PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-389.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 21, 2003
Indian Money Account Claim Satisfaction Act of 2003 - Establishes the Indian Money Account Claim Satisfaction Task Force: (1) to complete an analysis of records, data, and other historical information with regard to the conduct of an historical accounting submitted by the parties in the class action to the district court in January 2003 (Cobell v. Norton (No. 96cv01285, D.D.C.)); and (2) after such completion to hold meetings with representatives of the plaintiffs in the civil action, the Departments of Justice and of the Interior and any other parties that, in the discretion of the Task Force, are necessary to carryout out its duties.
Requires the Task Force to develop appropriate methodologies or models to conduct an accounting to determine in current dollars the balances of: (1) all individual Indian money accounts opened in or after 1985; (2) all individual Indian money accounts opened on or after the enactment of a certain Act of June 24, 1938, regarding deposit, care, and investment of Indian moneys, and before 1985; and (3) all individual Indian money accounts opened before such enactment.
Establishes the Indian Money Claims Tribunal to serve as arbitrator if an eligible individual elects to have the amount of the balance in the individual Indian money account determined through arbitration. Binds the individual and the United States to any determination made by the Tribunal.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires payments made pursuant to this Act to be derived from the permanent judgment appropriation (commonly known as the Judgment Fund), without further appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Campbell, Ben Nighthorse [R-CO] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-389.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S12979-12980)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S12978-12979)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1770 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1770 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1770 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1770 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.