To refer H.R. 5862, a bill making congressional reference to the United States Court of Federal Claims pursuant to sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code, the Indian trust-related claims of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma (O-Gah-Pah) as well as its individual members.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I had a long oration I was going to make, but I want to be quite honest. My good friend Chairman Smith and my good friend Ranking Member Lofgren have actually covered the case as well or better than I can. They're both distinguished attorneys. They understand the intricacies involved here, so there's no need for me to go through and literally repeat point by point what they have already made.

I do want to make one central point, or two points.

First, I want to thank both of them. This is a matter of justice. This is a bipartisan effort to try and make sure that an Indian nation that has a legitimate claim against the United States of America has an opportunity to go to court and make its case; no predetermination of the outcome, no settlement without coming back through Congress again, just simply an opportunity to make a case of an injustice that all sides admit occurred, and establish what's fair compensation.

I want to commend, again, both my colleagues, and particularly Chairman Smith. This simply could not have happened without his cooperation, his help, and the diligent work of his staff.

I urge passage of the legislation.

Introduction

Several hundred years ago, the Quapaw (``the Downstream People'') were part of a larger group known as the Dhegiha Sioux, which split into the modern tribes known as the Quapaw, Osage, Ponca, Kansa, and Omaha. The Quapaw's ancestral lands are located at the confluence of the Arkansas and Mississippi rivers in what is present day Arkansas. When first encountered by the Europeans in the 1670's, there were some 20,000 Quapaws living in four villages in this area.

A series of treaties with the U.S. Government resulted in most of the Quapaw land being ceded to the United States, and the

Tribe acquiesced to relocation to the far northeastern corner of present day Oklahoma. In the process, the tribal land base was whittled down to its current acreage.

After Quapaw lands in Oklahoma were found to contain rich deposits of zinc and lead in 1905, the Government allowed mining activities to be carried out largely unfettered, and not for the benefit of the Quapaws. For years the value of the Quapaw mineral estate was exported from their land with the Government failing to ensure that royalties, bonuses and other payments were properly made and managed.

Why H. Res. 668 is Necessary

The Office of Historical Trust Accounting (OHTA) was established by Secretary of the Interior Secretarial Order No. 3231 on July 10, 2001; OHTA is charged with planning, organizing, directing and executing the historical accounting of tribal trust accounts and non-monetary assets.

In 2002, the Tribe filed a lawsuit for an accounting and for asset mismanagement in the Federal District Court in Oklahoma alleging the U.S. Government owed them an accounting and had mismanaged their funds and non-monetary assets.

During this time, there were over 104 tribal lawsuits pending and the Department of the Interior--Office of Historic Trust Accounting's ability to fund the accountings and determine whether assets were mismanaged was severely limited. At the same time, the Department of Justice had similar concerns about its ability to respond to the myriad of tribal lawsuits

In July 2004, the U.S. Government and the Tribe negotiated and agreed to settle the pending lawsuit, and enter into an agreement under which the Department of the Interior would enter into a contract with Quapaw Information Services as contractor, to ``identify, select, and analyze documents, and prepare an analysis (the Quapaw Analysis), of Interior's management'' of the Tribe's Tribal Trust Fund Account, along with certain non-monetary land and natural resources assets held in trust on behalf of the Tribe, and eight individual members of the Tribe.

In 2010--after six years of work, Quapaw Information Systems gave its report to the U.S. Government. In turn, the U.S. Government accepted the accounting as being in conformity with the Federal standards, but refused to do anything with the accounting.

The Tribe fulfilled its end of the bargain. The U.S. Government did not.

By 2011, the Tribe was left with no choice but to seek relief in court from the Government's failure--not only its failure to fulfill its trust obligations, but its agreement to mediate and settle the matter once the accounting was completed. Accordingly, eight Quapaw tribal members filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated tribal members. This case, Goodeagle v. United States, seeks damages for the Government's breach of trust in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

In May 2011, the Tribe submitted a formal settlement demand to the Government, to which the Government has never responded.

Instead, the Government has filed repeated Motions to Dismiss the Goodeagle case.

With the settlement demand ignored, and the Government's ongoing refusal to resolve these claims through settlement, in September 2012, the Tribe filed a complaint for damages in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

In November 2012, the Government filed yet another motion to dismiss the Tribe's case.

The Mechanics of H. Res. 668

To ensure that the Tribe and its members can pursue their trust- related claims in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, Rep. Tom Cole and Rep. Dan Boren introduced H. Res. 668. Notably, this resolution does not pre-determine the outcome of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims review of the Tribe's lawsuit.

It simply allows the Tribe and its members to plead their case to a neutral decision-maker in a judicial proceeding.

Some may assume that the sending of a congressional reference to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has already predetermined liability in favor of a claimant. As observed by former House Member (Rep. Marion T. Bennett (R-MO)), who became a Claims Court judge, ``nothing could be further from the truth or the intent of Congress . . . Congress intends only to afford an impartial and independent forum for determination of the merits of a complex claim by judicial methods.'' Bennett, Private Claims Acts and Congressional References, 9 JAG L. Rev. 9 (1967).

H. Res. 668, as amended, simply affords the Tribe and its members the chance to present their case about the nature, extent, and character of the Indian trust related claims of the Quapaw Tribe and its tribal members for compensation as legal or equitable claims against the United States other than the legal claims that are pending in the Court of Federal Claims on the date of House approval of this to a neutral decision-maker in a judicial proceeding.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 668) to refer H.R. 5862, a bill making congressional reference to the United States Court of Federal Claims pursuant to sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code, the Indian trust-related claims of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma (O-Gah-Pah) as well as its individual members, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for sponsoring House Resolution 668.

This bill allows a Native American Tribe that resides in Oklahoma, the Quapaw, to appear before the United States Federal court of claims to plead for damages against the Federal Government for mismanagement of tribal funds. The court would issue a report, either favorable or unfavorable, to the tribe. If favorable, the Natural Resources Committee would be authorized to move separate legislation to effect the court's decision.

In 2002, the tribe filed a lawsuit for an accounting in Federal district court of the U.S. Government's mismanagement of tribal and tribal member trust assets.

In November 2004, the tribe and the U.S. Government agreed that the tribe and third-party contractors would conduct an accounting of the U.S. Government's actions and inactions related to the trust assets. This was to facilitate a mediated solution to this lawsuit's claims. In exchange for this mediated route, the tribe would dismiss the lawsuit.

In June 2010, after 5 years of accounting and related analysis, the Quapaw Analysis was completed and shared with the U.S. Government. This set the stage for mediation. That analysis confirmed that the government's mismanagement of the Quapaw's trust constituted a breach of trust.

The tribe initiated multiple attempts to resolve their claims, which the government rejected. By 2011, the tribe sought relief in court from the government's failure to fulfill its trust obligations and to mediate and settle the trust claims.

Last year, eight Quapaw Tribe members filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and other individuals for damages based on breach of trust. The government filed motions to dismiss the case and also refused to respond to a formal settlement demand proffered by the tribe.

The government's foot-dragging necessitates our passage of House Resolution 668 today. The bill doesn't guarantee a desired outcome; it only allows the Quapaw a chance to go before the Federal court of claims and make their best case. Even if the court rules in their favor, the Natural Resources Committee must still move subsequent legislation that incorporates the court's decision through both Houses of Congress.

Also, a revision to the bill stipulates that an award of damages by the court only applies to claims that are not already pending before the Court of Federal Claims. This ensures that claimants will not be doubly or excessively compensated.

Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for his persistence on this issue and for introducing this particular bill. I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 668.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), who is the sponsor of this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, due to a family matter requiring my presence in New Mexico, I was not able to be present for a number of votes on the House floor this week.

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 627, on motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 4606, to authorize the issuance of right-of-way permits for natural gas pipelines in Glacier National Park, and for other purposes, as amended, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 628, on motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 3193, the Barona Band of Mission Indians Land Transfer Clarification Act of 2012, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 629, on motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6504, the Small Business Investment Company Modernization Act of 2012, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 630, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate Amendment on H.R. 3783, an act to provide for a comprehensive strategy to counter Iran's growing hostile presence and activity in the Western Hemisphere, and for other purposes, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 631, on motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6621, to correct and improve certain provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act and title 35, United States Code, as amended, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 632, on motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 3642, the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification Act, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 633, on motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6672, to reauthorize certain programs under the Public Health Service Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to public health security and all-hazards preparedness and response and for other purposes, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 634, on motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1845, the Medicare IVIG Access Act, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 635, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 668, to refer H.R. 5862, a bill making congressional reference to the United States Court of Federal Claims pursuant to sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code, the Indian trust-related claims of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma as well as its individual members, as amended, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 636, on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6655, the Protect Our Kids Act, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 637, on the motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 3564, the Public Interest Declassification Board Reauthorization Act, I would have voted ``aye.''

Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 638, on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6016, the Government Employee Accountability Act, as amended, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of House Resolution 668, a congressional reference bill concerning the trust-related claims of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma.

Now, congressional reference bills are rare in Congress. The House hasn't considered such a bill since 2002 in the 107th Congress, but the fact that this procedure is a rare one doesn't mean that it isn't a useful one.

Unlike most other legislation, reference bills require passage in only one Chamber to take effect. If passed by either the House or Senate, the bill would simply refer a claim against the U.S. Government to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for consideration.

The court, however, as the chairman has indicated, would not be authorized to render a final ruling on the claim. Rather, it would only be authorized to consider evidence and to submit a report to Congress with its findings and recommendations. Congress could then decide, based on the court's report, whether or not to enact a private claims bill or appropriate funds to the claimant in the interest of justice.

In this case, H. Res. 668 would refer the bill, H.R. 5862, a bill relating to members of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma, to the Court of Federal Claims. And as amended, the bill would authorize the court to determine whether the tribe and its members have trust-related legal or equitable claims against the U.S., other than legal claims that are currently pending before the court.

We have consulted with the Department of Justice and the Department of the Interior on this matter, and both agencies agree that the Quapaw Tribe has legitimate claims against the United States concerning certain tribal lands that were held in trust by the Federal Government. The only real dispute is the value of the claim.

This makes this congressional reference bill an appropriate measure to help bring this matter to a final resolution. By referring the case to the Federal claims court, they can consider all the evidence, submit a report on what the court believes to be the appropriate value of the tribal claim, and then, based on that court's findings and conclusions, Congress can play its appropriate role to consider whether or not it is in the interest of justice to pass a private claims bill or otherwise appropriate funds to satisfy the claim.

This procedure will help the Congress do the right thing, and that's why we're sent here, to do the right thing.

So I ask my colleagues to support this important legislation. I commend Congressman Cole for his diligent pursuit of this matter of justice.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Madam Speaker, the purpose of this statement is to clarify the scope of the resolution before us. It states that it encompasses Quapaw tribal and individual claims ``other than the legal claims that are pending in the Court of Federal Claims on the date of enactment of this resolution.''

A question arises. If one or more of those currently pending legal claims are dismissed by the Court for lack of jurisdiction, would the dismissed claim be considered ``pending'' for purposes of this resolution?

In my view, the answer is no. Our intention with the reference resolution is to request from the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims a report containing findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning the nature, extent, and character of the Indian-trust related claims of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma and its tribal members for compensation. As the language of the resolution suggests, these claims may be legal or equitable in nature, and exclude only the claims that are already within the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims (including the statute of limitations) and are already pending in the Court of Federal Claims on the date of enactment. If a claim is dismissed as being outside the statute of limitations or for jurisdictional reasons, in my view, it was not pending on the date of enactment.

The intent behind the resolution is to have the Court review and render a final and complete resolution of all such claims--that resolution to occur either in the pending cases under the jurisdiction already granted the Court of Federal Claims by the Indian Tucker Act or else under the terms of H. Res. 668.