like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on the introdo,

The introduction of this le

After twelve years under 1

removal for many

their homelands to od Insular Aftai.

inent domain

Indians has been 20515

analogous

San Carlos Udall:

e 232,000

e pi/avajo Land Settlement Act of 1986.

rized and
il signifies the failure of Public Law 93-531.
ct we now have the opportunity to examine what was wrought by Congress in

The Udall/McCain proposed legislation enables us to
passing the Act of 1974.
take an historical look backwards and a cautious look forward.

ld
It is obvious from the evidence of those twelve years that the relocation of
adapting to a new way of life, these people have become sociological statistics
in government and private agencies.
could conceivably rotate between social programs for years to come.
destructiveness of the relocation process is not limited to individuals and
their families. The current damage to the overall Indian culture is devastating
and its actual effect may take years to assess.
With this much evidence available to us now, we must look to the future in a
considered, cautious manner. We must insure that any subsequent legislation
protects from further injury, these people who have suffered so much.
Enis light that I write regarding the Uda Il/McCain proposed legislation (the
Hopi/Navajo Land Exchange Act of 1936). It is my hope that you will consider
and respond to the following issues:

The relocatees and their coming generations

The

It is in

POINTS OF CONSIDERATION :

1.

Given the failure of the United States governinent to carry out its
program under the Hopi/Navajo Relocation Act as prescribed, it would
seem that the United States has significant liability, likened to that
of the Japanese relocation in the 1940's. Under your bill, are we now
placing that liability in the laps of the Navajo by ask ing them to pass
a resolution and to accept responsibility for resolving the process of
relocation?

Under your prosposed legislation, the residents of the Joint Use Area
spen to have little voice in the decisions regarding their welfare and

SUBJEXT: NAVIJO/

HPI LAND SETTLEMENT ACT

WEREAS the unity we find in Crist recognizes that "we are neither Jew nor Greek,

slave nor free, male nor female", and;

WHEREAS Our Social Principles (1980) read "The conditions of Indian people continue

to deteriorate on a national and international level through the genocidal policies of various governments and regimes in the western Hemisphere, through land and resource acquisition by multinational corporations, sterilization, mass murder, and the denial of relicious freedom.

" anc;

WHEREAS the Navajonopi Land Settlement Act (P.L. 93-531) passed by Congress in 1974

has caused grave hardship among the 13,000 Kavajo people dislocated from their land and threatens the traditional lifestyle of both the Navajo and Hopi people, and;

WHEREAS the settlement act is simificantly motivated by econanic gains by energy

production Simms seeking easier access to coal and uraniun, and;

WHEREAS the covernment has failed to provide pranised land for relocation and has

forced Navajo people into non-traditional lifestyles in Gailup and Flagstaff leading to many cases of cestitution, liopi lifestyles are equally threatened, and;

WERSAS attempts have 5285. Tace to soften the impact by invoiving the B.1... in

relocation procedres, and inst recently by the introjuction of Public Law 96305 by Morris Ucanl, but these attempts do not accress the whole problem.

"HEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Desert Southviest Annual Conference calls upon the

Congress of the U.S. to reveal the Land Settlement Act (P... 93-531), anc;

5E IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we notify the congressional representa-ives and Sen

ators representing the people within the bones of the inual Core xence oí our position, ana;

in coopera

pastors and it teliavajo and

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on the introduction of
the Hopi/lava jo Land Settlement Act of 1986. The introduction of this legis la-
tion signifies the failure of Public Law 93-531. After twelve years under this
Act we now have the opportunity to examine what was wrought by Congress in
passing the Act of 1974. The Udall/McCain proposed legislation enables us to
take an historical look backwards and a cautious look forward.

It is obvious from the evidence of those twelve years that the relocation of
traditional peoples, given any and all safeguards, does not work. Rather than
adapting to a new way of life, these people have become sociological statistics
in government and private agencies. The relocatees and their coming generations
could conceivably rotate between social programs for years to come. The
destructiveness of the relocation process is not limited to individuals and
their families. The current damage to the overall Indian culture is devastating
and its actual effect may take years to assess.
With this much evidence available to us now, we must look to the future in a
considered, cautious manner. We must insure that any subsequent legislation
protects from further injury, these people who have suffered so much. It is in
this light that I write regarding the Udall/McCain proposed legislation (the
Hopi/Navajo Land Exchange Act of 1936). It is my hope that you will consider
and respond to the following issues:

POINTS OF CONSIDERATION :

1.

Given the failure of the United States governinent to carry out its
program under the Hopi/Navajo Relocation Act as prescribed, it would
seem that the United States has significant liability, likened to that
of the Japanese relocation in the 1940's. Under your bill, are we now
placing that liability in the lans of the Navajo by asking them to pass
a resolution and to accept responsibility for resolving the process of
relocation?