Bill Overview
Title: Recreation and Public Purposes Tribal Parity Act
Description: This bill authorizes the Department of the Interior to sell or lease public lands to federally recognized Indian tribes for recreational or public purposes, subject to annual acreage limitations.
Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]
Target Audience
Population: Federally recognized Indian tribes and their members
Estimated Size: 1500000
- Federally recognized Indian tribes are the primary target population of this bill, as it directly authorizes transactions between these tribes and the government regarding public lands.
- The bill involves the sale or lease of public lands to Indian tribes, which means it might also affect the communities living on or near these lands, but the primary legal and decision-making authority lies with the tribes.
- Public lands affected by the bill could be those currently used for various public purposes, potentially affecting current users, but only if a transition in usage occurs; this would primarily be under the tribe's stewardship once an agreement is reached.
Reasoning
- We need to consider the direct impact of the policy on federally recognized tribes, given the central role these tribes play in decision-making and use of lands.
- The policy has a somewhat allocated budget which might influence the scale of implementation, affecting only a certain number of tribes based on land value and lease arrangements.
- Some individuals in these tribes may experience a high impact if their community is directly involved in land transactions, potentially boosting local economy and community projects.
- It's also important to consider non-tribal populations who may be impacted indirectly by changes in land use or tribal economic activity.
- The commonality score reflects the proportion of these scenarios in the broader US population, recognizing that not all individuals in these interviews would be affected at the same level or at all.
Simulated Interviews
Tribal Council Member (Navajo Nation, Arizona)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is an excellent opportunity for our tribe to expand recreational facilities, which could improve community health and unity.
- I'm excited about the potential for tourism increase, which can bring jobs and economic growth to our area.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Business Owner (Cherokee, North Carolina)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If our tribe acquires more public land, we might be able to expand business with new attractions and improve our offerings.
- There needs to be careful planning to ensure environmental sustainability with this expansion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Non-Profit Worker (Urban Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a step forward in recognizing tribal sovereignty, but we need to ensure fair execution.
- I worry there's not enough budget to reach all those who could benefit.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Montana)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy doesn't limit access I currently have for grazing and access routes.
- I think it's fair, but any changes should consider pre-existing arrangements with non-tribal residents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Engineer (Pocatello, Idaho)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support tribes gaining more control over their land use.
- It's important to balance public access with tribal rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It could be a good case study for how policy impacts tribal sovereignty.
- I hope it includes clauses for environmental protection.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Elementary School Teacher (Rapid City, South Dakota)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Children can learn a lot from seeing their culture respected through such policies.
- I hope there are educational programs developed alongside this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Park Ranger (San Juan County, Utah)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's an exciting time, seeing these relationships evolve towards tribal management.
- Balancing new recreational facilities with conservation is key to sustainability.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Environmental Scientist (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Monitoring the environmental impact is vital as these land use changes occur.
- Our science community can assist in ensuring sustainable development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Legal Consultant (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a major step towards recognizing tribal autonomy over land use.
- It opens new avenues for legal negotiations that can benefit many communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Key Considerations
- Tribal sovereignty issues and the degree to which tribes want to or are prepared to manage such lands.
- The current usage of the lands and potential conflicts or changes associated with the new management structures.
- Potential costs related to legal or environmental compliance.