Carcieri ‘Fix’ Faces Uncertain Future In Senate
26 Jul, 2010
The vote by the US House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee to amend the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 was intended to rebuff the US Supreme Court decision in Carcieri v. Salazar, in which the court ruled Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar could not take land into trust for the Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island because the tribe was not recognized before Congress enacted IRA.
The Narragansett Indians, officially recognized by the Federal government as a tribe in 1993, is seeking to have land it owns in Charlestown placed in trust status so it can establish a reservation and develop a casino. Trust status permits tribes to be exempt from most state and local laws and taxes.
While Carcieri v. Salazar has been largely portrayed in the media as a gambling issue, Indian advocates contend the ruling would hinder efforts by tribes recognized after 1934 to have land placed in trust status for any business enterprise and governmental purpose.
“Without this language, the standard set forth in Carcieri v. Salazar will be devastating to tribal sovereignty and economic development,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.)
“Resolving any ambiguity in the Indian Reorganization Act is vital to protecting tribal interests and avoiding costly and protracted litigation.”
Cole, a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation and the only American Indian in Congress, said he hopes the full committee and US House of Representatives “will ensure this provision receives long overdue consideration.”
But John Tahsuda, vice president of the Washington, D.C., political consulting firm Navigators Global, stopped short of predicting the amendment, as included in an appropriations bill, will meet with success in the House and Senate.
“This amendment is a significant step toward a legislative fix for the Carcieri decision,” said Tahsuda, a Kiowa-Comanche. “However, in this election year climate it is not yet clear how this Congress will enact its appropriations bills.”
Political consultant Jana McKeag, a member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, was skeptical the legislation would meet with a receptive Senate.
“It is great legislation and it’s likely to be well received in the House, but my concern is it will get stuck in the Senate side,” McKeag said.
“It might pass the House but there are a number of governors, attorney generals and others who want to hold up tribes who want to take land into trust for gaming.
“The sad thing is this decision holds up a lot of applications to place land into trust for all types of businesses and things like schools and health clinics. It places tribes recognized after 1934 in a kind of limbo status.”
There are more than 560 American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages that have federal recognition. About 230 tribes and villages operate casinos. It could not be immediately determined how many were recognized under IRA.
The subcommittee action, based on legislation (H.R. 3697) previously introduced by Cole, makes clarifying changes to the IRA so that the Interior Department will be able to continue to acquire trust lands for tribes, regardless of the date a tribe was federally recognized.
The Supreme Court in Carcieri v. Salazar ruled that a modern reading of the IRA did not adequately provide authority for the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for the Narragansett Tribe. The court narrowly interpreted the phrase “any recognized Indian tribe now under federal jurisdiction” to mean a tribe that was federally acknowledged in 1934.
The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs earlier this month passed a bill to ensure that all tribes, regardless of the date of federal recognition, could follow the land-into-trust process.
But the bill has yet to come up for a vote on the Senate floor amid a lack of Republican support.
“This bill will not move as a standalone due to political opposition,” lobbyist Debbie Ho of Ietan Consulting, told Indian Country Today newspaper.
The leaders of 17 tribal organizations submitted a letter to Senate Committee Chairman Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., stating that failing to address the Carcieri ruling would result in “irrevocable damage…to tribal sovereignty, tribal culture and the federal trust responsibility.”
The Narragansett Indians, officially recognized by the Federal government as a tribe in 1993, is seeking to have land it owns in Charlestown placed in trust status so it can establish a reservation and develop a casino. Trust status permits tribes to be exempt from most state and local laws and taxes.
While Carcieri v. Salazar has been largely portrayed in the media as a gambling issue, Indian advocates contend the ruling would hinder efforts by tribes recognized after 1934 to have land placed in trust status for any business enterprise and governmental purpose.
“Without this language, the standard set forth in Carcieri v. Salazar will be devastating to tribal sovereignty and economic development,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.)
“Resolving any ambiguity in the Indian Reorganization Act is vital to protecting tribal interests and avoiding costly and protracted litigation.”
Cole, a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation and the only American Indian in Congress, said he hopes the full committee and US House of Representatives “will ensure this provision receives long overdue consideration.”
But John Tahsuda, vice president of the Washington, D.C., political consulting firm Navigators Global, stopped short of predicting the amendment, as included in an appropriations bill, will meet with success in the House and Senate.
“This amendment is a significant step toward a legislative fix for the Carcieri decision,” said Tahsuda, a Kiowa-Comanche. “However, in this election year climate it is not yet clear how this Congress will enact its appropriations bills.”
Political consultant Jana McKeag, a member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, was skeptical the legislation would meet with a receptive Senate.
“It is great legislation and it’s likely to be well received in the House, but my concern is it will get stuck in the Senate side,” McKeag said.
“It might pass the House but there are a number of governors, attorney generals and others who want to hold up tribes who want to take land into trust for gaming.
“The sad thing is this decision holds up a lot of applications to place land into trust for all types of businesses and things like schools and health clinics. It places tribes recognized after 1934 in a kind of limbo status.”
There are more than 560 American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages that have federal recognition. About 230 tribes and villages operate casinos. It could not be immediately determined how many were recognized under IRA.
The subcommittee action, based on legislation (H.R. 3697) previously introduced by Cole, makes clarifying changes to the IRA so that the Interior Department will be able to continue to acquire trust lands for tribes, regardless of the date a tribe was federally recognized.
The Supreme Court in Carcieri v. Salazar ruled that a modern reading of the IRA did not adequately provide authority for the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for the Narragansett Tribe. The court narrowly interpreted the phrase “any recognized Indian tribe now under federal jurisdiction” to mean a tribe that was federally acknowledged in 1934.
The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs earlier this month passed a bill to ensure that all tribes, regardless of the date of federal recognition, could follow the land-into-trust process.
But the bill has yet to come up for a vote on the Senate floor amid a lack of Republican support.
“This bill will not move as a standalone due to political opposition,” lobbyist Debbie Ho of Ietan Consulting, told Indian Country Today newspaper.
The leaders of 17 tribal organizations submitted a letter to Senate Committee Chairman Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., stating that failing to address the Carcieri ruling would result in “irrevocable damage…to tribal sovereignty, tribal culture and the federal trust responsibility.”