THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary _____________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release April 29, 1994 PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT AND ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS ADA DEER The Briefing Room 1:05 P.M. EDT SECRETARY BABBITT: Good afternoon. I would like to take a few minutes to see if I can cast this meeting, which I believe has historic significance, in the context of the evolution of the relationships between the United States government and the Indian tribes of this country. I think in order to do that, it's necessary to look backward to what's happened during the course of the 20th century. If you look back prior to World War II, the relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes was paternalistic in every sense. The Interior Department was virtually the only representative of the federal government on Indian reservations. And the Interior Department inherited that role in history from the United States Army. In fact, the Interior Department ran an operation that had many features of the United States Army. The BIA superintendents were on reservations not to consult, not to collaborate, but basically to run the show. And clear up into the 1950s, if you went to an Indian reservation, you would find a tribal council which, in reality, was an advisory committee to the BIA superintendent. And you would find a tribal chairman or a tribal president who would quite frankly say to you, the decisions on this reservation are made over there in this parallel structure by the Superintendent of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This paternalistic, sort of dependency kind of relationship really began to change in a very different direction in the 1950s and the 1960s. It began, first, at the hands of the United States Supreme Court which, during the 1960s, took a series of cases and began to look deeply into the history of treaties, of the constitutional provisions, of the early Supreme Court decisions and recast this relationship by writing a series of opinions which made it very clear that Indian tribes had as an inherent feature a reservoir of sovereignty; which meant that they were entitled to be genuine sovereign governmental entities; and that this tribal sovereignty which attached to Indian tribes and their reservations really stood independent not only of states, but in some measure of the federal government and the federal executive branch itself. Now, fortunately, just as the United States Supreme Court began to paint a larger picture of the potentiality for Indian sovereignty and of their right to self-determination and their right to govern their territory and their affairs, along came a new generation of Indian leaders. And you're going to see this generation with the President today. I can't overstress the extraordinary nature of the transition. Young Indian leaders in the 60s, 70s and the 80s began leaving reservations, graduating from Harvard and Stanford and national schools, entering the professions, and a great many of them then going back to their traditional cultures. And they have had a tremendous effect in making this transformation, because with this sophistication, with the technical skills and the education, they no longer listened to BIA bureaucrats in this old paternalistic mode. They have seized upon these concepts and have stepped forward to lead their tribes into a very new and very different world. Now, most recently, in this evolution of a brand new, entirely different kind of relationship, the United States Congress has stepped into the picture most interestingly, or perhaps, most notably, through the work of the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs, chaired by Senator Inouye. It's very important to recognize the role that Congress and Senator Inouye have had in this. Because Congress in the last several years has begun passing legislation to incorporate the leadership of the tribes and the background of the Supreme Court decisions into federal law. In the Indian Self-Determination Act and other pieces of legislation, Congress has mandated the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Department of the Interior and the Executive Branch to begin dealing with Indian tribes as sovereign governments. And Congress has said to the Executive Branch and the Department of the Interior, we want you to begin the process of restructuring and moving the services and programs of the Bureau of Indian Affairs out to the governments themselves. And Congress has created a mechanism in which the tribal leaders have, for several years now, been working directly with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of the Interior to structure these self-governance programs, to slenderize the Bureau of Indian Affairs, transfer the programs, sort of step away and begin recognizing and dealing with tribal governments much in the way that we would deal with state governments, for example. Now, it's in that context that I believe this meeting today has historic significance because, for the first time, the Executive Branch, the President are saying to every Indian tribe in this country, we invite you to Washington not to lay out a whole set of prescriptions for what it is that you ought to be doing in the old paternalistic mode, not just for ceremonial functions, but to heighten the reality of this government, the government dialogue. And I would suggest to all of you that as you listen to this proceeding, that you think about these concepts and look beneath the surface of this discussion. And think of it and listen to the responses and the comments in the same way, for example, that you would at a national governors' conference, when the governors of the 50 states come and, in assembly, begin to discuss all of the problems of governments in a federal system; because that's really in fact what's happening today. And you're likely to hear Native American leaders talking about a tax apportionment; talking about their frustrations with the welfare system; talking about health care; talking about the need for the national government to be more sensitive and more responsive to the needs of their governments. And if you think of it in the context of what you hear at a national governors' conference, I think you'll see a lot of similarities for precisely that reason. The President will sign several executive orders, one relating to a very important religious issue surrounding the use of -- the means of obtaining eagle feathers; a second executive order which stresses and says to all federal agencies, it's now time for you to deal as one government to another. When you deal with Indian tribes, no more of this business of simply sending out programs, making requests, rendering opinions. It's now time, when you deal with the government of an Indian tribe and its elected president or chairman, to deal with that tribe -- whether you're the Department of Housing and Urban Development, whether it's Health and Human Services, whatever department -- to deal with that tribal government in the same spirit that you deal with governors and states; because that's, in fact, a good analog for the way these tribes have recaptured and begun to develop their sovereignty in this governmental context. I'd next like to introduce Ada Deer, who is the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, and ask her to make a few comments. And then I'll come back together with Ada and we'll respond to any questions. Ada. MS. DEER: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. It's very exciting to be here today at this historic time -- the first time that a President of the United States has invited all of the elected tribal leaders to a meeting, face-to-face, here in the White House. I'm very pleased to be a part of this administration, and bringing about change. I'm a former tribal leader of my tribe, the Menominee Indian tribe in Wisconsin. I'm a social worker, an activist, an advocate. And when Secretary Babbitt interviewed me on January 21st, I told him this and he said this is what he wanted, this is what the President wanted; and that's what I'm attempting to do in my capacity as Assistant Secretary. I'd like to emphasize that we are part of an ongoing process here in carrying out the instructions and working with the tribes in consultations with their desires and their requests. Just to mention a few of the ongoing accomplishments that we've been involved with, first is trust funds management. Some of you know that this has been an ongoing issue, but we are making substantial progress in bringing about a resolution of trust funds management. Early in the fall, I was very pleased to sign off on a memorandum resolving the status of Alaskan aid of villages and tribes. That has been a serious matter of question for a number of years, and it was a great pleasure to be able to do this -- to recognize the Alaskan aid of villages and their government-to- government relationship with the U.S. government. This administration is in support of religious freedom. That's a very important act that is now before the Congress. We are in support of self-governance. We are working to resolve many of the serious land settlement and water issues. And there are a number of initiatives that will be undertaken dealing with serious economic problems that confront native country. I was recently named co-chair -- along with Undersecretary Bob Nash and the Department of Agriculture -- co-chair of the Indian Economic Subcommittee of the Community Enterprise Zone. This will be a vehicle whereby we will focus many of the resources of the federal government in analyzing and working on the problems of Indian economic development. We have staffed, fully staffed our federal acknowledgement office. This means that the tribes that are petitioning for federal acknowledgement will have a much speedier action on their petitions. So there are many ongoing efforts within the administration and I want to stop here and then proceed with questions or comments. Q Mr. Secretary -- SECRETARY BABBITT: Mr Blitzer, first question, imagine that. Q What should the role of the federal government be, if any, in overseeing gambling on Indian reservations? SECRETARY BABBITT: Let me broaden the question, and then I'll come straight back to the answer. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act has provided the basis for a number of very satisfactory gaming compacts involving my department, the tribes and the states. In fact, it has been the rule -- we hear about the exceptions, about states where there is still controversy. In fact, we now have workable, negotiated compacts in an enormous variety of states working quite well. The regulatory role of the states, the tribes and the federal government under those compacts has generally been negotiated. And I think that's a very appropriate way to go. The states have concerns; Indian Gaming Regulatory Commission has concerns. And if you look at those compacts, you're going to see a whole variety of arrangements, including a fairly significant state presence. And I guess to answer directly, it would be my belief that the best way to handle this is in the context of compact negotiations where the states can voice their concerns, the tribes can respond, and as a condition of signing, I can mediate any differences. Q Mr. Secretary, this administration says that it is committed to this new relationship and to a number of issues ranging from welfare reform to health care. But in its Bureau of Indian Affairs, it proposed a major cut in the budget. There's only -- partially retracted by Secretary Shalala apparently last week and which congressional members say that they have not been able to find offsetting cuts to fund the balance. So, how do your rationalize your budget prescription with your stated policy? SECRETARY BABBITT: There has been some vigorous discussion about the administration's initial set of budget proposals, specifically with regard to the Indian Health Service. Now, in the context of those discussions, Secretary Shalala has sent, through OMB, an amendment to the budget restoring approximately $125 million of the initial proposed cuts. Now, we are, at this point, back discussing the situation with the appropriation committees. And what I have said to the tribes is, this is something we need to continue discussing and work out. This is the kind of budget discussion we're having with states and lots of other agencies. And I think there's going to be -- the President will have some comments today. We've restored $125 million, and I think we'll continue discussing the issue. Q There's still a net loss. It's still less than was spent last year. SECRETARY BABBITT: That's correct, and that will be the subject of some additional discussions. We've made that clear. Q Mr. Secretary, can we look at this cut in the IHS budget as a prelude to the elimination of the Indian Health Service in the health care reform? SECRETARY BABBITT: Absolutely not. The President has made it clear that the health care reform is not about eliminating the Indian Health Service. I think, in fact, you should draw the opposite conclusion -- it empowers and strengthens the Indian Health Service. How does that happen? It happens because health care reform puts insurance behind every single consumer, every single Native American who chooses to utilize the services of the Indian Health Service. And, as the President has often explained, the health care proposal is broadening the choices of all Americans, including Native Americans. Now, as a practical matter, most Native Americans are probably for the foreseeable future -- especially with health care reform -- going to be looking to the Indian Health Service. Why? Because most of them live in remote areas where the best, most up- to-date infrastructure for health care is, in fact, the Indian Health Service. And the fact that they bring insurance to that system is going to provide the kinds of resources that the Indian Health Service needs as a purveyor of health care. Q Mr. Secretary, the President and you and your staff -- SECRETARY BABBITT: Joe, are you wearing press credentials today? Wait a minute. (Laughter.) Q out for a Timber Summit. We've had a River Basin Restoration Summit, 129 different tribes from Southeast Alaska, the Endangered Species Act has various impacts on tribal trust lands. And how do we work with you and your department to stop getting conflicting decisions from Fish and Wildlife in the northwest, the southwest and different parts of the country? We recommended we deal with our undersecretary to be the coordinator for the trust between the branches of Interior, because we don't have time to keep educating everybody if you keep changing staff. SECRETARY BABBITT: Good. If you're nominating Ada Deer to do that, I accept your nomination. (Laughter.) Joe, we've got to keep pushing our efforts to get the tribes to the table on resource issues. I think the next big one is going to be the salmon issue. And I think Judge Marsh's opinion is a sort of strong directive from the courts to make certain that, as we begin working those issues through, under Section 7 and the rest of the laws, that the tribes are at the table. Q Our problem is different interpretation from one region to the next within your agencies. And that's where we end up having problems with -- SECRETARY BABBITT: Good, I understand. Q Mr. Secretary, what is this expanded autonomy mean to the U.S. taxpayer? Will there be more or less federal dollars flowing to tribes? And also, what was that bit about eagles' feathers? SECRETARY BABBITT: What was that bit about eagles' feathers? Joe, would you like to answer that question? Q Could you answer the tax question first? SECRETARY BABBITT: The budget issues obviously are in the hands of the United States Congress each and every year. I think that the most important ramification is that as tribes begin to exercise their governmental functions, and we begin to devolve programs back, that we really ought to get a lot more bang for the buck. I'm absolutely certain that a tribe administering a resource program or an education program with a block grant from the Department of Education or the Department of the Interior is going to make that money go a lot further than when the program is being run from Washington, through a regional office, through a BIA office, over to the tribe and finally down to the intended recipients. Q? So you don't see any decline in the federal budget, but -- SECRETARY BABBITT: No, I don't. And the tribes have been quite outspoken about this. We can't possibly make a case for sort of eliminating or slashing of federal budgets as a way of sort of getting rid of our responsibility. That's not what this is about at all. Q Mr. Secretary, while we're talking about the religious rights and religious freedoms of our people, the Native Americans, my concern is the fact that while we're banging the buck, the White House is wanting to increase taxes on tobacco. They're trying to outlaw the use of tobacco on all the federal properties and state properties and so forth. Yet, to our people, it's part of our religious prayers. So where are they going to open up religious freedom by restricting the use of tobacco in federal properties? SECRETARY BABBITT: Well, let me invite Ada to respond to the eagle feather question and the free exercise of religion questions. They're important. Ada. Q Could you add peyote to that, too, please? MS. DEER: There's been a coalition of tribal groups and other groups supportive of American Indian religious freedom acts. And this has been an ongoing process for the last couple of years. There's been some important conclusions, important settlements made on the American Indian Religious Freedom Act guaranteeing freedom of religion. It's a fairly complicated act, but I want to point out that it's extremely important that we, as American citizens, have the same rights as everyone else to practice our religion. Tobacco is an important part of this in some of the Native American ceremonies, and eagles are a very important part of this. Eagles are a sacred object. There's been a lot of discussion on how to resolve the use of feathers and eagle parts, and we have come to an agreement on this. And the President will be talking about this in more detail this afternoon. Q Mr. Secretary, in respect to the executive orders, the second part of that on federal -- you said that in dealing with the federal government, they'll have to deal as one government to another. But I'm having a little trouble understanding what will change with these executive orders in terms of how they deal? Will the Indian nation deal not through Interior specifically anymore? They can go directly to these agencies, or how does it actually functionally change? SECRETARY BABBITT: I think what you suggest is in fact a significant part of the thinking underlying this executive order. The old notion around this government was that Indian tribes went to the Department of the Interior where they said, mother, may I? And the Interior Department would then sort of check around the rest of the government and then, sort of from on high, pass back to the Indian tribes permission, directives or whatever. If you compare that to what happens when a governor comes to town, I think you can see the difference. When a governor comes to town representing a state, they go straight to Cabinet agencies, to the White House, moving in the fullness of the relationship. And behind this executive order implicitly is that kind of command to the other Cabinet agencies. And it's long overdue. Q So does the Indian nation itself, or do the different tribes, then, come and deal with the federal government in various agencies? SECRETARY BABBITT: I use tribe and nation interchangeably. I think nation is often the nomenclature that the Native Americans themselves prefer. But whether you call yourself a tribe or a nation, it is that sovereign tribal entity that becomes, in effect, the party to the government-to-government relationship. And that means there are approximately 540 recognized tribes, and that means 545 Native American leaders in that relationship. Now, the other thing I would point out is you are going to hear tremendous diversity of issues and opinions as you talk with the Native American leaders and listen to the dialogue with the President. That's something obviously that is implicit in this relationship. The Northwest tribes are going to have a certain number of issues. The Alaska natives will be talking about fishing and hunting subsistence; the Eastern tribes, often about issues relating to recognition. In the Southwest, it may be oil and gas. So there's going to be a bewildering array of issues. But, again, that simply is a reflection of the diversity of the country and the tribes, much as you would hear at a gathering of the 50 states. Q Mr. Secretary, would you talk just for a second about next week's conference as well. What's the purpose behind that, and what's that supposed to accomplish -- SECRETARY BABBITT: I think most of you know Attorney General Reno and I, accompanied by Ada Deer and numerous other assistant secretaries, are going to Albuquerque next week to spend a couple of days following up on today's meeting. The President has made it clear that in this relationship, we need to spend more time listening. And that's the reason that it's literally entitled a listening conference. The reason, I think, that it is centered on -- this particular conference -- on the Attorney General, myself, Secretary Cisneros is that there is an enormous amount of interest in the natural resource issues, and they may not get as detailed of coverage today at the beginning of this heightened dialogue. Q? Can we ask Ms. Deer, as a fellow president of your nation, how this change will affect the nation -- the change, from your perspective, how it affects changes of the nations dealing with the federal government? MS. DEER: This effort, meeting with the President, the listening conference demonstrates the sensitivity, the openness, the willingness of this administration to deal government-to-government with the tribes -- Q In practical terms, what does that is going to mean? MS. DEER: This means there are open doors across the government. We've got open doors in my office, in the Interior, and many other offices here in the White House. The Cabinet secretaries have indicated their interest, their willingness, their desire to assume their obligations to American Indians and Alaska natives. Let me say that we will have a new partnership within the government. I will soon be meeting again with Dr. Trujillo, the new director of Indian Health Service. We expect to have a closer ongoing partnership between BIA and Indian Health as we position tribes for the 21st century, as we assist tribes to work toward progress in the 21st century. The Indian Economic Subcommittee will be focusing efforts of the agencies on Indian economic development. This will be done in close consultation with the tribes. We are not going to do for, we are going to do with. And so people need to understand this. Tribes are very sophisticated, they are knowledgeable, and we are going to be responsive to their needs and their goals. Q? Does this cut red tape, or is it a change of attitude? MS. DEER: Both. Q How does this contrast with the experiences, Ms. Deer, that you've had in the past as an activist with previous administrations? MS. DEER: There's a great deal of difference. I want to stress again the openness, the sensitivity, the knowledge. We have a Secretary of Interior who is knowledgeable, who is experienced, who is sensitive to native interests. He spent three weeks in Alaska in August visiting many of the native villages, meeting with the native peoples there, as well as going to parks and dealing with some of the other responsibilities of the Department of Interior. So I want to stress that we have a knowledgeable people, a committed people, and we are embracing the tribes in a new partnership. Q Ms. Deer, to come back to religious freedom, I don't think you answered the other question earlier. Will the President today approve the killing and trapping of eagles for religious purposes? SECRETARY BABBITT: No, no, not at all. Not at all. Q Can you explain what's happening? SECRETARY BABBITT: The tribes have traditionally placed great reverence on the eagle, and used eagle feathers in a great variety of religious ceremonials. With the advent of the Endangered Species Act, the tribes -- obviously the ones with the most to gain from the restoration of the American eagle -- have abandoned any kinds of practices that would threaten eagles. The question is, to what extent can we -- where dead eagles are found on the land -- can we make feathers available, and create a system which says to the tribes, as we together work to conserve the American eagle, when feathers are available from carcasses, we want to make sure that everybody recognizes the importance of getting those back into the hands of those tribes that traditionally use them. Okay, thank you very much. Q Mr. Secretary, do you anticipate any changes that oil and gas leasing or payments to Indian tribes? END1:38 P.M. EDT