Bill Overview
Title: Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Repeal Act
Description: This act repeals the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act, which sets forth how funds credited to the Klamath Tribe must be distributed. The Department of the Interior must disburse to the tribe the balance of funds that were appropriated or deposited into per capita trust accounts and trust accounts for remaining legal fees and administration.
Sponsors: Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the Klamath Tribes
Estimated Size: 4100
- The Klamath Tribes are the direct beneficiary of the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act, which means the repeal will affect how monetary distributions are handled.
- The act specifies that the funds held in trust for the Klamath Tribe will be disbursed to the tribe itself, potentially impacting all members by changing the way funds are managed and distributed.
- This change in the fund's management will primarily impact the members of the Klamath Tribes, who are the intended recipients of these appropriations and disbursements.
Reasoning
- The Klamath Tribes consist of approximately 4,100 enrolled members or descendants who reside in the United States, primarily in southern Oregon. This is a relatively small population compared to the overall U.S. population, which allows us to assume a high impact per capita from the disbursement of funds.
- The policy's budget allocation of $50,000,000 USD over 10 years indicates that substantial funds could be individually channeled into economic initiatives or direct personal benefits among the tribe members.
- The disbursement of funds held in trust to the tribe itself suggests that the management, distribution, and accessibility of these funds will be directly affected, potentially altering the financial stability of the tribe members.
- It's necessary to capture a variety of perspectives from within the Klamath Tribes, including varying socioeconomic backgrounds. Not all tribe members will view the repeal in the same light, as it may clash with personal financial goals or their view on communal versus individual financial benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Tribal Government Employee (Chiloquin, OR)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think having the funds managed collectively allowed us to finance important community projects.
- I am concerned about individual disbursements leading to short-term thinking.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Rancher (Klamath Falls, OR)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having more control over the funds locally could make it easier for me to apply for agricultural support through tribal grants.
- I worry about the funds being spent too quickly without proper management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Student (Portland, OR)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope that more funds are allocated towards scholarships for tribal members.
- Changes in disbursement could make it more difficult for students like me to receive aid.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Chiloquin, OR)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on the tribe for assistance in covering my healthcare costs.
- I am concerned that the funds might not be available when needed if not properly managed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Health Worker (Klamath County, OR)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe properly managed funds can improve access to healthcare services.
- There's a risk that funds might be misallocated if not carefully overseen.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Teacher (Medford, OR)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I'm not directly affected, I think the extra funds could support better educational resources for my students.
- The community needs to ensure funds benefit future generations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Business Owner (Salem, OR)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There could be opportunities for business growth with more financial resources.
- I'd like to see a focus on economic development projects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Activist (Eugene, OR)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The enhanced funds distribution could support land conservation efforts.
- I am skeptical about how fair the distribution process will be.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Craftsman (Klamath Falls, OR)
Age: 57 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new fund setup could enhance support for artisans and cultural events.
- I'm not sure individual disbursements will reach small scale crafters like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Community Leader (Klamath County, OR)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see potential for improved community programs with direct fund access.
- Every member should understand the fund's long-term impact on our community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $55000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The policy's main action is transferring the balance of funds to the Klamath Tribe and disbanding associated trust accounts.
- Administrative implementation requires oversight to ensure fair and equitable distribution within the Tribal framework.