Native Voice One

Native American Radio Network

Infrastructure

By

Water projects will be a high priority for infrastructure spending. (Bureau of Indian Affairs photo)
This is the ideal moment for infrastructure projects across the country and the need remains particularly great in tribal communities.
This is Trahant Reports.
Infrastructure is one of those words that has broad support across politics. (The only dividing line is how to pay for stuff.) Everyone knows we need to rebuild so many structural parts of our society. Then again in tribal communities some of these infrastructure projects are not rebuilds … but being done for the very first time.
What do we mean when we talk about infrastructure?
There are roads, rails and bridges. Water systems. Energy transmission — such as electricity. Ports and waterways. And even pipelines. 
The shared idea is that these projects are extraordinarily expensive and to be successful there has to be a partnership with the federal government.
John Tahsuda III, who was a deputy Interior assistant secretary for Indian affairs, said that roads and bridges will be high priorities for many tribal communities. He told Indian Country Today’s newscast last week about a “horrific accident in South Dakota where a culvert had washed out.” That’s and example of the kind of projects that need to happen
Across the country there are a lot of aging systems, roads, water pipelines … and that’s why Congress is considering spending the $2 trillion as a downpayment. 
In addition to the money there are other challenges for tribal leaders.  In testimony last month, the chair of the Colorado Indian River, Amelia Flores, said “The first thing you need to know: you don’t need to just throw money at the problem. It helps of course, but it’s not the only thing holding tribes back.” She cited a number of legal and policy barriers that make it nearly impossible to maintain a water system.
She said routine maintenance often goes unfinished because the Bureau of Indian Affairs fails to charge water users enough to cover the basic costs of maintenance. Flores testified: “The tribe asks the BIA year after year to raise these rates — essentially taxing ourselves—so that the work can get done. But we have had minimal success even as the maintenance backlog grows.”
None of this is new.  A few years ago a Senate report pegged the unmet infrastructure needs in tribal communities at $50 billion.
Indeed two areas where there will be a lot of discussion are about safe water delivery and waste water management. Both of these were important weaknesses in the transmission of the coronavirus and essential going forward. A report four years ago by the National Congress of American Indians found that nearly 10 percent of American Indian and Alaska Natives do not have access to safe water at home and the backlog of sanitation systems had grown more than 80 percent to $3.39 billion worth of projects. 
So, yes,  the federal government is about to spend a lot of money … but there is still a much longer “to do” list.

 

I am Mark Trahant

A Question of Spending

By

Let’s talk about the challenge to spend billions of dollars. 

 

This is Trahant Reports.

 

The premise sounds absurd. How do governments — namely the United States and some 500 tribal nations — spend billions of dollars to try and limit the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic? The money was in a spending pipeline before there were clear rules about how to even distribute those funds. 

 

The need is clear. The economic activity that supported jobs, social services, and growth all came to a halt last year. Congress responded with an unprecedented investment in Indian Country targeting money for relief.

 

But how?

 

A lot of tribes came up with different answers. Some created their own version of individual relief efforts, urging tribal citizens to apply directly for funding 

 

And now, nearly a year after Congress passed that bill, some tribal governments remain in legal limbo over what’s been distributed. 

 

The issue didn’t become any clearer for three tribes that argued during a federal court hearing last week. They said the formula used to dole out a portion of the $8 billion set aside for tribes based on the inaccurate  tribal populations are counted.

 

The Shawnee Tribe in Oklahoma and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians in Florida were among those given the minimum of $100,000 because U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development data showed they had a population of zero.  Zero. The Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation in Kansas has argued it should have received $7.65 million more than it got, based on its own enrollment data.

 

And a Washington think tank, the Center for American Progress, published a report in February that called for Washington policymakers to use tribal enrollment data instead of census information in order to fix this problem. 

 

Yet Congress is pushing ahead with another coronavirus relief package. The House bill includes  $20 billion directed for tribal governmental efforts, money distributed by a formula.Another $8 billion will go directly to federal programs that serve American Indians and Alaska Natives, such as the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service. 

 

Will this be enough to make tribal economies whole again? Tough to say. On one hand tribes are ahead of the curve on vaccinating populations. On the other hand it remains clear that we have a long way to go before the economy is back to some kind of normal.

 

One study looking at the Wisconsin economy found that tribal enterprises — casinos, hotels and restaurants — lost 80 percent of their business in 2020.

 

So even with the latest relief bill from Congress … It will take a long time to make up for a financial collapse of that magnitude. 

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Budget Deadline

By

It would be nice to have some quiet time. A few days, or better, a few weeks where the country doesn’t face a major challenge. 
Of course in a pandemic that’s not going to happen. And lawmakers in Washington may make things worse. 
Really. 
This is Trahant Reports.
The deadline is December 11th. That’s when the federal government — once again — will run out of money. Three things could happen. First, Congress could enact a real budget for the year that already began in October. Second, there could be another temporary solution, a Continuing Resolution, in the language of Washington. Or finally the House, the Senate, and President Donald Trump could fail to reach a deal altogether. And if that happens … then once again the federal government will go into shutdown mode.
During a pandemic, no less.
So far the House and the Senate have different spending approaches. And after a deal is reached, then President Donald Trump will have to agree too. That might be complicated in a time when he still claims he won the election … “by a lot.”
This year’s spending bills are thorny because of the election results. Democrats want to spend more money on the priorities of the next administration. And, conversely, Republicans are hoping to protect as many of their policies as possible. Think border wall and immigration. 
Congress has a lot on its agenda beyond the immediate budget. There are loud calls for a new pandemic relief bill.
And states and tribes are looking for money to distribute vaccines, a task that’s huge given the size of the country. Imagine reaching 100 million people or more so they can take one or two shots.
More than 125 economists have called on Congress to act soon. They wrote: “The COVID crisis has caused some of the most significant and unequal damage to the U.S. economy in modern history, leaving families and businesses alike struggling to get by. Unless policymakers act quickly to respond to the crisis at the scale necessary, we risk the damage to the economy lasting much longer than necessary, particularly for those at the bottom who have been hit the hardest.”
Tribes, and some states, could also use more time to effectively distribute the already funded 
In the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security or CARES Act. That  $2.2 trillion stimulus package signed into law in late March, was by all accounts a successful factor in mitigating the economic impact of COVID. 
But tribes have asked for more time. Building up an infrastructure, while fighting the pandemic itself, has been particularly challenging for smaller governments. The money is supposed to run out at the end of the year.
So far there doesn’t seem to be a lot of consensus about what to do next.  Democrats are eager to pass something significant, while Republicans in the Senate remain cool to anything costly.
Congress returns to work this week and the deadlines are coming fast.
I am Mark Trahant.

Fund Litigation

By

There are a lot of questions about the disbursement of an $8 billion fund by the federal government to tribes and Alaska Native corporations.
This is Trahant Reports.


The $8 billion tribal relief fund will not last long. More than 600 tribes, corporations, and even nonprofit organizations registered last week with the Treasury Department documenting what’s needed to at least partly mitigate the impact of the coronavirus. 

And based on the leaking of sensitive information, it’s clear the pool will be far short of what’s needed, likely less than ten percent.
There is also no clear indication from the Trump administration about the process. 
Will the release of the funds be public? What formula will be used, population, or land base, or employees? Or all three?
And will even the formula be a public document?
These questions are punctuated by the chaos of an $8 billion disbursement that could happen as soon as Tuesday with a completion date of April 26. 
Several tribes — including two in Alaska — have sued the Treasury Department over the issue of money directed to Alaska Native Corporations. 
The lawsuit says “COVID-19 is causing devastating harm in Indian country” and that Congress recognized the unique hardships on tribal governments. 
The Interior Department said Alaska Native corporations are eligible for the funding, pointing to a definition that includes them as an “Indian Tribe” in the Indian Self Determination Act. 
And most of the tribes arguing against funding Alaska Native corporations argue that money should be used to to support governments with a political relationship with the United States.
The Aleut Community of St. Paul Island says there is a middle ground. “A very workable solution to controversy (is) the authorization by Alaska’s federally recognized tribes for tribal organizations/consortia to receive funding on their behalf, if they so choose,” wrote Amos T. Philemonoff, Sr. in a letter to the Treasury Secretary.
Philemonoff makes the case to let the money flow up, not down. 
However in an op-ed published in Indian Country Today four leaders of Alaska Native corporations had their own take. “The law is clear. Our legal mandate as Alaska Native corporations is to support our Alaska Native communities and shareholders economically, culturally and socially,” they wrote. 
The federal court, like the spending program itself, is on a tight deadline. Once the money begins to flow any legal challenge could be irreversible.

Budget Proposal

By

The federal budget for next year is out today. May it rest in peace.

This is Trahant Reports.

Every winter the White House releases a budget for the federal government. The document outlines the president’s priorities in the year ahead. Then Congress pretty much ignores that document and enacts a budget of its own. (And that is true no matter which party runs is in control.)

But even if the budget does not become law, it does open a window into the thinking of any presidential administration.

This budget follows a familiar pattern. It will spend $4.8 trillion and carries a promise to balance the budget within 15 years. But to get there it carries deep spending cuts to domestic programs, an idea that Congress has rejected. It also would spend more money on the military and leave Social Security and Medicare benefits the same.

An election year document. Republicans will like the increase in military spending and Democrats are unhappy with the spending cuts.

Last year it was pretty much the same proposal. Then Congress said no until a deal was reached between the White House and House Democrats. This plan erases that deal by imposing an immediate 5 percent cut to all non-defense spending. Agencies that would be hard hit include a 27 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency, fewer dollars for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 9 percent cut to the Department of Health and Human Services, including the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Protection.  (The agencies charged with figuring out how to treat the coronavirus).

A special concern to Indian Country: The proposal to take $700 billion from Medicaid over the next decade. One way the Trump administration hopes to accomplish that goal is by creating waivers for states to swap program flexibility for less funding. The idea is then states could design programs that would better serve citizens. That’s the theory anyway.

** Extra: The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says: “The proposed waivers are a lose-lose proposition for people with Medicaid and for states. Far from promoting better health outcomes, as the administration has claimed, the waivers would worsen people’s health by taking away coverage and reducing access to care. For states, they would mean greater financial risk, with federal funding cuts most likely to occur during recessions, public health emergencies, and other times when states face high demand for coverage and strain on other parts of their budgets. States taking up the proposed waivers should also expect to face litigation, since the waivers appear to violate federal law in several respects.” **

In recent years the Indian Health Service has been dramatically reshaped by Medicaid spending; it now accounts for funding for one out of four patients. And that’s a conservative figure. It’s likely higher.

In the State of Indian Nations, National Congress of American Indians President Fawn Sharp called the federal budget “incompetent.”

Nothing in the document released today will change that perception.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Good, Bad & The Ugly

By

The big picture: The White House budget has no chance of becoming law, but the federal government is on track for more chaos.

This is Trahant Reports.

President Donald J. Trump has outlined his budget for fiscal year 2020. It would slash funding for virtually every domestic program, add money to the military budget, and of course, build a border wall. The document is titled: “A Budget for a Better America: Promises Kept. Taxpayers First.” The president’s budget would “save” nearly $2.7 trillion, more budget cuts proposed than any administration in history.

Only Congress, not the president, decides how money will be spent in the federal system. At best the administration writes a budget that initiates a conversation. The real work of the budget occurs in the Senate and House appropriations committees.

Not that presidential budgets are totally worthless. As the White House said a year ago the budget is a “messaging document.” Last year’s budget, for example, assumed Congress would repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with a block grant. As I wrote a year ago: “The votes are not there for that. It’s fantasy.”

And that was when Republicans controlled Congress. The House is now under Democratic Party control turning the dial even more toward government.

So it’s not useful to get excited about the numbers in this White House budget (probably any presidential budget for that matter) and instead focus on the larger issues.

One big picture issue is that Congress and the president must reach a deal on spending under the Budget Control Act or there will be budget cuts of more than 11 percent on the existing budget figures (Defense and Domestic programs are cut about the same under the sequester … an idea to make it easier to reach a deal).

This is the economic version of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. A three-way gunfight, or a truel. The players: Those who hate government, especially domestic programs, that also want money for the military. Those who would like to significantly spend less on the military, but spend more on domestic federal programs. And then the President of the United States is a wild card. (At least in the movie the wild card character fought without actually having a loaded gun.)

Congress knows this chaos is expensive and bad management. There might be enough votes around to fix the process, particularly for programs involving American Indians and Alaska Natives. Congress could appropriate funds for key programs, such as those that provide services in Indian Country, at least a year in advance.

This is already happening for many education programs and there is growing support for Indian Health Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs advance funding from members of both Democrats and Republicans..

Given the increasing budget uncertainty … this might be the year to make it so.

 

I am Mark Trahant.

Trump’s New Budget

By

National Economic Council discusses White House infrastructure plan. (White House photo)

Budgets are statements: This is what “we” care about.  It’s money that reveals priorities. The “we” could be, and ought to be, the country. Or the “we” could be a presidential administration that’s really not equipped to govern.

This is Trahant Reports.

President Donald J. Trump’s budget this year, like last year, expresses the administration’s desire to cut federal Indian programs, wipe out public broadcasting, end student loan forgiveness, starve Medicaid and Medicare, food stamps, housing programs, and generally, limit just about every federal program that serves poor people.

As Trump budget director Mick Mulvaney told reporters: “This is a messaging document.”

And what a message. Rich people face tough times so they deserve a huge tax cut. Poor people are poor because of their own failures. And more money is needed for a wall that’s not needed, for the largest military in the world, and the Republicans no longer believe that deficits matter.

Mulvaney has a different version. Here is what he says are the messages.

“Number one, you don’t have to spend all of this money, Congress.  But if you do, here is how we would prefer to see you spend it,” he said.

Now the action is in Congress. But even Republicans on Capitol Hill know that this budget cannot be. It’s chaos as numbers. Because for this proposal would become law only if you overwrite the current spending bill. Then, the House and Senate would have to agree on a budget. And that’s unlikely. As I have said before there are lots of votes against any budget but not enough votes to pass any budget.

The most popular part of the president’s budget is infrastructure spending. But most of his plan would be funding from state, local, and tribal governments. That’s a problem. Congress will not be easy to follow this approach, especially in an election year. Members of Congress love announcing new roads and other projects. It means jobs back home.

In theory infrastructure spending should be easy. This is an area where Republicans and Democrats agree (actually anyone who looks at the crumbling state of infrastructure can figure this one out). But in Congress? We shall see.

At the State of the Indian Nations Monday, National Congress of American Indians President Jefferson Keel said: “Tribal infrastructure is American infrastructure. In 2018, NO infrastructure bill should pass, UNLESS it includes Indian Country’s priorities.”

This 2019 presidential budget will accomplish one thing: It will serve as a mile post for the fall election. And the messages are clear for both Republicans and Democrats.

I am Mark Trahant.

State of Indian Nations

By

What are the state of 573 tribal nations? Jefferson Keel, president of the National Congress of American Indians, gives his answer at the Newseum in Washington, DC.

This is Trahant Reports.

The State of the Union is a tradition in Washington. Its roots are in the Constitution as a presidential report to Congress. Members of Congress, the executive branch, and the Supreme Court listen to the words of every president since FDR in an annual report. (Before that there was a presidential message to Congress but some presidents sent it in writing while others went to the Congress.)

These days Indian Country is rarely mentioned in a formal State of the Union. But in July 1970  President Richard Nixon’s sent a special message to Congress on Indian affairs, announcing his policy on self-determination without termination.

But that was rare exception. And not the official State of the Union. So 15 years ago the National Congress of American Indians decided to deliver an annual message about tribal priorities for the Congress and the administration.

On Feb. 12, President Keel called this “an important moment. Our governments and our communities stand on high alert.” He said the echoes of America’s colonial past have continued to reverberate with disparaging rhetoric, failed policies, and, a disregard for the inherent sovereignty of tribal nations.

The recent tax legislation, for example, did not include Indian Country. Keel said tribal leaders met with members of Congress often. He said tribes offered thoughtful, pragmatic, deficit-neutral policy proposals. “But the bill came together in a flurry. And when the dust settled, Indian Country’s top priorities were absent from the version the President signed in December,” Keel said. “That is completely unacceptable.”

There are two pending pieces of legislation that still wait for a tribal voice — the most recent farm bill and a plan for national infrastructure spending. Keel said: “From wild rice and bison to salmon and blueberries, traditional Native foods are not only our way of life but are an economic driver too. Indian agriculture is a 3.2 billion-dollar industry, supporting nearly 72,000 jobs in Indian Country.” So, he added, no farm bill should pass  unless it also listens to and strengthen Indian Country’s agricultural potential.

Keel had a similar message on infrastructure, saying tribal infrastructure is American infrastructure.

The country, and Indian country, are better off when there is a recognition of the historic tribal-federal relationship, and when there is a true partnership of consultation between tribes and the federal government.

The State of Indian Nations is more than a tribal wish list. It’s an opportunity for a discourse about where Indian Country stands in the American government. And what the prospects are for improvement. The annual event draws members of Congress, the administration, and the public through a live broadcast. It’s become an important voice reminding the country what could be.

President Keel’s conclusion: “As it has been for thousands of years, the state of Indian nations is strong…. and everlasting.”

I am Mark Trahant.

$1.5 trillion and counting — Cost of climate change

By

How much does climate change cost taxpayers?

This is Trahant Reports.

The thing is governments really have two choices when it comes to managing the costs of global warming: Spend money on trying to reduce the problem; or spend money on cleaning up the catastrophes.

The Trump administration is on the hook for the catastrophe.

A report released last week by The National Centers for Environmental Information pegged that cost at $1.5 trillion. That includes estimates for Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria.

I witnessed first hand the impact of Hurricane Maria on the island of Dominica last month. We keep hearing stories about the power grid being down (similar to Puerto Rico) and you think, why? It’s been months. Why aren’t the lights on? Then you see nearly every electrical pole on the island sideways. The entire grid needs to be rebuilt (or better, rethought) and that’s decades of infrastructure. So the figure of $1.5 trillion is far short of what will be needed. And that’s just one island. Multiple the effect across the region.

The Centers for Environmental Information says there were sixteen weather and climate disasters with losses exceeding $1 billion each across the United States.

But instead of trying to reduce the costs of weather-related catastrophes, the Trump administration continues to develop more oil and gas. The Interior Department announced new rules that, if enacted, will open up nearly all of the United States coastal waters to more oil and gas development beginning next year.

As Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke put it: “The important thing is we strike the right balance to protect our coasts and people while still powering America and achieving American Energy Dominance.”

Dominance such a funny word. How can any nation be dominant in the face of storms that are ever more powerful and destructive?

A group of elders from the Bering Sea immediately condemned the Interior Department’s offshore drilling plan. They wrote: “The northern Bering Sea is a very fragile ecosystem. The marine mammals that we rely on use it as their highway and they follow specific migration routes. That is how we know when and where to find them. The noise and vibration associated with drilling will interfere with their sonar and disrupt their migrations. Then we the coastal people will lose our primary food source.”

There is a connection between developing oil and gas and paying the high costs to clean up after a storm. One side of the ledger goes to the few; the oil and gas “industry.” The other side of the ledger is the rest of us. The taxpayers who will foot the bill for this continued folly.

And on the Bering Sea? The folks who live there are one storm away from tragedy. As the elders put it: “Our people and our way of life are being exposed to danger and we do not understand why.”

I am Mark Trahant.

Congress Faces New Pressure to Cut Federal Spending

By

President Donald J. Trump celebrates the passage of tax legislation. That new law will reduce money going into the federal treasury by some $1.5 trillion. (White House photo)

Congress is governing at short-term intervals because there are not enough votes to pass a real spending bill. And that’s not a good sign going forward because the budget only gets more complicated because of all the issues that Congress has been avoiding.

The New Year starts with all kinds of resolutions. One issue that’s been put off for a “later” day is a resolution about how the federal government spends money. That later day will be Jan. 19.

This is Trahant Reports.

Government budgets are policy documents. What programs are more important and therefore get more funding? Which agencies should get less?

The Trump administration has been clear since the election that it wants smaller government. But Congress, not the president, makes that call. And that’s where the problems begin.

Congress is supposed to enact spending bills by October 1. But the votes are not there to make that so. Some conservatives want the federal government to spend far less across the board, while others want more money for Defense. Neither of these wings has enough votes to pass their spending plan. So they need help from Democrats. And Democrats are against harsh budget cuts in domestic programs.

So instead of a spending plan, Congress has been enacting short term budgets. The latest temporary bill includes money for the Children’s Health Insurance Program — a program that includes insurance for American Indian and Alaska Natives. That program expired in October.

But Congress has avoided most of the contentious issues that divide Republicans. The leadership says it will address immigration, health care and national security in the next spending bill.

Right.

Over the next year or two there will be much more pressure for Congress to cut the budget. Deeply. The new tax law means there will be fewer dollars going into the federal treasury.  Roughly one point five trillion dollars less.

So the White House is already telling federal agencies to prepare for severe budget cuts in the 2019 budget.  A memo recently surfaced that called for a government-wide pay freeze just to save money.

The Washington Post reported that federal employment has dropped by some 16,000 workers. That’s a small percentage. But it includes the slow appointment of political posts — the president is choosing not to fill many slots — and it masks even deeper reductions in agencies such as the Environmental Protection Administration or the Internal Revenue Service.

The president is “committed to streamlining government for the 21st century, reducing bloat, duplication and waste, and focusing resources on key priorities like public safety and protecting our nation’s homeland,” a  White House spokesman told the Post.

The president is shrinking government — as he promised.

Congress is governing at short-term intervals because there are not enough votes to pass a real spending bill. And that’s not a good sign going forward because the budget only gets more complicated because of all the issues that Congress has been avoiding.

I am Mark Trahant.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use our site, we will assume you have given your consent. Click here to opt-out.