Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans Land Allotment Extension Act of 2025

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I am coming down to the Senate floor for the second time in about a month to try to pass a really important bill for some really heroic constituents of mine, Alaskan Native Vietnam veterans, and I am going to explain this bill a little bit.

Hopefully, the Senate is going to work well, because when I tried to pass this a month ago, Senator Padilla said: Hey, I am going to object, but if you work with us on some bills that you can move in a pairing, then we will pass this.

So I have done that, and I will talk about that. I am actually going to try to pass two bills.

I see that the senior Senator from New Mexico is on the floor, which doesn't bode well for the passage of this bill, which is disappointing, and I am going to get to why it is disappointing. It is remarkable that this bill would be blocked, again, by Democrats. But let me give you a little bit about the background.

So Alaska Native people in my State serve at higher rates in the military than any other ethnic group in the country--what I refer to as special patriotism. You go into Alaska Native villages, you ask how many veterans are there, and almost everybody raises their hand. It is remarkable. It is patriotic. It is incredible. If the rest of the country were like Alaska Native people in terms of service to our military, we would have a better America.

They underwent an incredible injustice because so many Alaska Natives went to Vietnam to serve in the war when a lot of Americans--let's face it--were avoiding service in Vietnam. So these great men and women went to serve their country in Vietnam. When they got drafted, they would say: Hey, it is my time. My dad fought in World War II. My uncle fought in Korea. I am just going.

So they all went. And what happened--every Alaska Native had the ability to get, under a 1906 law, a Native allotment. You could go and say: Hey, I grew up in this area. I hunted and fished here. I want to get 160 acres for an allotment.

The Federal Government would say: Here, you get that allotment.

That was in the law.

When these guys were over serving in Vietnam, Congress changed that law. It is complicated, but they passed what was called the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act--a very important bill--and it extinguished the ability for Alaska Natives to get their Native allotment.

Well, guess what. A lot of these guys and a few women were overseas serving their country in Vietnam. They didn't know. There was no internet, no cellphones, right? So they got home. They weren't treated well because they were Vietnam vets. Let's face that. They weren't treated well because there is still a lot of discrimination with regard to Native people, indigenous people. And then they were told: Oh, by the way, that Native allotment that you wanted? Sorry. When you were fighting for your country, we passed a law saying you can't get it anymore.

Well, look, I thought that was a huge injustice, so I worked on a bill during President Trump's first term to say: Now, wait a minute, if you were overseas serving your country, and you missed your ability to apply for a Native allotment, you should get your ability to do that.

That law passed. I was in the Oval Office when the President of the United States signed it. He said: This is an injustice. I am going to fix this for the Alaska Native Vietnam vets.

I mean, what is more bipartisan than that? Why would you come down to the Senate floor and block this bill?

So anyway, when Secretary Haaland, Secretary of the Interior--when she went through her confirmation process, I talked to her about a number of things. She was a Congresswoman at the time. I said: The No. 1 issue I care about more than anything--more than oil and gas, more than resource development--the No. 1 issue I care about that you need to commit to me, Congresswoman Deb Haaland, is to rapidly implement this bill, OK? These are Vietnam vets. A lot of them are dying, OK? Make this a priority.

I met with her twice, and she committed to me twice to do that. Guess what. Secretary Haaland did not keep her commitment at all. As a matter of fact, one of the first things she did when she got into office, the Secretary of the Interior under Joe Biden, she delayed implementation of this bill for 2 years, just put a moratorium on it.

I was like, whoa, you certainly lied to me there, Madam Secretary. OK. Two years. She just did nothing.

Overall, the program is a 5-year program. She shamefully did 40 allotments in 4 years. Forty Alaska Native Vietnam vets got this. There are 2,000--over 2,000 who are eligible. They just didn't do it because they didn't want people to get land--even Alaska Native Vietnam veterans.

So anyway, this bill has a 5-year window. It expires in December. All I am trying to do is extend it for 5 more years. That is it. This is a one-sentence bill. It changes the words ``5 years'' to ``10 years.''

Guess what. Last year in December, I came down to the Senate floor, and I passed this unanimously. It passed. So the Senate passed it last year. The House has already passed it. If this bill passes tonight, it is going to go to the President, and he is going to sign it.

Why would anyone block this?

So I tried to do this a month ago, and Senator Padilla was on the floor, and he said: Hey, I am going to block it because we kind of don't think it is fair if we just get one Republican bill over the goal line.

So he and I talked on the floor and said: Let us work with you, Dan, because we know this is important to you. We know this is important to your heroic constituents. Let us work with you. If you pair this with a Democrat bill that is important, we will work to pass it.

So Senator Padilla objected when I tried to pass it last time. Democrats even suggested to me what bill to pair it with. It is called H.R. 1034 or S. 909. It is the La Paz County Solar Energy and Job Creation Act. It is a pretty good bill. It is a land exchange. This is Senator Gallego's bill.

So the Democrats told me: If you can pair your bill for Vietnam vets with the Gallego bill, H.R. 1034, then that is fair because we are moving a Democrat bill and we are moving a Republican bill. They are paired together. By the way, they are both ready to go to be signed by the President. That would be fair.

So my team worked really hard to clear all the Republican holds on the Senator Gallego bill. We worked on it for the last 3 or 4 weeks. There were a number of holds, and I went to my Republican colleagues: Hey, guys, can you lift the hold, right? This is a pretty good bill from Senator Gallego. It is important to him in Arizona, and this is really important to me.

I explained the Alaska Native Vietnam vet bill. So we lifted the holds. Republicans cleared the hotline.

So that is what has happened.

Now, I guess, unless he is here to talk about how he supports my bill--so 2 hours ago, we thought this was going to clear. Gallego's bill. Sullivan's bill. Good for Arizona, Democrats. Good for Alaska Native Vietnam vets. We get a call an hour ago saying: Nope, the Dems are going to move the goalpost, and they are going to object.

Why? I am really looking forward to hearing from my good friend from New Mexico on why they are going to object, but I am pretty sure I know why. He is going to tell me: Hey, we want to move more bills.

Well, wait. You guys just told me 2 weeks ago: Pair the Gallego bill with the Alaska Native Vietnam vet bill, and we will pass it.

Normally, the Senate works on trust, right? So I did that. But I guess now the Democrats are going to move the goalpost, and they want to leverage--leverage--Alaska Native Vietnam vets, heroes, to get more stuff. I don't know. I want to hear from Senator Heinrich.

You know, the Dems are starting to get really good--it is a pattern-- at leveraging really good Americans--air traffic controllers for the last 40 days--to get other stuff. Now it looks like they are going to leverage Alaska Native Vietnam vets who got hosed by their own government. All they want is to get their allotment that they missed the opportunity to get when they were serving their country in Vietnam. Like, how hard is that?

So, again, we have two good bills right now. One is a Dem bill, and one is a Republican bill. If we pass the H.R. bill, they are going to go right to the President's desk.

Now, the other objection I heard from my Democratic colleagues is that, well, they don't want to pass House bills. So I am like, all right. Well, if you don't want to pass House bills, let's pass the Sullivan Senate

version of this and the Gallego Senate version.

Again, I am down here on the floor trying to help Senator Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona. He is a marine. I like marines. He has a good bill here. It seems like it is going to help his constituents. So I am ready to go.

All right. If you guys want to object to the House bill, I get that. We are objecting--some of our Senators are objecting to House bills even though those go right to the President's desk. We will move forward on the Senate bill. Now, that means it will have to go back over to the House, so it won't get signed by the President right away. So I am ready to do that too.

I just want to help the people I represent, and these are very special people. If any of you or Senator Heinrich met some of these Alaska Native Vietnam vets, you would cry when you hear their stories. So heroic. And all I am trying to do is help them. And we got this done.

By the way, the program expires in December. The program that I got done with President Trump's signature on it expires in a month. Secretary Haaland slow-walked it. I got it passed last year to extend it, and now my Democrat colleagues are going to slow-walk it. It is going to expire next month.

I came here a month ago. They told me: All right, Dan. We know it is important to you. Go pair it.

They said: Go pair Gallego's bill with this, and we will sign off on it.

I got all the Republicans to sign off on my bill and Gallego's, and just an hour ago: Nope. We are going to leverage these Vietnam vets against you, Dan Sullivan, to get more.

Now, look, the Senator from New Mexico is probably going to say: Hey, I want to move more bills.

All right. I will help you move more bills. You just saw I worked Gallego's bill. But these two bills are ready to go to the President's desk--a Democrat bill which is a pretty good bill for Arizona and a Republican bill which is a really good bill for my constituents, heroic constituents.

So I am going to try, and maybe Senator Heinrich is going to get up and say: Gosh darn it, Dan Sullivan. This is a great bill, and I just want to come here and speak out on behalf of it.

You know, a lot of the Democrats talk about indigenous people, people of color, how much they care about minority communities. When it comes to my State, these guys target Alaska Natives. I have seen it my whole career. I mean, geez, the minority leader--the guy goes after Alaska Natives like they are some kind of criminals. It is outrageous.

This is a bill for indigenous people of America, and all the Democrats: Oh, we care about--no, you don't. If you did--maybe Senator Heinrich tonight is going to talk about how much he cares about indigenous people in Alaska. I have seen him talk about it before. If he does, then he should prove it right now.

So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc; further, that the bills be considered read a third time and passed en bloc and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc: H.R. 410, the Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans Land Allotment Extension Act of 2025, and H.R. 1043, the La Paz County Solar Energy and Job Creation Act.

Mr. President, I am disappointed in this. Now, I was trying to pass the H.R. bills from the House because those bills have already passed--the Gallego bill, the Sullivan bill, the lands transfer bill for Arizona, the Alaska Native Vietnam vets bill for my brave Alaska Native veterans. I was informed--and you heard it from the Senator from New Mexico--that maybe they don't want to pass House bills. He kind of said that. He did mention that he is objecting because he doesn't want to favor one party over the other. That argument is irrelevant because I am passing a Democrat bill and a Republican bill. So this is even stephen when it comes to the parties.

I am very surprised that he is objecting on behalf of Senator Padilla because, when Senator Padilla objected to my bill a month ago, he literally said: Hey, Dan, work with us. Pair it with the Democrat bill. Then Senator Padilla's team even suggested which Democrat bill to pair it with, which was the Gallego bill, which I am trying to pass right now.

So, as to what my colleague from New Mexico just said, none of it makes sense unless people are going back on their word, which is a little bit frustrating because the Senate operates on trust here. Maybe it is because my colleague doesn't like a House bill.

So what I am going to try and do now--again, for Senator Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona, and for me, a Republican from Alaska--is try and pass by unanimous consent the Senate version of these bills. What I did--because I told the other side that I would do it--is I told Senator Gallego and Senator Padilla that I will clear Senator Gallego's bill; that I will clear it on the Republican side. It took a lot of work, but we got that done. So let's see if we can pass the Senate version of these bills.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc; further, that the bills be considered read a third time and passed en bloc and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc: Senator Gallego's bill, S. 909; the La Paz County Solar Energy and Job Creation Act; and my bill, S. 785, the Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans Land Allotment Extension Act.

Mr. President, I am just going to end by saying I am very disappointed. I tried to do this a month ago. This bill of mine is really for some great heroes in America, and the program is going to expire in a month. This bill passed unanimously in December. My colleague from New Mexico came down and talked in process terms about why he is objecting. It is a little hard to understand, but I actually think there is probably something else going on here as I have been around this place long enough.

This is a chart that I have called the last frontier lockup. It lists the 70 Executive orders and Executive actions all throughout the State of Alaska to lock up my State--70 Executive orders and Executive actions issued by the Biden administration to shut down Alaska, to stop getting access to Federal lands in Alaska, to stop any kind of resource development in Alaska--and 1 of those 70 was to delay and stop the Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans Land Allotment Extension Act

that Secretary Haaland committed me to implement.

This is what my Democrat colleagues do. This is what they do to Alaska. They have groups--far-left groups--that tell them, when they get in power, to shut down Alaska.

But wait a minute. We have bills that help Alaska Native indigenous people.

They are like: Hey, we don't care about them. Shut down Alaska. Shut down indigenous people's opportunities.

I saw, for 4 years with the Biden administration, this whole area of the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska, which is meant for oil and gas development--that they shut down the whole thing, OK? Guess who wanted that to be open. All the indigenous leaders of the North Slope: the Tribe, the Alaska Native Corporations, the Borough Leadership. They came down here eight times to DC--eight times--to try to meet with the Secretary of the Interior, saying: Don't lock up my lands. Don't lock up my lands. She never met with them. She never met with them.

My colleague from New Mexico has been the leader in locking up Alaska. I mean, I have come down to the floor and raised a little bit of heck on all of the actions he has taken to lock up my State.

So, look, the Democrats really don't want anyone, including heroic Alaska Native Vietnam vets, to have access to land even though that is the law. It is really, really ironic that they always say they want to help indigenous people, but in my State, their actions are very different, and this is a great example of what they are doing.

You know, it is really ironic, too, that during the 4 years of the Biden administration, when this was going on, it was ``drill, baby, drill'' in New Mexico. New Mexico, with the Secretary of the Interior's help, increased oil production from 1 million barrels to 2 million barrels a day on Federal lands. Yet the Senator from New Mexico and the Secretary of the Interior and Joe Biden said: We are going to shut this place down.

Now they are saying: We are going to make sure the Native Vietnam vets--they have had a real injustice. We fixed it under law. Then it was delayed by the Biden administration's Secretary of the Interior.

All I am trying to do is get a two-word change so this program can continue. These guys are dying every day, these great heroes. I came to the floor a month ago and tried to get it done.

The Democrat Senator said: Do this, Dan.

I did it.

Do this, Dan.

I did it.

Pair it with the Democrat bill.

I did it. It was ready to go.

Then, an hour ago, they said: Nope. We are going to block it again.

It is an outrage--it is an outrage--and it is not because of process. It is because they want to keep my State shut down. I see it every time here, and it is wrong. It is wrong.

I will keep working. If you guys want to pass more bills, I will keep trying, but I am starting to lose a little trust. A month ago, I was on the floor, and you guys told me what to do to move this. I did it and none of you kept your word and that is not how this place operates.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, with me today is one of my colleagues from my office Mr. Nick Ayers.

Every time I look at or read an article about the One Big Beautiful Bill, I am shocked--though that sounds pejorative, maybe ``impressed'' is the right word--at its breadth. It is such an expansive piece of legislation.

On the airplane flying back from our last break, I sat down with some of my notes and just made a quick list off the top of my head of some of the things that we did in the One Big Beautiful Bill. And I hate to read to people, but I will just read you from my notes--and I won't even read all of them--but this is what we did in the One Big Beautiful Bill.

We extended the 2017 tax cuts. We saved $1.3 trillion for the American people. We made them permanent. We cut taxes on tips. We cut taxes on overtime. We cut taxes on Social Security. We provided deductions for car loans. We increased the standard deduction. We continued the 20 percent income deduction for LLCs. We repealed the IRS reporting requirements for gig workers. Nobody ever talks about that. That was huge.

We passed school choice tax credits--first time Congress has ever done something like that. We enhanced 529 education savings accounts. We provided full expensing for research and development.

I mean, I could keep going here.

We reformed Medicaid. We ended Federal payments for abortion and gender surgery and sex change operations through Medicaid.

I could go on for 20 more minutes. It is just an extraordinary piece of legislation.

My only regret with respect to the bill is that we did it without Democratic votes. We did it with all Republican votes. I wish that hadn't been the case. I wish we had been able to convince some of our Democratic colleagues to join with us.

The obvious question while I make my statement is: How did you do that? How did you get past the filibuster? It takes 60 votes. You don't have to be an astrophysicist to know that about the U.S. Senate.

Well, as you know, Madam President, we did it under reconciliation.

Under reconciliation, only a majority vote is required--60 votes aren't required. You can do it with a majority vote. That is how we passed the One Big Beautiful Bill.

That is how President Biden passed much of his legislation. Reconciliation, as we know, is a creature of the Budget Control Act. I think of reconciliation as sort of a minibudget. That is a gross exaggeration and oversimplification, but I think of it as a minibudget.

Madam President, could we ask for order?

Madam President, I think of reconciliation as more of a minibudget. Now, that is an oversimplification and exaggeration, and we can't do everything in reconciliation, but we can do a lot--we can do a lot.

We passed the reconciliation bill on July 1, about 5 months ago. And something that even members of the media are not aware of is we have the authority before the midterm elections to do two more reconciliation bills.

The first one that we did--we can do two more--the first of three potential reconciliation bills we passed 5 months ago.

You know, you can do a lot in 5 months. Five months around here is a long time ago. In 5 months, you can learn a language. You have to work at it every day. In 5 months, you can learn how to play a musical instrument. In 5 months, you can write a book. In 5 months, you can start a small business.

In 5 months, during World War II, the United States defeated the Japanese in the Guadalcanal invasion. In 5 months, the Duke of Wellington defeated Napoleon after he escaped from Elba. In 5 months, a baby goes from gurgling and crying to saying mama and dada.

Five months is a long time.

How have we used that 5 months? Now, I am not putting anybody down. I want to say that. I am not criticizing any of my colleagues. I love my colleagues. I don't hate anybody. I love every one of my colleagues. And I am labor; I am not management.

But one of the reasons I came to the floor is to suggest to all of my colleagues--both my Democratic friends and my Republican friends--that time is wasting. The President has been pounding us. He has been criticizing us like we stole Christmas--like we stole Thanksgiving--for not getting rid of the filibuster.

Why does he want to get rid of the filibuster? Because he thinks we can pass a bill with 51 votes. We can already pass a bill with 51 votes. We just did it with the One Big Beautiful Bill, and we can do two more.

So why have we sat around for 5 months and not started on the second reconciliation bill? I just don't get it. I don't get it. I mean, in my opinion--and really I am not--I am just making an observation--to me, it is a 12-piece bucket of stupid not to do another reconciliation bill and to waste 5 months before we even start on a second reconciliation bill, assuming that we get started tomorrow.

I mean, humans are supposed to have evolved as a species. Why wouldn't we not do a second reconciliation bill? Think of what we could do. I mean, moms and dads all across America tonight are going to lie down to sleep, and they won't be able to.

What are they worried about? Well, they are worried about the cost of housing for one thing. They are worried about the cost of home insurance. They are worried about the cost of flood insurance. They are worried about the cost of health insurance.

We all know that.

They are worried about the cost of living. Now, I think President Trump has done a good job on inflation. At one point under President Biden, we experienced 9 percent inflation. We have got it down to 3 percent, and I think that is extraordinary.

But the American people don't understand--nor can they be expected to understand because they are too busy earning a living--they don't know the difference between deflation and disinflation.

What we have experienced is disinflation. When we went from 9 percent to 3 percent, all that meant was that prices were going up at 9 percent. Now they are only going up at 3 percent.

They are still going up.

What the American people are interested in is deflation, getting the high prices that we have as a result of the policies of President Biden's administration, getting those prices down, not stopping them from growing as quickly--getting them down. And the American people are worried about it.

And again, I applaud President Trump and his economic team for doing as well as they have, but we have got more work to do.

And reconciliation, assuming it could survive the parameters of the Budget Control Act, we could address rules and regulations. We spend almost $2 trillion a year--we, I say ``we,'' the business community does. It spends almost $2 trillion a year complying with Federal rules and regulations. They pass that cost on.

Why do you think goods and services cost more today? In large part, in substantial part, it is the result of rules and regulations. Through a reconciliation bill, we could pass measures to get the cost of those goods and services down and actually reduce those prices by getting a little government off the backs of businesspeople.

We could do all those things through reconciliation.

And so, the first reason I came to the floor tonight is to say to my colleagues: Pretty please, with sugar on top--I will even add a cherry, I will even throw in a coupon for a personal pan pizza--please, let's do another reconciliation bill.

And when I say ``we,'' I am saying the Republican majority. Let's invite our Democratic colleagues to join with us--and I hope after inviting them, I sincerely hope they will take us up on it.

But if they don't--and they don't have to; it is a free country--it only takes a majority to pass the reconciliation bill. And after we do the second one, we can do a third one before the midterms.

If we do not take advantage of this opportunity to lower the cost of living for the American people through reconciliation when we only need 51 votes to do it, it is legislative malpractice. It is legislative malpractice. It is dumb as a bowl of noodles.

So that is my plea to my colleagues tonight. I am not saying we have done nothing for 5 months. We have done a lot of other things in 5 months, but we haven't done anything to lower the cost of living for the American people, and we can't look back. We have lost 5 months, but we should get started tomorrow.

Mr. President, now I hope we can move to the next bill that, to be honest, should be even easier because the bill I am going to try to pass right now passed the U.S. Senate in December, unanimously. It already passed, so this should be a no-brainer. I hope my Senate colleague from California is on the floor here ready to give this bill his full endorsement and not object to it.

Let me just talk about this bill, briefly. Again, it already passed. It passed the House in July, so if we pass it right now, it is going to go to the President of the United States' desk for a signing. And this is a really big deal for my constituents.

Here is what it is: I talked about what I called the special patriotism of Alaska Natives. They serve at higher rates in the military than any other ethnic group in the country.

They had a situation when so many--and I mean thousands and thousands--of Alaskan Natives were serving in Vietnam. When a whole host of Americans didn't want to serve in Vietnam, Alaska Natives answered the call. So we have tens of thousands of Vietnam vets.

And when they came home, like a lot of Vietnam vets, they were not treated well. That was horrible. Our country should apologize for the horrible treatment our Vietnam vets got. Let's face it, as Alaska Natives, a lot of people still discriminated against Alaska Natives back then. They weren't treated well in that regard either. And, finally, a law had changed when they were overseas.

Alaska Native people used to have a right, starting in 1906, for a Native allotment; that is, 160 acres of land that if they can prove this is where their family raised them and hunted and fished, they could get that allotment--160 acres.

Well, when they were overseas fighting in Vietnam, that law changed. So here they were serving their country--when a lot of American males were avoiding service--and they got home, and they were told: By the way, your allotment that you are supposed to be able to get, that you wanted your whole life, that allotment changed, and you can't do it anymore. Huge injustice.

So during the first Trump administration, I introduced legislation called the Alaska Native Vietnam Veterans Land Allotment Act. And it said: Hey, if you were overseas serving in the military and you came home and the ability to get your allotment extinguished, you shouldn't be penalized for fighting for your country. You get the extended time to get your allotment. So that bill passed.

I was in the Oval Office when President Trump signed it. It was a great day for Alaska Natives, Vietnam veterans, very patriotic. It was a 5-year program. Unfortunately, we had Secretary Haaland implement it. Secretary Haaland did not implement it. Secretary Haaland, when she went through her confirmation hearing, committed to me twice: Senator, I will make this a priority of mine to implement this bill. You know what she did? She didn't do anything.

Shamefully, because radical leftwing environmental groups told her: We don't want anyone else getting land in Alaska, she did 40 allotments out of well over almost 3,000 available. She dragged her feet. She delayed it for 2 years.

So the 5-year program has almost run out of time because Secretary of the Interior Haaland was more interested in appeasing radical leftwing environmental groups than she was getting Alaska Natives their allotment, which is what the law demanded.

So this bill is very simple. Because of that delay, it changes two words in the already passed law. It says ``5 years'' to ``10 years.'' It is just a 5-year extension to a bill that everybody agrees with.

These patriotic Alaska Native Vietnam vets deserve their allotments, and they shouldn't have to suffer because of Secretary Haaland's delay tactics.

So this bill has already passed the House. This bill passed the Senate unanimously in December, and I am really hoping that my Democratic colleagues--respecting the indigenous Native people of my State and their valiant Vietnam service--will join with me in just passing it, like we did in December, and it will go right to the President's desk, and they will have 5 more years to really implement this really important piece of legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 410 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague from California's cooperation on the first bill, the ARTIST Act.

I am a little disappointed here on this one because, you know, it is a little bit of a delay tactic, but he certainly has my commitment to work with him, if they need to try to pair this. But I will say this: The 5 years of this bill expires at the end of this year, and we cannot--regardless if there is pairing or not pairing--we cannot let this bill expire. These great American

patriots served their country and deserve their allotment that they were unable to get during Vietnam. And then, when we passed the bill, Secretary of Interior Haaland purposefully dragged her feet to make sure that no Alaska Native--or very few--got their allotment. That was a disgrace.

And so, Mr. President, to my colleague from California, you have my commitment to work with you, but we have got to get this done by the end of the year--before the end of the year--and get it on the President's desk. These great patriotic Americans deserve nothing less, and we can't delay much longer.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be permitted to complete their remarks prior to the scheduled rollcall vote: Senator Grassley, Senator Cramer, and Senator Hoeven.

Mr. President, in a little while, we are going to vote to proceed to S.J. Res. 62, which I introduced with Senator Hoeven to repeal the Biden administration's Bureau of Land Management resource management plan for North Dakota.

Of course, H.J. Res. 105, which mirrors our bill, introduced by Congresswoman Fedorchak, has already passed the House of Representatives, and final passage is scheduled for later this evening.

The Bureau of Land Management--or BLM, as we call it--is the landlord of 745 million acres of land and subsurface deposits nationwide. BLM's management of these public resources is governed by what is known as the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, otherwise known as FLPMA, which requires--I stress ``requires''--the Bureau to develop resource management plans or RMPs to guide management decisions.

And, when created, Congress was clear: These RMPs must abide by the multiple-use mandate.

Now, ``multiple use'' is a term that is thrown around a lot in the public lands discussions. It was championed by President Theodore Roosevelt, who drew from his experience in his two ranches in North Dakota, the Maltese Cross and the Elkhorn Ranch, and throughout the West.

And, by the way, North Dakota is where his Presidential Library is being built, and it will be open next July 4--unpaid announcement.

``Multiple use'' means that land is sustainably used by the State and local population, rather than preserved like a national park or a wildlife refuge. Multiple use lands are used by miners, cattle grazers, oil and gas developers, and recreationalists alike. They are not meant to be locked up.

Multiple use is a mandate, as I said earlier. It is not a suggestion. And that is what brings us here today.

In the final days of the Biden administration, they approved the North Dakota resource management plan, which governs the management of 58,500 surface acres and 4.1 million acres of mineral estate across our State for the next 15 to 20 years.

Despite vocal objections from the State, the people who actually use the

land, the final plan prohibits coal leasing on over 4 million acres by inexcusably prohibiting all future development outside of a 4-mile radius from current development--over 90 percent of North Dakota's affordable, reliable coal, out of touch. It is gone.

It also blocks 213,000 acres, or 44 percent, of federally owned oil and gas acreage from future development. This restriction alone deprives the State--and we are a small State--of $34 million annually and--get this--the State's Common Schools Trust Fund a minimum of $50 million.

And if that wasn't enough, non-Federal minerals are also held hostage to the Federal Government's management plan. As I mentioned earlier, these RMPs govern subsurface acreage. Whether it is coal, oil, or gas, federally owned subsurface minerals are intermingled with State and private mineral owners. In plain speak, the Biden resource management plan is a de facto taking from the State and private mineral owners.

Throughout the rulemaking process, this point was made very clear, but BLM ignored it. And it is unacceptable and needs to be undone. And I will add that it needs to be undone by Congress so it is clear to the bureaucracy that this sort of resource management plan is out of bounds.

By passing this resolution, we reassert congressional intent and remind the bureaucracy: Our boundaries are not optional.

Mr. President, this rule will need to be replaced once we repeal it. Thank goodness Congress had the foresight in the Congressional Review Act to say no replacement rule could be substantially similar to the one it is replacing. But by no means does it preclude the proper replacement of a rule.

I have the utmost confidence in Secretary Burgum and Deputy Secretary MacGregor to get this done right, but this cannot sit on the back burner.

Nearly 6 years ago, during the first Trump administration, I wrote a letter on behalf of a single constituent advocating for this RMP to be updated so he could develop some of his privately held minerals. They started the work, but unfortunately the Biden administration finished the work.

While Congress is acting to repeal their disastrous plan today, the administration must swiftly replace this RMP, ensuring North Dakota gets the best long-term plan possible to responsibly utilize our natural resources.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

I yield the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 410) to extend the Alaska Native Vietnam era veterans land allotment program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 410, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise to support H.R. 410, the Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans Land Allotment Extension Act of 2025.

Sponsored by Representative Begich, this legislation would extend the Alaska Native Vietnam era veterans land allotment program for an additional 5 years, to end on December 29, 2030.

Alaska Natives have long experienced land-related hardships. Recognizing this, Congress passed the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971 to settle the aboriginal land claims of Alaska Natives.

Unfortunately, this congressional action coincided with the Vietnam war, meaning that many Alaska Natives who were serving overseas in the U.S. military at the time were unable to apply for a land allotment. Congress has attempted to fix this problem legislatively over the years, but many eligible Alaska Native veterans have yet to receive their allotment.

Accordingly, the Alaska Native Vietnam era veterans land allotment program was established in the 116th Congress. Through this program, eligible Alaska Natives, or their heirs, can select an allotment of up to 160 acres of certain Federal land.

In January 2021, the Trump administration revoked 11 public land orders, which opened up 28 million acres of Bureau of Land Management land for allotment purposes. The next month, however, the newly elected Biden administration postponed that revocation, prompting a battle that waged throughout the rest of President Biden's term. During that time, Alaska Natives remained without their allotments.

Immediately upon his return to office this year, President Trump reinstated the revocation through an executive order titled ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential.''

While this executive order will help address Alaska Natives' allotment needs, the program is running out of time. Recent estimates show that over 2,000 eligible Alaska Native veterans had yet to receive their allotment, illustrating a clear need for an extension.

H.R. 410 would provide this relief by extending the Alaska Native Vietnam era veterans land allotment program for an additional 5 years.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Begich for sponsoring this legislation, for his hard work on behalf of Alaska Native veterans, and for ensuring that we keep our promises to those who fought for this country.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Begich), the lead sponsor of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation, again, would extend the Alaska Native Vietnam-era Veterans Land Allotment Program through the end of 2030.

I commend Mr. Begich for his leadership and for working on this important issue for his constituents in Alaska.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of H.R. 410, and I yield back the balance of my time.