Page 137 - Knighted_2018

Introduced to the United States House of Representatives on July 10, 1990 by Democrat
Morris Udall of Arizona, NAGPRA sought to provide legal recourse for the return of American
Indian human remains and sacred objects to Native guardians.20 NAGPRA was debated in the
House Committee on Interior and Insular affairs, and moved through the House of
Representatives in just over three months.21 After transitioning into the Senate, two amendments
were proposed: Sen. Wendell Ford moved that wording which expressly included the
Smithsonian Institute under federally funded organizations which were obligated to uphold
NAGPRA should be changed to exempt the Smithsonian,22 while Sen. John McCain, the vice
chair of the Indian Affairs Committee, moved that minor wording technicalities should be
redressed in sections two and fifteen. Both Sen. Udall and Sen. McCain were previously active in
legislative attempts to regulate institutional ownership and possession of Native American
human remains and sacred objects. Another proponent of repatriation legislation in the Senate
was Daniel Inouye, of Hawaii. Some protests arose from various museums and the scientific
community; these entities ironically feared the un-rightful loss of their mostly ill-gotten
collections. Addressing dissenting opinions, Sen. Inouye cleverly pointed out in a Senate floor
debate, “For museums that have dealt honestly and in good faith with Native Americans, this
legislation will have little effect. For museums who have consistently ignored the requests of
Native Americans, this legislation will give Native Americans greater power to negotiate.”23After
a unanimous voice vote to pass both the Senate and the House, H.R. 5327 was signed by
President George H. W. Bush and became public law 101-106 on November 16, 1990.24

20 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 USC 3001–3013.
21 “H.R. 5237” Congress.gov.
22 This change was viewed as essential by many in the Senate; the Smithsonian had enough political clout to stop

the passage of this legislation if it felt unfairly singled out.
23 Trope, “The Case for NAGPRA,” 28-29.
24 Trope, “The Case for NAGPRA,” 28-32.

132