Legislative Hearing on: H.R. 411 (Rep. Bergman), “Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Land Claim Settlement Act of 2025” H.R. 2916 (Rep. Stefanik), To authorize, ratify, and confirm the Agreement of Settlement and Compromise to Resolve the Akwesasne Mohawk Land Claim in the State of New York, and for other purposes H.R. 3620 (Rep. Begich), “Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act” H.R. 3670 (Rep. Stansbury), “IHS Provider Expansion Act”

House Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs

2025-06-11

Loading video...

Summary

The subcommittee meeting convened to address four proposed bills concerning Indian and Insular Affairs, focusing on land claim settlements and improvements to healthcare services and workforce in tribal communities, while also acknowledging broader concerns about tribal program funding cuts[ 00:22:58-00:23:05 ] [ 00:27:35-00:27:42 ] .

Themes

Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Land Claim Settlement (H.R. 411)

The H.R. 411 bill aims to resolve a longstanding land claim for the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) due to the unconstitutional taking of over 4,000 acres of treaty-protected reservation lands by the federal government, which were then transferred to the state of Michigan in the late 19th and early 20th centuries[ 00:28:59-00:29:37 ]

[ 01:15:15-01:15:16 ] . The legislation proposes a $33.9 million monetary settlement to KBIC, an amount derived from a professional appraisal, to extinguish their claims and provide clear title for current landowners without seeking to reclaim land from non-tribal owners[ 00:29:55-00:30:01 ] . This bipartisan bill has broad support from the tribe, local communities, the State of Michigan, and passed the Senate by unanimous consent in the previous Congress[ 00:30:01 ] [ 01:18:38 ] [ 01:18:46 ] . Enactment would address a historical wrong and ensure that tribal rights are upheld and the community is made whole[ 01:19:11 ] .

Akwesasne Mohawk Land Claim Settlement (H.R. 2916)

H.R. 2916 seeks to authorize, ratify, and confirm a comprehensive settlement agreement to resolve the Akwesasne Mohawk land claim in New York State, ending a dispute related to lands reserved in the 1796 treaty that were improperly taken by New York[ 00:30:12-00:30:22 ]

. The agreement involves multiple parties, including the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, the Mohawk Council of Akwesasne, the State of New York, and various counties and authorities[ 00:30:31-00:30:50 ] . Key provisions of the settlement include returning 3,500 acres of land to reservation status and allowing the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe to acquire up to 14,000 more acres from willing sellers[ 00:31:07 ] [ 00:31:12 ] . Additionally, it provides tuition waivers for Akwesasne Mohawk students at SUNY institutions and preferred electricity rates from the New York Power Authority, with no federal monetary contribution required[ 00:31:17-00:31:21 ] . The settlement clarifies jurisdiction, ensures no current landowner loses land, and helps the tribe with housing and economic development.

South Central Foundation Land Transfer Act (H.R. 3620)

H.R. 3620 proposes to transfer ownership of a federal land parcel in Anchorage, Alaska, to the South Central Foundation (SCF), an Alaska Native-owned nonprofit healthcare organization[ 00:31:40-00:31:42 ]

[ 00:34:31-00:34:47 ] . SCF has operated a behavioral health center, Quiana Clubhouse, on this land for three decades, but federal ownership prevents modernization and expansion[ 00:31:46-00:31:54 ] . The bill aims to facilitate the construction of a new 40,000-square-foot facility to house and expand critical behavioral health and intensive case management programs, which are currently operating in aging and inadequate buildings[ 00:34:42-00:34:47 ] . While the Indian Health Service (IHS) supports the intent, it expressed concerns about the bill not explicitly guaranteeing the land's use for Alaska Native and American Indian health services, the lack of a reversionary interest, and the use of a warranty deed over a quitclaim deed. However, SCF, as a 638 contractor, has a proven track record of serving Alaska Native and American Indian people, and the community supports the program's location and purpose.

IHS Provider Expansion Act (H.R. 3670)

H.R. 3670 seeks to establish a new permanent Office of Graduate Medical Education (GME) within the Indian Health Service (IHS) and authorize $4 million annually for its operation[ 00:32:34-00:32:44 ]

. This initiative is designed to address chronic provider shortages within IHS facilities, which currently stand at a 33% vacancy rate for primary positions, by developing residency and fellowship opportunities[ 00:32:52 ] . The office would coordinate with academic institutions and existing IHS programs, modeled after the successful Veterans Health Administration's Office of Academic Affiliations. Proponents emphasize that doctors tend to practice where they train, and this program would create a pipeline for healthcare professionals, including Native individuals, to serve tribal communities with culturally attentive care[ 01:03:47-01:04:01 ] [ 02:38:22-02:38:33 ] . IHS noted concerns about the lack of a clear implementation plan and long-term sustainability without significant appropriations growth.

Funding Challenges for Tribal Programs

During the meeting, concerns were raised regarding proposed funding cuts to Native American and tribal programs, particularly those serving healthcare and social services. Specific cuts mentioned include an 800-employee reduction in the Indian Affairs Division, a 60% funding cut for BIA social services (including child welfare and foster care), and an $84 million cut to public safety and justice funding. Additionally, a proposed elimination of advanced appropriations for IHS, and an 87% cut in sanitation facilities construction, were highlighted as detrimental to tribal communities. The potential devastating impact of proposed Medicaid cuts on tribal-operated clinics, which rely heavily on such funding, was also emphasized[ 02:29:21 ]

. IHS representatives, when questioned, declined to comment on these broader funding issues[ 00:52:30 ] [ 00:55:48 ] .

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely respectful and cooperative, especially concerning the specific bills under consideration, which garnered bipartisan support[ 02:48:32 ]

. Witnesses expressed gratitude and optimism regarding the potential positive impact of the legislation on their communities[ 01:15:08 ] [ 01:30:04 ] . However, a notable tension arose during the questioning of the IHS Deputy Director, who declined to comment on broader funding cuts and policy changes impacting tribal healthcare, leading to frustration from some members[ 00:52:30-00:52:41 ] . This highlighted underlying concerns about administrative actions and their potential effects on tribal sovereignty and well-being.