried over.''
Question 1: There seems to be a lack of understanding by the tribes
and the financial community on how to make the most of the guarantee.
How can we increase the desire to use the loan guarantee?
NOTE: The fiscal year 2003 budget request does contain a $2-million
set-aside from the Indian Housing Block Grant allocation for the Title
VI Loan Guarantee Fund. This amount, divided by the credit subsidy
factor of 11.07 percent set by the Office of Management and Budget,
will provide $18 million in loan guarantee authority in fiscal year
2003. Cumulative unused set asides through fiscal year 2002 amount to
$27.2 million, resulting in cumulative unused loan guarantee authority
of $246 million. Thus, the $18 million in guarantee authority, when
added to cumulative carryover guarantee authority, results in $264
million of available Title VI loan guarantee authority.
Answer 1: The staff of the Office of Native American Programs
(ONAP), Office of Loan Guarantee is partnering with Federal Home Loan
Banks, Federal Reserve Banks and State Housing Finance Agencies to
increase awareness of the program among lenders. Presentations are also
being made to tribal advocates at regional housing authority and other
Native American informational meetings. Our website now features
``success stories'' regarding affordable tribal housing projects
assisted with title VI loan guarantees. As tribes become more familiar
with the program, we expect to see increased usage. Currently, tribes
have made HUD aware of potential loan guarantee transactions that would
use $54 million in guarantee authority.
Training and Technical Assistance
Question 2: The HUD training and technical assistance budget is
proposed for a reduction to $3 million, and while I understand that
many tribes have already received technical assistance, are we seeing
an increase in tribal capacity that makes ``Training and Technical
Assistance funding'' unnecessary?
Answer 2: From the inception of the Indian Housing Block Grant
(IHBG) program in fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2002, a total of
$28 million in training and technical assistance funding has been as
appropriated directly to HUD as follows: fiscal year 1998--$5 million,
fiscal year 1999--$6 million, fiscal year 2000--$6 million, fiscal year
2001--$6 million, fiscal year 2002--$5 million. In addition, the
National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) has received, through
either the Indian Housing Block Grant or the Community Development
Fund, $14.9 million to provide training and technical assistance during
that time period. The total amount of funding available for training
and technical assistance through fiscal year 2002 is $42.9 million.
In fiscal year 2000, HUD executed a $2 million training and
technical assistance contract with NAIHC. As of December 2001, less
than $500,000 of these funds had been expended by NAIHC. The Department
has emphasized to NAIHC the need for timely performance under this
contract.
The President's fiscal year 2003 budget requests $7.4 million ($3
million to HUD and $4.4 million to NAIHC) for these purposes. If
enacted at the request level, total funding for training and technical
assistance since the inception of the Indian Housing Block Grant
Program will be $50.3 million.
There is a significant, long-term commitment by the Congress, the
Department and the National American Indian Housing Council to improve
each grant recipient's technical capacity to operate its IHBG program.
While many tribes have reached the point where they no longer need
regular technical assistance, this is not universal.
Regulatory Reform Commission ``In 2000 we enacted 'Regulatory
Reform and Business Development on Indian Lands Authority'
headquartered in the commerce department. I would very much like you to
work with the Commerce Department and the Interior Department to see
that this commission gets off the ground and can begin to study ways to
peel back unproductive regulations.''
Question 3: Will you work with us to make that happen?
Answer 3: The Department will be pleased to work with the committee
and other Federal agencies on this effort.
Questions from Senator Pete V. Domenici
Rural Housing and Economic Development
Question 1: There is no funding requested for the Rural Housing and
Economic Development Grant program, which has previously been funded at
$25 million per year. Why is the program not being funded this year?
Answer 1: The President's budget request for Fiscal Year 2002, as
well as for fiscal year 2003, did not contain funding for the Rural
Housing and Economic Development Program. While there have been some
beneficial initiatives funded with these grants, it is the
Administration's position that this program duplicates numerous
Department of Agriculture rural development programs that have been in
existence for years covering housing, infrastructure and economic
development.
Training and Technical Assistance
Question 2: Under the Public and Indian Housing Technical
Assistance program, there is a decrease of $2 million. Are there other
opportunities in HUD that Indian Nations can take advantage of to
offset this decrease in funding?
Answer 2: In the 5 years that the Indian Housing Block Grant
Program has been in effect, the Office of Native American Programs has
used training and technical assistance funds to develop long-term
solutions to the challenges of providing training and technical
assistance to Indian tribes and their tribally designated housing
entities. One example is the number of training courses that are
regularly scheduled in locations throughout Indian country. These
courses include NAHASDA Basics, Indian Housing Plan/Annual Performance
Reports, Board and Tribal Roles and Responsibilities, Environmental
Review, Self-Monitoring, Construction Contract Management, Financial
Management, and Basic and Advanced Financial Leveraging. Course
locations include Oklahoma City, Portland, OR, Phoenix, Seattle, Boise,
ID, Minneapolis and Anchorage. The cost to repeat these courses, as
necessary, is significantly lower after initial development.
In addition, advanced technology now allows for the presentation of
training without the burden of travel costs. Using pre-prepared and
distributed slides and other visual aids at training sites with
telephone connectivity, the trainer no longer has to be onsite to
provide quality training. Conferencing allows multiple locations to
receive training in this manner without incurring travel costs for
either the trainer or the tribal housing staff.
T2Section 184 Program
Question 3: Why is there a decrease of $1 million in the Indian
Housing Loan Guarantee fund?
Answer 3: There is a substantial amount of unused carryover
appropriations from previous fiscal years. This results in cumulative
current uncommitted loan guarantee authority of over $ 506 million. A
decrease in the subsidy factor (which is set by OMB) in fiscal year
2002 and again applicable in fiscal year 2003 tripled the dollar amount
of loans that can be guaranteed in each of those years. A $5 million
appropriation appears adequate for near-term budget cycles given the
amount of carryover loan guarantee authority available.
Question 4: Regarding the NATIVE eDGE initiative, how is the money
spent? What are some of the successes of NATIVE eDGE?
Answer 4:
How is the money spent?
Native eDGE began as a Federal interagency initiative to develop a
one-stop-shop for economic development assistance to American Indian
and Alaska Native organizations and individuals. To date, Native eDGE
has not received any funding from Congress or the other 17 Federal
agency partners. The initiative was started as a pilot project with
minimal use of HUD funds. Since launch, the cost of HUD staff has been
HUD's contribution to the interagency partnership.
Native eDGE can be a true catalyst for the creation of sustainable
economic development in Indian country.
Approximately $1 million of the fiscal year 2003 appropriation is
needed for web site improvements so that clients can be served more
efficiently and effectively. Approximately $500,000 of the fiscal year
2003 appropriation is needed for training to provide regional workshops
for tribes and individuals on how to create businesses; start tribal
career, educational, and economic development programs; and create
opportunities for youth using Native eDGE as a tool.
T2How successful is Native eDGE?
Since Native eDGE began in April of 2000, over 40,000 individuals
have visited the web site, over 7,000 publications have been ordered,
and over 2,000 requests for assistance have come in through the
Technical Assistance Call Center. Over 800 Indian economic development
projects are registered in the Native eDGE eLab portion of the web
site. These projects continue to receive ongoing technical assistance
from the Native eDGE staff.
Institutional Successes
Overall, Native eDGE improves the effective and efficient delivery
of Federal services through coordination with 170 Federal program
offices, approximately 60 educational organizations, and over 50
grassroots entities. A major objective of Native eDGE is the promotion
of collaborative efforts between Federal agencies, lenders,
foundations, and the private sector. Through these collaborative
approaches the limited resources of all Federal entities can be
combined for maximum impact for Native Americans and Alaska Natives.
This is a unique service provided by Native eDGE that is not available
from any other Federal or non-governmental organization.
Native eDGE improves the effectiveness of outreach to client
populations through the provision of one-stop access to information on
Federal, NGO, and private sector resources. Native eDGE provides
efficient service to client populations through an electronic medium 24
hours per day, 7 days per week. Finally, Native eDGE provides full
customer service through regular follow-up and on-going technical
assistance.
Individual Successes
This program has enabled Native Americans to more efficiently
navigate through the complexity of Federal Government programs by
providing a single access point for economic development support.
Instead of having to invest significant amounts of time searching
through numerous agencies, Native eDGE provides a single access point
to explore an extremely wide range of options and opportunities that
cross multiple organizations. Native eDGE provides this access point
through a call center, web site, and publications clearinghouse.
Native eDGE provides Native American businesses with one-stop
access to economic development resources, which saves search time and
energy. It also enables businesses or individuals to collaborate with
economic development experts in a virtual workspace environment. For
example, Native eDGE's economic development specialists review and
comment on the projects registered by Native Americans using a web-
based internet tool as a means of helping clients improve their
projects.
Examples of how the project has benefited a specific individual,
enterprise or organization
``Personally I have recommended Native eDGE to others. If I did not
have access to the Native eDGE program, I would have had to contact
multiple resources for information, and would not have known about
other possible funding sources.''--Larry Rodgers, Chairman, Four
Corners Enterprise Community Board of Directors.
``I was interested in opening up a Subway sandwich shop--Native
eDGE pointed me in the right direction for applying for small business
loans for Native Americans. Although, in the end, I received funding
from the private sector, rather than through a small business loan,
Native eDGE was extremely helpful in providing information about
different sources of funding. I'm glad that kind of resource for Native
Americans exists. ``--Meredith Long, Subway Owner in Kansas City,
Missouri.
``Through using the Native eDGE web site, I found out about
resources for potential funding on business and economic development
projects that I would not have thought of otherwise. What I liked best
about Native eDGE was the ease of use, and not having to make time-
consuming phone calls or searches through pages of potential
opportunities. The time saved in finding potential grants is
invaluable. Even when some of the auto-generated responses were not
directly relevant to my particular needs, they gave me ideas for other
resources and options to explore.''--Kelly Lammon, Central Council of
Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska
______
Prepared Statement of Greg Sarris, Chairperson, Federated Indians of
Graton Rancheria
Chairman Inouye, Vice Chairman Campbell and members of the
committee, my name is Greg Sarris, tribal chairperson of the Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria. Federal recognition was restored to Graton
Rancheria by Title XIV of Public Law 106-568, the Omnibus Indian
Advancement Act, an important piece of legislation enacted with your
help on December 27, 2000. In fiscal year 2002, the Department of the
Interior budget contained zero, I repeat zero, funds for Graton
Rancheria under the New Tribes Program, despite repeated letters from
Graton Rancheria to the Secretary of the Interior and Assistant
Secretary-Indian Affairs sent before the fiscal year 2002 budget was
enacted.
While we have not yet seen the detailed line items for the fiscal
year 2003 Indian Affairs budget, we are very concerned about the
potential for the same thing to happen in this budget cycle and want to
be proactive. The Tribe also received zero funds in response to its
request for one-time capital startup costs (separate from New Tribes
Program) and did not even receive a written reply to its formal
resolution to the Bureau. The lack of funding is a major obstacle to
developing effective governmental systems for the tribe. We have opened
a tribal office primarily with non-Federal funds that come from other
tribes in California and with donated, used furniture. We have no
ability to hire an administrator and only limited ability to respond to
the needs of tribal members. We cannot even plan basic next steps
because of the uncertainty about future funding.
The tribe is certainly grateful to have its Federal recognition
back and wishes to warmly thank the committee members who made that
possible. However, at the same time, we need to look forward and would
appreciate the Committee's support in resolving this funding dilemma.
If funding is provided in fiscal year 2003, it should be considered the
Tribe's first year of the 3-year period for new tribes in the New
Tribes Program. We will continue to monitor closely the situation and
voice our concerns as necessary.
A separate funding issue relates to Indian Health Service funding
and preparation of the Tribe's base roll, as required under P.L. 106-
568. The Tribe to date has had to expend an enormous amount of time on
enrollment issues because the Bureau denied 330 of 772 individual
applicants for the base roll and would not accept the tribe's roll of
documented members at the outset. Many persons have unfortunately not
been able to file appeals and the Tribe has minimal resources to help.
The number of members on the base roll is critical for Indian Health
Service funding.
While the tribe does not have the resources to personally attend
the hearing, we would be happy to respond quickly to any questions or
requests for additional information. Thank you for your consideration
of this testimony. Any assistance you can provide would be greatly
appreciated.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael H. Trujillo, M.D., Director of the Indian
Health Service
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
Good morning. I am, Dr. Michael H. Trujillo, Director of the
Indian Health Service [IHS]. Today I am accompanied by Michel E.
Lincoln, deputy and Gary Hartz, acting director of Office of Public
Health. We are pleased to have this opportunity to testify on the
fiscal year 2003 President's budget request for the Indian Health
Service.
The IHS has the responsibility for the delivery of health services
to federally recognized American Indians and Alaska Natives [AI/AN's]
through a system of IHS, tribal, and urban [I/T/U] operated facilities
and programs based on treaties, judicial determinations, and acts of
Congress. In carrying out our statutory responsibility to provide
health care services to Indian tribes in accordance with Federal
statutes or treaties, we have taken it as our mission to raise the
physical, mental, social, and spiritual health of American Indians and
Alaska Natives to the highest level, in partnership with the population
we serve. The agency goal is to assure that comprehensive, culturally
acceptable personal and public health services are available and
accessible to the service population. The mission and goal are
addressed through four agency strategic objectives, which are to: No.
1, improve health status; No. 2, provide health services; No. 3, assure
partnerships and consultation with IHS, tribal, and urban programs; and
No. 4, perform core functions and advocacy.
For the 5th year now, development of the health and budget
priorities supporting the IHS budget request originated at the health
services delivery level and with tribal leadership. As partners with
the IHS in delivering needed health care to AI/AN's, tribal and urban
Indian health programs participate in formulating the budget request
and annual performance plan. The combined expertise of the IHS, tribal,
and urban Indian health program health providers, administrators,
technicians, and elected officials, as well as the public health
professionals at the area and headquarters offices, has defined health
care funding needs for AI/AN people. Improving the health of the AI/AN
population overall, and providing health care to individuals in that
population, are important and challenging IHS goals. Comparing the
1996-98 Indian [IHS Service Area] age adjusted death rates with the U.S
All Races population in 1997, the death rates in the AI/AN population
is 6 times greater for alcoholism, 4 times greater for tuberculosis,
times greater for diabetes, and 2 times greater for unintentional
injuries.
3 The fiscal year 2003 President's Budget request and performance
plan represents a critical investment in improving the delivery of
health care to the American Indian and Alaska Native population.
The President proposes an increase of $60.027 million to the IHS
budget in fiscal year 2003 above the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
This request provides an additional $65.807 million for current service
items including staffing for newly completed health care facilities,
$16.351 million in program increases for Services, and $1 million in
program increases for Facilities and Environmental Health. In addition,
the increases include an offset of $23.131 million for administrative
and management reforms and one-time facilities projects and
construction funds. These proposals result in an overall net increase
of $60.027 million.
In support of the President's Management Agenda and the Secretary's
Workforce Restructuring Plan, the IHS will streamline its general
administrative and management staff at all organizational levels and
institute cost controls on administrative support systems. Along with
other DHHS agencies to increase administrative effectiveness, the IHS
will transfer its public affairs, legislative, and human resources
staff, functions, and funding to the Office of the Secretary in fiscal
year 2003. During fiscal year 2003, the IHS will prepare to move
facilities 4 construction, management and maintenance staff, functions,
and funding to the Office of the Secretary in fiscal year 2004.
Further, the President's fiscal year 2003 budget reflects the IHS's
full share of the accruing cost of retirement benefits for current
civil service and Public Health Service commissioned personnel. These
cost amounts for fiscal year 2003 are shown as $60,671 million in
services, $7.904 million in facilities, and $8.873 million in
collections for a total accrual cost of $77.448 million. These costs
are also shown comparably for fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2002.
These investments will continue to improve the IHS, tribal, and
Urban Indian Health Programs' capacity and infrastructure to provide
access to high quality primary and secondary medical services, and
begin to slow down recent declines in certain health status indicators.
From a policy perspective, this budget is based on both new and
longstanding Federal policy and commitment for improving health status
by assuring the availability of basic health care services for members
of federally recognized Indian tribes. The request supports the
following three policy initiatives:
\\\\\\HHS' effort to ensure the best health, and best health
care services possible, without regard to race, ethnicity or
other invidiously discriminatory criteria,
\\\\\\proposed Healthy People 2010 and its goal of achieving
equivalent and improved health status for all Americans over
the next decade,
\\\\\\DHHS Strategic Plan with goals to reduce major threats
to health and productivity of all Americans; improve the
economic and social well-being of individuals and families, and
communities in the United States; improve access to health
services and ensure the integrity of the Nation's health
entitlement and safety net program; improve the quality of
health care and human services; and improve public health
systems.
The Indian Health Care Improvement Act and other Federal statutes
make clear that the U.S. Government's obligation under Federal statutes
and treaties includes providing health care services efficiently and
effectively to Indians and Indian tribes.
The primary policy basis for this budget request is to deliver
efficiently and effectively health care services to the AI/AN
population to substantially improve the health of members of that
population. Consistent effort will be required over the long 6 term to
improve the health of members of the AI/AN population, and such long-
term consistent effort should lead us to the day when the health
statistics of the AI/AN population do not differ from those of the U.S.
population as a whole. The Administration takes seriously and is fully
committed to honoring its obligations to American Indians and Alaska
Natives under statutes and treaties to provide effective health care
services.
A major priority in the budget proposal is to restore access to
basic health services. The IHS has demonstrated the ability to maximize
and utilize available resources to provide services to improve the
health status of AI/AN people. However, the Indian Health Care system
continues to face competing priorities, escalating costs, and an
increase in patient demand for more acute and urgent care treatment.
Thus, to address continuing access to essential individual and
community health services, the Area IHS, Tribal, and urban Indian
programs identified funding of personnel-related costs and increases
associated with current services items as their first priority for
budget increases for fiscal year 2003. In an effort to maintain the
current level of services, the budget request includes $26.812 million
for Federal pay cost increases and $19.758 million for tribal pay costs
increases; $16.737 million to fund the staffing and operative costs of
those facilities that will open in fiscal year 2003 or have recently
opened; and $2.5 million increase for Contract Support Costs.
The ongoing replacement of outdated clinics and hospitals is an
essential component of supporting access to services and improving
health status. In the long run, this assures there are functional
facilities, medical equipment, and staff for the effective and
efficient provision of health services. As you know, the average age of
IHS facilities is 32 years. The fiscal year 2003 budget includes $72
million for health care facility construction to be used for
replacement of existing health care facilities. This amount will fully
fund construction of the quarters at Fort Defiance, Arizona; the final
phase construction of the hospital at Winnebago, Nebraska; and the
final phase of the construction of health centers at Pawnee, Oklahoma,
and St. Paul, Alaska; the continued construction of health centers at
Pinon, Arizona, and Red Mesa, Arizona.
Also critical is the provision of adequate contract support costs
necessary to support the health services provided by tribal health
programs. These requested funds are necessary for tribal communities to
assure that there are utilities, training, clerical staff,
administrative and financial services needed to operate health
programs. Without this contract support funding, these support services
are either not available or must be funded from resources that would
otherwise fund health service activities.
This investment is consistent with the Administration's commitment
to expand tribal participation in the management of federally funded
programs, and reinforces the principles of the Indian Self-
Determination Act.
The fiscal year 2003 budget includes an increase of $2.5 million
over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level for contract support costs
(CSC). The increase is necessary to provide CSC funding for new and
expanded tribal programs to be contracted in fiscal year 2003. The $2.5
million increase will first be used to provide CSC for new assumptions
of IHS programs under self-determination agreements. To the extent the
$2.5 million is not needed for new assumptions, it will be used to
increase contract support cost funding for existing contracts.
The requests that I have just described provide a continued
investment required to maintain and support the IHS, tribal, and urban
Indian public health system to provide access to high quality medical
and preventive services as a means of improving health status. The
following proposals are intended to strengthen health improvements
among the Indian health care components.
Proposed increases of $7.351 million for contract health services,
$1.5 million for the tribal epidemiology centers, $4.150 million for
health care professions, $3.0 million for information technology, $1.0
million for maintenance and improvement, and $850,000 for HIPAA privacy
regulations are also included in the funding request.
The health status that the I/T/Us must address is formidable,
particularly in terms of death rates. Comparing the 1996-98 Indian age-
adjusted death rates with the U.S. all races population in 1997 reveals
greater death rates in the AI/AN population for alcoholism,
tuberculosis, diabetes, unintentional injuries, suicide, pneumonia and
influenza, homicide, gastrointestinal disease, infant mortality, and
heart disease. Even more alarming is recent data that indicates the
mortality disparities for AI/AN people are actually worsening.
Given these formidable challenges, the IHS is pleased to present
this budget request for fiscal year 2003 as one that will improve
access to basic health services and address the multiple health issues
affecting AI/AN people. The request and associated performance plan
represent a cost-effective public health approach to assure
improvements in the health of AI/AN people. The request reflects the
continued Federal commitment to enhance the IHS, tribal, and urban
Indian health system so that we can continue to make significant
improvements in the health status of American Indian and Alaska Native
people.
Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the fiscal year 2003
President's budget request for the IHS. We are pleased to answer any
questions that you may have.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Congress of American Indians
On behalf of NCAI's more than 200 member tribal nations, we are
pleased to have the opportunity to present written testimony on the
President's fiscal year 2003 budget request for Indian programs.
The tragic events of September 11 brought forth the strength and
the determination, of our Nation to survive in the face of adversity.
It is this same spirit that has carried Indian country through years of
annihilation and termination. It is this same spirit that has propelled
Indian Nations forward into an era of self-determination. And it is in
this same sprit of resolve that Indian Nations come before Congress to
talk about honoring the Federal Government's treaty obligations and
trust responsibilities throughout the fiscal year 2003 budget process.
On February 4, President Bush proposed a $2.13-trillion budget for
fiscal year 2003 that included largely level funding for Indian
programs, continuing the trend of consistent declines in Federal per
capita spending for Indians compared to per capita expenditures for the
population at large. This trend demonstrates the abject failure of the
Federal Government to commit the serious resources needed to fully
honor its trust commitment to Indian tribes.
As you know, the Federal trust responsibility represents the legal
obligation made by the U.S. Government to Indian tribes when our lands
were ceded to the United States. This obligation is codified in
numerous treaties, statutes, presidential directives, judicial
opinions, and international doctrines. It can be divided into three
general areas protection of Indian trust lands; protection of tribal
self-governance; and provision of basic social, medical, and
educational services for tribal members.
NCAI realizes Congress must make difficult budget choices this
year. As elected officials, tribal leaders certainly understand the
competing priorities that you must weigh over the coming months.
However, the fact that the Federal Government has a solemn
responsibility to address the serious needs facing Indian country
remains unchanged, whatever the economic climate. We at NCAI urge you
to make a strong, across-the-board commitment to meeting the Federal
trust obligation by fully funding those programs that are vital to the
creation of vibrant Indian Nations. Such a commitment, coupled with
continued efforts to strengthen tribal governments and to clarify the
government-to-government relationship, truly will make a difference in
helping us to create stable, diversified, and healthy economies in
Indian country.
NCAI's written statement focuses on the key areas of concern
surrounding the President's budget request of course, there are
numerous other Federal programs and initiatives that are important to
American Indians and Alaska Natives. Attached is an agency-by-agency
breakdown and NCAI resolutions detailing key programs that benefit
Indian Nations. NCAI urges Congress to support each of these programs
at the highest possible funding level as the budget and appropriations
process moves forward.
Bureau of Indian Affairs/Office of Special Trustee
The President has requested a $22.9-million increase for the Bureau
of Indian Affairs, from $2.25 billion to $2.27 billion. The funding
increase is primarily dedicated to trust management activities. Other
key areas of the BIA budget, such as Tribal Priority Allocations,
public safety, and economic development, remain deeply under-funded.
Tribal Priority Allocations provide tribes with the resources for
governmental services at the local level. Because we are able to
prioritize TPA funds according to our unique needs and circumstances,
providing adequate TPA resources is one of the most important things
the Federal Government can do to further the goals of tribal self-
governance in a practical way. Unfortunately, the budget requests only
a $23.4-million increase to this account, with nearly $18 million of
that going toward trust-related activities.
The Census Bureau's Poverty in the United States for 2000 showed
that American Indians and Alaska Natives remain at the bottom of the
economic ladder--with 25.9 percent of our population falling below the
poverty line. This compares to an 11.9-percent poverty rate for all
races combined. Simply put, tribal governments simply cannot continue
to provide essential government services to our growing--and
disproportionately poor--population without a substantial increase in
our TPA funds.
As stated earlier, the budget request includes a significant
initiative to increase funding for trust management within the BIA and
the Office of Special Trustee. Within the BIA, $153 million--a $35-
million increase is included for trust operations and services at the
headquarters, regional, and tribal levels. The Office of Special
Trustee would receive a 44-percent increase--to $160.6 million--which
is partially offset by a $3-million cut to the Indian Land
Consolidation Account.
NCAI is concerned that a large portion of the requested increase
for trust management likely would go toward implementing the new Bureau
of Indian Trust Assets Management that is strongly opposed by tribes.
NCAI believes that a large funding increase is key to reversing the
hundreds of years of gross mismanagement that continues to plague
tribal and Indian trust accounts. As Secretary Norton herself has
pointed out, it will cost ``hundreds of millions'' of dollars to remedy
the problem. However, any such increases must be targeted Testimony of
NCAI
President's Budget Request for fiscal year 2002 March 7, 2002 Page
4 of 8 for workable, well-planned reform initiatives developed in close
consultation with tribes and individual beneficiaries.
Finally, one other area of the BIA budget--education--deserves
special mention. The budget request includes an extremely troublesome
proposal that would authorize the privatization of the 64 schools
directly operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, unless tribes decide
to operate these schools under contracts or grants. Of course, tribal
operation of schools is a fundamental principal of self-determination,
and NCAI firmly supports the right of tribes to privatize schools if
they so desire.
However, the budget request fails to provide adequate funding to
cover the costs of tribal administration of BIA-funded schools,
especially for the lowest-performing ones slated for transfer. The
small increase in funding proposed for Administrative Cost Grants does
not come close to addressing the drastic shortfalls in this account,
which is currently funded at less than 80 percent of the level required
under Federal law. Additional school conversions to tribal operation
would decrease the slice of the already too-small pie going to each
school even more. Likewise, the $2 million increase proposed for
student transportation is completely inadequate compared to the $21.5
million needed just to bring tribally operated schools up to a funding
level that equals the national average of 5 years ago.
Indian Health Service
The budget request includes $2.9 billion for the Indian Health
Service, a $60-million increase over the current funding level, but a
de facto decrease given the absorption requirements proposed under the
President's request. Of this total, $2.5 billion is proposed for Indian
health services. For facilities, $370.5 million is proposed--an
increase of less than $1 million.
Because most of the increases are targeted for mandatory pay-cost
adjustments and staffing at new facilities, the budget request falls
short of allowing the IHS to break even with fiscal year 2002 funding
levels once the new absorption requirements under the President's
budget are accounted for. When measured in constant dollars, per capita
spending for health care in the IHS service population is actually
lower today than it was in 1977. Since 1993, funding has dropped below
the rate of inflation and the 27 percent hike in the IHS service
population in the 1990's.
Indian country is all-too-familiar with the disproportionate impact
that diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer have in
American Indian and Alaska Native communities. In January, the Centers
for Disease Control released a study\1\ that found that, between 1990
and 1998, the lung cancer death rate for American Indians and Alaska
Natives increased by 28 percent and the percent of low birthweight
infants increased by 11 percent. The study also found that American
Indians and Alaska Natives do not appear to have experienced the same
improvements in the suicide, breast cancer, and stroke death rates as
other racial/ethnic groups.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Control, Trends in Racial and Ethnic-Specific Rates for the Health
Status Indicators: United States, 1990-98, January, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To help address these health disparities in a meaningful way, the
IHS Level-of-Need Funding Workgroup has identified an $18-billion
needs-based budget for the IHS, including a non-recurring $8.7 billion
facilities request and $10 billion to fully fund the health needs of
American Indians and Alaska Natives.
A 10-year phase-in of the $18 billion needs-based budget can be
achieved through a several years of appropriations increases. If a
first year increase of $2.6 billion were appropriated [a 112-percent
increase], the following years' increases would decline to 20 percent
in year 5 and 10 percent in year 10. The first year increase would be
substantially more to help offset the more than $2 billion lost to
inflation over the past 8 years.
This type of major investment would account for the real revenue
losses due to inflation and population growth, create long-term savings
to taxpayers, and eliminate the vast health disparities that exist
between American Indians and Alaska Natives and the general U.S.
population.
Other Key Issues
Public Safety
More than 200 police departments, ranging from tiny departments
with only two or three officers to those with more than 200 officers,
help to maintain public safety in Indian Country. According to a recent
Justice Department\2\ study, the typical Indian country police
department has no more than three and as few as one officer patrolling
an area the size of Delaware.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
National Institute of Justice, Policing on American Indian
Reservations, September 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The same study found that inadequate funding is ``an important
obstacle to good policing in Indian country.'' According to DOJ, the
appropriate police coverage comparison may be between tribal
departments and communities with similar crime problems. Because the
violent crime rate in Indian country is more than double the national
average, we should compare our police coverage with large urban areas
with high violent crime rates. According to the Bureau of Justice
Statistics, cities like Baltimore, Detroit, and Washington have high
police-to-citizen ratios of 3.9 to 6.6 officers per 1,000 residents. On
the other hand, virtually no tribal police department has more than 2
officers per 1,000 residents.
Given that the Justice Department itself just published a study
that justifies the need to increase resources for Indian country law
enforcement, it is astounding to see that our law enforcement programs
actually took a $40-million direct hit in the fiscal year 2003 budget
request. The budget would eliminate all $35 million in tribal jail
construction funding and would cut $5 million in tribal law enforcement
personnel funds. We strongly oppose these cuts, and request an increase
to the FY 2002 funding levels for Indian country law enforcement
programs.
Housing
According to statistics provided the by the National American
Indian Housing Council, 40 percent of the homes in tribal communities
are overcrowded and have serious physical deficiencies. The comparable
national average is 5.9 percent, almost six times lower.
These types of conditions have a very real and detrimental impact.
Respiratory illness, skin conditions, head lice, sleep deprivation that
affects schooling, and a lack of privacy that sometimes leads to child
physical and sexual abuse can all be traced back to the housing crisis
that plagues some of our reservations.
In the face of the widely reported housing deficiencies in Indian
country, I am sure that you were as surprised as us to see that the
fiscal year 2003 budget request actually cuts several programs
authorized under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act [NAHASDA]. The President's proposal reduces the
Indian Housing Block Grant Program by $2 million, to $647 million, and
slashes the title VI loan guarantee program by two-thirds.
The FY 2003 request is far below the $1.1 billion base funding
determined by the National American Indian Housing Council [NAIHC] as a
minimum to begin addressing the housing shortage in American Indian
communities. NCAI supports the NAIHC-recommended funding level and
calls upon Congress to reject the cuts proposed by the Administration.
Transportation Indian Reservation Roads [IRR] make up 2.63 percent
of all existing roads in the Federal-aid highway system, but
historically they have received less than 1 percent of all Federal
highway dollars. On average, only $500 per mile--and in some cases, as
little as $80 per mile--is available for maintenance. In comparison, an
average of $2,200 per mile is spent maintaining other Federal roads,
and an average of $2,500 to $4,000 per mile is spent by States.
Recognizing the urgent need to improve the road conditions in
Indian country, Congress last year approved a fiscal year 2002
Transportation Appropriations bill that provided funds to offset the
obligation limitation on the IRR and thus resulted in a final funding
level of approximately $275 million, the full authorization level.
The budget request for the Department of Transportation eliminates
the additional IRR funding contained in the fiscal year 2002
appropriation, which means that we would see a funding level of
approximately $240 million.
Indian Reservation Roads are among the worst maintained in the
United States and often must be shut down during the winter months or
in rainy weather. This type of unreliable transportation infrastructure
hurts our ability to attract businesses, provide emergency services,
and bus our children safely to school. The IRR program needs an
increase, not a decrease, and we urge you to support an appropriation
to offset any negative effect of the obligation limitation on its
authorized level of $275 million.
Community and Economic Development Programs Members of the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee know the critical need to promote community
development and economic diversification in our tribal communities.
Many economic development programs that assist tribes would be cut
or eliminated in the budget. The request for the Small Business
Administration would eliminate One Stop Capital Shops, Micro-Loan
Technical Assistance, New Markets Venture Capital, and BusinessLINC.
The Administration also failed to request any funding whatsoever to
establish the Office of Native American Business Development, as
authorized in the Native American Business Development, Trade
Promotion, and Tourism Act of 2000.
Furthermore, programs designed to help tribes close the ``dial-tone
divide'' and improve the telecommunications infrastructures in their
communities are eliminated outright or severely reduced in the
President's budget. For example, the request for the Commerce
Department would eliminate the Technology Opportunities Program--TOP--
which in fiscal year 2001 provided over $4 million in competitive
grants to tribes and tribal organizations for the purpose of expanding
technology in their communities.
Reducing or eliminating economic development tools for Indian
country is unthinkable in the face of the compelling needs that exist.
NCAI has approved numerous resolutions calling for increased support of
economic development programs within the Small Business Administration
and Department of Commerce, and we urge that these programs and others
that are designed to promote tribal community development be fully
funded.
Conclusion
Thank you for this opportunity to present written testimony
regarding the President's fiscal year 2003 budget request for Indian
programs. The National Congress of American Indians calls upon Congress
to fulfill the Federal Government's fiduciary duty to American Indians
and Alaska Native people. This responsibility should never be
compromised or diminished because of any political agenda or budget cut
scenario. Tribes throughout the Nation relinquished their lands and in
return received a trust obligation, and we ask that the Congress to
maintain this solemn obligation to Indian Country and continue to
assist tribal governments as we build strong, diverse, and healthy
nations for our people.
______
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.315
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.316
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.317
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.318
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.319
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.320
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.321
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.322
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.323
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.324
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.325
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.326
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.327
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.328
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.329
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.330
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.331
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.332
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.333
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.334
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.335
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.336
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.337
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.338
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.339
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.340
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.341
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.342
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.343
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.344
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.345
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.346
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.347
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.348
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.349
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.350
FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 2002
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room
485, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel Inouye
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Inouye, Campbell, Conrad, Dorgan, and
Domenici.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII,
CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. The committee meets this morning for the
third in the series of hearings on the President's budget
request for Indian programs for fiscal year 2003. Today, we
will examine the budget requests for the Bureau of Indian
Affairs and the Department of the Interior for the National
Indian Gaming Commission and for the Environmental Protection
Agency.
One of the proposals set forth in the President's budget is
for the privatization of schools that are currently
administered by BIA. Under that proposal, the operation of BIA
schools would be offered to the respective tribal governments;
and if they opted not to assume the responsibility, the Bureau
would enter into a contract with a private organization to run
these schools.
Naturally, when one considers the fact that we are talking
about placing our most precious resource of all, our children,
in the hands of private educational organizations for whom
there is no rating system or accrediting body, there will be
questions.
There are some cost considerations driving this proposal;
or put another way, will it cost the Government less to
contract with private organizations, to operate Indian schools?
Has there been such a comparative assessment of costs? Has
there been any assessment of the performance of those schools
that are now tribally operated, as compared to the schools
administered by the Bureau?
How can we assure parents that the quality of education
that is provided by private organizations will be the same or
better than that which currently exists? What role will parents
and school boards play, and what relationship will they have
with these private entities?
What accountability will there be to parents and school
boards, or will the private organizations only accountable to a
contracting officer in Washington?
We are told that these educational organizations expect
performance bonuses and incentives. Are such bonuses or
incentives going to be provided to tribal governments that
elect to take over the operation of the schools?
These are just a few of the questions that Indian country
is asking about this proposal. So we welcome the witnesses
today, and look forward to an ongoing dialog on these and other
matters.
Now it is my pleasure to call upon the vice chairman of the
committee.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning and thank you for holding this hearing. It is
nice to see our friends Neal McCaleb, Montie Deer, and Diane
Regas from the EPA. I welcome you to the committee.
It certainly must be noted that the fiscal year 2003 budget
request must be viewed against the backdrop of the war on
terror and homeland security. Clearly, that is where a lot of
the focus of the Congress has been the last few months, as
everyone knows. Nevertheless, the needs are great in Indian
communities.
The request includes a $20-million overall increase for BIA
programs. I am very happy to see more attention on education
and economic development for the bureau. Increases are proposed
of $70 million for trust activities. We do not have the Task
Force recommendations yet, so I am not quite sure how that
amount of money is going to fit in with what we may have to do
to help straighten out the Trust Fund problem.
I know, in the past, we have put a lot of money in that,
and I want to make sure that we are careful that we do not just
throw more good money after bad.
The TPA will see a $24-million increase, I think that we
have to have an ongoing dialogue about that, because I know
that some of tribes in real need do not get the amount that
they would like. Meanwhile, some of the few very wealthy tribes
that are out there seem to get a bigger percentage.
There will be a $4-million increase for tribal courts. It
is probably not enough, but certainly I approve of that. There
is also $2.1 million for energy development. I think as we move
our energy bill, and we are dealing with that now on the floor
of the U.S. Senate, as we go into future years, the energy
crunch is going to put more and more interest, I think, on
developing energy on Indian lands. You mentioned the contract
support costs increase of $3 million expansion, and I certainly
support that, too.
In January, the President signed the No Child Left Behind
Act, which included the Native American Education Improvement
Act that I and the Chairman had worked on. I certainly thank
the President for his request of nearly $293 million for school
construction, but note that it is probably still short of the
needs.
I believe there are other ways to help get more schools
built, like school bonding, and I hope the Administration
considers supporting that idea. I know I have talked to Neal
McCaleb about it, and I know he thinks it has some real merit.
On September 28, the GAO reported that in many categories,
BIA schools failed to produce the kind of education that Indian
children need so badly. Let me quote from that report.
The academic performance of many BIA students, as measured
by their performance on standardized tests and others measures,
is far below the performance of students in public schools. BIA
students also score considerably below the national average on
college admission tests.
We can do better than that.
Of all the 185 BIA schools, Indian tribes already operate
121 of them through grants. The Bureau operates the remaining
64. The budget request includes a proposal to bring competition
to these schools by way of a privatization initiative.
I think this may have some merit because all these
youngsters are going to have to go out to the big world and
compete, and I do not think it is ever too early to start
learning how do to that. I believe in competition, and I think
we need to look at it very carefully.
We also need to ask some questions. Can we provide
incentives so that tribes assume control of the remaining
schools at a more rapid rate? What role would tribal government
play in a selection of private contractors? What experience do
the current contractors have with Indian culture and
traditional beliefs of Indian people?
With that, Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to
put the rest of my statement in the record, because I know Neal
McCaleb has a very tight schedule. He is going to be over on
the House side very shortly, and thank you.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered.
[Prepared statement of Senator Campbell appears in
appendix.]
The Chairman. Our first witness is Neal A. McCaleb,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of
the Interior.
Mr. Secretary, it is always good to have you here, sir.
STATEMENT OF NEAL A. McCALEB, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF
INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. McCaleb. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, I am
delighted to be here and have the opportunity to visit with you
about our budget request for fiscal year 2003.
You are very aware of the sphere of services of the Bureau
of Indian Affairs, which services 1.4 million Native Americans
in 31 different States, composing 559 tribes. We provide a wide
range of Governmental services that are usually provided by
local government such as education, law enforcement and
detention, social services, roads; and peculiarly to the Bureau
of Indian Affairs, but certainly in focus now, is the trust
asset resource management activities.
On the roads, I want to point out that that is an off-
budget item, funded through the Federal Highway Trust Funds,
which total about $264 million in fiscal year 2002; but that we
maintain 25,000 miles of BIA on-system roads, and an additional
25,000 miles of Indian roads that constitute a total of a
little over 50,000 in the Indian reservation road system.
The allocation of our funds is, I think, noteworthy; 90-
percent of all the funds that are appropriated to the Bureau of
Indian Affairs are directed to the local level, either for
school operations, to the agencies, or the regional offices.
Fifty-four percent of our entire budget is directed
straight to the tribal organizations themselves, either through
Public Law 93-638 or self-governance contracts and compacts,
pursuant to the policy of self-determination contained in
Public Law 93-638 and the subsequent titles for that. In terms
of actual direct administration, about 8 percent bureau-wide
goes for administrative dollars.
The needs and the demand for services are well known to us
all. With poverty in the 33 percent level and unemployment at
40 percent, they engender a variety of social problems,
including alcoholism and violent crime, and other behavioral
health problems in the reservation environment.
Our proposed budget for fiscal year 2003 is $2.3 billion,
which is an incremental increase of approximately $46 million.
Of that $46 million, $21.9 million is the congressionally-
mandated Civil Service Retirement System, that is applied
directly now to the agency. There is about $23.1 million in
actual accumulative programmatic increases.
As I indicated, there are other off-budget items, such as
the roads at $264 million; the Wildlands Fire Management
System, which last year was about $20 million; and notably, the
Office of Indian Education Programs, which last year was about
$132 million.
The emphasis, as has been indicated in this year's 2003
proposed budget, is education, which is funded at $562 million.
In addition, that is an incremental increase of about $18
million. Of that, about $11.9 million is designated in the
budget for the privatization initiative. There is an additional
$3 million in new money to fund seven new FACE schools for
early childhood education.
Our construction budget remains high, at $292.7 million. I
would point out that over the last 4 years, or if you go back
to fiscal year 1999, the entire construction budget was only
$64 million. In fiscal year 2000, it jumped to $130 million.
For the last 2 fiscal years of 2001 and 2002, it has been
in the $292 million range, and this year, the request is for
$292 million, which is an increase of over 200 percent over the
2000 budget. This budget remains committed to eliminating the
backlog of school replacements that are necessary, and that
includes both the school replacement and the facilities
improvements that are necessary; about $125 million for school
replacements, and $164 million for facility improvements and
repairs.
As indicated, the tribal priority allocations are
emphasized. It is the next largest aspect of our budget, which
is $523 million, or an incremental increase of about $17
million.
The Trust Enhancement Program has an incremental increase
exclusively for the Bureau of Indian Affairs of about $34
million. The other additional increase to bring it up to over
$70 million is in the Office of the Special Trustee, but about
$34 million is directly in the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
For the first time, we are including an element
specifically for energy development, a little over $2 million.
This is the initial funding for this, and we are requesting it
so that we can assist the tribes in developing their under-
developed and undeveloped energy resources.
With that, Mr. Chairman and members, I think I will refer
the rest of my written testimony to you for your perusal at
your convenience, and answer any questions that you might have.
[Prepared statement of Mr. McCaleb appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. I thank you very much.
Before I go to questions, Senator Conrad, do you have
anything you would like to say?
STATEMENT OF HON. KENT CONRAD, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Conrad. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I have just a couple of brief comments.
First of all, I was extraordinarily disappointed that the
Administration has cut funding for the tribal colleges. In my
experience, tribal colleges are one of the most positive
institutions in Indian Country. I have seen them change
people's lives.
I do not know how the Administration justifies coming in
and cutting tribal colleges by $2 million from what was
provided last year. Now I know, as Budget Committee Chairman,
we face tough choices. But honestly, I cannot think of a worse
choice than deciding to cut tribal colleges.
Perhaps even worse, the United Tribes Technical College in
my own State, after being funded by every Administration for
the last 20 years, had its funding completely eliminated in
this budget. I really am amazed that the Administration would
yank the rug out from under this school and the more than 500
students that attend it.
This school does not receive assistance under the tribally-
controlled college or the University Assistance Act. Therefore,
it is dependent on these BIA funds.
I would love to hear what the explanation is for
eliminating the funding for this institution that is the only
inter-tribally controlled, post-secondary vocational
institution in the country. It is the only one, and you submit
a budget that eliminates the funding for it entirely. I await,
with great interest, the explanation.
The Chairman. Senator Dorgan.
STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH
DAKOTA
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, I cannot say it better, but I
can say it again. My colleague has talked about the United
Tribes Technical College. I was on the campus of the United
Tribes Technical College about 2 weeks ago, following the
Administration's recommendation that it not be funded. That is
a huge mistake.
As Senator Conrad indicated, Republican and Democratic
Administrations for 2 decades have recommended funding for this
unique institution. It is unique in the country in the way it
serves Native Americans from virtually all over America.
I cannot believe that anyone who went to United Tribes and
looked at that curriculum and looked at the results and said,
by the way, this is unworthy. I cannot believe anybody did
that. I believe that someone who knew the cost of everything,
but the value of nothing, as the old saying goes, decided just
to zero this out.
But I have asked the Administration to send someone there
now, go to the campus, meet with the teachers, meet with the
students, review the curriculum, review what that institution
has done for Native Americans for many years, and then tell us
that it is unworthy.
I do not think that will be the case. I think that if
someone takes a look at this and does due diligence, and does
what should have been done before the budget came out, I
believe that there will be a conclusion that this is a very
important and worthy institution to fund.
I am also concerned about the proposed decrease in tribal
community colleges. This has been a ray of hope. It allows
people with the connections to their home area for child care
and other things, to be able to access college. Our per-student
support is miserably low even now, but to propose a decrease is
just wrong.
If I might, Mr. Chairman, have 1 more minute. I spoke at a
tribal college graduation ceremony 1 day. The person with the
broadest smile that day was a woman named Velma, who was
getting her degree.
She had been a janitor, a single mother with four children,
cleaning the hallways and cleaning the bathrooms of this
college. She decided she wanted to do something more than that.
The day I showed up, because of our investment and our
support, and because of this tribal college, Velma was able to
be a college graduate that day. That is something no one will
ever take away from her. She did it herself with our help.
It describes the value of tribal colleges, because she was
able to do it in her community, with the support of family, for
child care and other things.
So I want to just implore the Administration to take a new
look at the tribal college recommendation. Cutting that is
wrong. It is just wrong, and especially with respect to United
Tribes.
It is inconceivable to me, and I will ask, Mr. Chairman,
whether anyone from the Administration went to United Tribes,
and took a look at that curriculum; and if so, did they find it
wanting, and if so, where and how? My guess is that somebody
just took a pencil and just zeroed it out, and I think that is
unforgivable.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Domenici.
STATEMENT OF HON. PETE V. DOMENICI, U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW
MEXICO
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I have a series of questions when it comes my turn, but I
would like to make a couple of comments.
Mr. Secretary, first, I want to commend the Administration
for including in the budget this year $292,700,000 for the
construction of new Indian schools.
For years, instead of catching up, we were going backwards
in terms of schools that needed replacement or significant
rehabilitation. It was a rather deplorable situation, when the
President arrived on the scene here in the White House, to find
the condition of the BIA schools. He made a commitment, and I
thank you very much for encouraging him to live up to it.
This means eight Indian schools in the United States, three
in Arizona, two in South Dakota; and South Dakota will have two
schools, the total of which will be over $27 million; one
Indian school in New Mexico, and one major Navajo school, a
boarding school, which has a very, very expensive price tag,
but it is going to be constructed also, at $33 million.
Now all of us on this committee, including as I look
around, every single one, has been on the Floor of the Senate
from time to time, extremely critical of the deplorable
condition, the physical plant-wise condition, of the Indian
schools.
I think we had something to do with making the change; but
nonetheless, we have to give the President and you credit for
living up to it. It will make a big difference, and we will
soon catch up. It will take a few more years, but we will.
There are many other things we could talk about that are
positive in this budget, and some are negative. Some the
President found that he could not fund, if he was going to live
within the budget that he has come up with.
We will have our turn at those in the processes up here. If
we find them extremely wanting, his decisions, we will make up
for it as we go through the appropriation process.
So if I was the college that has been spoken about by our
two distinguished Senators, I would not be too worried. The
Senate has its opportunity to work its will. From what I can
see, some of these issues will be taken care of, and it will
not be terribly expensive.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Senator.
Mr. Secretary, what is the Bureau's legal authority to
privatize Bureau-operated schools?
Mr. McCaleb. Well, I think the Bureau, as the trustee to
Native Americans, has the authority and the obligation to seek
the most effective ways to provide for quality education.
As was pointed out earlier, the BIA has been criticized in
the recent General Accounting Office report for the achievement
and proficiency levels of BIA-educated students. So the
motivation for exploring privatization is to try to expand the
kinds of choices that are available to the local school boards
for enhancing the quality of education and the proficiency of
the students.
Privatization has shown some demonstrable success in other
areas that are characterized by poverty and high unemployment.
The objective is to work with the students in the BIA-operated
schools and use privatization on a demonstration project basis,
to measure its effectiveness and success in some of our least
high performing; or let me say it another way, our worst low
performing schools, to see if we can, in fact, through their
experience, effect meaningful change.
The Chairman. The Indian Child Protection and Family
Violence Prevention Act was enacted, as you know, to prevent
child molesters and pedophiles from working in BIA schools;
because it is common knowledge that these people seem to
gravitate to places where they can have access to children
without having to undergo background checks.
This act only applies to tribal and Federal employees.
Would it apply to private contractors?
Mr. McCaleb. We are currently expanding our security
measures in a variety of areas within the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, to include not only BIA employees, but also tribal
employees in any privatized contracts.
The Chairman. Well, under the present law, BIA employees
and tribal members must undergo a background check. My question
is, would the employees of these private institutions be
required to undergo background checks?
Mr. McCaleb. Yes.
The Chairman. That would be in the contract?
Mr. McCaleb. Yes.
The Chairman. This privatization, although it in one glance
would appear to give the Indian tribe a choice, to me, it seems
to present the tribe with an ultimatum. You either contract or
grant the schools, or the Bureau will hire a private entity.
Mr. McCaleb. I do not think, Mr. Chairman, that it is a
mandate in any form or fashion. It does present an additional
choice. I can assure you that no tribal school board will be
forced to privatize, if they choose not to; certainly, until
there is some demonstration over a period of some years.
The Chairman. Can they choose to stay with the BIA-operated
school?
Mr. McCaleb. Yes.
The Chairman. So you have that choice; it is either
contract or tribe? I thought that was your proposal.
Mr. McCaleb. Right now, we give the tribes the choices to
contract the schools, either through Public Law 93-638 or a
grant basis. That is their choice.
The Chairman. Under your proposal, the tribe is given a
choice. You either privatize or you do it yourself.
Mr. McCaleb. Mr. Chairman, I do not think that decision has
been made yet, because we have not gone through the
consultation process with the tribes, which is supposed to
begin this next month. Those are the kinds of things that will
be sorted out in the consultation process with the tribes.
The Chairman. I am glad you brought up consultation. Have
you consulted the Indian tribes before making this proposal to
this committee?
Mr. McCaleb. Not in a formal way; no, sir.
The Chairman. When do you intend to sit with tribal leaders
on this matter?
Mr. McCaleb. Beginning in the middle of this coming month;
we have organized and scheduled about seven different regional
consultation sessions.
The Chairman. So when the President released his budget
request, no Indian Nation had received some notification of
consultation.
Mr. McCaleb. No formal consultation; no, sir.
The Chairman. Well, I would like to know what the Indian
Nations have to say about this before this committee acts upon
it. I think that is the proper way.
In coming to your decision to privatize schools, was this
based upon some recommendation made by a report, or by a panel
of scholars or something like that; or was it a matter of the
budget, the bottomline?
Mr. McCaleb. I do not think that the bottomline objective,
the driving objective, is to reduce the cost. We are, of
course, hopeful that that will be a by-product. But the
objective is to increase the proficiency and the performance of
our Indian students academically.
We have seen, in some demonstrations right here in
Washington, DC, as an example, where some schools have been
privatized, and had a marked enhancement in their achievement
test scores.
The Chairman. Do you have copies of those reports?
Mr. McCaleb. I am sure Mr. Mehojah has those reports. Bill
Mehojah, who is the Director of our Office of Indian Education
Programs, is here with me today.
The Chairman. Mr. Mehojah, can you tell us on what document
the Department based its decision to privatize? Is it just the
Washington, DC schools?
Mr. Mehojah. No, sir; we took a look at the 1999 and 2000
school achievement levels of our schools. There were 106 of
those schools that were 50 percent or more partially
proficient. That means that there are three levels. There is
partially proficient, proficient, and advanced.
The Chairman. There were BIA-operated schools?
Mr. Mehojah. These were BIA-funded schools. In that, of
course, were included the BIA-operated schools; the 64 BIA-
operated schools that we still have.
To answer your question, yes, we do have documentation to
show how some of these private companies are influencing the
achievement levels of the schools that they have contracted
with.
The Chairman. And based upon that, you recommended this.
Mr. Mehojah. Based on that, we decided that we needed to
look at all options to improve achievement levels in our
school.
The Chairman. But in the process, you did not discuss this
matter with the tribal school teachers or tribal parents?
Mr. Mehojah. No; we did not discuss it with them.
The Chairman. I have many other questions, but now may I
call on the vice chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It sounds like kind of the same old deal. The decision is
made in Washington, and then the tribes are brought in after
the deal has already been made. To me, that is not
consultation.
I have got about 40 questions that I want to ask, too, but
I want to also share the time we have with Senator Dorgan and
Domenici. So let me ask you just a couple.
First, let me say one thing about education and the
President, and that is this. When Senator Domenici and I met
with the President and 28, as I remember, tribal leaders in Las
Cruces when he was a candidate, he made a commitment then to
improve Indian education, and told us then of his commitment to
put more money into school construction.
I think he has kept his word; maybe not up to the level he
would have wanted, or we would have wanted, but he was kept his
word in that respect.
I was rather surprised to hear Senator Conrad's statement
about the United Tribes Technical College funding. I am
concerned about that, too, because I do not think all young
Indian people that go to school want to, or maybe are not meant
to be white collar workers. We have got a need for vocational
instruction, too.
But as Senator Domenici alluded to, the budget request is
just that--it is a request. Congress is a separate branch and
we have some input on where we are going to put the money. I
just wanted to make a commitment to Senators Dorgan and Conrad
that I, for one, am going to do everything I can to make sure
that there is money put back in the budget for that vocational
school.
Let me ask a couple of questions about the schools, since
Senator Inouye talked about the demonstration project. As I
understand the demonstration project, there are 121 schools
already run by the tribes, either under contract or with a
grant agreement with the Bureau, and that leaves 64. But if the
tribe does not want to operate the school, it is automatically
turned over to a private corporation.
That is not a demonstration project. It sounds like some
sort of a mandate, and I am not sure if we should not launch a
pilot where we tried it with two or three schools before we
just made kind of a blanket decision about it.
But can you describe how a contractor is chosen to run a
school; what degree of involvement do they have with the tribe
before they get that contract?
Mr. McCaleb. I think a number of those questions will be
answered as a product of the planned consultation process.
My opinion about how they would be chosen would be that the
proposers would have their credentials evaluated based upon
their achievements in other schools and what they have
accomplished; and that the local school board, along with the
BIA, would look at the similarities between the school service
areas, to determine if their experience appeared useful in
terms of the local school board's objectives.
I think they would evaluate some things like their
financial stability, because this demonstration is not going to
be done in a year. I think they have proposed the five year
contracts with walking privileges for either party.
Senator Campbell. Well, I am concerned, not only as a
member of this committee, but also as a person who taught
public schools for a good number of years, about the
comparative data between these contract groups and other
schools, Bureau schools, educational private schools, and so
on.
Could you provide for the committee some kind of a report
card on comparative data between the people that may be getting
these contracts and the schools that are in place now?
Mr. McCaleb. Yes; I think we can.
Senator Campbell. Let me go on to another subject. The
budget request proposes a reduction in land consolidation money
of some $3 million, because there are unexpected amounts
carried over from previous years.
That is a concern, because we identified that problem some
years ago, as you remember, Neal, and we provided the funds to
fix it, to remedy it. But now how are we going to carry it out,
if we are going to cut the funds to that program?
Mr. McCaleb. That is a concern to me, as well, Senator. We
should have fully utilized all the funds that were available in
the fiscal years in which those funds were made available. It
was a disappointment to me that that has not been done, as you
indicated it is to you.
However, the reality is that we do have some carry-over
funds. Given the environment of the budget, we felt like we
would utilize those carry-over funds, and demonstrate our
ability to spend those funds now in the coming fiscal year, and
hopefully come back and ask for additional funds for this
purpose.
In fact, when we started the process, I was asking why do
we not ask for additional funds for land consolidation? It is
one of the things that everybody agrees that we ought to be
doing more of.
The answer was, well, we have not spent the funds we have,
which was a very unsatisfactory answer, but that is the reason
why the funds were reduced in this fiscal year. I hope that we
spend those funds down rapidly, and that we come back in the
2004 budget, having demonstrated that ability, and ask for more
money for that.
Senator Campbell. This program has met with, I think, a
great success for those tribes who have tribes who have tried
it, and I would encourage you to expand the pilot.
Mr. McCaleb. It is popular with everybody. It is popular
with the Congress. It is popular with the Administration and,
most importantly, it is popular with the service beneficiaries.
Senator Campbell. I do not have to tell you the
unemployment figures on reservations. I am sure you already
know them. It seems that the success rate in employment
training of the job placement program's success rate for
Indians is rather good.
But I would like to ask, what efforts is the Bureau taking
to expand that program? How is the Bureau working to ensure
that individual tribes can take advantage of that employment
training program and job placement; or how do you bring the job
placement program directly to the reservations?
Mr. McCaleb. Senator Campbell, one of the things that we
are proposing this calendar year, probably in the early Fall,
is to have an economic development summit, in which we bring
both tribal leadership, industry and investors to a common
meeting in which we demonstrate not just the need, but the
opportunities on reservation lands and in Indian country for an
economically viable enterprise, and attract them to bring the
jobs to the reservation areas.
In other words, we want to try to focus on reservation-
based jobs. That is the general mechanism that we would
propose.
Senator Campbell. All right, I will submit the rest of my
questions in writing. Just let me encourage you once more to
consult with the tribes before you make the decisions, not
after.
Mr. McCaleb. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Dorgan.
Senator Dorgan. Thank you very much.
I neglected to and should have thanked you for the budget
submission on Indian school construction. Senator Domenici did
that, and all of us who have been working on that see a ray of
hope here. I think that is a very positive piece in the
President's budget, so thank you for that.
But let me go to the areas that are troublesome for me, as
well. Let me talk about United Tribes Technical College, and
ask you, how did it come about that the Administration's budget
recommended zeroing out that college in the budget; do you
know?
Mr. McCaleb. I think the focus of this Administration's
budget is in the primary and secondary school years. That has
been historically the mission of the Bureau of Indian Affairs
in education. It is clearly the area where our dollars would
yield the highest rate of return, in terms of student
proficiency.
In fact, we are shifting some of our influence to preschool
activities through the FACE Program, the Family and Child
Education Program, to try to reduce our dropout rate, enhance
our proficiency rate, and to graduate students from high school
who are better prepared to go on to some post-secondary
activity, whether it be a baccalaureate program or a technical
training program.
Senator Dorgan. But let me ask again, is there any
particular reason that the Administration de-funded this? I
mean, did someone visit the college, review the curriculum and
find it wanting?
Mr. McCaleb. I am not aware that that happened, Senator.
Senator Dorgan. Can you tell me what you are aware of then,
with respect to United Tribes?
Mr. McCaleb. Well, I am aware that we reduced, as I
indicated, a lot of our post-secondary funding, including some
tribal colleges, a reduction of $2 million in tribal colleges,
and the elimination, in some cases, of funding of the technical
training.
Senator Dorgan. So to your knowledge, no one visited United
Tribes, or made an affirmative judgment that there is something
wanting at that school.
Mr. McCaleb. No; I do not think that happened.
Senator Dorgan. All right, do you think it would be
advisable to have someone visit that college, and evaluate that
curriculum? As Senator Domenici indicated, we are going to
consider this. I am on the Appropriations Committee.
But if, in fact, the decision was made without visiting the
college, would you be willing to send someone to that school,
and give us an evaluation of what you think that school is
contributing to those students?
Mr. McCaleb. I will have that done, Senator.
Senator Dorgan. Would you do that within the next 30 or 45
days, so that we have that available, both to this committee
and to the Appropriations Committee?
Mr. McCaleb. Before the end of April, that will be done.
Senator Dorgan. All right, that is very helpful, and I
appreciate that.
Let me just say, if I can, I think you will find what I
have found and others have found. This is a unique, remarkable
institution that contributes substantially to the lives of
people who want to better themselves and, who in many cases,
have a pretty tough road, but who have found the way and found
this as an opportunity; and I look forward to that visit.
Now let me ask about the Chairman's line of questioning,
because I do not think I got the answer. If you would please
ask your staff, and I regret that I have forgotten the
gentleman's name.
Mr. McCaleb. Mr. William Mehojah.
Senator Dorgan. Thank you for being with us.
The Chairman asked you if you had some evidence of the
improvement in student's achievement with respect to
privatizing schools. I think Mr. McCaleb indicated that some of
that came from the District of Columbia.
There have been experiments and actual programs to
privatize certain kinds of public education throughout the
country. Some of it has been successful; some has not been
successful, as you know. Can you tell us more specifically on
what basis you recommend privatization?
Mr. Mehojah. I think the one thing that we took a look at,
as Mr. McCaleb mentioned, was various options that we could
provide to schools and to tribes.
One of them, of course, like you mentioned, are the private
companies, education management companies. There are
approximately seven of those companies that are out there in
the country, the largest of which is the Edison Schools,
headquartered out of New York City. They have about 75,000 kids
in their system.
We have taken a look at their track record, to see how they
performed over the years, in some of the many similar
populations, with unemployment, poverty, under-education, those
kinds of factors.
We have also looked at a couple of the others, to see what
they do, and we visited some of the schools, to take a look at
how they operate, how they structure their days, et cetera.
I think we have done a cursory review of them, and have
collected some data, both from them, as well as from outside
sources, to see how they have fared.
Senator Dorgan. And I think the Chairman was asking the
questions that would lead to our asking, could you provide that
data to us then? If you have collected data sufficient so that
you have made a judgment about privatization and the
advantages, perhaps, of privatization, could you share with us
the information that led you to that conclusion?
Mr. Mehojah. Yes, sir; we sure could.
Senator Dorgan. Do you agree that, in some cases, the
privatization of schools has been a success; while in other
cases, it has been a failure?
Mr. Mehojah. Yes, sir; we have seen that. As an example, at
the Edison Schools, we have seen some places where they have
not succeeded. But their average success rate is fairly high.
Senator Dorgan. Would privatization represent a case where
you would choose the lowest bidder?
Mr. Mehojah. No, sir; we would choose the best provider.
Senator Dorgan. And what role would cost play in that?
Mr. Mehojah. The role that cost would play is that we would
show the private management company what resources currently go
to our schools. That would be what would be available to
provide an education program.
Senator Dorgan. I think the BIA schools are found wanting.
There is no question about. I disagree strongly with those who
say that the system of public education in this country is
somehow unworthy.
We did not send people to the moon and cure polio and split
the atom and splice genes, and clone animals, invent plastic,
silicon, and radars. We did no do that because we do not have a
wonderful system of public education; and because some of it is
failing ought not persuade us to privatize what I think has
been a remarkable success in this country.
Having said all that, I think the BIA schools, in many
cases, are wanting. But what I think the BIA schools represent
is exactly what the schools in trouble in the inner cities
represent. The schools inherit everything that comes from the
home, the neighborhood, and the culture surrounding it. People
who are having a tough time with 50 percent and 60 percent
unemployment, and substance abuse, and a whole series of other
things, import that to the daily school. That daily school
struggles with that mightily.
In most cases, with the teachers that I have visited on the
reservations, in BIA schools and in virtually every other
school, I come out of that classroom thinking, ``What a
wonderful person. What a remarkable person to dedicate their
lives to teaching children.''
So I have great concern about people who very quickly and
easily say, do you know what we should really do? Let us
privatize America's schools.
We have some private schools in this country that are
wonderful. Every parent has the choice to access those schools.
But this country takes a back seat to no place in the world for
the system of public education it has created, that allows
every child to rise to whatever level that child can rise to,
in a public system of education.
We do not separate them out. We do not move them through
different chutes, based on our assessment of their ability.
Every child, for two centuries in this country, has benefitted
from universal education. And if that was the import of the
Chairman's questions, then I certainly echo that.
I do not want us to be flippant or quick suggesting, to do
this; let us take public education apart; or let us take the
BIA education system apart and just privatize it. I think that
is headed toward very big trouble for our public system of
education.
So thank you for listening to me. But I think some of us,
at least on this committee, will look very, very carefully at
what you saw and what you evaluated, in terms of your
recommendations.
Mr. McCaleb, thank you for agreeing to send someone to
United Tribes. I think it is very important you do that. Also,
let me end on a positive note. Thank you again on the school
construction issues.
At the Ojibwe School on the Turtle Mountain Reservation,
just last year we got that funding. With those little kids
walking between mobile trailers in unsafe conditions in the
middle of the howling wind in the bitter cold winter; what was
going on out there was not right for those kids.
We struggled and struggled. They are finally going to get
their school. Because of the recommendations, a number of other
schools are finally going to get built, as well. That is a
bright spot. But do help us with the other areas.
Tribal colleges should not be cut. Tribal colleges ought to
be increased. The per pupil burden of tribal colleges that we
provide is still too low. If you compare it to every other per
pupil cost in the country, we are under-funding tribal
colleges. So let us fix that, as well.
Mr. McCaleb, thank you.
Mr. McCaleb. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. Thank you, very much.
Senator Domenici.
Senator Domenici. Mr. Secretary, let me suggest to you that
there is no orderliness about post-high school funding and
which institutions the Government is going to help and which
they are not.
I would think that if some point, if you intend to make a
difference, that you might have an analysis of the Indian
colleges and the vocational schools, and try to figure out and
make more sense out of what we are trying to do.
I have an institute, too, Crownpoint Institute of
Technology. It is zeroed out in the budget. It should get a
little bit of money, and we get it every year in
appropriations. But you would be amazed. You would not pick
this up in a report.
But sitting out in various places are these vocational
institutions or vocational colleges. They are getting by on a
shoestring, because sometimes the tribe funds them, in some
cases; and in some cases, they do not.
I think you would be surprised at the job training that is
occurring on these kinds of facilities, including the one I
have just mentioned. If you would take a look at it, while you
are looking at the post-high school vocational type
institutions, I would appreciate it.
I will do everything I can to get some funding for it,
because I think you would not like it closed, if you were able
to analyze its role there in that part of New Mexico and
Arizona.
Mr. McCaleb. Senator, it happens that I am going to be in
the Farmington area the first week in April, and I will make an
effort to go by Crownpoint and view the school personally.
Senator Domenici. You might not be able to. It is a pretty
long distance out. But if you had time, it would probably be a
joy for them to honor you. It is a very, very exciting thing to
see what happens out there.
Let me first ask you on the privatization, and give you the
benefit of my experience, I think it is imperative that at the
soonest and earliest opportunity, that you get the Indian
leaders together and tell them that you are exploring this,
that you are thinking about this.
It will not happen if, in fact, the Indian leaders think
that you have surprised them, and that they have not had an
input. They will come out against it from the beginning, and we
will never convert them to even give any of it a try, even if
it is justified.
So I think you should go slow, but you should make sure
that the Indian leaders are in on it. Do not come to them with
something all completed. Get a group of them interested now in
bettering their schools, and make sure that they understand
that maybe together you can be looking at this. If it is done
unilaterally, we will prohibit you from doing it, and all your
good thoughts will be for naught.
I have two New Mexico issues. I just gave you one of them:
Crownpoint Institute of Technology. We have Pueblos in New
Mexico. As you know, we have many Indian Pueblos in New Mexico.
We have 17.
Those are generally small groupings, as you know, living on
large, large land holdings, and they are pueblos because they
were constructed that way during the Spanish era, and still
have their own language, and are Indian people.
Santa Domingo has a land claim settlement, and maybe this
is part of what you were talking about under not getting the
money disposed of. But Santa Domingo has a claim, and it seems
like the Government is not paying it in an orderly manner.
I would ask if you would take a look at that, and we will
give you the details of what the authorization for payment was,
and ask you to tell us when we could expect payment. If you
would do that, I would greatly appreciate it.
I have one last one, if you do not mind. The BIA is going
to be replacing a dormitory in Pine Hill, serving the Navajo
Nation with a 72 bed capacity. However, the Ramah Navajo Board
has supportive evidence that a 100-bed facility is needed and
justified.
Does the department concur with this information and
justification? If not, I ask if you would take a look at it. In
other words, we are planning on 72, but the Board there is
indicating that would be insufficient from the beginning, and
that 100 beds are needed. So if you would look at that, I think
it would be good for us and good for you to be right, rather
than get it done and be wrong.
Mr. McCaleb. We will make a thorough analysis of that,
Senator, and we will include it in our report.
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Secretary, we are well aware of your time problems, and
that you will have to go to the House now. Regretfully, we will
have to submit our questions to you, sir, and I hope you will
look them over and provide us with your responses.
Mr. McCaleb. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. If I could
have one concluding statement about post-secondary education
and the need for it.
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCaleb. I am very sensitive and aware, and made a
personal decision early in my life, relative to post-secondary
education. I wanted to get a degree as a civil engineer, and I
ran out of money. I was married and had my first child on the
way.
I sold the legacy from my mother of her Chickasaw allotment
in order to finance the balance of my education, and it stood
me well. I think as much as I hated to part with that land,
that education has been very beneficial to me, and stood me in
good stead. It was the right decision, as difficult as it was.
I hope I have not left the impression with anybody that I
depreciate or do not hold in high value the importance of post-
secondary education, whether it be a baccalaureate degree or
technical training. In fact, I have some initiatives on
technical training, relative to surveyors, that we will be
submitting and discussing with you.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Our next witness is the Acting Assistant Administrator,
Office of Water, Environmental Protection Agency, Diane C.
Regas. Madam Administrator, welcome.
STATEMENT OF DIANE C. REGAS, ACTING ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR,
OFFICE OF WATER, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Ms. Regas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I
am Diane Regas, the Acting Assistant Administrator for Water
and the National Program Manager for Tribal Programs at the
Environmental Protection Agency. I very much appreciate the
opportunity to be here today to speak with you about the
President's 2003 budget for EPA's tribal programs.
The President's budget requests for EPA reflects the
agency's strong commitment to cleaner air, purer water, and
land that is better protected. This commitment is especially
challenging with respect to Indian country and tribal programs.
At the outset, I would like to stress that the tribal needs
are significant. Tribes are disproportionately at risk by
nearly every yardstick we use to measure the quality of life.
Poverty and unemployment are high. Their education, economic
development, and physical well being lag well behind those of
the general population.
With respect to cleaner air, purer water, and better
protected land, tribal needs are truly challenging. For tribes,
clean water often means providing the basic sanitation that the
rest of us take for granted. In some instances, our funds are
providing indoor plumbing for the first time. In other cases,
our funds bring modern drinking water systems to two tribes.
For tribes, cleaner air means ensuring compliance with
Federal, State, and tribal standards. Eighty-three tribes are
located in non-attainment areas for one or more air pollutants
and suffer the consequences of this pollution.
For tribes, better protected land means their homelands are
places where modern life thrives as do ancient traditions and
ceremoneys. Today, there are 1,110 open dumps in Indian
Country, yet only about 12 percent of tribes have solid waste
management programs.
These are just a few of the daunting challenges that EPA
and tribes face in their efforts to reduce risks to human
health and the environment in Indian Country.
EPA's 2003 budget requests for tribal programs is $232
million, an increase of $3.6 million this year, and a six-fold
increase since 1994, when EPA created its American Indian
Environmental Office. Tribes and EPA continue to work closely
to protect public health and the environment in Indian country.
Our budget request reflects our ongoing commitment to
working with tribes as they build their capacity to develop and
manage their environmental programs.
For example, the General Assistance Program, often called
the GAP Program, frequently provides the tribe with its first
environmental grant, which allows the tribe to hire and train
its own staff to assess the environmental conditions on the
reservation and develop its own administrative, legal, and
technical approaches to solving its problems.
Currently, about 400 tribes receive General Assistance
Program or GAP funding, and I am very pleased to tell you that
the 2003 budget request would allow EPA to fund an additional
45 tribes.
In addition to capacity building, our 2003 budget request
will support our continued efforts to help tribes meet their
basic health and sanitation needs. It includes approximately
$18.2 million in clean water set-aside funding to help meet the
very significant tribal needs for waste water infrastructure.
I would like to note that our two statutes that provide
infrastructure funding, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the
Clean Water Act, are inherently different.
Under the Clean Water Act, funding for tribal waste water
infrastructure is limited to one-half of one percent of the
total appropriation, while the drinking water set-aside is set
at 1\1/2\ percent.
The President's budget proposes that the Clean Water Act
ceiling again be increased to one and one half percent, so that
tribes receive the funding they need to support their
significant drinking water and waste water infrastructure
needs.
I would also like to note that Alaska Native villages
represent the bulk of needs for both waste water treatment,
where they represent 75 percent of the total needs, and
drinking water infrastructure, where they represent about 50
percent of total needs.
I have personally visited Alaska Native villages and have
seen firsthand the consequences of the lack of basic sanitation
and potable drinking water in some of these areas.
To help meet these staggering needs, EPA is proposing an
additional $40 million over and above the Clean Water and Safe
Drinking Water Act funding for infrastructure improvements in
Alaska. This is an amount equal to that provided by Congress
last year.
As part of EPA's budget, the Administration is requesting
that Congress eliminate the statutory cap on funding of
implementation of tribal non-point source management programs.
Removing this cap would allow us to help 70 tribes educate and
train people on reducing polluted runoff and implementing on-
the-ground watershed protection projects.
EPA's budget also proposes extending our authority to enter
into cooperative agreements with tribes. These agreements are
instrumental in our efforts to actively engage tribes in day-
to-day environmental management at the same time they develop
their own managerial capacity.
The Administration's budget request would allow EPA to
continue working with tribes to improve their environment
through numerous grant programs, training opportunities, data
exchange, and technical assistance. My written testimony
provides more detail on EPA's 2003 budget request to support
cleaner air, purer water, and better protection of tribal
lands.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you, and would be pleased to answer any questions.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Regas appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Madam Administrator.
Over the past 10 years, tribal interest in participating in
EPA programs and developing broad-based tribal environmental
programs has grown dramatically. Has the EPA responded, and if
so, to what extent, to these growing tribal environmental
needs?
For example, they have suggested that there be direct
funding to tribes to build tribal environmental capacity and
implement tribal environmental programs through either the
treatment as a State designation, or direct implementation
through tribal cooperative agreements. Have we done anything
like that to recognize tribes as States?
Ms. Regas. Yes, Mr. Chairman; we do. Over the last few
years, since 1994, EPA has increased its GAP funding, the
General Assistance Program Funding from $8.5 million that year
to $57 million. That is in the President's request for 2003.
This represents a six-fold increase.
In addition, the EPA has approved a number of tribes for
treatment as a State, under our statutes. At this time, we have
23 tribes who are approved for treatment as States under
Section 303 of the Clean Water Act, which covers establishment
of basic standards, and two additional tribes who are approved
for treatment as a State for other programs; specifically, the
Public Water Systems Supply Program, that is operated under the
Safe Drinking Water Act.
The Chairman. Are you satisfied that the tribes are
receiving about what the States are receiving?
Ms. Regas. We continue to invest in growth in our tribal
programs. This year's budget is no exception. Our long-term
goal would be to be able to provide all tribes with a GAP level
of funding at about $110,000, which would allow the tribe to
develop its own capacity to manage programs.
Our rate of growth in that program needs to be commensurate
with our ability to adequately manage it. This year's increased
investment will allow us to take the next steps and fund 45
additional tribes, which we think is a very positive step.
The Chairman. We provide generous non-competitive grants to
cities and States. Do we provide the same for Indians?
Ms. Regas. The EPA's funding to States develop their
ability and capacity to manage environmental programs was
generally provided first in the early 1970s. We were much later
to come to the realization of the need to provide similar
funding for tribes, but we do currently provide non-competitive
funding to tribes for basic management.
In addition, there are several different funds that we
provide to tribes. Our total investment in tribal programs in
2003 is proposed to be approximately $232 million. The vast
majority of that is in grant programs to tribes.
The Chairman. I wish to congratulate you on taking the
initiative to visit these far-away places, such as the villages
above the Arctic Circle.
After your visitations in Alaska and in the Lower 48, have
you come to any sort of broad conclusion as to how much would
be needed to bring Indian country to the same level that other
Americans enjoy so that they may have running water and maybe
even toilets. Because on some reservations, less than one-half
the homes have running water, less than one-half have toilets.
In Alaska, as you know, they have honey buckets rather than
toilets.
Ms. Regas. Yes, Mr. Chairman; we do have an estimate of the
need to provide basic sanitation and drinking water on tribal
lands. Our current estimate of the known needs is $650 million
for needs in waste water, and 42 billion for needs in drinking
water. We continue to chip away at those needs through our
programs, and other agencies provide funds for those, as well.
The Chairman. At the rate of funding at the present time,
will we be able to resolve this matter, or will it just
continue. What we have learned through our programs throughout
the country is that investment in waste water infrastructure
and drinking water infrastructure will be an ongoing need for
the country, far into the future.
These are not problems that are ever solved once and then
we can walk away. We see a need for continued investment in
these programs, as far as we can predict.
The Chairman. I have so many questions that I would like to
submit, if I may, for your study and response to us.
May I now recognize our vice chairman.
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Regas, I commend you on your travels. Just for my own
information, have you visited Pine Ridge, SD or Lame Deer, MT;
but particularly Pine Ridge?
Ms. Regas. No, sir; I have not visited Pine Ridge, although
a number of EPA staff have been to Pine Ridge, and we are very
well aware of the pressing drinking water needs in Pine Ridge.
We are continuing to work with the tribe to invest in improving
the level of particularly drinking water services that are
provided there.
Senator Campbell. I thank you for doing that.
Any caring person that would visit those two reservations,
or many more of them in what we call Indian country, they would
know that we can do better than we have.
In my State of Colorado, we only have two land-based
tribes, the Southern Ute and the Ute Mountain Utes. The Ute
Mountain Utes have been on the same piece of land for 130
years, and did not get fresh water until about 6 years ago,
when we passed the legislation to build a pipeline. The State
helped, and we got it done.
But up until that time, the only water on the reservation
was an open ditch and a gravel back-flow filter that would not
even screen out some of the bigger bugs, let alone anything
else that might be in that water.
So I think if you applied that problem to most communities,
non-Indian communities in the United States, there would be a
public uprising or some kind of an outcry. So thank you for
being sensitive to that.
But since I mentioned the Southern Ute, let me ask you
something. I know it is very difficult when you are talking
about improving environmental conditions, when you have to work
with the tribes and non-Indian communities right next to the
tribes.
How do you reconcile those interests? How do you regulate
air quality over Indian and non-Indian lands, when they are
next to each other, and what kind of expertise do you have
working with the tribes and communities that are non-Indians,
when they are literally right next to each other?
Ms. Regas. The issues of jurisdiction and working with
communities to provide adequate and equal levels of protection,
both on and off tribes, is one of the most difficult issues we
face in implementation of our environmental programs.
In the Southern Ute Tribe specifically, there has been
legislation, as I understand, passed by the State of Colorado,
and signed by the tribal chairman, and we are continuing to
work with the tribe and the State to resolve these issues of
jurisdiction, so that both the State and the tribe will
continue to have a role in protecting air quality.
What we have learned in our management, whether it is air
programs or water programs, is that the environment does not
respect these boundaries.
Senator Campbell. That is right.
Ms. Regas. We really need, in addition to being cautious
and careful, to respect the jurisdiction of the various
entities, and to work on a government-to-government basis with
tribes. We do try to bring together the interested parties, so
that we can help resolve these issues as they come up and
provide protection to the people on these lands.
Senator Campbell. Well, thank you for your sensitivity to
that.
Using the Southern Utes as an example, there are nine law
enforcement jurisdictions on that reservation, because it is
checkerboarded, and I am sure others are the same. When you try
to resolve a problem, boy, you have to deal with an awful lot
of entities at different government levels.
But thank you for that. I will submit further questions in
writing.
Ms. Regas. We would be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Ms. Regas, I thank you on behalf of the
committee.
Ms. Regas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Our final witness this morning is the
Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission, the
Honorable Montie Deer. Judge Deer, it is always good to have
you.
STATEMENT OF MONTIE DEER, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING
COMMISSION
Mr. Deer. Good, good; thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you all
know, I am Montie Deer. I am Chairman of the National Indian
Gaming Commission. I do want to thank you for allowing me this
opportunity to report to you on the work of our Commission.
As you are no doubt aware, the other Commission members and
I are approaching the end of our terms. We appreciate the
interest and the support that this Commission has received to
us and from us. In other words, I think we have worked together
for the 3 years I have been here.
My remarks can be summarized by simply saying that the
tremendous growth in the Indian gaming industry, particularly
in light of the recent dynamic changes in California, have
really strained our ability to keep pace.
In 1988, when the Commission was created, Indian gaming was
Indian bingo. Today, it is a major industry, producing revenues
on a par with Las Vegas and Atlantic City, combined.
While the Indian gaming industry has increased more than
100-fold, the Commission, in contrast, has little more than
doubled its capacity since start-up. It is becoming
increasingly difficult for the Commission to carry out our
statutory functions effectively under the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act.
We come today to ask this committee's support for the
President's request for the $2 million appropriation for fiscal
year 2003. To be completely candid, we view this request as an
interim measure, while we work with you, your staff members,
and the Indian gaming industry and community, to secure
legislation needed to allow flexibility in our fee collection
structure.
The Administration supports this one-time budget request,
and our goal of statutory adjustments to the current
limitations in our permanent financing.
The upcoming fiscal year marks the fifth consecutive
funding cycle during which the Commission has operated under a
flat budget. However, by contrast, the industry now generates
approximately $11 billion per year, an increase of nearly 50
percent since our last fee cap adjustment.
If you will look at the bar graph, and I think you have
copies in your papers, this graph shows the industry's growth
through the year 2000. We do not yet have the numbers for 2001,
but we will have them in a couple of months, and we will amend
this so that you will have that.
At the same time, the Indian gaming boom in California
continues to put a severe strain on our resources. Prior to the
passage of proposition 1-A in March 2000, there were 39 gaming
operations in California. Today, there are 46. The nature of
gaming in California has changed, as well, with the involvement
of major commercial players, such as Harrah Entertainment,
Anchor Gaming, Stations Casino, and Donald Trump.
The Commission is, nevertheless, solvent. But we remain
solvent only by allowing vacant positions to remain unfilled
and reducing our presence in Indian country.
This oversight responsibility given to the Commission by
Congress requires professional employees. We must have field
investigators, auditors, and lawyers, and we simply do not have
enough. But we do not have the money to hire more of these
employees and fund the travel overhead and operational expenses
associated with a larger staff.
I now refer you to the pie chart. As you can see, 84
percent of our costs are fixed. Let me illustrate this
situation by describing our Audit Division. We began fiscal
year 2002 with six auditors. Through attrition, we have lost
two. These positions, although critical, have not been filled
because of our need to impose a hiring freeze.
Because gaming is a cash-intensive industry, it poses
special concerns. For many years, the gaming industry has
recognized that strong internal controls were essential to
effectively identify and deter irregularities in the handling
of large volumes of cash. Like other regulatory jurisdictions,
the National Indian Gaming Commission promulgated its own
minimum internal control standards or MICS with the great
assistance and consultation of the tribes.
It has been said that we can measure compliance with our
MICS with an appropriate level of sampling, and in doing so,
make a meaningful contribution to ensuring the overall
integrity of Indian gaming.
Unfortunately, at current staffing levels of the Audit
Division, it would take us 20 to 30 years to evaluate the over
300 existing gaming operations in Indian country.
Beyond the personnel shortages, the flat budget is
beginning to impact the quality and quantity of our
consultations with Indian tribes. We, at the Commission,
believe that it is imperative for us to consult regularly with
the tribes, both in the context of specific rulemakings and
more generally, so that we can ensure that we are meeting the
precise needs of the industry.
As our budget has grown tighter, we have worked hard to
continue our consultations in the context of specific
rulemaking; but this has cost us our quarterly regional
consultations, where we provide extensive training and meet
one-on-one with the tribes to evaluate the needs of their
industry.
This will ultimately pose a cost to the quality of our
regulatory program and the productivity of our relationship
with the tribes.
In addition to these issues, we have other needs, as well.
The Commission would like to complete several projects that
will pay future dividends in terms of overall efficiency and
effectiveness.
As I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, the terms of
the current Commission members are drawing to a close. Our
successors will have some significant challenges. We hope that
by my remarks today, we will help pave their way as they guide
the new Commission.
Let me say that for myself, Vice Chairman Homer, and
Commissioner Poust that we each appreciate the support and many
courtesies that you have extended to us. Thank you, and I would
be happy to answer any questions.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Deer appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
When one considers the gross income of the operations, $2
million seems to be so small, it is almost embarrassing.
However, do you intend to hire more staff?
Mr. Deer. To answer your question, Mr. Chairman, the first
thing we will do, if we get $2 million, is to fill the two
auditor positions that have been left vacant, and also
additional lower individuals to assist them.
We want to provide the field with the funding and the
ability to go to Indian country and do the consultations they
do and do the training that they do on site.
Then we have some technological improvements that we would
like to do. We would like to complete a financial component to
the database, so that we can track receipts and expenditures.
We would like to do an electric accounts receivable, so that
the tribes can pay their fees on line. We would like to do an
electronic records management.
Finally, an area that we have a big issue with is that old
thing called Freedom of Information Act. We have a lot of work
there, and we spend a lot of time there. So we would like to
dedicate some software in that area, if we could.
The Chairman. Will you continue your consultation process?
Mr. Deer. Certainly, as long as we can.
The Chairman. Just for the record, can you just provide us
with a list of what you just told us, about how the funds will
be used?
Mr. Deer. Yes; we will give you that.
The Chairman. Now you spoke about legislation to allow
flexibility in your fee structure. Has the Commission developed
such a proposal?
Mr. Deer. We are ready to prepare a rough draft and consult
with not only your staff, but with the tribal individuals and
leaders on that issue. What we are looking at now is a floating
fee that we think will work.
The Chairman. I would suggest that you do this as soon as
possible, because this is a rather busy session with elections,
terrorism, et cetera. So we would like to be of help.
A few years ago, Senator McCain and I introduced a measure
which would provide for a licensing fee mechanism that placed
the burden of funding for the Commission on those wishing to do
business with Indian casinos by requiring them to pay a
licensing fee. Have you considered this type of proposal?
Mr. Deer. What you are getting at is what is sometimes
referred to as licensing vendors, et cetera. To do that and do
the backgrounds, you would need to increase this Commission
several fold, as far as employees. That would be large amounts
of dollars.
Again, you have a sovereignty issue. Do the tribes want to
do their own licensing, or do they want the Federal Government
to do that for them?
The Chairman. Well, this would not be a Federal
appropriation. We are requiring vendors to pay a fee to you.
Mr. Deer. That is correct, but then we make the decision.
The tribe does not make the decision on who gets a license.
The Chairman. But is it not your responsibility to make
certain that scam artists do not get involved in doing business
with Indian country?
Mr. Deer. I would say that is in the preamble of the act,
and I would agree with you; yes, Senator.
The Chairman. In this business, it would appear commonplace
to have people who would go out of their way to con Native
people.
Mr. Deer. Any time you have cash-intensive business, I
think that is correct.
The Chairman. I hope the Commission will consider this
proposal.
Mr. Deer. We will certainly be more than happy to have the
staff work with your staff on that issue.
The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
Well, I have other questions and I will be submitting them
to you. But before I do, I would like to thank you for your
service, not only to Indian country, but to our Nation. I wish
you the best, Judge, in future endeavors.
Mr. Deer. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Mr. Vice Chairman.
Senator Campbell. Judge Deer, I would like to also join
Senator Inouye in wishing you well in your future. We have not
always agreed, but I have always appreciated your friendship
and your openness before the committee.
I was interested, I have to tell you, about your comments
about who is moving into Indian gaming, the big corporations.
You mentioned Harrah and Trump Casinos.
Well, I can remember 10 years ago, when Donald Trump,
himself, testified against Indian gaming over on the House side
before the committee, when George Miller was the chairman. He
testified against it by saying, ``they do not look like
Indians.'' I guess with a certain amount of money, he can
become colorblind. I think they are looking more like Indians
to him now. [Laughter.]
But I guess that just tells you how things change when
there is a lot of money on the table.
I wanted to ask you a couple of questions on your charts
here. This chart refers to the Federal oversight. Is that
correct?
Mr. Deer. That is correct.
Senator Campbell. But there are three layers of oversight.
One is tribal oversight of their gaming. The other two are
State oversight and Federal oversight.
How does this chart compare and do you know if there has
been an increase in State and tribal oversight of their gaming
operations?
Mr. Deer. I do not have the facts before me, but I would be
more than happy to try to supply you with what we have. But I
would say that it has remained constant, as far as States go.
You have some States, as you know, Senator, that are quite
involved, and you have some States that will not do anything.
Senator Campbell. Yes; well, if you can find that
information, I would be interested in knowing if the activities
at the State and tribal level have increased to keep up with
the growth in Indian gaming.
You requested a $2-million increase in Federal funds, which
I do not think is exorbitant by itself. That is in addition to
the $8 million in fee assessments, for a total of $10 million.
A few years ago in 1998, I worked and helped to get that
celing raised to $8 million, as you remember, Judge Deer. Since
then, I have been resistent about raising it more, because I
was not convinced of the consultation or the need for it; but I
know that the amount of work is going up.
At the time, we were getting some letters here at the
committee from tribes who felt that the Gaming Commission was
being punitive, and we had talked about that, or maybe a little
invasive into the tribes' operations.
I would just encourage you to make sure you have a lot of
consultation with the tribes before you bring any legislation
before the committee, so we do not have some kind of a
backlash, as we often do here, when tribes feel they were not
asked.
But maybe it is time to raise the ceiling a little bit, or
maybe more than a little bit; I do not know. But I do know the
growth has been huge since California has kind of come on line
with gaming.
In the original budget, when we first started out, the
ceiling was $2.5 million. Is that not correct, when the
Commission was first formed?
Mr. Deer. I believe that is correct.
Senator Campbell. I think that was it.
How long did it take to reach the $8 million ceiling that
we increased in 1982?
Mr. Deer. Well, I know you remember Tony Hope was the first
chairman, and I think he had three or four employees.
Basically, for the first 3, 4, or 5 years, I think that all
they did was draw up the regulations and do the legal work, you
might say.
It was not until they started having, as you recall, the
field investigators living out of their suitcases. There were
seven of them, if you recall.
Senator Campbell. Yes; I remember that.
Mr. Deer. Then Phil Hogen, commissioner, vice chairman,
came up with the plan of, I would say, the regional offices. I
remember you wanted to know if there was going to be one in
Denver.
Senator Campbell. Yes.
Mr. Deer. So I would say that it took 4 or 5 years before
we got up to the $8 million.
Senator Campbell. How many regional offices are there now?
Mr. Deer. We have five.
Senator Campbell. You have five, and you have increased the
field staff in each one of those offices, too, I assume?
Mr. Deer. Well, we have lost some auditors. That is where
we are hurting.
Senator Campbell. I see.
Okay, I really do not have any further questions, Mr.
Chairman. But I would be interested, as we go along, in talking
more about this increase; thank you.
Mr. Deer. It was been my pleasure. Again, may I say to at
least the two of you, you have always been here and that means
a lot; thank you.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Judge.
The record of this hearing will be kept open for another
two weeks, just in case you have addendums to make or
corrections. In light of the fact that we will be submitting
questions, I believe it will take two weeks to respond to them.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 11:26 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to
reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, U.S. Senator from
Colorado, Vice Chairman, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
Good morning, and thank you Chairman Inouye for holding the
Committee's last hearing on the President's fiscal year 2003 budget
request.
Today we welcome old friends Neal McCaleb from the BIA, Montie Deer
from the Indian Gaming Commission and a new friend, Diane Regas, from
the EPA. I welcome you all to the committee.
It may be obvious to some, but I think we need to be reminded that
this budget request must be viewed against the backdrop of the war on
terror and homeland security. Clearly, that is where our Nation's focus
is at the present time.
Nonetheless, there are great needs in our Native communities.
The President's request includes a $20-million overall increase for
BIA programs and I am happy to see more attention on Indian education
and economic development for the BIA.
Increases are proposed for:
\\\\\\Indian trust activities--+ $70 million.
\\\\\\TPA--+ $24 million.
\\\\\\Indian tribal courts--+ $4 million.
\\\\\\Indian energy development--+ $2.1 million.
\\\\\\Contract support costs--+ $3 million.
In January 2002, President Bush signed the ``No Child Left Behind
Act'' which included the ``Native American Education Improvement Act''
that I am proud to have introduced along with the Chairman.
I commend the President for his request of nearly $293 million in
new funds for Indian school construction.
I believe that there are other ways to help get more Indian schools
built, such as school bonding, and I hope the Administration considers
supporting that idea. I know that our Assistant Secretary has supported
the idea in the past.
On September 28, 2001, the GAO reported that in many categories,
BIA schools fail to produce the kind of education Indian children need
so badly. I quote from that report: ``The academic performance of many
BIA students, as measured by their performance on standardized tests
and other measures is far below the performance of students in public
schools. BIA students also score considerably below national averages
on college admission tests.''
Of all 185 BIA schools, Indian tribes already operate 121 of them
through grants or under Indian Self-Determination Act contracts. The
BIA continues to operate the remaining 64 schools.
The President's request includes a proposal to bring competition to
these schools by way of a ``privatization initiative''.
I believe in competition but I think we need to look at it
carefully and ask probing questions such as:
No. 1. Can we provide incentives so that the tribes would want to
assume control of the schools?
No. 2. What role would tribal governments and local school boards
play in the selection of a private contractor?
No. 3. What experience do the current contractors have with Indian
culture and people?
I will reserve the balance of my time for questions for all of our
witnesses Mr. Chairman but would ask unanimous consent that my formal
statement be included in the record.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank H. Murkowski, U.S. Senator from Alaska
Chairman Inouye, thank you for holding this series of hearings on
the President's budget request as it relates to Indians, Alaska
Natives, and Native Hawaiians. It is important to have these
opportunities to receive the views of the various department heads and
others who are charged with carrying out these programs, which are so
important to my constituents in Alaska.
There is no doubt about it, Mr. Chairman, there is not enough
funding for many of the fundamental programs designed to benefit
America's indigenous people. We need to do more in order to keep our
commitments to our native brothers and sisters.
We know we need more funding if we plan to address the needs of
Alaska's Native population and Indian country. The concern I have is
weather all the funding that we do have being administered fairly? Do
formulas take into consideration the various circumstances that make
each region of the country unique from the rest. I bring this up
because of the extraordinary circumstances of many of Alaska's Native
population; the weather, the isolation, the lack of roads, the
transportation expense, the vast distances, housing costs, the cost of
food, et cetera. Some of these circumstances are shared with other
regions of the country. Some are not. I think for the most part BIA
programs are fair and are administered with a willingness to
acknowledge and account for these differences.
The one program I have concerns with, however, is the Indian
Reservation Roads program. I have several pages of questions that
address what my constituents and I believe is unfair treatment of my
region in the Indian Reservation Roads funding distribution. I look
forward to working with Assistant Secretary McCaleb on correcting these
inequities and have confidence that when he analyzes the program he
will see that adjustments do in fact need to be made.
______
Prepared Statement of William H. Kindle, President, Rosebud Sioux Tribe
Good Morning Chairman Inouye, Vice Chairman Campbell and
distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. I am
William H. Kindle, president of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe representative
of 24,086 Sicangu Lakota living on the Rosebud Sioux Indian
Reservation, in Rosebud, SD. We are a federally recognized Indian
tribe. On behalf of the Sicangu Lakota, I want to take this opportunity
to thank you for allowing us to present our concerns to you on the
President's Fiscal Year 2003 Budget Request for American Indian
Programs. The President's stroke of the pen has far reaching impact
upon our tribes, his budget request will directly affect our Sicangu
Lakota Oyate. It is important for you to picture behind me, our
children, people and elders. It is them in mind that I speak before you
today.
As you may well know, any discussions that surface regarding
American Indian tribes and the Federal Government is based on the many
treaties signed by both Nations on the fundamental inherent rights of
all Indian people on this continent as it pertains to the many treaties
signed by our people and the U.S. Government. We stand firmly by those
agreements made to us in those treaties signed by our forefathers. I
will reiterate here again, what so many tribal leaders have said in
regards to sovereignty and the obligations of the U.S. Government to
American Indian tribes. Today we are asserting those treaty agreements
made with us, and the sovereignty that is part of those treaties.
On November 19, 2001 in President Bush's proclamation of the
National American Indian Heritage Month the President stated that our
governments must cooperate with each other on a sovereign to sovereign
basis to provide Native Americans with new economic and educational
opportunities. And that Indian education programs will remain a
priority, so that no American child, including no Native American
child, is left behind. President Bush further stated that ``we will
protect and honor tribal sovereignty and help to stimulate economic
development in reservation communities, he also stated we will work
with the American Indians and Alaska Natives to preserve their
freedoms, as they practice their religion and culture.
In 1997 President Clinton signed an Executive Order 13175, which
establishes a government to government consultation policy with the
purpose of strengthening relationships between the United States and
American Indian tribes and ensure that all executive departments and
agencies consult with tribes as they develop policy on issues impacting
Indian communities, the President's Budget Request to Congress is
ultimately a policy.
Mr. Chairman, We are requesting that the Federal Government, honor
our sovereignty and to remind all of the Federal programs of their
responsibilities concerning American Indian tribes. We as tribal
nations reaffirm those treaties made with us as perpetual and binding
documents solidified by a term used in the treaties ``As long as the
grass grows and the waters flows, this land shall be yours'' meaning
those lands contained in our 1851 and 1868 peace treaties belong to us
the Eceti Sakowin (the Seven Council Fires of the Lakota, Nakota, and
Dakota Nations).
Our tribe provides services to approximately 24,086 tribal members
with some very key and vital programs. I want to inform you that the
President's request in fiscal year 2003 falls short of what we need to
effectively carryout services for our communities.
On the Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation, continuous efforts are
being developed to empower our youth through collaboration of our
communities, the youth themselves and all of our tribally and federally
funded programs. I want to talk about what our needs are:
No. 1. New Tribal Building: One of our biggest need is for
development of a new comprehensive, culturally appropriate and
centrally located tribal building for our people. As it is our programs
operate out of makeshift offices inside renovated houses. Some of our
programs are forced to purchase mobile homes for office space. We need
to centralize our Federal and tribal programs into one facility to
include the Bureau of Indian Affairs services and all of our tribal
programs. We are requesting $15 million dollars to build the center of
our nation.
No. 2. Wanbli Wiconi Tipi: The Wanbli Wiconi Tipe is a project on
the Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation to build a comprehensive Youth
Rehabilitation Center funded under the Department of Justice, our
elders have named this facility the ``Wanbli Wiconi Tipi (the Eagle
Nations Center of Renewal). This is a facility designed to address the
problems with youth violence, alcohol and drug abuse, school drop outs,
juvenile delinquency and attempted suicides. To some people this
project was thought to be a maximum security, lock down facility where
you put our youth in and throw away the key, this is not the case.
Instead we want to help our youth by providing them with better
opportunities for leadership, life skills development, cultural
enrichment, mentoring, and excellence in education. The Justice
Department approved funding at approximately $8.5 million for
construction but we have fallen short of our construction goals. We
have been forced to cut corners and downsize the project to fit our
budget because the final appropriation for this project is not enough.
Our construction cost will be short approximately $3 million. We are in
need of funding at $1.9 million for facility maintenance and
operational costs. Once this facility is completed we anticipate the
need for funding of approximately 65 key salaried personnel at a cost
of $3 million annually. We have a total need of $7.9 million dollars in
this area alone for fiscal year 2003. We will have an annual need of $5
million for our Wanbli Wiconi Tipi.
No. 3. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe-Youth Advocacy Center/Transitional
Living Center (YAC/TLC) is yet another project our tribe is also
working on. The YAC/TLC Center is being developed with seed funds from
the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Drug Elimination Program, as you
may know, the funding for this program was eliminated in the
President's fiscal year 2002 budget request. The YAC/TLC project will
be providing shelter care for approximately 100 at risk youth from ages
13 to 17 years of age. We will be providing out-patient treatment,
individual coping skills, counseling, foster home care, a home for the
homeless youth, educational services, transitional living for youth
returning from rehabilitation or treatment centers, mentoring,
recreational activities, adventure field trips, and cultural enrichment
programs for trouble youth coming from broken homes, most importantly
we are trying to stop the State social services from placing our
children in out of state foster homes or institutions. This project
will also be providing outreach services to an additional 1000 youth of
all ages. We are in need of $1.5 million dollars annually for operation
and services for troubled youth.
No. 4. Child and Family Services: The Rosebud Sioux Tribe Child and
Family Services Program provides services to families in dysfunctional
homes, where the court has intervened and is forced to remove children
from homes due to alcohol and drug related crime and addictions. This
program was funded at $181,797 to provide services to some 300 to 600
hundred clients. The tribe wants to help families to become self-
sufficient and healthy, the program also wants to develop innovative
programs to reunite families that have been separated. The Rosebud
Sioux Tribe is requesting $700,000 to provide services to those
children and families.
No. 5. Indian Child Welfare Act: The Rosebud Sioux Tribe Indian
Child Welfare Act Office is responsible for enforcement and
administration of this act. The office currently has over 355 children
in need of services. These are Lakota children that have been removed
from their homes and are placed in non-Indian foster homes or
facilities throughout the United States. They are tribal members and
need to come home and be placed with their own people. There are costs
associated with this act to including the cost of bringing children
home, the cost of placing them in homes, attorney fees for case by case
management, and at times there will be litigation and court costs. We
are also in need of more staff to include social workers, case
managers, Advocates and administrative staff. We are requesting
$350,000 for this program.
No. 6. Economic Development: On the Rosebud Sioux Indian
Reservation we have an unemployment rate of 88.5 percent, we will need
to create 500 jobs to make a dent in the unemployment rate. The tribe
has submitted our application for the Empowerment Zone Funding under
the U.S. Department of Agriculture and developed a Comprehensive
Economic Development Strategy so that we might develop opportunities
for industry or commerce to come to our area to assist us to become a
viable location to develop economically. There is not enough businesses
located within our reservation to turn our dollar around, there is no
mechanism in place to retain the dollar in our local economy. Most
places in America have industrial parks and zones we do not. The
biggest problem for our area is that we have no capital. We have some
50-100 individuals who want to start small businesses but we just do
not have the funding to assist them. We feel any funding for Economic
Development will help but we are requesting $10 million to assist us to
develop our economic development projects and to build capital so that
we may start building businesses that will retain our dollar.
No. 7. In Education: President Bush has released his ``leave no
child behind'' sweeping reforms, but has sweeping cuts for Indian
Education Programs. In the President's fiscal year 2003 budget request
he has with a stroke of his pen zeroed out the United Tribes Technical
College in Bismarck, ND, and has cut Tribally Controlled Community
Colleges which affects our Sinte Gleska University which is on the
verge of expanding degree areas. The St. Francis Indian School was
recently approved for expansion funding for its new school at around
$14 million when based on its student population increase of 7 percent
per year, has an actual need of $34 million to complete its
construction. The St. Francis Indian School was built a new school in
1996, but by the time it was built, student enrollment increases by 150
percent, they are now in already overcrowded classrooms, the how can
you let the President say ``leave no child behind'' and then cut key
education programs. If the U.S. Government wishes not to leave any
child behind then they will fund the Johnson-O'Malley at $200 per
student, restore funding to the United Tribes Technical College,
increase funding for Tribally Controlled Community Colleges. We are in
need of $34 million to complete the construction at the St. Francis
Indian School.
No. 8. Contract Support Funds: As you may know Contract Support
Funds continue to be in a constant shortfall and in dire need of 100
percent funding, If you send us a dollar by the time we receive our
contract support funds we end up with 65 cents , this has a lot to do
with the trickling effect tribes have talked about for decades. With
the historic under-funding adding up over the years then we are
constantly operating inadequately. We can only stretch the dollar so
far before it breaks. We are in need of $1.8 million dollars for
contract support.
No. 9. Our Roads Department is responsible for maintaining,
servicing and repairing 200 miles of paved, gravel, earth improved and
improved roads and bridges that are a part of the Federal Aid Indian
Road System. Funds are used to cover salaries and equipment. However,
we are now in need of new and updated equipment and machinery and more
staff to man an effective roads department. We are also in need
developing streets in many of our communities and the University. Are
need is for $1.5 million for roads.
No. 10. In Law Enforcement Services our tribe employs 20 police
officer which translates into one police officer per 1,204 tribal
members. In fiscal year 2001, our Law Enforcement Services received
over 28,000 calls for assistance. We have 20 police officers that are
already overworked and burn out is commonplace. Our tribe would like to
employ an additional 20 officers to alleviate the burden of already
overworked police force, to include equipment, vehicles, training and
salaries. Our tribe will be working with schools and community members
to prevent crime. We have a need of $1 million to address our Law
Enforcement Needs.
No. 11. Our Rosebud Agency Bureau of Indian Affairs programs are
also experiencing shortfalls with the Tribal Priority Allocations
Administrative Services with an unmet need of $100,000, the Social
Services Program is in need of $571,000 for its assistance of indigent
tribal members, The Real Estate Services service's a five county area
consisting of 3.2 million acres and is understaffed with a need of $1.7
million for more staff and real estate services to deal with the tribal
lands being fractionated. The Agriculture program receives $1 per acre
to manage public lands while other Federal programs receive $3 per
acre, with a tribal. This program maintains 880,000 acres and is in
need of $1.8 million to manage those tribal lands. The Forestry Program
has a need to of $100,000 to manage 7,261 acres of ponderosa pines and
18,614 acres of other various hardwoods which qualifies as a Category 1
reservation according to 25 CFR, Part 163.36. The Community Fire
Protection line item in the TPA system has never been funded but we are
requesting $100,000 permanent funding to help us with our fire
departments to facilitate quick responses for local fires. Our fire
department has responded to 25 structure fires in fiscal year 2001.
In Conclusion. Chairman Inouye, Vice Chairman Campbell, and the
distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, our
tribe will hope that what we have testified here today will be heard
back home in the services we provide. Once again I want to thank you
for allowing us to present our concerns. I would hope that you take our
concerns and assist our tribe with our request.
______
Response to Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye, U.S. Senator
from Hawaii, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
Department of the Interior Privatization Proposal
Question: The Department of Interior has proposed privatizing the
administration of schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, if
an Indian tribe does not elect to operate the school as a grant school.
Does the Department of Education have any experience with private
organizations that operate schools? Are there any reports or ratings on
these private organizations available?
Answer: Because, unlike the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the
Department of Education does not operate schools, we do not have direct
experience privatizing the administration of schools. We are aware
that, in a number of school districts across the country, contracting
with private companies is an actively discussed option, particularly in
situations where the schools are consistently low performing. Some
districts are, in fact, experimenting with this approach.
The Center for Education Reform, an independent, non-profit
advocacy organization and clearinghouse for information on education
reforms, recently published a catalog of major companies operating
public schools in Public-Private Partnerships: A Consumer's Guide. The
catalog, designed as a resource for parents and educators, identifies
19 education management companies, both for-profit and not-for-profit,
that operate about 350 schools. Many of these schools are charter
schools; others are non-charter public schools.
Office of Indian Education
Question: It is the committee's understanding that the Office of
Indian Education Director's position is unfilled. When do you expect
this position to be filled? If regulations are developed for title VII,
how do you propose to ensure that the needs of American Indian students
are met if the Director's position is not occupied?
Answer: We expect to complete the process of interviewing
candidates for the position of Director within the next few weeks, and
then to make a selection. Because this is a Senior Executive Service
position, our selection will then have to go to the Office of Personnel
Management (unless a current SES member is selected.) Once the
submission reaches OPM, our selection will be reviewed by a
Qualifications Review Board. This final step in the process typically
takes a few more weeks to complete. Thus, we hope to have a new
Director selected and on board by June.
The Office of Indian Education is currently under the leadership of
an Acting Director who has many years of experience with the program.
She is overseeing implementation of the new Act, including the very
minor changes we will make in the regulations for Indian Education.
National Advisory Council on Indian Education
Question: Over the last 5 years, the budget for the National
Advisory Council on Indian Education has been $50,000. How much is the
Department requesting for the Council for Fiscal Year 2003? How much
does the Department estimate that the Council needs to establish its
office within the Department of Education and be staffed adequately?
Answer: Since 1996, the Department has not requested specific
amounts for the National Advisory Council on Indian Education in annual
budget requests. Instead, funds are allocated from the Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education's administrative funds to cover
Council expenses.
The Department supports Council activities without creating
separate office space and a full-time staff. We believe this
arrangement has been more cost effective, and that it effectively meets
the Council's needs. The Department's administrative funds support
Council meetings and other activities. In addition, staff from the
Office of Indian Education provide assistance to help the Council
fulfill its duties.
Tribal Colleges
Question: The Department is proposing funds for the Adult Education
State Grant under Title II of the Workforce Investment Act (Adult
Education and Family Literacy). Because there is a critical need for
basic adult education in Indian country, does the Department support
reserving $5 million of the funds for the Adult Education State Grant
for Tribal Colleges and Universities?
Answer: Under the current authorization, eligible entities for
Adult Education State grants include the States, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Outlying Areas (Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, Marshall Islands, Micronesia,
and Palau). In addition, the statute specifies set-asides for national
leadership activities, the National Institute for Literacy, and
incentive grants. The statute does not currently contain any provision
for reserving funds for tribal colleges and universities and our budget
request does not call for creation of such a set-aside.
Research Activities
Question: In your testimony, you indicated that the Department has
established a comprehensive research agenda for Indian education and
that fiscal year 2003 funds will be used to implement that agenda. What
type of assurances are in place to ensure that researchers comply with
the research agenda--that is tribal consultation of research designs
and instruments--when implementing the Agenda?
Answer: The Department plans to ensure that there is tribal
consultation and involvement in the various stages of implementing the
research agenda and the National Study of Indian Education. The
development of the research agenda itself entailed extensive Native
consultation through panels, a 2-day conference, and focus groups in
tribal areas. In the near future, we plan to implement a first-stage
feasibility and design study that will include the public presentation
of progress reports in geographical areas that will facilitate American
Indian and Alaska Native input. Native American researchers will serve
on the technical advisory panels for the major studies being planned.
Question: The research agenda acknowledges that most research is
done by non-natives. What type of procedures will the Department use to
ensure that the Department works with tribal colleges and Native
researchers? What are the parameters of the first issue to be
researched? How will the additional funds for fiscal year 2003 be used
to implement the Agenda?
Answer: For all contracts for research supported under the American
Indian and Alaska Native Education Research Agenda, the Department will
give preference to Indian tribes, organizations, and institutions,
consistent with Section 7143 of the reauthorized ESEA.
Currently, American Indian researchers are principal investigators
on two of the initial contracts supported under this agenda. One study
is an analysis of 2000 Census data that focuses on the educational
status of American Indians and Alaska Natives. Another project is
looking at factors in achievement for Indian students. A third study,
still in the planning stage, will use NAEP data to establish baseline
data on the academic achievement of American Indian and Alaska Native
students. The increase for fiscal year 2003 will be used for the
studies mentioned above.
Education Planning in Afghanistan
Question: During your testimony before the committee on March 5,
2002, you indicated that you would provide the names of the individuals
who have participated in education planning activities in Afghanistan.
Answer: In January 2002, Secretary Paige met with Afghan Minister
of Education Rasool Amin and Minister of Higher Education Sharif Faiz
at the Department of Education in Washington, DC as part of the visit
to the United States by Chairman Hamid Karzai of the Afghanistan
Interim Authority and other high-ranking Afghan officials. Secretary
Paige noted that the United States intends to be a supportive partner
to Afghanistan for the long term. He offered to work with the
Department of State, the United States Agency for International
Development, and the Government of Afghanistan to identify concrete
ways in which the United States can assist in addressing the country's
educational needs.
Education planning activities in Afghanistan are still in the very
early stages of development. The Department will participate in an
informal interagency working group on Afghanistan led by the State
Department.
______
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.128
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.129
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.130
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.131
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.132
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.133
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.134
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.135
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.136
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.137
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.138
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.139
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.140
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.141
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.142
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.143
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.144
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.145
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.146
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.147
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.148
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.149
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.150
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.151
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.152
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.153
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.154
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.155
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.156
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.157
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8431.158