Alaska Native Allotment Subdivision Act

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on ``Review of Current Investigations and Regulatory Actions Regarding the Mutual Fund Industry.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 10 a.m., on steroids.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10, at 11:30 a.m., to consider pending calendar business.

Agenda

On Wednesday, March 10, at 11:30 a.m., the Committee will hold a Business Meeting in Dirksen 366 to consider the following items on the agenda:

Agenda Item 1: To consider the nomination of Susan Johnson Grant, to be Chief Financial Officer at the Department of Energy.

Agenda Item 8: S. 1307--A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to assist in the implementation of fish passage and screening facilities at non-Federal water projects, and for other purposes.

Agenda Item 9: S. 1355--A bill to authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the rehabilitation of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon, and for other purposes.

Agenda Item 10: S. 1421--A bill to authorize the subdivision and dedication of restricted land owned by Alaska Natives.

Agenda Item 12: H.R. 620--To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide supplemental funding and other services that are necessary to assist the State of California or local educational agencies in California in providing educational services for students attending schools located within the Park.

Agenda Item 17: H.R. 2696--To establish institutes to demonstrate and promote the use of adaptive ecosystem management to reduce the risk of wildfires, and restore the health of fire-adapted forest and woodland ecosystems of the interior West.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 9:25 a.m., to conduct a business meeting to consider a GSA resolution and S. 1904, S. 2022, and S. 2043, and to conduct a hearing on the proposed FY 2005 EPA budget.

The hearing will be held in SD 406.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 2 p.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to hear testimony on ``United States Economic and Trade Policy in the Middle East.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10, 2003, at 9:30 a.m., to hold a hearing on Nonproliferation and Arms Control Strategy.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday. March 10, 2003, at 2:30 p.m., to hold a hearing on ``A Fresh Start for Haiti? Charting the Future of U.S.-Haitian Relations.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 9:30 a.m., in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the proposed reorganization of major agencies and functions related to Indian trust reform matters without the Department of the Interior.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 10 a.m. on ``Letting the People Decide: The Constitutional Amendment Authorizing Congress to Prohibit Physical Desecration of the flag of the United States,'' in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226.

Witness List:

Panel I: The Honorable Daniel J. Bryant, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy, Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Panel II: Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, Chairman of the Board, Citizens Flag Alliance, Recipient, Medal of Honor, Summer, WA; John Andretti, NASCAR Nextel Cup Series Driver, Mooresville, NC; Richard D. Parker, Williams Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA; Gary E. May, Associate Professor of Social Work, University of Southern Indiana (1981-1985), Evansville, IN; and Lawrence Korb, Former Assistant Secretary of Defense, Navy Veteran, Alexandria, VA.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 2:30 p.m. on ``Judicial Nominations'' in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226.

Witness List:

Panel I: Senators.

Panel II: Peter W. Hall, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Second Circuit.

Panel III: Jane J. Boyle, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas; Marcia G. Cooke, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida; and Walter D. Kelley, Jr., to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the scope and operation of organizations registered under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, for a joint hearing with the House of Representatives's Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to hear the legislative presentation of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

The hearing will take place in room 216 of the Hart Senate Office Building at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Joint Economic Committee be authorized to conduct a hearing in Room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Wednesday, March 10, 2004, from 10 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 10, 2004, at 9:30 a.m., in open and closed session to receive testimony on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs of the Department of Energy and the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program of the Department of Defense, in review of the Defense Authorization Request for fiscal year 2005.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on International Trade and Finance of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 1 p.m. to conduct a hearing on ``Argentina's Financial Crisis.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the subcommittee on public lands and forests of the committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 10th, at 2:30 p.m.

The purpose of the hearings is to receive testimony on the following bills: S. 1354, to resolve certain conveyances and provide for alternative land selections under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act related to Cape Fox Corporation and Sealaska Corporation, and for other purposes; S. 1575 and H.R. 1092, to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to sell certain parcels of federal land in Carson City and Douglas County, NV; S. 1778, to authorize a land conveyance between the United States and the City of Craig, AK, and for other purposes; S. 1819 and H.R. 272, to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey certain land to Lander County, NV, and the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain land to Eureka County, NV, for continued use as cemeteries; and H.R. 3249, to extend the term of the Forest Counties Payments Committee.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the subcommittee on Seapower of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 10, 2004, at 2 p.m., in open session to receive testimony on the posture of the U.S. Transportation Command, in review of the Defense authorization request for fiscal year 2005 and the future years defense program.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space be authorized to meet on Wednesday, March 10, 2004, at 2:30 p.m. on NASA/Mars Exploration Program.

Mr. President, the Native Allotment Subdivision Act is the only answer to resolving the question of whether Native landowners have the authority to subdivide their own property. Individual Alaska Native landowners cannot subdivide their land to transfer it either by gift or by sale. There is no current authority that allows them to dedicate rights-of-way across their land for public access or for utility purposes. The lack of explicit statutory authorization calls into question the legal validity of lands that have been subdivided and lands that likely could be subdivided in the future. This legislation will provide the necessary authorization to the Department of the Interior and Native landowners to dedicate their land for public purposes as they see fit. No other legislation or policy exists that addresses such a unique problem. Essentially this bill allows Alaska Natives to own lands with the same obligations and privileges of other private landowners in Alaska. However, the bill creates no obligation of Alaska Natives to do anything with their allotments unless they elect to sell or dispose of their lands.

Over the past twenty years, hundreds of allotments have been subdivided, either for the purpose of commercial sale or to facilitate transfers of land to the landowners' children or other relatives. Problems arose when the Borough placed a utility line across frontage property of one of the Native landowners. Frontage property the Borough thought it had legal access to; there was no reason to consider potential conflicts existed. The new owner questioned the validity and legality of the Borough placing any kind of feature across his land. In addition, grantees of existing easements, such as utility easements for local electric cooperatives, have felt threatened with trespass action for easements previously granted in good faith.

The question clearly goes to whether a trespass had been committed by local government. In fact in this case, subdivision plats were filed, signed and approved as evidenced by the appropriate signatures of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the landowner and by the local governing authority. The official plats show streets laid out to provide frontage to the lots created by the subdivision, describing 10 foot utility rights-of-way on each lot. It is recognized that compliance with State law is required when landowners choose to subdivide their land. Given a choice, it would be advantageous to the Alaska Native landowners if the same opportunity was available to them. There is no applicable Federal law on the subject of subdivision of Native allotment lands. State law requires that access to subdivided lots be assured, typically by dedication of public rights-of-way, which will be shown on the subdivision plat.

In an effort to overcome this problem, a collaborative process was undertaken by the affected Boroughs and the State of Alaska to validate such dedications by separately conveying either easements or title to roads and utility easements to State and local governments. This was so burdensome, time-consuming and complex, the process had to be abandoned. The platting authorities and the State were so disenchanted by this process, they had no choice but to turn to Congress for relief. The common sense approach to solving this dilemma, is to afford the same considerations to Native landowners that others have. Native landowners must have the same authority to subdivide and dedicate their land as anyone else has the right to do, according to existing State law

By speeding up and simplifying the allotment subdivision process, the Native landowner, the Federal, State and local governments would all benefit. This legislation permits a Native landowner at his own option to abide by and receive the benefits of subdividing his land in accordance with State or local law. The uncertainty of whether officially filed allotment subdivision plats are valid would be removed. This legislation will also serve to authorize future allotment subdivisions, ratify and confirm the legal validity of those already created.

The Native landowner will not be deprived of any of the protections of restricted land status. This legislation will confirm the restricted Native landowners' right to act in his own best interest. The issue they face is a choice between being able to subdivide their land, obtain a much greater total compensation for sales of subdivided lots or continue to be unable to subdivide their land. Their only option will be to sell one large tract that will almost always bring a substantially smaller total amount of compensation.

The legislation I am introducing today is an issue that applies to Alaska only. The solution affects the Native Allotment Act of 1906, the same legislation which provides for Alaska Natives to receive title to up to 160 acres of public land.

This legislation is non-controversial and is beneficial to all affected parties and to the general public. The State of Alaska and local governments have urged such legislation. The Department of the Interior is supportive.

And, finally, passage of this legislation will be in the best interest of the Native allotment owners and the general public. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, the Native Allotment Subdivision Act is the only answer to resolving the question of whether Native landowners have the authority to subdivide their own property. Individual Alaska Native landowners cannot subdivide their land to transfer it either by gift or by sale. There is no current authority that allows them to dedicate rights-of-way across their land for public access or for utility purposes. The lack of explicit statutory authorization calls into question the legal validity of lands that have been subdivided and lands that likely could be subdivided in the future. This legislation will provide the necessary authorization to the Department of the Interior and Native landowners to dedicate their land for public purposes as they see fit. No other legislation or policy exists that addresses such a unique problem. Essentially this bill allows Alaska Natives to own lands with the same obligations and privileges of other private landowners in Alaska. However, the bill creates no obligation of Alaska Natives to do anything with their allotments unless they elect to sell or dispose of their lands.

Over the past twenty years, hundreds of allotments have been subdivided, either for the purpose of commercial sale or to facilitate transfers of land to the landowners' children or other relatives. Problems arose when the Borough placed a utility line across frontage property of one of the Native landowners. Frontage property the Borough thought it had legal access to; there was no reason to consider potential conflicts existed. The new owner questioned the validity and legality of the Borough placing any kind of feature across his land. In addition, grantees of existing easements, such as utility easements for local electric cooperatives, have felt threatened with trespass action for easements previously granted in good faith.

The question clearly goes to whether a trespass had been committed by local government. In fact in this case, subdivision plats were filed, signed and approved as evidenced by the appropriate signatures of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the landowner and by the local governing authority. The official plats show streets laid out to provide frontage to the lots created by the subdivision, describing 10 foot utility rights-of-way on each lot. It is recognized that compliance with State law is required when landowners choose to subdivide their land. Given a choice, it would be advantageous to the Alaska Native landowners if the same opportunity was available to them. There is no applicable Federal law on the subject of subdivision of Native allotment lands. State law requires that access to subdivided lots be assured, typically by dedication of public rights-of-way, which will be shown on the subdivision plat.

In an effort to overcome this problem, a collaborative process was undertaken by the affected Boroughs and the State of Alaska to validate such dedications by separately conveying either easements or title to roads and utility easements to State and local governments. This was so burdensome, time-consuming and complex, the process had to be abandoned. The platting authorities and the State were so disenchanted by this process, they had no choice but to turn to Congress for relief. The common sense approach to solving this dilemma, is to afford the same considerations to Native landowners that others have. Native landowners must have the same authority to subdivide and dedicate their land as anyone else has the right to do, according to existing State law

By speeding up and simplifying the allotment subdivision process, the Native landowner, the Federal, State and local governments would all benefit. This legislation permits a Native landowner at his own option to abide by and receive the benefits of subdividing his land in accordance with State or local law. The uncertainty of whether officially filed allotment subdivision plats are valid would be removed. This legislation will also serve to authorize future allotment subdivisions, ratify and confirm the legal validity of those already created.

The Native landowner will not be deprived of any of the protections of restricted land status. This legislation will confirm the restricted Native landowners' right to act in his own best interest. The issue they face is a choice between being able to subdivide their land, obtain a much greater total compensation for sales of subdivided lots or continue to be unable to subdivide their land. Their only option will be to sell one large tract that will almost always bring a substantially smaller total amount of compensation.

The legislation I am introducing today is an issue that applies to Alaska only. The solution affects the Native Allotment Act of 1906, the same legislation which provides for Alaska Natives to receive title to up to 160 acres of public land.

This legislation is non-controversial and is beneficial to all affected parties and to the general public. The State of Alaska and local governments have urged such legislation. The Department of the Interior is supportive.

And, finally, passage of this legislation will be in the best interest of the Native allotment owners and the general public. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 12, 2004, at 10 a.m., to conduct an oversight hearing on the semi-annual monetary policy report of the Federal Reserve.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 12 at 10 a.m. to consider the President's fiscal year 2005 budget for the Department of the Interior.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Thursday, February 12, 2004, at 2 p.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to hear testimony concerning the Revenue Proposals in the President's fiscal year 2005 Budget.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 12, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. to hold a hearing on the State Department: Policy/Programs.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 12, 2004 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a hearing on Trade and Human Rights U.S./Vietnam.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Thursday, February 12, 2004, at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Senate Building Room 226.

Agenda

I. Nominations

William James Haynes II to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Fourth Circuit, Raymond W. Gruender to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, Henry W. Saad to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, Judith C. Herrera to be United States District Judge for the District of New Mexico, F. Dennis Saylor to be United States District Judge for the District of Massachusetts, Sandra L. Townes to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, Louis Guirola, Jr. to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Mississippi, Virginia E. Hopkins to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, Kenneth M. Karas to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, Michele M. Leonhart to be Deputy Administrator of Drug Enforcement, and Domingo S. Herraiz to be Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, United States Department of Justice.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate for a hearing entitled, ``The President's FY2005 Budget Request for the SBA'' on Thursday, February 12, 2004, beginning at 9:30 a.m. in room 428A of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on February 12, 2004 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed Business Meeting.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Evaluating a Temporary Guest Worker Proposal'' on Thursday, February 12, 2004 at 2:30 p.m. in Dirksen 226.

Witness List

Panel I: The Honorable Asa Hutchinson, Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC; The Honorable Eduardo Aguirre, Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC; The Honorable Steven J. Law, Deputy Secretary, Department of Labor, Washington, DC.

Panel II: Albert C. Zapanta, President, U.S.-Mexico Chamber of Commerce, Washington, DC; Richard R. Birkman, President, Texas Roofing Company, Austin, TX; Dr. Vernon Briggs, Professor of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY; Demetrios Papademetriou, Co-director, Migration Policy Institute, Washington, DC.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 12 at 2:30 p.m.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1421, to authorize the subdivision and dedication of restricted land owned by Alaska natives; S. 1466, to facilitate the transfer of land in the state of Alaska, and for other purposes; S. 1649, to designate the Ojito Wilderness Study Area as wilderness, to take certain land into trust for the Pueblo of Zia, and for other purposes; and S. 1910, to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out an inventory and management program for forests derived from public domain land.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Thursday, February 12, 2004, at 9:30 a.m., for a hearing entitled ``DOD Contractors Who Cheat on Their Taxes and What Should be Done About It.''

Mr. President, I believe Social Security is one of the greatest success stories of our government.

Social Security is the only program in the history of our Nation that has provided dignity and respect for our senior citizens, regardless of their income or backgrounds.

For almost 70 years, Social Security has been there for our citizens when they need it. It has provided seniors with independence and economic security in their retirement years.

In addition to helping millions of senior citizens, Social Security has provided economic security for surviving spouses and children and to countless Americans with disabilities.

It is easy to see why people believe Social Security is the most successful social program our country has ever adopted.

I rise today to reintroduce legislation that would correct a problem that plagues a special population of Social Security recipients. I am speaking on behalf of those affected by Social Security notch.

The Social Security notch causes more than nine million Social Security recipients born between the years of 1917 and 1926 to receive fewer Social Security benefits than Americans born outside the notch years due to changes made in 1977 to the Social Security benefit formula.

I have continued to speak out on this issue and the injustice it imposes on millions of seniors. The notch issue has been discussed, studied and reviewed, yet to date, Congress has not corrected this wrong. Because of this, many older Americans born during this period cannot afford the most basic necessities.

Congress must accept responsibility for any error that was made. We should not ask notch Seniors to accept less because of our mistake. While we must preserve and protect Social Security for future generations, we have an obligation to those, who through no fault of their own, receive less than those that were fortunate enough to be born just days before and after the notch period.

The notch situation has its origins in 1972, when Congress decided to create automatic cost-of-living-adjustments to help Social Security keep pace with inflation. Prior to 1972, each adjustment had to await legislation, causing beneficiaries' monthly payments to lag behind inflation. When Congress took this action, it was acting under the best of intentions.

Unfortunately, this new benefit adjustment method was flawed. To function properly, it required that the economy behave in much the same fashion that it had in the 1950s and 1960s, with annual wage increases outpacing prices, and inflation remaining relatively low. As we all know, that did not happen. The rapid inflation and high unemployment of the 1970s generated rapid increases in benefits.

In 1977, Congress revised the way that benefits were computed. In making its revisions, Congress decided that it was not proper to reduce benefits for persons already receiving them. It did, however, decide that benefits for all future retirees should be reduced.

We have an obligation to convey to our constituents that Social Security is a fair system. Notch Babies in Nevada feel slighted by their government and if I were in their situation, I would too. Through no fault of their own, they receive less, sometimes as much as $200 less, than their neighbors.

The legislation I am offering today is my proposal to right the wrong. Let us fix the notch problem and restore the confidence of the nine million notch babies across this land. Government has an obligation to be fair. My support of notch babies is longstanding. I sponsored numerous pieces of legislation over the years to address this issue. With this legislation, my effort continues.

It is unfortunate that these measures have not seen the light of day. Many who have written to me think Congress is waiting for notch babies to die rather than honor this debt. I must tell you it concerns me when our constituents have this perception of their elected representatives.

We have to do something to make sure Americans believe that Social Security is a fair system. Passage of my legislation provides us that chance.

My legislation is intended to make good on what this government should have done long ago. I propose that workers who attain the age of 65 after 1981 and before 1992 be allowed to choose either lump sum payment over four years totaling $5,000 or an improved benefit computation formula under a new 10-year rule governing the transition to the changes in benefit computation rules enacted in the Social Security Amendments of 1977.

It is time to put these dollars into the hands of those who earned them. It is time to show our support for notch reform.

I am introducing this legislation because actions speak louder than words. The `Notch Fairness Act of 2003' that I am introducing on behalf of notch victims today, is intended to put my words into action. I ask all my colleagues to join me in support of this important and long overdue legislation.