In the two decades since the Land Claims Settlement Act was signed, the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians has acquired property, built buildings, organized and operated a council with a full staff, among many other things. In this, the Maliseets have acted much like the Penobscot Nation or Passamaquoddy Tribe, with one major exception: The band remains prohibited from taking part in the rights of self governance provided in the act to the other tribes.

A bill scheduled to be heard tomorrow before the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee would change that, providing the Maliseets with authority over internal tribal matters. Already approved by the Maine Indian-State Tribal Commission, the bill is well deserving of committee endorsement and support by the full Legislature.

There were good reasons that the Houlton band was not included fully in the 1980 federal settlement act or the subsequent state Maine Implementing Act. The band had come to those negotiations late, lacked a land base and could claim neither official continuous existence nor federal recognition. All that has changed, and the evidence for this is not only the band’s 800 acres in trust but its health-care workers, housing authority, environmental and education staff, all under a formal tribal council.

The Maliseets want recognition under the settlement act for a simple reason. Without the recognition, they cannot operate independently of the state of Maine and lack the ability, for instance, to enact ordinances, set hunting and fishing rules, collect taxes or establish a judiciary to settle civil disputes, child-protection cases or misdemeanor crimes. Currently, the band is generally regarded as separate from the state but has few of the rights and responsibilities to go with it.

The King administration is uneasy about changing the status of the Maliseets. Evan Richert, director of the State Planning Office and a member of the tribal-state commission, wants the band to explain its position on a number of questions that have arisen in recent years over the meanings of some of the sections within the implementing act. These questions come from disputes between the state and the Penobscots and Passamaquoddies. The administration, understandably, wants to know what it is agreeing to before deciding whether to support the status change.

Unfortunately, neither the King administration nor anyone else can predict how courts of the future will interpret the act, so litmus tests on untried legal interpretations are of little use here, and could, in fact, be harmful to the relationship between the Maliseets and the other tribes. The list of questions also cannot account for disagreements over issues that have yet to surface or changing interpretations by administrations after the current one. It is the sort of document for which the phrase “unintended consequences” was created.

Mr. Richert also may propose a modified version of LD 2178, the bill being heard tomorrow. His version would significantly limit what constituted internal tribal matters, again leaving the Maliseets with a status less than that of the other tribes and handing the state two, instead of one, sets of laws on Indian affairs. That’s not to say the state’s proposal of a compromise isn’t well-intentioned or worth pursuing, but the draft document it is currently offering is insufficient.

Maine now has 20 years of experience with both the settlement act and the growth of the Maliseet band. It has no reason to fear either. Instead, it should welcome the chance to provide the Maliseets with the rights and responsibilities they have demonstrated they deserve.