the positive part of this treaty so overwhelms and outweighs the objections, which i respect, that the plurality up here is highly significant. >> the energy opportunities in the united states today are of game changing proportions. an economist just a few months ago said within the next decade in the u.s. policy is done well, we will become the new middle east for energy production. i think there's two dimensions to this answer. the first is we need to think long term. we need to look at things and see how do we secure our energy future. not only the next 10 to 20 years, but the next 50 to 100 years. oil and natural gas will

continue to be the foundation energy building block for many decades yet to come. even as we strive to move to alternative renewable forms, and other less emitting forms of energy. the second dimension we shouldn't overlook, and it goes back to the senator's point earlier, we have to get ourself back as a country in our own political will and ability to produce our own energy. we can secure the border. we can secure the long-term future through the law of the sea, but we've got to have processes within the united states where we say energy is a priority. producing clean burning natural gas that saved the consumers of pennsylvania close to a quarter billion dollars in one year.

it can't stay there forever. but we have the same possibly with oil. north dakota is the number two producer. oil production is $90,000 a year. median wage for everybody else, $42,000 a year. we ought to talk about energy as we make this decision because it will be altering for this nation for many years yet to come. >> you don't have to, but if you want to add anything -- >> no, the only thing i would add is while we are out mining the seabed, we are putting the cables across so that these companies can make the investments and run their businesses effectively.

and we should do everything we can to eliminate the risk associated with this vital network. >> i want to thank you you all. i think your testimony has been extraordinarily significant. very, very thought out and thorough. and i think important to this process. so we're very, very grateful to all of you for taking time today. we will leave the record open for a week and look forward to koptding the discussion with you for the next months. appreciate it. we stand adjourned. thank you. next on c-span3, a house hearing looks into how ipdian

tribes apply for recognition from the federal government. a discussion at the brookings institution about defense budget cuts. and the state department's bureau of democracy human rights and labor celebrating the 35th anniversary. >> this is the conversation we need to have in the country that nobody is willing to have. what role should the country play in housing finance? >> gretchen morgenson detailed the 2008 financial meltdown and one continuing issue, government subsidized homeowner ship. >> if you want to subsidize housing in the country, an we want to talk about it and the populous agrees that it's something we should subsidize, then put it on the balance sheet and make it clear, and make it evident. and make everybody aware of how much it's costing.

when you deliver the subsidy with private shareholders and executives who can extract a lot of the subsidy for themselves, that's not a very good way of subsidizing homeowner ship. i think we saw the end of the movie in 2008. a dispute between napa county, california, and a local indian tribe came to congress when both sides testified at a hearing on the recognition of tribes by the federal government. they claim it was illegally stripped in 1959. meanwhile, a napa county supervisor argued that only congress should be able to recognize the tribe. the house indiana sub committee

held this 98-minute hearing. >> let me welcome mr. lujan and the position he's had. it makes me feel good about that side of the ail and the people who worked with me over the years. i'm confident the young man will fill his shoes. the sub committee already came to order. the sub committee on india and alaska native affairs is meeting to hear testimony on the standards and procedures on whether and how indian tribes should be knewly recognized by the federal government. opening statements for the chairman and ranking member of the sub committee so we can hear from the witness more quickly. i ask unanimous consent if committed by the clerk by the close of the business day. i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from virginia, mr. whitman from california, mr.

thompson and florida mr. miller be allowed to join us and participate in the hearing. in today's hearing we will hear the perspective of several groups seeking recognition under the federal law. we'll also hear from the k supervisor in california with concerns over federal recognition process. the purpose of the hearing is not to determine the fate of any recognized petition but to gather facts that may inform the committee as to what a reasonable policy should be. it's one of the most solemn issues this committee deals with. it has impact on the federal budget, on the trust committee and other recognized tribes and on states and the political sub kwigs. rightly or wrongly, the executive branch has wrestled control over any recognition from the congress. the apartment says to enclose on the accountable system.

they are setting forth cry tier yar for a group to be recognized to make some sense. a few people questioned the motives of the small bededicated staff of the professionals who are tasked with reviewing recognition petitions and making recommendations for them. the basic problem is the decisions are ultimately made by an appointee and not those accountable to the word voters. the department occasionally ignores its own regulations and outside any transparent administrative or statutory process. this is not to increase public confidence in the tribal system. unfortunately they declined my invitation of a witness today. the only explanation given to the staff is that every department official capable of testifying has scheduled conflicts. i cannot accept this as a valid

excuse. they will appear and answer questions that they want to hide. that deeply disturbs me. while we take testimony from the witness who graciously accepted today, several who had to fly many miles to be here, i do intend to hold the administration's feet to the fire. we will hold a second hearing at a time to be determined when someone can make from the department available to answer questions. i think it's extremely important, if i may so, to ad lib a little by. my concern is some tribes are recognized, some are not, and there's no justification for the process. why some were denied and some were accepted. and that's what we're trying to make a standard rule, because as a role of the congress, it's not the role of the secretary of the make the decision. it's the role of the congress, the recognition and tribes to accept or not accept the standards as a tribe. i look forward to hearing our witnesses now reck nided for five minutes on any statement he may make. >> i like to say how much i look

forward to working with you through the end of the congress. as ranking member and to thank you for you leadership, my recent apointment to the decision is a great honor, and it's truly a privilege to serve native communities and the leadership role and to work to strengthening the federal trust relationship. empowerment over tribal lands and resources is an important goal of my office and this administration. i will work to achieve it. the administrative acknowledgment process began in 197 when the department of interior p-- in the letter to then secretary on the occasion of the legislative acknowledgment of the tribe, president carter stressed that the new federal acknowledgment regulations reflect high standards by which tribal groups must be evaluated. today these standards are based on historical indian records, genealogy, anthropology, and

other scientific methods for evaluating tribal acknowledgment petitions, recognizing the need for methodical and detailed processes in addition to and where proesappropriate in lieu e recognition, his message still resonates today. in the petition for recognition and standards for evaluating the account must be in place. federal acknowledgment establishes a government-to-government relationship between the tribe and the united states. and makes such a tribe eligible to receive certain protection services and benefits by virtue of the unique status as indian tribes. federal recognition is therefore extremely important and valuable to a tribe's economic and social condition, but that's not say that the administrative processes and standards should remain static or ignorant to logistical realities. it's my understanding they're currently going review for

further changes. while i believe they should require a tribe group to provide historical materials to support the acknowledgment, i also believe these requirements must evolve to can't conditions and circumstances of the day. the tribe should be able to produce equal value documents available to them to produce the same result. proof of their continue wall existence. in my view, high standards can and should be taken into consideration. any and all compelling evidence to support a tribal group's claim on a case-by-case basis. i'm a strong supporter of tribal recognition, whether through legislation or administrative acknowledgment. we'll learn through the witnesses today that each path has the draw skbacks, but all should be available to seek to

restore the government relationship tw the united states. to do so is quite simply a matter of respect for the tribal groups whose lands were taken, cultural identities maligns, and nearly extinct, and native languages lost as a consequence of the establishment of our great nation. i look forward to hearing from the tribal witnesses today, and i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. i will call our witnesses up. chief stevenson adkins. chairman scott gabaldon, who is accompanied by his attorney chairman an tucker, and supervirz, dye yan dilon, supervisor of napa county.

your written record will appear in the hearing record. i ask you to keep your statements limited to five minutes in rule 4a. our microphones are not automatic. i want you to explain how the timing lights work. when you begin to speak, the clerk will start the timer and a green light will appear. after four minutes, the yellow light will appear. you can conclude the statement. at five minutes the red light will come on. you may complete your sentence, but at that time i will ask you to stop. one thing, keep in mind, that all of you at the table, i'm very strict about procedures. designated to the house of representatives preserve, not to assume the house -- make sure that the house conducts its business in an early fashion, but to permit members to properly understand and participate in business of the house. therefore, i want to remind our witness that house rules require

they not engage in personalities towards a member or a senator. i wouldn't mind if they did it to a senator, but a house member is a no-no. another one of those people in a derogatory fashion. or accusing a member or senator of falsehood and exception. any witness who branches that decorum, this committee will be called to order and i will actually remove you. so keep that in mind. iwill begin with steven adkins, chief of the crickahominy tribe. >> thank you, chairman for inviting me here today to speak to this very important subject which looms large across all of indian country. i seek to provide a voice for those tribes seeking federal

acknowledgment regardless of the process they're pursuing. however, in some specific areas i'm speaking on behalf of the other tribes, the six tribes named in hr-783. chairman, young, the tribe is honored to represent the essence and democracy of freedom as we participated in events in the commonwealth of virginia and the united kingdom. we took pride in representing commonwealth of virginia and the united states of america descendents of those tribes who welcomed the first permanent english settlement to virginia, to this place called america. however, when the festivities were over, we remained unrecognized as sovrj nations by the united states of america. the indians lived under the treaty, ironically called the articles of peace, crowned to

the united states. signatories are sovereign suggests of the crown. as recently as the first decade, this treaty was applied to a court case involving the virginia indians. why we are now recognized by the commonwealth of virginia, federal recognition continues to elude us. please allow me to site a painful example of why the current administrative process falls short in embracing the realities the virginia indians face. in 1912 a man became head of the first bureau of arts and statistics in virginia. he was an erratic white acce seperatist. to give you an idea of the motives surrounding this companion bill was a sterilization act that called for the sterilization of feebleminded inmates.

from 1924 the official common wel did not allow the virginian tribes to list indian or any other triable affiliation on the birth records. this act served as the official policy of virginia for five decades remaining in effect until 1967. sadly, there was one exception to this rule. many of the so-called first families of virginia, and i find that ironic, since the natives have been there for 10,000 years. be new first families claim to be descendents of pocahontas. this allowed the white families in virginia to list them as white. despite the one drop rule, while still claiming to be descendents of pocahontas.

so that only white or colored will list it. the state registrar will advise no indian tribes in virginia. despite the response, federal government officials and the virginia tribes conducted interviews and photographed people, places and things, substantiating their existence. they supported the fact that indiana tribes are doing under time. and tuition for the ipdia iandi to attend the high school in oklahoma. in addition to oklahoma, the commonwealth paid for indians to attend schools and other states.

additionally to provide funding for the schools. at one hand, we were acknowledged by both the federal and state government. the most telling testimony of the current system, the 1999, the head of the bia, the indian triable delegation that many of the people assembled on that day would not live long enough to get federal recognition through the administrative process. we have had many chiefs since then. the administrative process for people in the southeast has been very low. several factors contribute to the low success rate. lack of resources needed for the information to be complied or the process geared more towards post.

. a lot of them cannot afford the cost. criteria was for the tribes in the united states. i'll skip to my closing remarks. regarding when indian tribes should be newly recognized by the federal government, let me put it this way. tribes who have been able to maintain the identity over hundreds of years who are have faced abuse and insult because of their heritage, who have witnessed continued shrinking and sometimes complete loss of their tribal lands, who have seen them decembersy ma decembe decimated to the point where -- they have lost more fighting for the united states of america than any other group in the union, and who resolutely salute old glory and display pride and

love for the country. the answer to when to recognize newly recognized tribes, that answer is now. that answer is today. my testimony would be incomplete if i did not cite a common threat that exists among atlantic coast tribes. this is the respective tie to colonial governments. from colonial times forward there was a concerted effort to eliminate this the tribes through the documentation. the history predates 1607. the first sustained -- >> you have run out of time. >> okay. >> thank you. >> you did well. >> thank you for your time. >> by the way, i have to remind you, that we did pass and recognize you out of this congress last year.

>> thank you so much for your time. i heard you were going to be here. i have good friends in alaska. my confidence soared. >> i appreciate that. next witness is mr. scott ubaldon. >> good. my name is scott gabaldon. i am -- i would like to thank for the opportunity. our tribe was wrongly terminated and deserves it restored. our history, the napa valley was

inhabited solely by the indians until 1823 with 10,000 years of ancest ancestry. the name, napa valley itself is derived from our language, meaning land of plenty. although the county of napa posts the wappo indians as part of the heritage, some only want us to be a memory. representative mike thompson, who has had colorado first congressional district since 1998. the inconvenient truth of opposition to what is an injust done to the wappo people is those who oppose us are rich. there are no vineyards working to oppose us. the minimum wage workers do not oppose us, nor any local tribes in the area. they will use the stronghold of

power in napa county when our tribe is restored. to those who misled and to garner your support through perspection. we are not a new tribe. the lies they told by agency desperate to satisfy a political agenda in 1958 are nothing compared to the lies being told to the court, the press and the citizens of the counties. this was not the first attempt

to get federal recognition to correct this mistake. the record shows we tried many eaves in 2003 and 2004. we want the government to acknowledge the mistakes, and terminating our people as well as many other tribes who were affected by the injustice and restore our tribal status, benefits and land rights. two facts dictate that justice must be served. fact one, we're unlawfully terminated in 1961 after the request of a nonwappo indian who received two-thirds of the tribal lands. fact two, after many attempts of tribal restoration, we decided to sue the federal government. therefore, with all other options exhausted or unavailable, in 2009 the lawsuit was filed in the federal district court in open public form with a neutral party deciding the outcome. since 2009, at first we tried to build a relationship with three.

meaning all of them in private before they intervene the lawsuit with the federal government. and all of those meetings, they all express one concern, land. since then, they have worked hard to prevent our very existence to acquire land. the counties are more concerned with the region's economy disrupting the way of life than they are concerned with four generations of native americans being deprived of what they should rightfully have. the counties are concerned with the casino. we are concerned with education. counties are concerned about land use. we are concerned of housing for our elders. counties are concerned about environment impacts. we're concerned about our tribal's health care. it appears that we are winning, everyone wants to attack us, including not only the counties and a local coalition of vineyards, but even you, mr. young, wrote a letter objecting our restoration. in conclusion, i'm not here today to explain the laws of the land to you.

i am merely here to explain our position. we will fight to have our rights restored, and that includes litigation. although, i do feel it would be in the best interest of the united states to admit the errors and settle with my tribe. therefore, i truly hope this committee takes what i say here close to heart and take action, setting policies. not only for my tribe and the newly recognized tribes but for the unlawfully terminated tribes. we have suffer enough injustice from this nation for long enough. thank you. >> next witness will be -- i don't know how to pronounce that nam name. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. members of the sub committee, i'm pleased to join you today to

introduce ann dennison tucker. chairwoman tucker has served her tribe for over 30 years. she has in-depth knowledge of the history, the genealogy and federal tribal issues unique to northwest florida, and you'll find her testimony to be a telling one. i've had the opportunity to meet with the chairwoman on several occasions and have seen firsthand her tribe's great work and the impact that they've had from a local community. i know of no better person than ann to share with you the many hardships that her tribe has faced under the current federal recognition process. i want to thank you for holding this important hearing and preeshs the opportunity to join you today, mr. chairman. to listen to chairwoman tucker, the people of the nation of florida. and their continued efforts that i hope will lead ultimately, although i know that's not what this hearing is about. but the