▶ 0:17:25Chair Murkowski: The committee will come to order. On our agenda this afternoon is one bill, s.107, the lumbee fairness act. It is introduced by our friend and colleague senator thom tillis. This bill represents the latest effort in the lumbee drives more than 100 and two year quest for full federal recognition. Identical companion measure passed the house of representatives earlier this year.
▶ 0:17:56Chair Murkowski: It's been incorporated as an amendment into the house version of the national defense authorization act. President trump has also expressed support for federal recognition of the lumbee tribe. In a presidential memorandum, he declared it "the policy of the united states to support full federal recognition of the lumbee tribe of north carolina including granting the tribe eligibility to receive all associated federal benefits." once again, it is the senate's turn to take a closer look.
▶ 0:18:26Chair Murkowski: This committee has had a long history of examining and debating the federal recognition process for tribes including whether recognition should occur through the administrative process, at the department of interior's office of federal acknowledgment under part 83, or through direct congressional action.
▶ 0:18:46Chair Murkowski: Our committee has also heard arguments that favor and oppose lumbee going through the administrative process at interior under part 83 versus the congressional legislative recognition process. Today's hearing continues that work with respect to the lumbee tribe. I think it's important to remember congress has never given up its constitutional authority to decide whether a group constitutes a tribe.
▶ 0:19:13Chair Murkowski: As recently as 2019, congress granted full federal recognition to four tribes through passage of the ndaa. Since 1978 when the interior established its his ministry to process, congress has recognized at least 39 tribes. So this is serious work. It is work that I take seriously both as a senator and as chairman of this committee.
▶ 0:19:39Chair Murkowski: Full federal recognition establishes a government to government relationship between the united states and the tribe, and also creates a fiduciary trust responsibility on the part of the federal government to the tribe and to its members. Recognition makes a tribe eligible for the special programs and services that the united states provides to native peoples because of their status as indians.
▶ 0:20:04Chair Murkowski: It also affirms important elements of tribal sovereignty, the ability to govern their own affairs, to tax, to establish a tribal court system, and to exercise limited immunity from certain state and local laws. Federal recognition can also open the door to specific economic opportunities including the ability to conduct gaming under the indian gaming regulatory act. We have a full panel of witnesses here today and I'm looking forward to hearing from them.
▶ 0:20:33Chair Murkowski: However, it is notable that no representative from the administration is present. We did extend an invitation to the department of interior but due to the ongoing government shutdown, the department declined to testify in person. The department has submitted written testimony which will be made part of the hearing record and posted on the committee's website alongside the rest of our written submissions. With that, I will turn to vice chairman schatz for his introductory remarks.
▶ 0:21:01Sen. Schatz: Thank you, chair murkowski for today's hearing on the lumbee fairness act. Congresses authority of indian affairs is broad. It is enshrined in the constitution and it is plenary. One of our most secret duties in the exercise of this authority is federal acknowledgment. We do this either by delegating our power to the executive or directly recognizing tribes by statute.
▶ 0:21:29Sen. Schatz: Either way, federal recognition forms the basis for a tribal government to government relationship with the united states that is political in nature and incredibly powerful. To put this congressional power in historical context, until 1871, the united states carried out its indian policy through treaty negotiations. Treaty making was replaced in favor of the legislative process we use today. Over 150 years, congress has federally recognized just 39 tribes.
▶ 0:21:58Sen. Schatz: It's especially poignant, since 1888, congress has considered dozens of bills related to the lumbee tribe and our federal obligations to them. The majority have been on lumbee recognition alone including senator tillis's.107 bipartisan legislation that I'm a part of. The house of representatives have passed several lumbee recognition bills and the senate has had multiple hearings over several decades. We are here to continue to build on that record.
▶ 0:22:29Sen. Schatz: Each time we have a hearing on federal recognition for the lumbee tribe we learn more. This is a deliberative process, as it should be. Federal recognition of a government to government relationship between sovereigns is rare and that is because no aspect of congressional power over indian affairs is greater than our ability to recognize tribal relations with the united states. Thank you to our witnesses for being here today. I look forward to your testimony and the opportunity to add to the record.
▶ 0:22:57Chair Murkowski: Thank you, vice chairman schatz. Senator mullin, the courtesy of any comments if you wish. Otherwise, we will turn to our colleague. >> tillis is very impatient and I don't want to get in his way. He gets grumpy.
▶ 0:23:18Chair Murkowski: We will immediately turn it over to the sponsor of the bill, senator tillis, thank you for coming to the committee. You may proceed with your remarks and welcome.
▶ 0:23:27Sen. Tillis: Chair murkowski, vice chairman schatz, the stingless members of the committee, on behalf of senator budd, myself, members of the north carolina congressional title -- delegation, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the lumbee fairness act. This issue has become before congress many times over the decades but never with this level of unity and support.
▶ 0:23:52Sen. Tillis: These days, it is rare to see republicans and democrats come together on anything, but when it comes to lumbee recognition, the support is overwhelming, and it is bipartisan. We are talking about support from president donald j. Trump, president biden, vice president jd vance, former vice president kamala harris, governor josh stein, north carolina general assembly, nearly every member of our state's congressional delegation.
▶ 0:24:20Sen. Tillis: Here in the senate, nearly two dozen members from both parties have cosponsored the lumbee fairness act including senator schatz and senator mullin, who sit together on this very committee. Maybe most remarkable, more than 235 federally recognized tribes who have stood with the lumbee people including the alaska federation of natives representing 186 tribes and corporations.
▶ 0:24:47Sen. Tillis: I also want to offer my special thanks to president benjamin malat and former president julie kitka for their unwavering support, unsolicited and unwavering support. This kind of unity is rare, proves that fairness for the lumbee tribe is it partisan, it is simply the right thing to do. The lumbee's history is long and well-documented. They were recognized by the state of north carolina in 1885 and began seeking federal recognition three years later.
▶ 0:25:18Sen. Tillis: That was 130 seven years ago. During the 20th century come the lumbee were among the dozens of victims of the termination era. One of the darkest periods in federal indian policy. In 1956, congress passed the lumbee act. It acknowledges the tribe was denied the recognition that every other tribe receives. The federal government has since worked to create the grave injustices and the termination era for nearly every single tribe except for the lumbee.
▶ 0:25:49Sen. Tillis: Time and again the lumbee have proved their case. The records are filled with testimony, studies and reports that all lead to one conclusion. The lumbee are a tribe fully deserving of federal recognition. The house has acknowledge that repeatedly, passing lumbee recognition with broad bipartisan support in every congress since the 116th. This year it was unanimously included in the house-past ndaa without a single voice of opposition.
▶ 0:26:18Sen. Tillis: In 2022, I promise to identify and expose a small but persistent opposition to this bill. I have done that homework. What I found is simple. A small handful of well-funded tribes hiring high D.C. lobbyist to spin half-truths and spin fear, motivated by profit, not principal.
▶ 0:26:43Sen. Tillis: At the center of that opposition is the eastern band of cherokee indians who I am assuming you will hear from today and their constituents of north carolina and their advisor william. Plain and simple, their opposition is rooted in financial self-interest. And that is their right. But let's not pretend it is anything more than that. The eastern band has opposed nearly every recognition effort in their geographic vicinity that might affect their financial interest.
▶ 0:27:11Sen. Tillis: They even tried to block the land and trust application and lost, something I also supported. Now they are running the same playbook against the lumbee. They are spending millions of dollars on lobbyist and pay for play reports that have been discredited and condemned by the national congress of the american indians. It is disappointing to see this kind of money wasted on tearing down other tribes instead of lifting up their own people.
▶ 0:27:39Sen. Tillis: However, the ship has already sailed and it is heading full speed toward lumbee recognition. Today you'll hear from the same tyrant talking points. That this is somehow setting a bad precedent. That congress should sit back and let the interior department handle it. That argument doesn't hold water. Recognition through congress is the president, it is the norm. Since 1970 eight, twice as many tribes have been recognized by congress as through the administered process.
▶ 0:28:09Sen. Tillis: Congress has recognized tribes through legislation many times including the little shell tribe of the chippewa indians in the fy 2022 ndaa and six virginia tribes in 2017. I supported both because it was the right thing to do. Next month will mark 25 years since congress passed legislation to grant the shawnee tribe full federal recognition. So when people say that congress should enact, what they really mean is congress should enact what they don't like the outcome.
▶ 0:28:41Sen. Tillis: I invite anyone with doubts to visit robeson county, scotland county, holt county. Go to the university of north carolina pembroke founded by and for the lumbee people. You will see the rich lumbee culture, their deep roots in north carolina and their extraordinary contributions to our state and nation. You'll find a community defined by pride and resilience. Educators, first responders, small business owners and farmers.
▶ 0:29:08Sen. Tillis: Situated miles from fort bragg, the largest military installation in the world, you will meet countless lumbees and veterans that have served our country honorably and for generations. They have done everything this nation has ever asked of them, and all they ask in return is fairness. I do know one leader who has visited robeson county and has stood with the lumbee people, and that is president trump.
▶ 0:29:35Sen. Tillis: Just three days into a second term, president trump made it the official policy of the united states government to support full federal recognition of the lumbee tribe. That includes access to every federal benefit they have earned, and now is the time for congress to act. The lumbee people have waited long enough. They don't ask for special treatment, only fair treatment.
▶ 0:29:56Sen. Tillis: They have are earned and deserve full but a recognition, and to my friends and colleagues on this committee, I hope you understand how important this is not only to the lumbee tribe and the people of north carolina but to me personally. Madam chair, I'm about to wrap up. I know I'm over time but I need to emphasize what personal means to me. I became speaker in 2011. Shortly after I became speaker, I met none other than the now chief, he was the principal chief at the time, michell hicks.
▶ 0:30:25Sen. Tillis: He came to tell me the story about the cherokee and how they needed a negotiated new compact. I told the chief at the time, I needed to study this but quite honestly, I'm embarrassed to say that I don't know much about your story in north carolina. So I took time to figure out that story.
▶ 0:30:43Sen. Tillis: This bill, that study, and the right that I wanted -- the wrong that I wanted to fix their was embodied in a bill that was passed by none other than me, and is the only bill in the entire time I was speaker of the house that I was allowed to go to the floor at the don't have a republican majority vote. Thankfully, congressman tim moore was able to shepherd this through and create a transformational result for the eastern band of the cherokee.
▶ 0:31:09Sen. Tillis: Two years later, I discover the lumbee tribe, and I discovered they were working hard to maintain their culture and do everything they could, if they were to go through the administrative process, to prove they had done the homework. Which is why I signed another bill making sure their cultural heritage could be maintained and continued to go through the process that they were prepared to go through. But the defect in the statute will prevent this from happening. The only way this happens is through federal recognition and through an act of congress.
▶ 0:31:41Sen. Tillis: Madam chair, I appreciate your leadership. I appreciate your friendship in the 10 and a half years that I have been here. But when I tell you it is personal to me, it is because it is an injustice that needs to be righted. I look forward to your serious consideration and I look forward to listening to the testimony. Thank you.
▶ 0:32:00Chair Murkowski: Thank you, senator tillis for your remarks today, as well as your remarkable -- relentless continued advocacy. Now we will invite witnesses up to the table. We will have the honor ball john lowery. Mr. lowery is the chairman of the lumbee tribe from pembroke, north carolina.
▶ 0:32:28Chair Murkowski: We have arlinda locklear, a tribal attorney from here in washington, D.C. we have the honorable michell hicks, the principal chief of the eastern band of cherokee indians from cherokee, north carolina. As well as the honorable ben barnes, the shawnee tribe from miami, oklahoma.
▶ 0:32:54Chair Murkowski: To all of you, I would just remind you that we do have your full written testimony which will be included as part of the official record. We would ask that you keep your comments to no more than five minutes so that we have plenty of time for members to ask questions.
▶ 0:33:19Chair Murkowski: I introduced you going in this direction, so we will just continue it, beginning with you, Mr. lowery. Welcome to the committee. You may proceed.
▶ 0:33:31Mr. Lowery: Chairwoman murkowski, vice chair schatz, senator mullin, thank you for this hearing today and for the opportunity to speak in support of s.107, lumbee fairness act. I am john lowery, chairman of the lumbee tribe. Lumbee tribe has a long-standing appreciation for the work on the committee on indian affairs. Over the past 30 years, we have benefited from nine hearing before this committee.
▶ 0:33:56Mr. Lowery: Throughout the time we have received strong support from passed committee chairs such as senators campbell, daniel inouye, john mccain, byron dorgan, and many others who are true friends of indian country. Managers, please know that your commitment to the tribes and lumbee are deeply valued and appreciated.
▶ 0:34:15Mr. Lowery: I'm also proud to highlight the tireless efforts of north carolina's senator thom tillis on behalf of the lumbee, alongside senator ted budd, they have championed full recognition for our tribe following the footsteps of north carolina senators terry sandford, elizabeth dole, and richard burr.
▶ 0:34:34Mr. Lowery: As you are aware, the house of representatives has taken action on our legislation led by david rouser with the support of the nearly entire north carolina delegation hr 474 was included to the national defense authorization act. This morning, president trump issued a statement supporting the advancement of full federal recognition of the great lumbee tribe in north carolina. I would like to point out that we have the chiefs with us today.
▶ 0:35:04Mr. Lowery: They are our brothers and sisters directly to the west of us who we shared a close bond. We also have chief keith anderson of the indian nation of virginia, our brothers and sisters to the north. They all stand in solidarity with the lumbee people. Behind me are members of the lumbee warriors association, members of the united states armed forces, numerous park recipients. Their service example by the patriotism and love for the country that defines us as a people.
▶ 0:35:34Mr. Lowery: My roots run deep in lumbee history. I'm a direct descendant of the men who during the civil war led a campaign as they encroached on lumbee land and conscripted our indian people. Henry witnessed the murder of his father and brother execution style by confederate leaders, and he vowed revenge. My great grandfather's grandfather and members of the lowry gang fought back against those who've sought to oppress and steal from us.
▶ 0:36:02Mr. Lowery: Additionally, I'm a descendant of locklier senior, one of the 44 tribe leaders who, in 1888, petition congress to recognize the lumbee tribe, an essential step toward securing federal funding for our children's education. Today, 137 years later, I stand before you once again advocating for justice and equal treatment room full federal recognition. In 1956, the united states congress passed the lumbee act.
▶ 0:36:31Mr. Lowery: Sadly, that law was enacted during the height of the indian termination iraq, a period when the federal government was actively ending tribes legal relationships with the united states. While 9056 act says that we are lumbeeans, also included language stating that our tribe, the lumbee indians were not eligible for full service or benefits, a language specifically says nothing in this act shall make such indians eligible for any services performed by the united states
▶ 0:37:02Mr. Lowery: For indians because of their status as indians. None of the statutes of the united states which affects indians because of their status as indians shall be applicable to the lumbee indians. This problematic language of the termination era continues to hinder us to date, placing the lumbee in a legal limbo that only congress can resolve. There is no bureaucratic process that can amend what congress has legislated.
▶ 0:37:27Mr. Lowery: Thankfully, since the end of termination, congress has repeated to be taken steps to undo these unjust laws and move toward self-determination. I am confident this year congress will finally amend this law, this flawed law and extend the full services and benefits that the lumbee deserve. A tribes legal status should be clear, concise, and unambiguous, and the lumbee fairness act ensures this for our tribe.
▶ 0:37:52Mr. Lowery: In 1958, two years after the lumbee fairness act, the ku klux klan attended to intimidate our community. However, that night, more than 100 tribal members, many of whom were world war ii veterans, stood ready with arms and shotguns and successfully drove the clan away. It is only by the grace of god that no lives were lost that night and the headlines across the country bore witness to resilience of the lumbee indians.
▶ 0:38:18Mr. Lowery: Today, I stand before you as the leader of a people who have never been afraid to fight, to stand our ground and to resist oppression. When we are push, we push back. As a descendant of solomon and the brave men who faced down the kkk, I urge you to act now to do everything within your power to pass the lumbee fairness act and eliminate the harmful termination era language. Henry solomon, my grandparents, my father, and many others are no longer with us.
▶ 0:38:49Mr. Lowery: Senators have all passed on. Senator dole was in her twilight years. Do not let us bury another lumbee or lose another ally in this fight for justice. Congress must move to ensure the lumbee indians are no longer second-class natives in our own land. Thank you. Chair, I would like to submit into the record a conference of list, letters of recognized tribes and entities that support lumbee recognition.
▶ 0:39:19Mr. Lowery: This includes the nation of wisconsin and many more. Thank you.
▶ 0:39:24Chair Murkowski: We will include that a part of the record. Thank you. Welcome.
▶ 0:39:35Ms. Locklear: Thank you very much. We appreciate the opportunity to speak again today. My name is arlinda locklear. I have been an attorney working with the tribes on this effort since 1988. I have been at it for a few of those times of the chairman has referred to, as well as other witnesses today.
▶ 0:39:56Ms. Locklear: We have had multiple hearings and multiple opportunities to act, and to give justice to the lumbee people since 1899 when the first federal legislation was introduced. All of those bills have failed. And let me tell you, that has been a heartbreaking process for the lumbee people.
▶ 0:40:18Ms. Locklear: But we owe a vote of thanks to this committee in particular because as a result of that process, you have developed the richest record that exists for any non-federally recognized tribe in this country. We have a record that allows you to proceed with the enactment of s.107 with full confidence that by doing so you would extend full federal recognition to a tribe that truly exists as such.
▶ 0:40:48Ms. Locklear: The most important document that is in that long rich record is a report that was asked for, sought by this committee, and submitted in 1915 by special indian agent william mcpherson. We have particularly his record, which I have with me today, as well as the testimony of multiple expert witnesses over the last 100 years, that giving the body of evidence to prove tribal existence.
▶ 0:41:18Ms. Locklear: I think it is worth noting the quality of the experts and the preeminence of their appearance here and the testimony that they provide in support of federal recognition. We are honored to include among that group Dr. jack and cz who has authored more petitions in the administrative process than any other expert.
▶ 0:41:40Ms. Locklear: We include also the doctor who was the general editor for the authoritative smithsonian handbook of north american indians. We include among that group Dr. fogelson, who is no longer with us, but he was the editor for the southeast volume in particular of the smithsonian handbook of north american indians.
▶ 0:42:05Ms. Locklear: And we count among those experts vine deloria who spoke eloquently in 1988 to this committee in particular about political authority. What I would like to do this afternoon is summarize very briefly what the characteristics of tribal existence are and give you confidence in the record that you have already that establishes those criteria.
▶ 0:42:32Ms. Locklear: In a supreme court decision in 19 oh one called montoya versus the united states, the supreme court gave us guidance as to what an indian tribe is. The supreme court indicated that an indian tribe consists of a body of indians of the same race , factor number one, who are united in a community in a particular territory, factor number two, and who are united under one leadership or
▶ 0:43:02Ms. Locklear: Government, factor number three. A few years later in 1913, the supreme court spoke in united states versus sandoval. In that opinion, the court went to great lengths to confirm this bodies the ultimate authority to make the decision on establishing a formal government to government relationship with an indian tribe.
▶ 0:43:27Ms. Locklear: It noted that that authority is limited only to those groups that are "distinctly indian communities." so we have some indication of what those criteria are. I would like to speak very believed to those with regard to lumbee. First, a body of indians.
▶ 0:43:47Ms. Locklear: Your record beginning with the 1950 mcpherson report and continuing to today establishes that there is a single related body of indians residing in robeson and adjoining counties, who call themselves lumbee, and I will note for the record, have done so informally even before the adoption of formal state recognition, since the early 1920's. That has been the name we have chosen for ourselves. Second, these folks are united in a community occupying a particular territory.
▶ 0:44:18Ms. Locklear: They are so united in a community that even today more than 60% of modern day enrolled members are married to other lumbees. They attend the all-lumbee schools, they attend all-lumbee churches, and their primary interaction is among other lumbees.
▶ 0:44:40Ms. Locklear: They also occupy a territory that they have been in since the time of first sustained white contact in the early 1700s, and that is robeson and adjoining counties. That is home. The record establishes -- your record -- that more than 50% of the members of the tribe reside today in that traditional territory. Finally, leadership.
▶ 0:45:09Ms. Locklear: Many of the events that the chairman spoke about demonstrate the effectiveness and the repeated assertion of independence that the long record of political authority shows among the lumbee people. In this regard, let me highlight the testimony that you received in 1988 from vine deloria who spoke eloquently about the form of leadership at lumbee.
▶ 0:45:35Ms. Locklear: He noted that more than any other federally recognized tribe , the form of leadership at lumbee is more like the traditional form of leadership that existed before the adoption of the ira and before the formation of formal tribal governments. That is what leadership among indigenous communities looks like. And it still exists at lumbee today. Finally, let me say a word about very quickly the administrator process.
▶ 0:46:05Ms. Locklear: These facts and criteria and evidence that I have summarize for you indicate that under those criteria we have established what they referred to as high evidence of tribal existence. The concentration of membership within a defined territory, robeson and adjoining counties, and the high near marriage rate themselves.
▶ 0:46:31Ms. Locklear: Those two factors are considered to be conclusive evidence of tribal existence in those regulations. So you have the evidence before you. We urge you to act, and we think you can do so, again, with full confidence that you are recognizing a true indian community. Thank you.
▶ 0:46:49Chair Murkowski: Next we will turn to chief hicks. Welcome.
▶ 0:46:56Mr. Hicks: Chair murkowski, vice chairman schatz, members of the committee, thank you.
▶ 0:47:03Chair Murkowski: Can you move your microphone closer. I want to express my deep appreciation for convening this substandard hearing. For your willingness to examine the facts, the capital evidence-based review of this matter is long overdue. Your commitment to that standard honors every federal recognized tribe and the integrity of this committee's work. I speak today not to question anyone's personal identity or heritage.
▶ 0:47:33Chair Murkowski: This is not about policing identity. It is about evidence, about documentation, and the integrity of federal recognition process. I stand here as principal chief and as the voice of generations of cherokees who safeguarded our identity, safeguarded our language and our sovereignty through centuries of forced removal, the vision, boarding schools, and unprecedented political pressure.
▶ 0:48:02Chair Murkowski: This bill asked congress to recognize a group that has never demonstrated descent from any historical tribe. Let me be clear. For more than a century, this group has cycled through claimed identities, the croatoan, tuskarorawes, sue, and even the cherokees, choosing whatever label see most advantageous at the time.
▶ 0:48:27Chair Murkowski: Getting all this time, not one verifiable genealogy historical role, treaty, or historical document has demonstrated continuous tribal existence or descent from a historical tribe. Their claims rest on theories, speculation, and invented narratives. Federal records show this clearly. In late 1800s, only 223 individuals in their counties identified as indian.
▶ 0:48:58Chair Murkowski: 10 years later, the number jumps to 4000. 1700% spike. What change was not ancestry, history. It was access to a separate school system, for those willing to claim indian identity on paper. But the deeper historical record is even more revealing.
▶ 0:49:21Chair Murkowski: For generations, before that moment, the families that this group now claims as ancestors appears in official records as free british subjects, and later american citizens. Not as indians, not as a tribe, not as a political community, distinct from others. They exercise their full civil rights. They did not claim and indian identity.
▶ 0:49:51Chair Murkowski: Only after the civil war when north carolina rewrote its constitution and imposed new racial restrictions on nonwhite citizens did these families suddenly adopt and indian identity, calling themselves chromatin to access a separate indian school and government resources. And history that was not the end of identity shifts.
▶ 0:50:14Chair Murkowski: For over 40 years, from 1913 to 1953, this group identified as cherokees, and legally recognized by north carolina as the cherokee indians of robeson county. Over the objections of the cherokee nation and the eastern band of the cherokee.
▶ 0:50:38Chair Murkowski: There member self identified as cherokee on federal school applications and a petition congress for recognition as cherokee. Some individuals still assert cherokee identity today. When those claims were rejected because they could not be substantiated, the group adopted yet another identity. This is not a pattern of continuous tribal existence. It is a pattern of shifting assertions driven by circumstance, not historical evidence.
▶ 0:51:10Chair Murkowski: If congress passes this bill, this group would be the first american in history to receive federal recognition without demonstrating any descent from historical tribe. This is not fairness, it is abandonment of every safeguarded that protects tribal sovereignty and identity.
▶ 0:51:36Chair Murkowski: The office of federal acknowledgment exists to ensure recognition decisions rely on to improve, not assertion, documentation, not desire. Historical truth, not political pressure. Recognition confirmed that documented tribal reality. It does not create one. Congress has also been misled on the cost. Independent analysis shows the real price is in the billions.
▶ 0:52:11Chair Murkowski: Diverging treaty-based resources away from tribes with proven history and legal rights. I want to state this plainly and respectfully. There is no tribal language, there is no treaty relationships, no continuous tribal government, no documented a lineage to a historical tribe. We do not fear another tribe, I want to make that clear. We fear falsehood becoming federal law.
▶ 0:52:42Chair Murkowski: If there is evidence, let it be presented. If there is a tribal origin, let the ofa confirm it. And if they meet the same standard every other tribe meets, we will welcome them to the group of federally recognized tribes. But congress must legislate identity by replacing evidence with assertion.
▶ 0:53:07Chair Murkowski: In conclusion, thank you in advance for insisting that proof matters, and that federal recognition must remain grounded in the truth. On behalf of the eastern band of cherokee indians, I urge you to hold the line even though it is difficult. Protect the integrity of tribal sovereignty. Protect the integrity of federal recognition.
▶ 0:53:36Chair Murkowski: Protect the principal that history and evidence still matters in the united states congress.
▶ 0:53:48Chair Murkowski: Chief hicks, thank you very much. Chief barnes, welcome.
▶ 0:53:55Chief Barnes: Senate committee on indian affairs, madame chair murkowski, vice chairman schatz, senator mullin, other centers of the committee, thank you for inviting me. My name is ben barnes, chief of the shawnee tribe, chair of the united new missions indians oklahoma.
▶ 0:54:26Chief Barnes: I also serve as the chair of the national native american boarding school healing coalition. Let me begin with the truth that elders teach us. Sovereignty is the inheritance of survival, not reward for claiming it. Our nations exist because our ancestors endured forced removal , warfare, termination policies, and the boarding school system. Federal recognition does not make a tribe, it acknowledges a people who never cease to exist.
▶ 0:54:53Chief Barnes: When the united states forced my people from ohio through kentucky and missouri to kansas and finally oklahoma, we did not reinvent ourselves at each river we came to. We remained shawnee. We carried our ceremonies in secret. We kept our language alive in whispers. Our government lived in the hearts of our people even when the united states wished it would vanish. Nationhood is not a label we chose but an identity carried through generations of removal, loss, and resistance.
▶ 0:55:25Chief Barnes: I have seen what happens when identity becomes something someone can simply declare. Across every homeland we were forced throughâ, ohio, missouri, kentucky, kansas, there are now groups calling themselves shawnee who do not speak our language, they hold no shawnee ceremonies, they appear nowhere in historical record or records and roles, and they have no documented shawnee ancestors or ties to our community.
▶ 0:55:51Chief Barnes: The first time that one of these groups opened a bank account using the name shawnee, I learned a hard lesson. If identity becomes self assertion instead of a documented history, sovereignty becomes a sandcastle waiting for the tide. That is why we are here to defend a sovereignty paid for in blood, land, and children.
▶ 0:56:14Chief Barnes: Now returning to the matter of this committee, for years, this group has moved from identity to identity, lost colony, croatan, cherokee, siouxan, lumbee. Changing claims but never producing documentation to prove any of it. That research did not attempt to define who the lumbee are. It simply asked a single question.
▶ 0:56:44Chief Barnes: Can the lumbee's tribal claims be verified by historical and genealogical evidence? The resounding answer was no. The expert found no demonstrated descent from historical tribal nation, no continuous tribal government before the mid-20th century, no ancestral indigenous language community, and census records showing that ancestors identified as free persons under british and american law and never as a tribal polity.
▶ 0:57:16Chief Barnes: These findings do not come from a motion of politics, they come from archives, documents, history. Now, I must speak from a sacred place, a place where grief and memory live in our communities. As chair of the national native american board of healing school coalition, I have carried the names of native children who never came home. I have walked the ground where they lie without marks.
▶ 0:57:44Chief Barnes: I have sat with survivors who still flinch when they hear their native languages because it only brought punishment. The lumbee have invoked boarding school history to claim indigeneity, but the record tells another story. Nine individuals now held up in lumbee narratives attempted to enroll at the carlisle industrial school. Carlisle rejected them because they did not meet the federal definition of indian. They were only admitted after claiming falsely to be cherokee.
▶ 0:58:16Chief Barnes: And independent geological review shows not one of the nine had native ancestry. Yet their descendants now identify as lumbee and lumbee leadership presents that episode as proof of tribal status. That is not survivorship. That is borrowing our pain to manufacture a political identity. Our children's trauma is not a credential. Our unmarked graves are not a strategy.
▶ 0:58:46Chief Barnes: Our ancestors of suffering is not a political accessory. To allow trauma to be impersonated is to betray the memory of the children and denigrate oneself. There is a path established to federal recognition by the office of federal acknowledgment. It exist to examine history, continuity and nationhood. It is open to the lumbee but they have been told they may use it. They refuse. The truth is simple.
▶ 0:59:15Chief Barnes: People confident in their history do not avoid the place where history is examined. I close where I began with sovereignty. Tribal nations predate the united states. Federal recognition does not create us. It acknowledges us. If congress replaces documented history with political momentum, if identity becomes a matter of assertion rather than continuity , then this body will not be recognizing tribes, it will be manufacturing them. And once that begins, sovereignty will not be defined by history but by votes.
▶ 0:59:51Chief Barnes: I welcome your questions.
▶ 0:59:53Chair Murkowski: Chief, thank you very much. Thank each one of you for your testimony here today and for the opportunity to now engage in a round of questions. I will defer my questions to senator markwayne mullin from oklahoma. You may begin.
▶ 1:00:13Sen. Mullin: Thank you. Chief barnes, how is the shawnee tribe recognized?
▶ 1:00:20Chief Barnes: We had a separation from the cherokee nation in the year 2000. Under the authority of cherokee nation as citizens.
▶ 1:00:31Sen. Mullin: Which pat did you choose for recognition?
▶ 1:00:34Chief Barnes: We had a path to separate us from the cherokee nation established by an act of congress.
▶ 1:00:42Sen . Mullin: How many paths are there for a tribe to go through? You chose to go through congress because?
▶ 1:00:48Chief Barnes: We headed ofa review. It came down to a document signed by fred have been in the 1960's. Our continuity of government hinged on that government being continuous. As part of our separation -- our separation was not identifying us as a tribe. It was separating our tribe from the cherokee nation.
▶ 1:01:08Sen. Mullin: You asked for recognition from the congress.
▶ 1:01:11Chief Barnes: That was how the process happen, yes, sir.
▶ 1:01:14Sen. Mullin: Do you believe the lumbees are native?
▶ 1:01:18Chief Barnes: It is not what I believe, sir. I matter is in the ofa. I believe in the process. The ofa process exists --
▶ 1:01:26Sen. Mullin: Is there are two ways to be recognize? Congress has the authority to recognize.
▶ 1:01:33Chief Barnes: Agree.
▶ 1:01:35Sen. Mullin: Chief hicks, do you believe lumbee are native?
▶ 1:01:39Chief Hicks: I think there is potentially native dissent. Does not make them a tribe.
▶ 1:01:44Sen. Mullin: Wanted north carolina recognized them in 1985?
▶ 1:01:52Chief Hicks: To my understanding, north carolina has different standards for the recognition I'm not sure today that the lumbee could pass the standards that have been put in place by the state of north carolina.
▶ 1:02:05Sen. Mullin: Did the federal government recognized them in 1956?
▶ 1:02:10Chief Hicks: My conclusion of the 1956 act is simply recognizing the names of those who self proclaimed indian in a five-county area in eastern north carolina.
▶ 1:02:23Sen. Mullin: That the federal government recognized them as a triebe?
▶ 1:02:29Chief Hicks: Not in my conclusion.
▶ 1:02:31Sen. Mullin: Do you believe there are two paths recognition and congress has the right to recognize them?
▶ 1:02:37Chief Barnes: I do agree with that, yes.
▶ 1:02:40Sen. Mullin: He raised concerns that it was the cost. Is that correct?
▶ 1:02:46Chief Hicks: That was part of my testimony.
▶ 1:02:49Sen. Mullin: If it is the cost, should the federal government not recognize any more tribes coming in? That wasn't the point of the cost.
▶ 1:02:58Sen. Mullin: You are raising the cost that it would cost to recognize the lumbee tribe. I have been accused of not being native. I always say I cannot control who my ancestors loved, but I still live on the land where my family stopped walking because I am cherokee, proud to be cherokee. My family has been there since 1840. I have been accused because I may not look full native. I have a problem when somebody starts saying that and take it personally.
▶ 1:03:27Sen. Mullin: Chief, there is actually a split between cherokee nations of the eastern band. Would you agree?
▶ 1:03:32Chief Hicks: What is your question.
▶ 1:03:34Sen. Mullin: He is a split between the cherokee nation and the eastern band. My ancestors, we walked, the eastern band stayed back. Correct?
▶ 1:03:44Chief Hicks: That is correct.
▶ 1:03:46Sen. Mullin: You were fairly recognize. Should you be recognized as the cherokee nation at that point? We are all descendants of the cherokee nation.
▶ 1:03:56Chief Hicks: Do I get to respond? If you look at history of recognition, obviously the ofa was not established until 1978. The government stop doing treaties in 1871. The cherokees without question was an established government. If you look at --
▶ 1:04:17Sen. Mullin: I know the history of the recognition. My point is, you are single lumbees are not descendants of the eastern band or cherokee nation. You are descendants of cherokee nation in my opinion. You say they should be recognized because they should be a part of you but you should be a part of cherokee nation.
▶ 1:04:40Sen. Mullin: It doesn't make any sense to me because you are complaining about cost, you are complaining about their path to recognition and you are complaining that they may or may not be native because they don't have the heritage behind it. I am saying they were recognized in 1885. The cost shouldn't matter because if that is the cost, we shouldn't allow any more tribes to come in and we should stop enrollment. We have a federal obligation, treaty obligation, constitutional obligation to have oversight of the tribes.
▶ 1:05:11Sen. Mullin: We have the authority to build and recognized tribes without question. It just seemed like this argument continues to go through , my opinion, because of the territory dispute. That is my opinion. You cannot look over there and say they are not native. Turn around and look. You are told me they are not native? You are saying that is not native faces?
▶ 1:05:39Chief Hicks: That is done for me to determine.
▶ 1:05:42Sen. Mullin: We are determining it. That is why I support recognizing that. My flight up here has been always for native americans. I was shocked when I got up here, when I first got to congress, it was just tom cole and I were the only natives in congress at the time. I'm the only native american in the senate now.
▶ 1:06:08Sen. Mullin: I hate when we fight amongst ourselves because we should all be in the same boat, rolling in the same direction. If we are native, that we were wrong there long time ago by the united states. We have been fighting for recognition for a long time. When we have in-house finding, it causes congress to sometimes have an impasse. I think you know that. This happens all the time, often has to do with gaming.
▶ 1:06:39Sen. Mullin: All the are saying is the lumbee have a right to be recognize just like you have the right to be recognized.
▶ 1:06:43Chief Hicks: We don't disagree with that as long as it is through the ofa process.
▶ 1:06:48Sen. Mullin: If they have two options, why is it your opinion that they should go through congress?
▶ 1:06:55Chief Hicks: That is why this department is established, for evidence.
▶ 1:06:59Sen. Mullin: There are clearly two paths. Thank you for the extra time. Thank you for allowing me to go first. For the record, all or been established by the interior, they support this process and they support the lumbees becoming recognized. I, too, support the lumbees being recognized.
▶ 1:07:20Chair Murkowski: Thank you, senator mullin. Senator schatz.
▶ 1:07:27Sen. Schatz: Thank, chair, thank you to the test of fires. I think it is really important to assume good faith here. What I have heard is a kind of concerning series of accusations about bad faith.
▶ 1:07:49Sen. Schatz: I am trying to go back to 1888, and imagine that the lumbee people, whatever they were calling themselves, whatever language they were using at the time, why don't we pretend to be a tribe and petition the federal government. If it is a conspiracy, it is a long-standing, counterintuitive conspiracy.
▶ 1:08:13Sen. Schatz: The more likely explanation is what the department of interior said about 90 years ago, 100 years ago when the exquisitely side we are not going to recognize this tribe because the census is too large. We cannot afford to absorb the cost of delivering services. By the way, I think that is a valid concern for congressional appropriators.
▶ 1:08:41Sen. Schatz: If we are to recognize lumbee, the roles increase the total number of people in indian country went up, which means ihs, bie, bia, all of those services will have to increase by the percentage that the roles increase. That is a real issue. It is just not a reason not to grant recognition. The reason I am animated about this is that I don't know whether native hawaiians are ever going to come back to this congress and seek recognition.
▶ 1:09:14Sen. Schatz: But I remember it -- I was not here -- but I remember when the chairman of this committee tried to get recognition. The arguments were, do you know how may people that is? Do you know how much that will cost? And then, well, they are not indians. I don't take it as personally as senator mullin, but I do take it personally. And I will just say one other thing.
▶ 1:09:42Sen. Schatz: You can go through the administrative process or you cannot. But the constitution, not just the congress but this committee, has the authority. Maybe you think these folks should've gone through the administered process. Fair enough. But that is not a meaningful obstacle to consideration of lumbee recognition.
▶ 1:10:05Sen. Schatz: Professor locklier, I want to give you an opportunity, respectfully, rebut some of the claims made by the opponents of this legislation. Three things. Lumbee has used different names for themselves. , that they have no language, and that they do not descent from a historic tribe. Could you address those three assertions?
▶ 1:10:34Ms. Locklear: With pleasure, senator. Thank you for the question. First of all, with regard to the name and why it came about. The lumbee children, in 1884, were not able to go to school. Our children could not read or write. We were not allowed to attend either white or african-american schools.
▶ 1:10:58Ms. Locklear: In 1885, our leaders sought recognition from the state of north carolina for the purpose of establishing schools for our children. We prevailed with the assistance of a Mr. mcmillan in the house, who deemed himself to be an amateur historian at the time. Mr. mcmillan chose the name croatan for our people, but in his legislation, he did important things.
▶ 1:11:28Ms. Locklear: He established a government to government relationship, he allowed the creation of an independent school system, run by the tribe, limited to tribal children, and taught by members of the tribe. To my knowledge, no other tribe in the united states can claim that history.
▶ 1:11:47Ms. Locklear: So beginning in 1885, we controlled our own school system until the 1970's when a federal district court ruled that the state of north carolina must desegregate its school system. We thought we were exempt from that because after all we were in indian tribe. But the judge told our parents, you must bus your children because this is a racial classification because you are not utterly recognized.
▶ 1:12:17Sen. Schatz: To the language.
▶ 1:12:19Ms. Locklear: There is no requirement in either supreme court or other court authority or the acknowledgment regulations that our opponents so warmly embrace that require the presence of the language.
▶ 1:12:32Sen. Schatz: A lot of these things it seems to me, they are historical facts. They have been because of united states federal government policy. We lost language because of federal policy. People lost a land-based because united states federal government policy.
▶ 1:13:01Sen. Schatz: And it is not surprising that the department of interior repeatedly rejected the claims of the lumbee people, because the department of the interior -- I mean, the idea that we should accept the precedent of the department of interior from generations back -- when I think there is unanimous bipartisan agreement that the whole purpose of this committee is to reverse all of those policies,
▶ 1:13:31Sen. Schatz: Termination and assimilation. To use that as a proof point against recognition I-5 not to be compelling. There are criteria that we are to use to determine whether or not to recognize lumbee. But the idea that doi didn't do it in 1930, or they don't have their own language, frankly, we work a fair amount on language revitalization. There are a lot of tribes that have very few native speakers left or none.
▶ 1:14:00Sen. Schatz: So none of this is disqualifying because frankly many native people across the country have experienced that. I did not expect to get some exercise but I appreciate your testimony.
▶ 1:14:10Ms. Locklear: If I may. One final pack on the language point that I think is important. Vine deloria, when he testified in 1988, made note of the fact that he had not only personal knowledge of the lumbee tribe but also family knowledge of the lumbee tribe because his aunt de loria had gone down to the community who was a noted linguist for the purpose of studying the remnants that
▶ 1:14:40Ms. Locklear: Remained of tribal languages. She made note in 1940 that those remnants existed and her purpose was to establish a dictionary. She did not complete that work because she was not able to get funding. They were not interested in our community to do so.
▶ 1:14:55Chair Murkowski: Thank you, vice chairman. Chief hicks, I want to direct this to you. Because you have made very clear on behalf of the eastern band that you think the lumbee should go through the office of federal, through the administrative process, rather than come through recognition through congress.
▶ 1:15:26Chair Murkowski: Maybe it is maybe it is accurate the administrative route is more costly. Maybe we need to look at that in terms of whether greater oversight is needed there. But as senator mullin has indicated, there are two tracks/routes you can proceed for recognition.
▶ 1:15:55Chair Murkowski: I almost find it that federal recognition is between -- is a relationship between a tribe and a federal government. Somewhat curious about a process where that decision can be delegated entirely to an administered of state but I will not ask you to resolve that question for me.
▶ 1:16:20Chair Murkowski: What I want to turn to is your written testimony, you claim the situation is unique would be on congress' -- beyond congress' capacity to understand and evaluate. Can you understand why you feel it is unique in some way separate from other tribes that have gained recognition through congress?
▶ 1:16:53Chair Murkowski: We have this process. It's been repeatedly exercised. In terms of its constitutional authority to gain tribes. If you can cite to what you feel are some of the unique aspects as to why congress should not be the avenue here.
▶ 1:17:12Mr. Hicks: Thank you for that question. If you look at the gaps that have been clearly identified by historians and researchers, related to the history, these are aspects that I feel need expertise and genealogies, they need historians that do this on a daily basis.
▶ 1:17:34Mr. Hicks: And unfortunately, congressional staff do not always have that expertise to really dig into the subject matter documents or the h subject matter documents or the -- for the church records or court records, things of that nature, to relate back to what is necessary as we feel approved what you are saying is substantiation.
▶ 1:18:00Mr. Hicks: Again I think as you look at that set up and that structure, foa is better suited to make these determinations. >> how do you respond then to Ms.
▶ 1:18:14Mr. Hicks: Locklear's statement she made early on that given the number of congressional hearings here in the senate and the house, that this issue of federal recognition has not established quite a voluminous congressional record with which to be able to turn to?
▶ 1:18:38Mr. Hicks: I truly believe that if they go through the ofa process, they would get the answer they are looking for wherever that answer falls. As you think about this issue, it is well over a century old and continues to come back to the same conclusion. There's too many gaps. In the genealogies and the history. There is no treaty relationships.
▶ 1:19:10Mr. Hicks: Lumbee does not have a sister tried in oklahoma. So many things need to be evaluated. That is the importance of why it needs to go through the process. >> let me turn to you, Ms. locklear. You have testified congressional recognition is needed to correct what you have termed an injustice.
▶ 1:19:36Mr. Hicks: Beyond that you've got some practical differences between recognition through congress and recognition from the federal acknowledgment process. You've got the ability to take land into trust, particularly in the post-tertiary world here. Can you speak to the practical differences between the legislative and administrative recognition and whether you think those are drivers for this legislation?
▶ 1:20:05Ms. Locklear: Absolutely, they are. Let me summarize with a few points. First of all, I think it's important to put this controversy in some general history.
▶ 1:20:19Ms. Locklear: As the special agent reported, hostility between the cherokees to the west and ancestors of the lumbee people. We just have -- I think it is important to understand that context.
▶ 1:20:46Ms. Locklear: As to the other issue -- as a practical matter, because of that, only congress can solve it forever. I guarantee you that we are the tribe to go through the acknowledgment process and succeed as I am confident we would -- there would be a lawsuit filed by the cherokee to set that administrative agency decision aside. That would not resolve it.
▶ 1:21:12Ms. Locklear: There's only one way to finally resolve it and that is through a conclusive act of congress that extends full benefits and services. As you also implied, there is a problem which relates to the eligibility of newly recognized tribes to receive land in the trust and be treated like all of the federally recognized tribes.
▶ 1:21:33Ms. Locklear: Because of the 2009 supreme court decision we call car sherry, the only way to resolve the process is through an act of congress. Only congress can clearly indicate that it considers the 1934 date to be in significant and whatever may arise out of that decision notwithstanding those terms -- the tribe is nonetheless eligible for the land in the trust process.
▶ 1:22:01Ms. Locklear: And finally of there is going to be a special addressing of the cost factor, we think it is necessary only congress can do that as well. Congress is the one that appropriates the money and if there needs to be more money for the lumbee services, congress can do that. We think the existing processes for appropriations will protect the presently recognized tribes in bia and his processes.
▶ 1:22:32Ms. Locklear: Only through the appropriation of additional services -- additional funding to pay for those services will be lumbee membership receive those services at the end of the. So federally recognized tribes now are protected. That being the case, if they believe there should be an increase in federal funding for the ihs and bia, that is a political decision to be made by the congress. We think for all those factors -- one final one of my me. -- if I may.
▶ 1:23:03Ms. Locklear: Only one other time in history has they put a tribe in a position that they put the lumbee tribe in in '56 with the pueblo of texas, which is at the time federally recognized. We transfer any response ability we have from this tribe to the state of texas and we are going to impose termination language upon the tribe.
▶ 1:23:30Ms. Locklear: And in the legislative history, it specifically says that 1968 act which been referred to the natives as seamless of texas was modeled upon the 1956 lumbee act. The only other time congress has done that. And congress fixed that problem in 1987 by passing legislation to recognize fully the del sur pueblo of texas.
▶ 1:24:01Ms. Locklear: If congress does the same for us, there are no other tribes in that position, and that is what makes it fair and just, as well as the only appropriate and fully dispositive way to finally and conclusively resolve these issues. >> senator cortez masto. >> thank you. I appreciate your comments and uniqueness of the hearing today. Let me ask you this.
▶ 1:24:28Ms. Locklear: There's two ways -- two process ways to get this recognition. On a still congress and the other through doi and office of federal acknowledgment. Am I hearing today that we should eliminate the office of federal acknowledgment and rely on congress to do this in the future? >> not at all. >> do you have any concerns with the office of federal acknowledgment and how the process plays out? >> historically, we have, and we have expressed those along with other non-federally recognized tribes. >> I am saying right now.
▶ 1:24:59Ms. Locklear: Not historically. Now. We need to address this. Are there any concerns you have with the office right now? >> and has greatly improved as a result of the change regulations in 2015. >> so, can I just say, what is to stop you?
▶ 1:25:15Ms. Locklear: Sound like you have the support of the administration and doi, wood is to stop you from going through that process now and getting what you are seeking but go through an evidence-based process to address some of the concerns we have heard from the other tribe? >> although there have been changes to the bia process, we still don't know if it's going to take 20 or 30 years like it already does and I don't want my people waiting another 30 years to go through a process.
▶ 1:25:43Ms. Locklear: And than once there has been a rendering done by bia, there will be opponents who can then bring forth a lawsuit. And I have no doubt that 30 years from now they will bring forth a lawsuit that will take us into another 10 to 20 years and than 50 years from now my grandson will be sitting here doing the same thing. >> your concern as there would be a lawsuit to any decision that was made. >> absolutely. And the concern is how many decades it is going to take.
▶ 1:26:12Ms. Locklear: I for congress really needs to take a look at the bia process. I don't know any other government program that takes 20 to 30 years to come to a conclusion. >> does the process -- is that part of the problem? Do we need to look at the foa and say this process is taking 30 years, that is too long? Do we need to address this in congress? >> that may be the case. >> is that true? >> at this point we don't have enough experience with how the new regulations will be administered to give a full answer to that question.
▶ 1:26:40Ms. Locklear: >> so there is new regulations now that the tribe has not gone through. So you don't know how long it would take. Is that right? >> that's correct. >> let me ask you both, chief hicks and barnes, you talked about this. I understand two ways to do this. One is for congress. But you've got to get the votes. There's also an evidence-based approach. I'm not in a position to look out in the audience and by colleagues to see who was a member and who is in't.
▶ 1:27:11Ms. Locklear: Just like -- who isn't. Just like I should not be looking out in my community and say just because you have brown skin you are undocumented. There has to be an evidence-based approach and that's why it was created in congress. But if it's not working, I would want to know. Because that's not fair. But we need to hear that conversation.
▶ 1:27:31Ms. Locklear: So let me ask both -- chief barnes as well as to fix -- chief hicks, talk to me about this evidence-based approach and why it is so important the administration have a process like this. >> if I may, senator, thank you for that question, I'll give an example, little show was denied at foa and they went to congressional process.
▶ 1:28:02Ms. Locklear: Indian country decried that and said no. You've got this wrong. The chippewas came together and said you got this one wrong. This is a tribal nation. And historically because of a technicality on little shell -- it is a tribal nation. That is one of those instan ces -- instances where the process, even though it is flawed, I don't know any federal institution that is perfect at this time.
▶ 1:28:26Ms. Locklear: Even though the foa's not perfect, it still yielded results on behalf of little shell. Which tribal nations that come together and set on behalf of look at the evidence and this technicality should not keep little shell from being a tribe. Follow the path of little shell and go through the foa process.
▶ 1:28:48Ms. Locklear: >> I do feel as I responded earlier that the foa is without question uniquely equipped. To critically evaluate all related criteria. There are several criteria coming into play based on the claims. Having highly skilled and professional experience folks to be able to do that is critical.
▶ 1:29:13Ms. Locklear: But I do want to just respond to the other question around the foa process -- we have supported -- openly supported the expedited approach for this group to go through this process. And more than one scenario -- in more than one scenario. We still feel that there's an opportunity to not extend this 20 o3 20 year's -- or 30 here's. To do this evaluation properly and get the answer being solved.
▶ 1:29:46Ms. Locklear: In a timely manner. Publicly, we support the, we think it is a good decision -- that, it is a good decision. >> you want support that process expedited by the administration and we want something in a timely fashion? >> without question. >> let me stop there. I know my time is a. Madam chairman, thank you. >> thank you, senator.
▶ 1:30:11Ms. Locklear: I just have a couple more questions here this afternoon. I will probably direct this to you, chairman lowery. It is pretty clear that a tribe's authority to basically determine to define its membership is really central to his existence as an independent political community.
▶ 1:30:40Ms. Locklear: The legislation that senator tillis has introduced directs the secretary of interior to verify the lumbee tribe's role for service delivery purposes. The verification is limited to confirming documentary proof that members meet the criteria established in the tribe's constitution adopted november of 2001. A couple questions for you this afternoon.
▶ 1:31:11Ms. Locklear: Right now as it stands, what is required for enrollment in the lumbee tribe?
▶ 1:31:19Ms. Lowery: Thank you for the question. We have a base role, one is the 1900 census and one is in 1910 census and the reason those are based roles is because that is the first time the federal government and the census process actually identified american indians. You have to have -- you have to be able to trace the lineage back to 1900 or 1910's census.
▶ 1:31:43Ms. Lowery: If you do not have an ancestor that was documented by a federal census as an american indian, you cannot be a member of our tribe. Also we have to maintain contact. We are very big on -- if you do not live at home, he have to come back home, come back to the homelands. >> what does that mean? Maintain contact? Come back for an annual meeting? What specifically? >> where you have to come back every seven to eight years. >> ok. >> you have to come back and visit.
▶ 1:32:12Ms. Lowery: You have to maintain a relationship with your people. So you cannot become -- you cannot go and get your citizenship and leave and never come back home. We require citizens to come back and maintain contact with the tribal community. >> and at this moment, how many do you currently have enrolled? >> just over 60,000 enrolled in the lumbee tribe in north carolina.
▶ 1:32:40Ms. Lowery: >> and then the source documents for enrollment are the two you have just described. >> yes. >> traced back to just those two . >> yes. >> and this one is probably directed to you, Ms. locklear. There's been a fair amount of discussion today about the various names over the course of the century.
▶ 1:33:11Ms. Lowery: And it was not until later that the lumbee officially adopted the name. Because the point has been kind of disputed by witnesses today and made a little bit of an issue, can you state for the committee record today which historical tribe or tribes the lumbee tribe descends from? >> I can. And I can do so based on the record that has been developed by this committee.
▶ 1:33:41Ms. Lowery: There are two principal sources for that, the macpherson report from 1915 which identifies the ancestry of the tribes as coastal carolina tribes.
▶ 1:33:58Ms. Lowery: In addition you have the testimony of john s., preeminent anthropologist in the field in 1934, who testified in his view the tribe descended principally from related someone speaking tribes. That's been the consistent theory.
▶ 1:34:15Ms. Lowery: As a result of that theory, the lumbee people begin to satisfied with the name the state of north carolina had imposed upon them in various state laws that recognized them and the state conducted a referendum among members and said which name do you choose to go by?
▶ 1:34:43Ms. Lowery: And we overwhelmingly -- almost unanimously -- chose the name lumbee which as I indicated earlier we had used since at least the 1920's. That is important because it shows the link between the current lumbee tribe and the community. The lumbee tribe resides around lumber river. It was named that in 1809 -- 1809 by the state of north carolina.
▶ 1:35:14Ms. Lowery: It was known as drowning creek. The first recorded map of the area in 1724 by john herbert identifies the sharon residing around the creek. We have been there ever since. It's the same community. Regardless of the name.
▶ 1:35:30Ms. Lowery: Let me say in one final point, the administrative process our opponents so embrace specifically provides that if there is a collective entity that has existed for at least 50 years, which is plainly the case in lumbee since 1885 and the school record and the federal census records that show it, that entity can be recognized and I am quoting here -- notwithstanding any absence of or changes in name.
▶ 1:36:01Ms. Lowery: It is not the name. It is the indian people that you are recognizing. [applause] >> final question. Final question I will direct to you, chief hicks. The issue of cost has also been raised here at this hearing today.
▶ 1:36:26Ms. Lowery: And you noted that estimates from cbo are a little bit all over the board and may not be entirely accurate here. Can you clarify for the committee what factors you think might be contributing to these differing costs estimates?
▶ 1:36:47Ms. Lowery: And I agree with my colleague from oklahoma that will cost -- while cost should not influence a level of recognition of tribal status, it is something that I am dual hatted, not only chairman of the authorizing committee but chairman of the appropriating committee, and so, I cannot help but want to try to
▶ 1:37:19Ms. Lowery: Understand some of the financial implications of this. Can you if you are able to clarify a little bit about why we have got such a broad range of estimates out there? >> that was brought by both centers around the question, we have had a third party take a look at the prior cbo score and one of the things that was flawed and the score was typically cbo does a five year financial score -- and in that
▶ 1:37:51Ms. Lowery: Particular scenario the only included four years for some reason. In some reason that we are fairly certain federal agencies were not adequately included in that number. If you go back to the prior two cbo scores, one of those was close to double in years prior to this prior cbo score.
▶ 1:38:19Ms. Lowery: It was around 21 or 22, we think there were flaws in that particular school. The estimates we think over a five year period is in the range of around $2 billion over a five-year period if all agencies are included. >> thank you. Senator schatz. >> thanks to everybody for your testimony. One final point.
▶ 1:38:48Ms. Lowery: We've gone around and around on this -- but I think I speak for every member of the senate on this particular question. You can think we should defer to the administration, but we don't have to. Article one, section one of the constitution gives us this authority. Now, there is a statute that also delegates this authority to the administration but it does not require that recognition go through an administrative process.
▶ 1:39:18Ms. Lowery: You can think we are unwise for not taking it to the administration. But you cannot say that we are not permitted to recognize a tribe. That is a constitutional obligation and authority of the congress and specifically the senate committee on indian affairs. If you want to make the argument we need to build a historical record and you trust this agency within an agency more than you trust us -- that's fine, that is fair.
▶ 1:39:48Ms. Lowery: But this is still our authority. And we clearly intend to exercise it. >> adam gerol, can I respond to that -- >> madam chair, can I respond to that? I'm sorry but I did not hear anybody saying that we do not have that authority. I think it was very clear people recognize there's a dual track here. And the question is lumbee has chosen one path and they are asking us as members of congress to support that path.
▶ 1:40:17Ms. Lowery: And there is another side saying there's an evidence-based path. That is what is before us. I did not hear from anybody nor have I heard somehow they are preventing us as members of congress from doing our jobs. So I do as a member -- I don't want you speaking for me, I do recognize both sides of that.
▶ 1:40:39Ms. Lowery: >> senator cortez masto, I don't think anybody said that directly today but I will say that some of the organizations that have been steadfastly opposed to lumbee recognition have actually made advertisements about circumventing the administered process and undermining the tribal recognition process by going to congress. That is why I was speaking -- what I was speaking to.
▶ 1:41:06Ms. Lowery: I know it was obliquely referred to and you were suggesting we were going to -- that it would be better if we go through the administrative process. My own view is that this is a congressional authority, the doi has screwed this up for generation after generation and it is time for us to make a choice. >> I want to thank the members of the committee. I want to thank those who have come to testify today.
▶ 1:41:35Ms. Lowery: I appreciate you helping us continue to build out this record. Members may submit additional questions for the record, if they choose. The hearing record will be kept open for two more weeks. I also want to thank those who have attended.
▶ 1:41:57Ms. Lowery: We are a pretty small committee on most days, and we do not have to go into a big committee room like this, but I think that those who have joined today are evidence of the interest in this as an issue and I think your presence is important to us, as well.
▶ 1:42:23Ms. Lowery: Know that this committee takes very seriously, as the vice chairman has said, our role and responsibility when it comes to federal recognition of our tribes and ensuring that the sovereignty that they have is recognized by us in congress, the administration and the responsibilities that we have.
▶ 1:42:48Ms. Lowery: I want to thank everyone for the testimony you have presented in a way that I think has been respectful -- which is very important to this, the debate, the dialogue, the discussion. Because I know that it can be contentious. And I know that oftentimes, issues like these pit neighbor to neighbor, community against community, and that is hard. And particularly when you have been living with it for decades.
▶ 1:43:22Ms. Lowery: If not over a century. I respect the way you have come to be before the senate community on indian affairs today and your contributions. With that, the committee stands adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]