COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

GEORGE H. MAHON, Texas, Chairman

KENNETH SPRANKLE, Clerk and Staff Director
PAUL M. WILSON, Assistant Clerk and Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES

JULIA BUTLER HANSEN, Washington, Chairman

GEORGE E. EVANS, Staff Assistant to the Subcommittee

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1970

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1969.

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

WITNESSES

ROBERT L. BENNETT, COMMISSIONER

THEODORE W. TAYLOR, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

J. LEONARD NORWOOD, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR ADMINISTRATION

WILLIAM R. CARMACK, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMUNITY SERVICES

CHARLES N. ZELLERS, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION GEORGE W. HUBLEY, JR., ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

ARTHUR O. ALLEN, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR ENGINEERING HOMER D. GREEN, CHIEF, DIVISION OF BUDGET

FRANCIS M. WILES, ACTING DIRECTOR OF BUDGET, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

CHARLES P. CORKE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

RALPH R. REESER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMUNITY SERVICES

JOHN P. SYKES, CHIEF, PROGRAM PLANNING AND ANALYSIS, EDUCATION

DONALD T. KETHRO, ENGINEERING ADVISER

Mrs. HANSEN. The committee will come to order.

This morning we have the Bureau of Indian Affairs. May I say we are delighted to greet you, Commissioner Bennett. It has been a pleasure to work with you. We think you have done an outstanding job. And I may say that both Congressman Reifel and I had the opportunity of visiting the Navajo Reservation this winter and we saw many things that are on the plus side of your Bureau.

As you are well aware America has been in a dilemma for the last 20 years about what to do for the American Indians. Finally our Nation has become aroused and concerned enough to do the very best we can for the Indians. Sometimes in the desire to do the very best, nothing arises but criticism of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. It is only fair to state that for every minus there is also a plus. We saw so many fine young people who I am sure would not have an education today if it had not been for your work and your programs. We saw families that need much more, but who have begun to work for rehabilitation with job training. We saw good standards of food service in the schools, one of the highest standards of cleanliness I have ever observed in any school.

We admit we still have our problems, but I think many of us will recognize that these problems can be solved by increasing our activities even though we have had to short-change, due to the expenditure of money for other things, these activities. But I do think, Commissioner Bennett, that we have improved the situation in recent years. It is in a cooperative spirit that the committee welcomes you this morning to discuss very frankly not only your justifications but our mutual problems in the Indian programs. I think the best comment was from one of the Navajos who said "After all we are trying to accomplish something, we aren't burning our Nation down."

Now I am sure you have a general statement and if you wish to place that in the record at this point and then summarize it for us, we would be delighted. And I would like you, when you are making your statement to review the progress that you feel you have made during the past 5 years so that we may spell out our successes as well as the failures.

Mr. REIFEL. Madam Chairman, might I add, as the Commissioner moves into this last phase you just covered, we hear a lot today about panaceas for solving the difficulties which Indians face in this country. I wonder if he might at the end, to the extent he won't cover it in his general statement, tell us what his thoughts are along this line. I think this would help to complete the general statement for the record.

GENERAL STATEMENT

Mr. BENNETT. Thank you very much. It is always, of course, a pleasure to be before this committee where we have the understanding leadership who are acquainted first-hand both from their own background as well as their responsibilities in Congress with the local Indian situation.

I have a few remarks to make which are intended to bring another dimension into the discussion today.

It is good to be before you again in this period of history when the Indian minority is being discovered or rediscovered. I hope that funds will be provided for the long haul of human development and not be diverted to panaceas of the new discoverers of Indians. Some of them, whose panaceas have not been accepted by Indian tribes or even presented to them, find their way into high positions in Government and then seek to impose their will on Indian people from their positions of vantage as staff officers in the Government or in the Congress. Study upon study is not the answer, particularly when these designed to develop new ideas and new innovations, recommend that the Bureau itself come up with the ideas and innovations that the studies were set up to develop and take away the initiative of Indian people to propose solutions to problems they know and understand. What is the answer given by most who invite themselves in a study of Indian affairs? These answers generally fall into two classic categories: (1) Transfer the functions of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to another agency-Federal, State, or local-it does not matter which; or (2) abolish the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

This emotional concentration upon the Bureau of Indian Affairs is a part of the antiestablishment syndrome of some so-called bright and sometimes angry young men who equate anger with intelligence makes them proponents of the same grave injustice of which

they accuse the Bureau of Indian Affairs; namely, lack of Indian involvement altogether, or lack of involving leaders of the "Indian" establishment, such as tribal councils, and so forth. Many of these people are seeking recognition for themselves and respectability for their ideas under the antiestablishment syndrome by involving themselves in Indian affairs, most without invitation by Indian leaders. They seek to discredit those of us like members of this committee who have worked many years with and for the Indian minority even before it was fashionable to be involved with minority groups.

The main criticism of many, both in Government and outside, is not what we are doing as they are of the fact that we are doing it and they want to take our place to be the ones to work in partnership with the Indian people.

FEDERAL ROLE IN INDIAN AFFAIRS

Most of what we are doing is predicated upon the hopes, desires, and aspirations of Indian people. The Federal Government's role should be to help them achieve their hopes and aspirations, therefore, Government officials should not let their personal biases enter into the decisionmaking process, nor should their personal opinions be imposed upon the Indians.

I come to you also after 36 years of listening to Indian people, and I say that the answers to their problems lay with them. Whenever I want help, ideas, stimulation, or inspiration, I go to the Indian people. There is where we should concentrate our efforts, and there is where those who are now becoming concerned with Indians should begin, and not be overly concerned, as most of them are, with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Indian people are well aware that they can bring about the transfer or the abolishment of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and end my tenure as Commissioner should they so choose.

INDIAN INVOLVEMENT

A major premise upon which the programs before you are based is that of maximum involvement of the Indian people. We interpret self-help, self-development, and self-determination as meaning full involvement of the Indians as partners in all matters affecting their welfare. We believe this is a sound policy. Unilateral actions by the Government for the Indian have too often left the Indian in a stagnant eddy of nonparticipation.

This emphasis on involvement shows up in the material before you in several ways.

INDIAN INVOLVEMENT IN SCHOOL BOARDS

We have projected the involvement of 10 Indian communities in school boards-boards that actually have responsibility to control the operation of their school within the guidelines and requirements set forth in a contract with the Bureau through the establishment of Project Tribe (tribal responsibility in better education).

This concept was delivered by me in a speech in January 1966 to the Seminole Tribe of Florida, when I dedicated their school, so this is nothing new as far as the Bureau of Indian Affairs is concerned.