The shifting sands of the Washington, D.C., political pit can sometimes mean two people can propose the same bill in Congress, but only the one with party dominance has a chance of success.
Legislation to create a reservation for the Lytton Rancheria next to Windsor is once again being proposed in Congress. But the Sonoma County tribe of Lytton Pomos is relying on a Central Valley Republican to advance its effort to create a homeland instead of Jared Huffman, the North Coast Democratic legislator who carried virtually the same bill two years ago.
In fact, Huffman, D-San Rafael, is now distancing himself from it, saying he doesn’t want to doom it by having his name attached.
Instead, the Lytton Rancheria Homeland Act of 2017 is solely sponsored by Jeff Denham, R-Turlock, a member of House Natural Resources Committee, who sits on a subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs overseeing matters regarding Native Americans and 566 federally recognized tribes.
But Denham and his political action committee also received more than $68,000 from the Lytton tribe and its San Pablo Casino over the past year, leading rancheria opponents to claim his interest is solely mercenary.
The Lytton Rancheria Homeland Act would create reservation lands totaling more than 500 acres adjoining and southwest of Windsor, including some noncontiguous parcels, all owned by the Lytton Pomos.
It includes a 124-acre tract for a tribal housing project along Windsor River Road that is the subject of a separate, long-pending application with the Bureau of Indian Affairs to create a reservation.
But if Congress acts to create the Indian lands instead, it would give the tribe a much bigger chunk of territory and more development opportunities no longer subject to local land use zoning and guidelines.
Lytton attorney and spokesman Larry Stidham said Denham “is familiar with Indian issues throughout the state and this is an issue he has taken an interest in and feels it appropriate for the tribe to take the land into trust.”
With Republican sponsorship, it could stand a better chance than Huffman’s identical bill that died at the end of last year before it could be voted on.
“Obviously the partisan nature of the House was the singular reason it didn’t move out at the end of the session,” Huffman said of his Lytton Rancheria Homelands Act of 2015.
“At any given moment, if you are a Democrat in a high-profile battle with the House majority, they’re likely to punish you by freezing your bills. That’s what happened to me,” Huffman said.
Huffman was going to extra lengths this week to separate himself from the bill. Huffman and the tribe asked Denham to carry it, Denham’s office said.
“Not true,” Huffman replied, adding he sent a letter Wednesday to the chairman of the Lytton tribe and Denham clarifying his position.
Huffman said he doesn’t object to Denham carrying the legislation for the tribe and told him so, “but it’s not something I requested, or initiated.”
Huffman said there is “a level of partisan pettiness” in the nation’s capital that could sink a bill with him as the sponsor, for reasons unrelated to the substance of the legislation. In a letter to the Lytton tribe, Huffman said that is essentially what happened when Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield last year chose to prevent his bill from coming to a vote by the full House.
Our editors found this article on this site using Google and regenerated it for our readers.
