Ben Campbell

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Madam President, I rise in opposition to the Bingaman amendment. I will try to go through this as quickly as I can because I know Senator Domenici also wants to speak. On Thursday I introduced an amendment and withdrew it yesterday. That amendment was supported by the National Congress of American Indians, which is over 300 tribes, the Council of Energy Resource Tribes, which represents 50 additional tribes, and the U.S. Eastern and Southern Tribes, which represents 50. It was supported by five New Mexico Pueblos, including the Jicarilla Apache Tribe of New Mexico, the National Tribal Environmental Council, which represents 180 tribes, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. I pulled that back yesterday to refine some of the language but will be reintroducing it shortly--tomorrow or as soon as I can, as soon as we revise a little bit of the language. Let me point out this chart I have over here. Under existing law, current law, we have a real disparity among tribes. Tribes are treated like individuals in that, if they own land and want to develop the land for minerals or oil or gas, they could do it without complying with NEPA as individual owners or States can. If the Secretary gets involved by virtue of the tribe signing some agreement with an outside entity, she has to then approve the lease or not approve the lease. What has happened is that wealthy tribes have had the ability to develop their own resources. I live on one reservation, the Southern Ute Reservation, and they do that; they don't have to comply with NEPA. Most tribes are not that wealthy and have to seek an outside partner. Basically, that puts them at a terrific disadvantage for developing their own resources. I will not go into all resources now under Indian land because I did go through that the other day, but it is very clear that a great deal of American unutilized oil, natural gas, coal, and other minerals are under Indian land now. We are talking about a people who have 70 percent unemployment in some cases, so they definitely need the jobs and help as well as America needs the energy to become less dependent on foreign energy. In any event, let me go through the Bingaman amendment a little, if I may. We spoke about 2604 primarily. As I understand it, and as I believe, Senator Bingaman's amendment would force the statutory NEPA equivalent upon all tribes. As it is now, some are not required to go through NEPA, as I just mentioned. Also, it will create an unfunded mandate that will completely defeat the goal of facilitating energy development on tribal lands and diminish tribal sovereignty. I take strong issue with another aspect of the Bingaman amendment having to do with the liability of the United States for tribal decisions. Under title III, along with the power to create approved leases, agreements, and rights-of-ways without Secretarial approval, the tribes have the responsibility for the decisions they make. Mr. Bingaman's amendment in effect de-links the two, eliminating the language that says the Secretary will not be liable for losses arising under the terms of the leases the tribe negotiates on its own. That would mean he would keep the Secretary on the hook for those losses arising from lease terms negotiated by the tribe, even though the Secretary had nothing to do with the negotiations. I don't think that is very good policy, frankly. Paradoxically, Senator Bingaman's amendments would give the Secretary of the Interior authority to negotiate a tribe's remedies against the United States for breach of its duties under the tariff on a tribe-by- tribe basis. I know of one tribe--I believe two now--the Navajo, that supported the Bingaman amendment but opposes this one. But I think it has very little to do with section 2604. It has more to do with court cases recently which did not go their way. As I understand it, they really want some language that would effectively bail them out of losing that court case. The vast majority of tribes support the amendment that I introduced the other day. I think it is a particularly dangerous idea. In some instances, speaking of the Secretary's obligations, the Secretary might effectively negotiate away her obligations, although by including a provision that says the tribe will have no remedies against the United States, the Bingaman amendment expressly allows her to do that without limitation. Do the obligations referred to in the Bingaman amendment include the trust obligation? They must because there are no obligations on the part of the Secretary mentioned in his amendment other than duty to conduct annual trust evaluations. I point out that in the amendment I offered the other day, in section 2604 there was some question about whether it decreased trust responsibility. I know my colleagues can read as I can. Let me read, on page 14, section (6)(a), line 19: Nothing in this section shall absolve the United States from any responsibility to Indians or Indian tribes, including those which derive from the trust relationship or from any treaties, Executive Orders, or agreements between the United States and any Indian tribe. The Secretary shall continue to have trust obligation to ensure the rights of an Indian tribe are protected in the event of a violation of Federal law or the terms of any lease, business agreement or right-of-way under this section or any other party to any such lease, business agreement or right-of-way. Under the amendment which I introduced and which I will reintroduce, these trust responsibilities are very well protected. Finally, Senator Bingaman's amendment would sunset section 2604 in 7 years. I think that has somewhat of a chilling effect. First of all, if a tribe wants to avail itself of section 2604 as an alternative to the status quo, it will have to make considerable effort to develop this relationship and agreement to demonstrate its capacity to be able to develop its minerals resources. Under the Bingaman amendment, the alternative procedure would evaporate in 7 years. Very frankly, the tribe advances to self- determination would evaporate right with it. I think that would effectively prevent any tribe from pursuing the section 2604 alternatives. Senator Bingaman, as I understand his amendment, believes that section 2604 effectively waives NEPA. It does not. The language in the amendment expressly states that the Secretary must review the direct effects of her approving agreement under the provisions of NEPA. That means even though the tribe, when it is making agreements with an outside entity, will have to comply with NEPA upfront, before the Secretary can approve that agreement, she has to subscribe and conform to all NEPA provisions. The other provisions in the section require an opportunity for public and local governmental input and comment. The Senator mentioned some opposition from local communities. This is also taken care of under 2604, and it must ensure compliance with all applicable environmental laws in 2604. The Bingaman amendment also states that there is a tribal concern for section 2604 as it undermines the trust responsibility. I have already dealt with that. But, clearly, the United States is only held harmless from losses arriving from terms negotiated by a tribe operating under an approved agreement. Hopefully, as we move forward, we will be able to deal with the Navajo problem. I understand the Navajo. It is a very important tribe. And I have many friends in the tribe who are very willing to do that. Very frankly, when we talk about the responsibility of the Federal Government to Indians, let me go back a little bit and refresh my colleagues' memory about how tough they have had it in this Nation. This Government, as you know, took by hook or crook--and usually at gunpoint--roughly 98 percent of all the land from the American Indians. This Government also reduced the very proud, independent people to the poorest ethnic group in America with the highest unemployment rate, the highest degree of poor health, the highest high school dropout rate, and the highest suicide rate among any other group. This Government also has time and again told the Indians: We know what is best for you whether you like it or not. That is basically what I think the Bingaman amendment does. We will stifle your religious beliefs, destroy your culture, relocate and relegate you to a life of poverty and deprivation, as happened in the 1950s under the Terminations Act and the Relocation Act. We will drive you through a time bordering on ethnic cleansing, and we will not let you be a citizen in your own land--until 1924. That is when Indians got the right to vote in the United States. Through all of those years, the few threads of hope Indians clung to were that they would not lose what little they had left. And a few things that gave them hope were closely held beliefs about so-called Mother Earth, their belief in a creator, and that all things will get better. And one in particular was that U.S. Government promise; that promise is called ``trust responsibility.'' For the past 30 years, since the Nixon Doctrine of Self- Determination, American Indians have been making small strides. But in their culture, they are rather big gains considering how far they have come. It has been an endless struggle to try to share in the same American dream that Members of this body take for granted. In my view, the Bingaman amendment would literally strip tribes of 30 years of that direction of self-determination and would circumvent the trust responsibilities this Government has to tribes because it would force the statutory equivalent of NEPA on all decisions they make with their own land. As I mentioned, it is an unfunded mandate. I say to my colleagues in this body that if you want to keep American Indians on their knees, unable to provide jobs for their families and facing a dead end future, then vote for the Bingaman amendment. If you believe that fairness should be right for all Americans, including Indians, to do best what they can with their own resources and for their own people, vote against the Bingaman amendment and help me craft a better alternative, which is the one I mentioned that I introduced and pulled back and which I am going to reintroduce, and which already has the support of the vast majority of Indian people in this Nation. I yield the floor. I thank my colleague, Senator Domenici, for giving me time.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I will just make a couple of comments. Senator Inouye and I have been friends for a great number of years. When he was chairman, and now as the ranking member, we have worked on an awful lot of Indian legislation together. With all due respect, I think he might be mistaken about what 2604 did. In fact, maybe something else, too, and that is simply this. Tribes, generally, if they are not absolutely sure of themselves when they enter into agreements, or when they are dealing with the Federal Government, hire pretty sophisticated attorneys to do the research for them. All of these different groups, including the National Congress of American Indians, representing over 300 tribes; the Council of Energy Resource Tribes, representing over 50 tribes; the U.S. Eastern and Southern Tribes, representing over 50 tribes; the Pueblos of New Mexico; the Jicarilla Apache Tribe of New Mexico; and the National Tribal Environmental Council have had attorneys look at 2604 and, clearly, none of them has said anything about erosion of trust responsibility because--and I mentioned earlier--it is stated in 2604, on page 14, line 18 through page 15, line 3, that, if anything, tribal trust relationship is strengthened under 2604, which is the amendment I introduced the other day and am going to reintroduce. Unlike the Bingaman amendment, which I think, frankly, weakens trust responsibility--as near as I can tell, the language in his amendment weakens it. That is one of the questions: which one strengthens it and which one weakens it? My belief is that 2604 would be strengthened with the language I will be reintroducing. The other one is NEPA. I do not believe, frankly, that tribes are off the hook for NEPA unless they want to develop resources with their own money on their own land without outside agreements or Secretarial approval. Once the Secretary looks into it, or agrees to take it up after they have reached some negotiated agreement, she has to conform with all NEPA requirements. That is clear in 2604. Nobody is off the hook from NEPA for trust responsibility. One more thing. Under 2604, which hasn't been mentioned, and the amendment that I introduced and will reintroduce, no tribe needs to participate in this agreement at all. It is totally voluntary, tribe by tribe. Senator Bingaman mentioned that the Navajo Nation was not supportive of 2604 and my amendment. That is all right; they don't have to participate. This is open for the tribes that want to, and those that do not want to don't have to. As I understand the Bingaman amendment, they are all going to be caught in the same net. That is, they will all be required to come up with the money, as Senator Domenici mentioned, to subscribe to NEPA even before they reach an agreement. They don't have the money to do that. All it is going to do is prevent tribes from moving forward in this Nation. I have no further comments. I yield the floor.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank my colleagues for voting for this on the last motion to table. I know it is a difficult vote for some of my colleagues. I want to reintroduce tomorrow the amendment I spoke to earlier. I want to assure Senator Bingaman and Senator Inouye, who have worked on a lot of different Indian issues with us in the past, that if the language on trust is not strong enough, I will be more than happy to review that and work with you to make it even stronger and also to try to clarify the language dealing with NEPA.

Mr. CAMPBELL. How much time do we have?

Mr. CAMPBELL. We have 20 minutes; correct?

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Tamarisk Control & Riparian Restoration Act. Tamarisk is a noxious weed that is not native to the Americas, but has spread across 11 States, from California to Oklahoma, like a plague. Many westerners consider Tamarisk, also known as Salt Cedar, to be one of the West's most significant natural resources problems for a variety of reasons. Tamarisk's major threat is that it uses a significant amount of water, far more water than many realize. Yet, folks out West know all too well that we have been and are still experiencing one of the worst droughts in the West's recorded history. People who have been farming and ranching for generations have been forced to sell their homesteads and give up the life they love because there just hasn't been enough water for crops or to maintain livestock. I've personally felt the effects of the drought as my wife and I have had to sell our little cow/calf operation. I mentioned earlier that Tamarisk uses significant amounts of water, but I want to speak a little bit now about just how much water it uses. Studies have found that Tamarisk uses from 2 to 4\1/2\ million acre feet of water each year, water we frankly cannot afford to lose. To put that in perspective, several other States and the Republic of Mexico are delivered 10 million acre feet from all of Colorado's rivers and streams, including the mighty Colorado River. California is allotted 4\1/2\ million acre feet of Colorado water per year. That means that Tamarisk, a noxious, nonnative weed, uses the same amount of water flowing from Colorado to California. We must address the preventable loss of this most valuable resource before it's too late. My bill seeks to begin get the Tamarisk problem under control in a few innovative ways. First, my bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to assess the extent of Tamarisk invasion, identifying where it is in each affected State, and estimate the costs to restore the land. Second, my bill establishes a State Tamarisk Assistance Program to provide States the needed funds to control or eradicate Tamarisk. Grant funds will be distributed to states in accordance with the severity of the Tamarisk problem they have. The Governor of each State will appoint a state lead agency to administer the program in the State, working with Indian Tribes, colleges and universities, nonprofit organizations, soil and water conservancy districts, and Federal partners. This coordinate approach provides sufficient flexibility to deal with Tamarisk's spread and to reduce duplicative efforts. A watershed or basin can stretch across all kinds of land, including Federal, State, or tribal lands. Noxious weeds don't recognize those ownership boundaries and neither can we. Since my bill's focus is on getting rid of this water-sucking weed, it requires that 90 percent of the Federal funds must be used for eradiction or rehabilitation. This legislation authorizes $20 million for 2004 and such sums as necessary thereafter. States must share the burden by ponying up 25 percent of the costs. The Tamarisk problem hurts everyone and the non- Federal share can come from counties, municipalities, special districts, nongovernmental entities, or the States themselves. Our Nation is in a deficit, and every state is experiencing money shortages. Americans demand to know that their hard earned money is being spent wisely and in the most effient way possible. That is why my bill requires that each participating State must submit a report of the Secretary describing the purpose and results of the project in order to receive funding. In the West, water is more precious and scarce than elsewhere in our great nation. To do nothing about the preventable loss of precious water by the spread of this noxious plant and the loss of native habitat will cost us untold millions more in the future. Back in my State of Colorado, constituents tell me how the drought has affected them, even devastated their livelihoods. No one can control the weather and bring rain. However, getting a handle on the water-sucking Tamarisk plaguing the West is possible--if we act now. My bill provides the necessary tools to deal with this problem so that ther will be enough water for all of us, and habitat suitable for native species of plants and animals. I ask unanimous consent that the next of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Tamarisk Control & Riparian Restoration Act. Tamarisk is a noxious weed that is not native to the Americas, but has spread across 11 States, from California to Oklahoma, like a plague. Many westerners consider Tamarisk, also known as Salt Cedar, to be one of the West's most significant natural resources problems for a variety of reasons. Tamarisk's major threat is that it uses a significant amount of water, far more water than many realize. Yet, folks out West know all too well that we have been and are still experiencing one of the worst droughts in the West's recorded history. People who have been farming and ranching for generations have been forced to sell their homesteads and give up the life they love because there just hasn't been enough water for crops or to maintain livestock. I've personally felt the effects of the drought as my wife and I have had to sell our little cow/calf operation. I mentioned earlier that Tamarisk uses significant amounts of water, but I want to speak a little bit now about just how much water it uses. Studies have found that Tamarisk uses from 2 to 4\1/2\ million acre feet of water each year, water we frankly cannot afford to lose. To put that in perspective, several other States and the Republic of Mexico are delivered 10 million acre feet from all of Colorado's rivers and streams, including the mighty Colorado River. California is allotted 4\1/2\ million acre feet of Colorado water per year. That means that Tamarisk, a noxious, nonnative weed, uses the same amount of water flowing from Colorado to California. We must address the preventable loss of this most valuable resource before it's too late. My bill seeks to begin get the Tamarisk problem under control in a few innovative ways. First, my bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to assess the extent of Tamarisk invasion, identifying where it is in each affected State, and estimate the costs to restore the land. Second, my bill establishes a State Tamarisk Assistance Program to provide States the needed funds to control or eradicate Tamarisk. Grant funds will be distributed to states in accordance with the severity of the Tamarisk problem they have. The Governor of each State will appoint a state lead agency to administer the program in the State, working with Indian Tribes, colleges and universities, nonprofit organizations, soil and water conservancy districts, and Federal partners. This coordinate approach provides sufficient flexibility to deal with Tamarisk's spread and to reduce duplicative efforts. A watershed or basin can stretch across all kinds of land, including Federal, State, or tribal lands. Noxious weeds don't recognize those ownership boundaries and neither can we. Since my bill's focus is on getting rid of this water-sucking weed, it requires that 90 percent of the Federal funds must be used for eradiction or rehabilitation. This legislation authorizes $20 million for 2004 and such sums as necessary thereafter. States must share the burden by ponying up 25 percent of the costs. The Tamarisk problem hurts everyone and the non- Federal share can come from counties, municipalities, special districts, nongovernmental entities, or the States themselves. Our Nation is in a deficit, and every state is experiencing money shortages. Americans demand to know that their hard earned money is being spent wisely and in the most effient way possible. That is why my bill requires that each participating State must submit a report of the Secretary describing the purpose and results of the project in order to receive funding. In the West, water is more precious and scarce than elsewhere in our great nation. To do nothing about the preventable loss of precious water by the spread of this noxious plant and the loss of native habitat will cost us untold millions more in the future. Back in my State of Colorado, constituents tell me how the drought has affected them, even devastated their livelihoods. No one can control the weather and bring rain. However, getting a handle on the water-sucking Tamarisk plaguing the West is possible--if we act now. My bill provides the necessary tools to deal with this problem so that ther will be enough water for all of us, and habitat suitable for native species of plants and animals. I ask unanimous consent that the next of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, as the author of amendment No. 864, the Indian provision to the Energy Bill, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, June 11, 2003 at 10 a.m. in Room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing on the Nomination of Charles W. Grim, D.D.S., to be the Director of the Indian Health Service at the Department of Health and Human Services; to be followed immediately by another hearing on S. 1146, to implement the recommendations of the Garrison Unit Joint Tribal Advisory Committee by providing authorization for the construction of a rural health care facility on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, North Dakota. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forest

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, it is an indisputable fact that Indian country contains some of the richest energy resources in the America. Indian lands comprise approximately 5 percent of the land area of the United States, but contains an estimated 10 percent of all energy reserves in the United States, including: 30 percent of known coal deposits located in the western portion of the United States; 5 percent of known onshore oil deposits of the United States; and 10 percent of known onshore natural gas deposits of the United States. Coal, oil, natural gas, and other energy minerals produced from Indian land represent more than 10 percent of total nationwide onshore production of energy minerals. Even though in one year alone over 9.3 million barrels of oil, 299 billion cubic feet of natural gas, and 21 million tons of coal were produced from Indian land, representing $700 million in Indian energy revenue, the Department of the Interior estimates that only 25 percent of the oil and less than 20 percent of all natural gas reserves on Indian land have been fully developed. It is ironic that many Indian people were forced on to the most arid, barren, and least productive lands in the 1800s and now they find themselves resource rich. Despite what we may read in the Washington Post or the New York Times about the so-called rich Indians and Indian gambling, it is also indisputable that Indians are the most economically deprived ethnic group in the United States. Unemployment levels are far above the national average, in some cases as high as 70 percent. Per capita incomes are well below the national average. They have substandard housing, poor health, alcohol and drug abuse, diabetes, amputations, and a general malaise and hopelessness, even suicide among Indian youngsters. In fact, in some reservations it is not uncommon to find one out of every two teenage girls and one out of every three boys who attempt suicide driven by despair and a dead end future. In that context, this amendment I am offering today tries to give them some help. Given the extent of the economic deprivation in Indian country and the vast potential wealth residing in energy resources which could ameliorate this deprivation, it has long been a puzzle why these resources have not been more fully developed. The answer lies partly in the fact that energy resource development is by its very nature capital intensive. Most tribes do not have the financial resources to fund extensive energy projects on their own and so must partner with private industry, or other outside entities, by leasing out their energy resources for development in return for royalty payments. The unique legal and political relationship between the United States and Indian tribes sometimes makes this leasing process cumbersome. As with most Indian law and policy, history plays an important part. Towards the end of the 19th Century, Indian tribes were forcibly removed to isolated areas and reservations where it was believed they would not hinder the westward expansion of a new and growing country. The natural resources contained on these lands were taken into trust by the Federal Government to be administered for the benefit of Indian tribes. The ostensible reason for the trust was the belief that Indians were incapable and incompetent of administering such resources, and would be susceptible to land and resource predators. By the way, that belief was prevalent with a lot of people in American Government and led the Surgeon General at the time to issue a request to the U.S. Army that Indian skulls be sent to DC to study and find out if Indians had the intelligence to own their own land. That, in turn, gave rise to the saying among modern Indian people that there are more dead Indians in Washington, DC, than live ones, because until the last couple of years there were over 16,000 remains, primarily skulls and upper body bones, warehoused in the Smithsonian. Just a few years ago, we passed a Museum of the American Indian bill, and one provision of that required that the Smithsonian and other Federal agencies start returning those bones. A legal and bureaucratic apparatus was formed to administer this trust, and over a century later this apparatus remains in place in the Interior Department. In her capacity as trustee of Indian resources, the Secretary of the Interior is required to examine all leases of Indian trust resources, to ensure that the terms of the lease benefit the tribe, and to ensure that the trust asset is not wasted. The Committee on Indian Affairs has been informed over the year that the Secretarial approval process is often so lengthy that outside parties, who otherwise would like to partner with Indian tribes to develop their energy resources, are reluctant to become entangled in the bureaucratic red tape that inevitably accompanies the leasing of Tribal resources. Hence, the framework that was originally designed to protect tribes has become an obstacle to development of Tribal resources, in that the bureaucratic impediments of trust administration are now a disincentive to outside investors. To help remedy these problems, earlier this year I, along with Senator Domenici, introduced the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self Determination Act of 2003 to provide assistance and encouragement to Indian tribes to develop their energy resources. This was based really on last year's amendment to the Energy conference report, much of the same language. That report, of course, did not emerge from the conference committee and died with the end of the last Congress. This assistance included: The establishment of an Indian Energy Office; grants, loans, and technical assistance; capacity building; and regulatory changes to the rules governing the leasing of Indian lands for energy purposes. At the same time, the Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Bingaman, introduced his own Indian energy bill that somewhat mirrored ours. After the hearing and much debate the best of these two bills were melded together into a composite bill that made up title III of the bill before us now. The amendment I am offering today contains refinements but not major changes of title III and I would like to walk through these provisions for the benefit of the Members who will be reviewing the Record tomorrow. Section 2601 contains definitions. Its standard definitions section provides definitions for a number of terms including the following: Director of the Office of Indian Energy Policy; Indian Tribe; and Vertical Integration. Section 2602, the Indian Tribal Energy Resource Development, authorizes the Interior Secretary to provide assistance to Indian tribes in the form of development grants and grants for obtaining or developing managerial capacity needed for energy purposes. It provides low-interest loans to Indian tribes and tribal energy development organizations to promote Indian energy development. Section 2602 also provides assistance to Indian Tribes for purposes of energy efficiency and energy conservation; as well as planning, construction, operation, maintenance of electrical generation facilities on tribal lands. Section 2603, the Indian Tribal Energy Resource Regulation authorizes the Secretary of Interior to make grants to Indian tribes and tribal energy development organizations to use, develop, administer, and enforce tribal laws governing the development and management of energy resources on their own lands. This section helps tribes build the capacity, if they do not already have it, to develop their resources in an effective and safe way. For instance, a tribe could use these funds to develop a tribal energy resource inventory; to carry out feasibility studies necessary to the development of energy resources; to develop and implement tribal laws and technical infrastructure to protect the environment; to train employees engaged in energy development and environmental protection; and other functions related to scientific and technical data development and collection. Section 2604 establishes a voluntary process for those tribes that choose it to help develop their energy resources. Under the process, an Indian tribe must first demonstrate to the Secretary of Interior that it has the technical and financial capacity to develop and manage its own resources. Once it meets this burden, the tribe can negotiate energy resource development leases, agreements and rights-of-way with third parties without first obtaining the Secretary's approval. This will provide streamlining to the leasing process that is now burdened by an extensive Federal regulation I mentioned earlier. Whether a tribe decides to avail itself of the new procedure in the section or continue under the current system will be entirely at the option and discretion of each tribe. None is required to do so. It is totally voluntary, tribe by tribe. Under current law, in order to be valid, all leases, business agreements, and rights-of-way involving restricted land must be submitted to and approved by the Secretary of the Interior. Section 2604 of the Campbell amendment provides tribes with the obligation of submitting to the Secretary a proposed government-to-government agreement, a tribal energy resources agreement, sometimes called a TERA--and I will continue using that word for simplicity--that will set forth mandatory provisions for future leases, business agreements, and rights-of-way involving energy development on tribal lands. Along with the proposed TERA, the tribe will have to make a demonstration to the Secretary that it has the experience and managerial and financial capacity to regulate and develop its own energy resources. If the Secretary approves the TERA, that TERA will govern future development of the tribe's energy resources. The TERA, by virtue of this section, will require tribal leases and agreements to have certain terms, require compliance with all applicable environmental laws, notice to the public, and consultation with the States as to potential off-reservation impacts. The TERA will provide for an environmental review process that will identify all significant impacts, inform the public, and allow the public to comment on the potential environmental impacts before any lease agreement or right-of- way is approved. The Secretary will be required to review any direct effects of an approval of the TERA itself under NEPA. The subsequent tribal approval of leases, business agreements, and rights-of-way under TERA will not be subject to another review under NEPA. In other words, tribes will not be exempt from NEPA. It will be front-loaded so that the requirements are at the secretarial level, but if that agreement goes through, they will not have to go through the NEPA process two times. The TERA will also require the Secretary to do an annual trust asset evaluation to modernize the tribe's energy development activities and allow her to reassume the responsibility over those activities if she finds an imminent jeopardy of trust assets. This section gives third parties who have or may sustain a significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the tribe's failure to comply with its TERA the standing to petition the Secretary to review the tribe's activities. This process both protects the tribe's status and certainly does not allow them to circumvent NEPA. If she finds the tribe in violation of TERA, she may suspend the leases or rights-of-way or suspend TERA altogether. Section 2604 also discusses the Secretary's trust responsibility. It expressly states that the section does not absolve the United States from that responsibility and expressly states that the Secretary will continue to have a trust obligation to protect a tribe when another party to a lease agreement or right-of-way is in breach. It does not affect trust responsibility at all. Section 2604 provides that the United States will not be liable to any party, including a tribe, for losses resulting in the terms of any lease agreements or right-of-way executed by the tribe pursuant to the approved TERA, which makes sense; Liability follows responsibility. If a tribe makes the leasing decisions, it should certainly be held responsible. If the United States continues to make the leasing decisions, it will continue to be held responsible. If Indian self- determination means anything, it means the right of tribes to make their own decisions and their responsibility to the tribes to live with those decisions. Section 2605 deals with the Federal Power Marketing Administration. This section authorizes the Bonneville Power Administration and the Western Area Power Administration to encourage Indian energy development through a variety of means. It authorizes the power administrations to purchase power from Indian tribal generators to meet their own needs or energy needs on Indian lands, and it requires that any such power purchase must not cost more than the prevailing market price. This section also authorizes the Energy Secretary to undertake a power allocation study with a report due within 2 years of the enactment of the title. Section 2606 deals with Indian mineral development review. This section authorizes the Interior Secretary to undertake a review of all activities conducted under the Indian Mineral Development Act of 1982 and to report the results of that review to Congress. Included in the study would be recommendations for overcoming the barriers to greater mineral development on Indian lands, such as legal barriers, physical barriers, market barriers, and others. Section 2607 authorizes the Energy Secretary, in tandem with the Interior Secretary and the Army Corps of Engineers, to undertake a feasibility study of developing a demonstration project that uses wind energy generated by tribes and hydropower generated by the Army Corps of Engineers on the Missouri River to supply area to the Western Area Power Administration. A report of this study is due within 1 year of enactment. That is the substance of this amendment. It is very important that the choice of the tribes is upheld, and it certainly is whether you want to participate or not. For the record, I ask unanimous consent to have letters of support printed in the Record, including from the National Congress of American Indians which has over 300 tribal members, and the Council of Energy Resource Tribes with over 50 Members, and several letters from individual tribes, including the Chickasaw and the Cherokee.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I say to my colleagues, in supporting the amendment, you are not only assisting Indian tribes and the development of energy resources but helping the United States become less dependent on foreign energy which I think is the goal of all. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. That is all right.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I am going to speak for 15 or 18 minutes.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Tuesday, June 3, 2003 at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the Status of Tribal Fish and Wildlife Management Programs. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. subcommittee on national parks

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, June 4, 2003 at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing on Proposals to Amend the Indian Reservation Roads Program--S. 281, the Indian Tribal Surface Transportation Improvement Act of 2003, and S. 725, the Tribal Transportation Program Improvement Act of 2003. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, June 4, 2003 at 2 p.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on Impacts on Tribal Fish and Wildlife Management Programs in the Pacific Northwest. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. subcommittee on national parks

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I appreciate the broad bipartisan support given to Senate Concurrent Resolution 7, and the prompt action by the Committee on Foreign Relations, allowing for timely consideration of this resolution by the full Senate. Anti-Semitism is an evil that has bedeviled previous generations, formed a black spot on human history, and remains a problem to this day. As Co-Chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I have been particularly concerned over the disturbing rise in anti-Semitism and related violence in many participating States of the 55-nation Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, OSCE, including the United States. The anti-Semitic violence we witnessed in 2002, which stretched the breadth of the OSCE region, is a wake-up call that this evil still lives today, often coupled with a resurgence of aggressive nationalism and an increase in neo-Nazi ``skin head'' activity. Together with colleagues on the Helsinki Commission, we have diligently urged the leaders of OSCE participating States to confront and combat the plague of anti-Semitism. Through concerted efforts by the State Department and the U.S. Mission to the OSCE, a conference focused on anti-Semitism-- called for in the pending resolution--will be convened in Vienna, Austria, June 19-20. Meanwhile, the Helsinki Commission has undertaken a number of initiatives aimed at further elevating the attention given to rising anti-Semitism. In the year since the Commission's hearing on this issue, Commissioners have pursued it within the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly as well as in contacts with officials from countries of particular concern. I would point to France as a country that has recognized the problem and acted to confront anti-Semitism and related violence with tougher laws and more vigorous law enforcement. I urge French officials to remain vigilant, while recognizing that none of our countries is immune. A recent opinion survey of adults in five European countries conducted by the Anti-Defamation League, ADL, found that 21 percent harbor ``strong anti-Semitic views.'' At the same time, the survey revealed that 61 percent of the individuals polled stated they are ``very concerned'' or ``fairly concerned'' about violence directed against European Jews. An ADL national poll of 1000 American adults found that 17 percent of Americans holds views about Jews that are ``unquestionably anti-Semitic,'' an increase of 5 percent from the previous survey conducted four years earlier. According to ADL there were 1,559 reported anti-Semitic incidents in the U.S. in 2002, with attacks on campuses rising by 24 percent over the previous year. Mr. President, if anti-Semitism is ignored and allowed to fester and grow, our societies and civilization will suffer. A particularly disturbing element we have observed is the growth of anti-Semitic acts and attitudes among young people ranging from a rise in incidents on U.S. college campuses to violent attacks perpetrated on Jews by young members of immigrant communities in Western Europe. Education is essential to reversing the rise in anti-Semitism. Our young people must be taught about the Holocaust and other acts of genocide. Institutions such as the Holocaust Memorial Museum are making valuable contributions to promote the sharing of this experience at home and abroad. Such activity should have our strong support as a vital tool in confronting and combating anti-Semitism. Mr. President, passage of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 7 will put the United States Senate on record and send an unequivocal message that anti-Semitism must be confronted, and it must be confronted now.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation, the National War Permanent Tribute Historical Database Act, which would establish a permanent database to catalogue, identify, and locate the thousands of permanent veterans' memorials on public land. Right now, an individual can go online and access a network of all railway mainlines, railroad yards, and major sidings in the continental U.S. through the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. If someone wants to search all scenic byways--by location or keyword--he or she can easily access this database through the Federal Highway Administration. Through the National Park Service, one can access the inventory of historic light stations and publicly accessible lighthouses. But if one of my constituents, a veteran, or a young person working on a school project, wants to access a comprehensive list of veterans' memorials, they can't. Currently, there is no central catalogue of information on structures commemorating an individual or group in the Armed Forces available to the public--maintained either by the Federal Government or by a non- governmental entity. Unfortunately, many of these structures are in a terrible state of disrepair and rest in unknown storage facilities around the country. Through the Department of Veterans' Affairs, an individual can look up a list of all State cemeteries and their contact information. But, as I understand it, that's the extent of the database. And that's simply not enough. Admittedly, I am not an expert on navigating through the Internet, but I know that many of my constituents are. The ultimate purpose of this bill is to compile and classify the myriad of information that exists and make it available for anyone to access. Even those not proficient on a computer will benefit from a standardized database, because hopefully it will be operative from a number of means. In fact, under my bill, this database would be established by the Department of the Interior with the assistance of other agencies, non- profits, tribal governments, and any other entities the Secretary of the Interior deem appropriate. Since the Department of the Interior already maintains several databases, I believe it already has the infrastructure and the proven capability to maintain a catalogue of veterans' memorials. The Secretary would also have to report back to Congress three years after enactment to assess the feasibility of establishing a permanent fund to repair, maintain, and restore memorials that need help. Several years ago, Congress passed a law which expressed the need for cataloguing and maintaining these public veterans' memorials. When similar legislation, upon which this bill is based, was reported favorably out of the House Committee on Resources last Congress, staff from the Congressional Budget Office estimated that enacting this bill would not have a significant impact on the budgets of State, local, or tribal governments. It would also not preempt authority of State, local, or tribal law. Let's work together to get this common-sense, low cost effort off the ground and working for the millions of people who have so courageously defended our freedom. I have said this before, but I truly believe that veterans' memorials often serve as the only tangible reminders we have of their service to this country. Not only have we lost many of these brave men and women during conflict, we are losing thousands of them forever, each year, as the veteran population ages. A common-sense first step to making sure that the sites and structures honoring them are properly maintained is also making sure we know where each of them is. Future generations depend on it. Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed another veterans' bill of mine, the Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act of 2003, which is on its way to the President's desk. This bill, S. 330, would make a Federal crime, the destruction of veterans' memorials and would permit guide signs to veterans' cemeteries on Federal-aid highways. I cannot think of a better way to make this law more effective than to have a national database to identify these veterans' memorials. Having said that, it is my hope that we can work swiftly together to move this legislation introduced today. This weekend, we will be commemorating our veterans with festive celebrations and somber vigils. Let us honor what they have done to preserve our freedom by protecting and recognizing the sites which commemorate them. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation, the National War Permanent Tribute Historical Database Act, which would establish a permanent database to catalogue, identify, and locate the thousands of permanent veterans' memorials on public land. Right now, an individual can go online and access a network of all railway mainlines, railroad yards, and major sidings in the continental U.S. through the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. If someone wants to search all scenic byways--by location or keyword--he or she can easily access this database through the Federal Highway Administration. Through the National Park Service, one can access the inventory of historic light stations and publicly accessible lighthouses. But if one of my constituents, a veteran, or a young person working on a school project, wants to access a comprehensive list of veterans' memorials, they can't. Currently, there is no central catalogue of information on structures commemorating an individual or group in the Armed Forces available to the public--maintained either by the Federal Government or by a non- governmental entity. Unfortunately, many of these structures are in a terrible state of disrepair and rest in unknown storage facilities around the country. Through the Department of Veterans' Affairs, an individual can look up a list of all State cemeteries and their contact information. But, as I understand it, that's the extent of the database. And that's simply not enough. Admittedly, I am not an expert on navigating through the Internet, but I know that many of my constituents are. The ultimate purpose of this bill is to compile and classify the myriad of information that exists and make it available for anyone to access. Even those not proficient on a computer will benefit from a standardized database, because hopefully it will be operative from a number of means. In fact, under my bill, this database would be established by the Department of the Interior with the assistance of other agencies, non- profits, tribal governments, and any other entities the Secretary of the Interior deem appropriate. Since the Department of the Interior already maintains several databases, I believe it already has the infrastructure and the proven capability to maintain a catalogue of veterans' memorials. The Secretary would also have to report back to Congress three years after enactment to assess the feasibility of establishing a permanent fund to repair, maintain, and restore memorials that need help. Several years ago, Congress passed a law which expressed the need for cataloguing and maintaining these public veterans' memorials. When similar legislation, upon which this bill is based, was reported favorably out of the House Committee on Resources last Congress, staff from the Congressional Budget Office estimated that enacting this bill would not have a significant impact on the budgets of State, local, or tribal governments. It would also not preempt authority of State, local, or tribal law. Let's work together to get this common-sense, low cost effort off the ground and working for the millions of people who have so courageously defended our freedom. I have said this before, but I truly believe that veterans' memorials often serve as the only tangible reminders we have of their service to this country. Not only have we lost many of these brave men and women during conflict, we are losing thousands of them forever, each year, as the veteran population ages. A common-sense first step to making sure that the sites and structures honoring them are properly maintained is also making sure we know where each of them is. Future generations depend on it. Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed another veterans' bill of mine, the Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act of 2003, which is on its way to the President's desk. This bill, S. 330, would make a Federal crime, the destruction of veterans' memorials and would permit guide signs to veterans' cemeteries on Federal-aid highways. I cannot think of a better way to make this law more effective than to have a national database to identify these veterans' memorials. Having said that, it is my hope that we can work swiftly together to move this legislation introduced today. This weekend, we will be commemorating our veterans with festive celebrations and somber vigils. Let us honor what they have done to preserve our freedom by protecting and recognizing the sites which commemorate them. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Wednesday, May 21, 2003 at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on Reorganization of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, May 22, 2003 at 10 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the Status of Telecommunications in Indian Country. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at 224-2251.

Mr. CAMPBELL

Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the second bill I am introducing today is the ``Officer Dale Claxton Bullet Resistant Police Protective Equipment Act of 2003''. This bill is named in honor of Officer Dale Claxton of Cortez, CO, a fine law enforcement officer and family man, who was fatally shot through the windshield of his patrol car on May 29, 1998, after stopping a stolen truck. His assailants turned out to be dangerous fugitives and as a result, a large-scale man hunt was launched. The assailants were brought to justice, but Officer Claxton was tragically and prematurely taken away from his wife and four children. ``The Officer Dale Claxton Bullet Resistant Police Protective Equipment Act'' would aid law enforcement agencies in acquiring bullet resistant equipment for their forces, including bullet resistant glass for law enforcement vehicles, hand-held shields and any other equipment that officers may need when they serve on the front lines of law enforcement. Specifically, this legislation would help our Nation's State and local law enforcement officers acquire the bullet resistant equipment they need in order to protect themselves from would-be killers. This legislation would authorize the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance to administer a $40 million matching grant program to assist these agencies purchase bullet resistant equipment. This legislation is a worthy companion, and similar in many ways, to S.764, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act, which I recently introduced for reauthorization. Like S. 764, today's bill would help State and local law enforcement agencies acquire bullet resistant equipment--however this bill would simply provide for a wider array of bullet resistant equipment to supplement bullet proof vests. As a former deputy sheriff, I am personally aware of the dangers which law enforcement officers face on the front lines every day. One way in which the Federal Government can improve their safety is to help them acquire bullet resistant glass and other equipment for patrol cars. These partnership grants are especially crucial for officers who serve in small, local jurisdictions that often lack the funds to provide their officers with the life saving equipment they may need. The second component of this legislation would launch expedited and targeted research and development by authorizing $3 million over 3 years for the Justice Department's National Institute of Justice, NIJ, to conduct research and development of new bullet resistant technologies, such as bonded acrylic, polymers, polycarbons, aluminized material, and transparent ceramics. Promising new bullet resistant materials now being developed could be as revolutionary in coming years as the development of Kevlar was in the 1970s for the manufacture of body armor. These exciting new technologies promise to be lighter, more versatile and hopefully less expensive than traditional heavy bulletproof glass. Our Nation's police officers, sheriffs and deputies regularly put their lives in harm's way as they protect the people and preserve the peace. They deserve to have access to the bullet resistant equipment they need. The Officer Dale Claxton Bullet Resistant Police Protective Equipment Act will both accelerate the development of new lifesaving bullet resistant technologies and then help get them deployed into the field where they are needed. Officers lives will be saved. I ask unanimous consent that the text of Officer Dale Claxton Bullet Resistant Police Protective Equipment Act of 2003 be printed in the Record.