Maurice Hinchey: “my reading of this amendment is that it would effectively prohibit the Secretary from recognizing new Indian trust…”

“my reading of this amendment is that it would effectively prohibit the Secretary from recognizing new Indian trust lands. I therefore am opposed to the amendment, and I ask others to join me in that position. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, if it were to succeed, would be destructive not only to native Americans but also in many instances to the communities around which they reside or nearby where they reside. Why do tribes petition to the Secretary to take lands into trust for them in the first place? In some cases they are reacquiring lands they have lost because of their historical or religious significance and they want those lands back again. In most cases they are acquiring lands which have the potential to produce income for the tribe, to help them become economically self-sufficient. Because of the discrimination that they have faced, because of poverty and limited education and a host of other disadvantages, and because they lost their lands which they depended upon, many tribes cannot build self-sufficiency without building on their trust lands; that is, taking advantage of the edge that sovereignty gives them. In effect, this is no different from States that make use of their statehood to draw business or create industry; gambling in Nevada, for example, or credit cards in Delaware or South Dakota, or communities that offer tax breaks to attract industries.…”