cerned that the limited availability of funding may not support future activities in pursuit of a Self-Governance compact. At this point, the Navajo Nation is not entirely certain how we will undertake the compact process. With our tripartite government and 10 divisions, an incremental approach by division may be in our best interest rather than the Navajo Nation undertaking Self-Governance all at once. As of today, the only division within the Navajo Nation government that is farther along in its planning to take over its BIA funded programs is the Navajo Division of Natural Resources. Until we begin the planning phase and incorporate input of all divisions, only then, will we know how to proceed. Otherwise, we may be setting ourselves up for failure. The Navajo Nation supports the Self-Governance objectives of allowing tribes the choice to make changes in administrative procedures; streamline decision making; redesign procedures for direct funding to tribes; simplify reporting requirements; and redistribute more equitable funding pursuant to tribal priorities. Above all, our view is to strike the balance of the government to government relationship without infringing on tribal sovereignty. Regarding S. 550, the Navajo Nation is concerned that the provision in Section 315, Subsection C, limits the membership of the Policy Council to primarily federal employees, and non-federal members representing tribes with Self-Governance agreements chosen by each Secretary. This section makes clear that the Policy Council is to have a role in Self-Governance policy development, including hearings of appeals. It also states that the non-federal, or tribal representatives, are nonvoting members and have a limited, non-consecutive term of one year. The Navajo Nation strongly believes these sections be redeveloped to broaden the scope of voting eligibility, especially in light of the appeals process. To this extent, should the Committee proceed with S. 550, the Navajo Nation would like our concerns incorporated as expressed here today. Mr. Chairman, the Navajo Nation appreciates the opportunity to present our concerns regarding the Navajo Nation's potential participation in the Self-Governance Demonstration Project. Should the Committee develop permanent legislation, the Navajo Nation respectfully requests the opportunity to comment on it. By testifying here today, we are reiterating our support for the objectives of Self-Governance and reserving judgment on the form of permanent legislation. PREPARED STATEMENT OF BEVERLY BENNETT, CHAIRPERSON, BUSINESS COMMITTEE, LOWER ELWHA S'KLALLAM TRIBAL COMMUNITY COUNCIL My name is Beverly J. Bennett, chairperson of the Business Committee of the Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribal Community Council. I am here today to submit this testimony in favor of legislation which will make permanent that which is now the Self Governance Demonstration Project [SGDP]. The Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribe began to operate our tribal BIA programs under the authority of our Compact of Self Governance on March first of this year. We have found that the authority available to the tribe under the SGDP allows the tribal governing body much greater flexibility in designing tribal programs to meet the expressed needs of Lower Elwha S'Klallam tribal members. We are in the process of building forty additional tribal housing homes, some of which are more than three miles distant from the tribal center where the tribal police office is located. We hope to be able, in the current year, to provide 24-hour police protection for our Tribal Community. This will truly be a step forward for us as Tribal Government provides a high level of personal safety for the Lower Elwha S'Klallam Community. The need is for a sufficient base of funding in the law enforcement element that will ensure the Tribal Government's ability to provide round-the-clock police protection. This is a Self Governance issue.! We have been engaged in the planning for Elwha River Restoration for a number of years. These funds have previously been identified for the Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribe. Now, however, the Department of the Interior has assumed that directing funding for Elwha River Restoration through the National Park Service will be satisfactory. We contend that the Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribe should be involved in determining where funding should be directed for continuing studies of Elwha River Restoration. This is a Self Governance issue! The Lower Elwha S'Klallam tribal center was built sixteen years ago. There are now over fifty tribal employees. We have staff members whose desks are in hallway and lobby areas. We have made a request of the DOI Office of Self Governance for funding sufficient to remodel 4,800 square feet of the tribal center which was never finished off when the building was built. We realize that this request for Self Gov ernance Start Up monies may be large, but it is nevertheless necessary to house all of our staff now that the tribe is operating many additional government functions under our Compact of Self Governance. This is a Self Governance issue! Thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. The Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribe appreciates all that you have done for Self Governance. PREPARED STatement of LARRY NUCKOLLS, GOVERNOR, ABSENTEE SHAWNEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF OKLAHOMA Members of the panel and the 103rd Congress, my name is Larry Nuckolls, and I am the Governor of the Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma, headquartered in Shawnee, Oklahoma. As one of the initial seven Tribes to have participated in the Self Governance Demonstration Project, authorized by Title III of P.L. 93-638, as amended, we feel that we are somewhat experienced in the concept of Self Governance and are compelled to submit this testimony in support of making Self Governance a permanent option available to Indian Tribes and Nations as a method of conducting business both internally and externally with other sovereign powers, among which are other sovereign Indian nations, the several states and the United States of America. The concept of Self Governance, has from the beginning, had its roots and its driving force from the Tribes and Nations themselves, and in the main, the concept continues to be tribally motivated. The concept was initiated following a rather compelling expose' of the activities of the Bureau of Indian Affairs which was published both by the Arizona Republic and the Tulsa Tribune several years ago, in which the gross mismanagement, misuse and, in certain instances, outright fraudulent activities of the BIA were brought to public attention. The ensuing public outcry for changes to the existing system had much to do with the success of tribal leadership's ability to legislatively succeed in establishing what we now know as "Self Governance.' Since its inception, P.L. 93-638 and its several amendments, have stressed the importance of removing the paternalistic relationship of the federal government from the burdens of the Indian Tribes and Nations. This concept existed in the statute's original language and continues today, and while the intent is admirable, the practice is not as Congress envisioned. Self Determination succeeded in allowing Tribes and Nations to assume responsibility for the operation of a great many of the programs serving them, but was not allowed by the federal bureaucracies to truly achieve "self determination" beyond certain limitations which were established by the bureaucracies themselves. The original legislation envisioned a lessening of the size and scope of the affected agencies as more and more responsibilities were assumed by Tribes: this did not occur, in fact, just the opposite happened, the agencies grew in scope and size to "monitor and provide oversight" to tribal contractors. Following several years of contracting, the several bureaucracies became adept at controlling the Tribes in such a manner as most Tribal contractors simply became extensions of the Bureau: little if any real redesign or streamline effort by the Tribes resulted in acceptability and approval by the Bureau. Moreover, the bureaucracies found themselves in positions to "policy away" many of the rights and privileges that the statute afforded Tribes and Nations. These events caused there to be the opportunity for Tribes and Nations to assert themselves and their abilities via Title III of P.L. 100-472. Under the auspices of Self Governance, the participating Tribes have chosen to exercise the truest form of Tribal Sovereignty available. No longer do bureaucrats in Washington determine and decide what "cures" are to be used to address the needs of Indian peoples. Under Self Governance, the elected governing bodies of the several Tribes identify needs and allocate available resources to those needs, and the needs and redress of needs are locally identified, locally prioritized and locally addressed. This ability of Tribes and Nations must be preserved, protected and extended to other agencies beyond the Department of the Interior and the Department of Health and Human Services to include, at some point in the near future, other departments of the Federal government. The abilities of Indian Tribes and Nations to locally determine their own futures is vital to the true and viable self sufficiency of those entities. Federally identified and determined redress of "Indian needs" has proven time and again to be futile. The local identification and local redress of "Indian needs" are those which are suc cessful. They are grassroots development in which the Tribe and its membership become a team that is unified and determined to succeed with the resources available. Prior to this local involvement, Tribal governments reacted to the resources available in program specific categories. To address low educational levels, Tribes contracted to become an arm of the BIA, operating education programs exactly in the same ineffective and inefficient way the Bureau did: and in the main, achieved the same ineffective results. To address high unemployment levels, Tribes contracted to become an arm of the BIA and the DoL, operating employment programs exactly as those agencies had: and in the main, achieved the same ineffective results. This process was repeated again and again, with only those Tribes who fought diligently to redesign programs in such a manner as to maximize local input realizing long lasting positive results. These redesign efforts were generally achieved in spite of the participation of the federal agencies as opposed to their cooperation and assist ance. Certainly then, the Self Governance concept has successfully demonstrated that local control of federal revenues must be continued and hopefully expanded to include other Departments of the federal government as time passes. The abilities of the Tribes must not be returned to the system of paternalism and program specific oversight which evolved under Self Determination contracting. Conversely, we must continue to allow Tribes and Nations the opportunity to determine in a viable and effective way, their own respective destinies. Compelling need for permanent legislation authorization Self Governance is the ceiling which currently limits the number of participating Tribes and Nations. Already, this ceiling is being reached, and Tribes and Nations that desire to participate are being denied their right to truly govern themselves as Indian sovereigns. Thank you for your consideration and support to the Indian Tribes and Nations in their efforts to continue to develop under Self Governance by supporting legislation which makes permanent the option of Self Governance. STATEMENT OF MS. ADA E. DEER ASSISTANT SECRETARY INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, AT THE OVERSIGHT HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, UNITED STATES SENATE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF P.L. 100-472, AS AMENDED, "THE SELF-GOVERNANCE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT". October 20, 1993 Mr. Chairman, I am William Lavel), Director of the Office of Self-Governance, and I will be delivering the statement of Ms. Ada E. Deer, Assistant Secretary Indian Affairs, who is unable to be here today due to a prior commitment. Mr. Chairman, since my confirmation hearing, I have taken the reins of Indian Affairs, and I must say that there are many horses on this team and not all are pulling in the same direction. I aim to change that. Also, since my confirmation hearing, Vice President Gore has issued the National Performance Review report entitled "Creating a Government that Works Better and Costs Less". The Self-Governance Demonstration Project fits perfectly into this model. Things will work better as tribal sovereignty is enhanced with tribal governments assuming greater control over the use of Federal resources. Programs can now be designed and delivered by tribal governments with the ultimate customers clearly in mind individual Indians living on various reservations throughout the country or in Alaska villages. Further, as tribal governments assume more responsibility managing their share of the Federal budget, there will for 2 This will assist the be a reduced need for Federal staff. BIA in meeting targeted FTE reductions and administrative cost savings. As I indicated in my confirmation statement to you in July, Secretary Babbitt and I want to accelerate the trend toward self-governance and at the same time respect the rights of those tribes who choose a different course. Thus, while many tribes are reinventing their relationship with the Federal government, other tribes have chosen to maintain their current relationship. It is critical that support for non-participating tribes be maintained. I applaud the many tribal leaders and members of Congress who have worked very hard first to pass the necessary legislation and since then to implement the Self-Governance objectives. Their hard work has achieved remarkable results as many different kinds of tribes have come forth participate in the demonstration project. to In 1993, 19 tribes and consortiums operated programs under Self-Governance Annual Funding Agreements with total direct program resources of about $60 million which represents just under 10 percent of all BIA funds contracted or granted to tribes under the provisions of Public Law 93-638. These Annual Funding Agreements ranged from a low of $530,000' to a high of $10.6 million. In 1994, we anticipate that 28 tribes and consortiums will have annual funding agreements totalling approximately $100 million. These tribes and consortiums represent nine of the 12 BIA areas. |