|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PARRIS N. GLENDENING, Governor
|
|
H.B.342
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Mr. Speaker:
In accordance with Article II, Section 17 of the Maryland Constitution, I have today
vetoed House Bill 342 - Commission on. Indian Affairs - Formal Recognition of
Maryland Indian Status.
House Bill 342 establishes a new procedure for providing formal State recognition of
Maryland Indian status by altering the duties of the Commission on Indian Affairs,
the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Community Development and the
Governor. House Bill 342 would require the Secretary to transmit a recommendation
from the Commission regarding a request for formal recognition of Indian status by
an Indian tribe, band, group or clan to the Governor within 60 days of receiving the
recommendation. The Governor would be required to act within 120 days of receiving
the recommendation. The bill applies retroactively to any recommendation made by
the Commission after January 1, 2001.
The process for State recognition is a complicated one. It requires significant
historical work by the applicant, the Commission and the State. The decision to veto
House Bill 342 is a difficult one, given the heartfelt dedication of the sponsor of this
bill to the issue and the impact of this process on applicants for recognition. I have
concerns about the bill, however, for two reasons: the bill restricts the authority of the
Governor in this area, and unfortunately, the specter of expanded gambling
opportunities in Maryland continues to loom over this issue.
Admittedly, the road to federal recognition (and the potential for gambling
opportunities as a result of that recognition) is a long one. Additionally, other benefits
are associated with achieving recognized status. The history of the applicants who
supported the bill is, unfortunately, sprinkled with visions of gambling prospects at
the end of the recognition rainbow. In the past, the applicants have publicly stated an
interest in gambling after federal recognition and acknowledged that developers with
an interest in gambling provided some funds to support the group's ancestry research
efforts. These statements have rekindled the perception in the public forum that
gambling is the desired end result and that House Bill 342 is the vehicle for that
result. This may or may not be accurate, and I have no doubt that the focus of the
sponsor of the bill is unrelated to gambling. The sponsor has sincerely worked to
minimize the concerns of this Administration that House Bill 342 is a precursor to
expanded gambling. At the sponsor's request, language was amended onto the bill
making clear that passage of the bill did not create any right to gambling activities.
Unfortunately, the amendment has not removed speculation that gambling is
inevitable and does not prohibit gambling from occurring if federal recognition is
eventually achieved.
In light of this uncertainty, I am concerned about the general issue of restricting the
Governor's power to make a decision on recognition and the particular issue of the
time frames established by the bill. The bill, if signed, has an effective date of October
1, 2002. Section 3 of the bill requires the Governor to act on a pending application
within 120 days of that effective date. This would require the current Governor to
make a decision within the last 107 days of this term, or require the incoming
Governor to make a decision within the first 13 days of the new term. Generally, these
are not time frames within which the public wants to have its elected officials make
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 5079 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
