Grand Portage Band Per Capita Adjustment Act

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank Natural Resources Committee Chairman Hastings, who has served so well and so honorably in this Chamber--his absence will be missed as he retires--and, of course, Ranking Member DeFazio, and to Chairman Young, whom I had the good fortune to initially serve in this Chamber about 40 years ago, and Ranking Member Hanabusa of the Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs for their support of this bill. I also want to thank the staff for their work and their diligent efforts on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, in simple terms, this bill corrects a technical mistake in existing law, thereby allowing members of the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa to exclude up to $2,000 in payments from the State of Minnesota from their taxable income.

By way of background, in 1988, the Grand Portage Band and the Bois Forte Band of Chippewa entered into an agreement by which they would relinquish certain harvest rights and privileges accorded under the treaty of 1854 in return for annual per capita payments from the State of Minnesota.

In the year 2000, Congress passed the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act, which stipulated that a portion of these per capita payments should not count as income for the band members.

The problem was the legislative language included only the Bois Forte Band. The Grand Portage Band was inadvertently, accidentally left out, and, as a result, many members of the Grand Portage Band have been denied financial assistance and other benefits they are entitled to because their income appears higher than the law permits.

So this bill simply corrects the mistake by amending the act of October 9, 1973, to allow members of the Grand Portage Band to exclude up to $2,000 in per capita income payments from the State of Minnesota from their taxable income. It is the correct and the fair thing to do.

Let me also point out, Mr. Speaker, that this bill marks another step toward restoring the letter and the spirit of the 1854 treaty between the Federal Government and the Chippewa of Lake Superior, a treaty marked by serious violations from the very beginning as the waves of settlers were permitted onto the lands the agreement reserved for the Indians in perpetuity.

I often point to my colleagues that the bust of Chief Buffalo of La Pointe greets them, or greets us as we enter into the House Chamber from the west front. Chief Buffalo was recognized as the Head Chief of the Greater Chippewa Nation, and at the age of 92 years of age, he led a tribal delegation to Washington to meet with President Fillmore and paved the way for the treaty of 1854 to stop the removal of Lake Superior Chippewas from their native homes.

It was quite a trip. They left Wisconsin's Madeline Island by birch bark canoe--mind you, a 92-year-old man--traveling all the way to Sault Ste. Marie. From there, they took a steamer bound for Detroit, and then on by steamer to Buffalo, New York. Then the railroad took them to Albany, New York, where they boarded another steamboat to New York, and finally back onto the train to Washington, D.C., where they made their case to the President of the United States.

So, in asking my colleagues to support this bill, I ask them to also remember Chief Buffalo and the diligence and the long, hard work and the long and difficult trail that is often so often required to do the right thing when we are representing people that we have been, in our case, elected to represent.

It is a good lesson in point in a time and life where we have a kind of a fast-food mentality and everybody is expecting things to happen now. The voyage, the extraordinary effort that Chief Buffalo made, is a lesson to us all.

So here we are, 160 years later, still trying to fulfill the results of that important mission that he made. This legislation to restore a small piece of a larger trust relationship is part of that journey.

Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill, and I thank my colleagues for their bipartisan support.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3608) to amend the Act of October 19, 1973, concerning taxable income to members of the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

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

H.R. 3608 would protect certain funds paid by the State of Minnesota and held by the United States in trust for the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians from Federal and State taxation. Under the bill, the tribe may distribute these funds to its members, and these payments won't be counted against the members' eligibility for Federal financial assistance as long as each payment does not exceed $2,000.

The payments made by the State stem from a 1988 settlement in which two Minnesota Chippewa tribes agreed to forgo the exercise of certain treaty hunting and fishing rights. In 1999, legislation was introduced to protect these State settlement payments from taxation. However, by the time the bill was enacted into Public Law 106-568, only one of the two tribes was granted the tax relief.

The Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 3608. Neither the hearing nor a staff review of the legislative history for Public Law 106-568 reveals any explanation for the exclusion of the Grand Portage Band from the tax relief granted to its sister tribe. Principles of fairness and equity suggest that both bands of Minnesota Chippewa be accorded equal treatment. H.R. 3608 accordingly amends the applicable statute to provide the Grand Portage Band the same tax benefits.

The Committee on Natural Resources ordered H.R. 3608 reported by unanimous consent, and Chairman Camp of the Ways and Means Committee and Chairman Goodlatte of the Judiciary Committee have graciously agreed by letter to expedite consideration of this bill by not exercising their jurisdiction. As always, we appreciate their cooperation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC, November 5, 2014.

Hon. Doc Hastings,

Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Longworth House

Office Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Hastings: I am writing with respect to H.R.

3608, the ``Grand Portage Band Per Capita Adjustment Act,''

which the Committee on Natural Resources reported favorably

on September 18, 2014. As a result of your having consulted

with us on provisions in H.R. 3608 that fall within the Rule

X jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, I agree to

discharge our Committee from further consideration of this

bill so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor

for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee takes this action without mutual

understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 3608 at

this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject

matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our

Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the

bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may

address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our

Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an

appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate

conference involving this or similar legislation, and asks

that you support any such request.

I would appreciate a response to this letter confirming

this understanding with respect to H.R. 3608, and would ask

that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be

included in the Congressional Record during Floor

consideration of H.R. 3608.

Sincerely,

Bob Goodlatte,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 3608, which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.