Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Matthew P. Goodman as he retires from his leadership position at the Council on Foreign Relations, marking the conclusion of an exceptional career spanning more than three decades of service to America's economic security and international leadership and to the American people.

Mr. Goodman's dedication to our Nation's interests in the global economy has been unwavering. Throughout his career, he has served with distinction in multiple Presidential administrations, led groundbreaking research, and shaped the debates that define how our country engages with and in the international economy.

Mr. Goodman's exemplary commitment to public service has been in the best tradition of bipartisan service to our Nation. His government service began at the U.S. Treasury Department during President Reagan's second term, where he served as an international economist, including 5 distinguished years as financial attache at the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo, representing American interests during a transformative period in U.S.- Japan economic relations and the broader Asia-Pacific economy. He is being honored by the Government of Japan for his lifelong support for our alliance.

Mr. Goodman served as senior adviser to the Undersecretary for Economic Affairs at the U.S. Department of State, where he contributed to the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. From 2002 to 2004 under President George W. Bush, he served as Director for Asian Economic Affairs on the National Security Council staff during a pivotal period in U.S.-Asia relations, during which we worked together closely.

During the Obama administration he served as Director for International Economics on the National Security Council staff from 2010 to 2012, where he played a crucial role in helping the President navigate complex global economic challenges. As White House Coordinator for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC, forum and the East Asia Summit during America's APEC host year, he oversaw U.S. policy development in these critical forums and helped organize major international summits including the G-20 and East Asia Summit.

Mr. Goodman has been equally influential in shaping economic policy through his intellectual leadership. Most recently, he served as distinguished fellow and Director of the Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, where he launched and led the RealEcon initiative: Reimagining American Economic Leadership. Critically, with the RealEcon initiative Mr. Goodman sought not to take Washington wisdom to the American people, but rather to spend time with the American people, traveling across our Nation, meeting with Americans from all walks of life, listening to their concerns and hearing their ideas, so that he could take their wisdom back to Washington.

Through his leadership of the RealEcon initiative at CFR, Mr. Goodman tackled one of the most pressing challenges of our time: building a sustainable domestic consensus for American international economic engagement.

Before joining CFR in 2023, Mr. Goodman spent over a decade at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, CSIS, serving as senior vice president for economics and holder of the prestigious William E. Simon Chair in political economy. During his tenure at CSIS from 2012 to 2023, he established and directed important work on global economic policy with particular expertise on the dynamic Asia-Pacific region, testifying before Congress on numerous occasions and advising policymakers on critical economic and trade issues. Like many of my colleagues, I have been the beneficiary of his insight and advice.

His private sector experience, including 5 years as head of Goldman Sachs's government affairs operations in Tokyo and London, gave him invaluable insights into how policy intersects with commerce and the private sector.

Mr. Goodman's analytical rigor rests on a strong academic foundation. He earned his master of arts in international relations from the Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, one of the Nation's premier institutions for training foreign policy professionals, and his bachelor of science in economics from the prestigious London School of Economics.

Behind every accomplished public servant stands a supportive family, and Mr. Goodman's achievements have been made possible by the unwavering love and partnership of his wife Patty Goodman. Together, they have built a warm home in the Washington area and raised two accomplished sons--Misha and Will--while navigating the demands and long hours of public service.

The Goodman household has also been a place of multigenerational care and connection. When Patty's father John needed support, they welcomed him into their home with love and dedication. Matthew's own father Ray Goodman, born in London in 1916, lived to celebrate his centennial birthday, a testament to the resilience and longevity that runs in the family and a living connection to a century of global history and the ``special relationship'' between the United States and the United Kingdom. Countless Washingtonians were also blessed to have Matthew's mother Dorothy in their lives as the founder of the Washington International School and a fierce advocate for education reform.

Those who know Matthew Goodman recognize not just his policy expertise, but his remarkable sense of humor, his ability to maintain perspective during challenging times, and his gift for bringing people together. His annual family poems--shared with friends and family during the holidays--reveal a man who can find light even in dark times, who values literature and wit alongside economic data and policy analysis, and who never lost sight of what matters most even while serving at the highest levels of government and policy making.

Mr. Goodman's contributions to American economic statecraft have been important and lasting. He has been at the table for critical decisions affecting trade policy, international economic institutions, supply chain security, and America's engagement with the Asia-Pacific region. His work on economic security, geoeconomics, and the intersection of economics and foreign policy has influenced a generation of policymakers and scholars. An important part of his legacy are the hundreds of interns, associates, and staff who benefited from his training, support, and encouragement. Many have followed his example in service to the country in roles across the government.

As Mr. Goodman retires from CFR and this chapter of extraordinary public service comes to a close, he leaves behind a legacy of rigorous analysis, principled leadership, and dedicated service to the American people. His work has made our Nation more secure, more prosperous, and better positioned to navigate the complex challenges of the global economy.

On behalf of a grateful Nation, I congratulate Matthew P. Goodman on a distinguished career and wish him, Patty, Misha, and Will health, happiness, and well-deserved time together in the years ahead. I know that his retirement will be filled with the same humor, grace, and intellectual curiosity that have characterized his remarkable career. We will all continue to look to him for his thought leadership and wise counsel.

I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Matthew P. Goodman for his decades of exceptional service to the United States of America.

Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to reject the Biden administration's unlawful attempt to stifle Alaska's congressionally mandated oil and gas leasing program in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, ANWR. I urge my colleagues to support the Alaska congressional delegation's joint resolution of disapproval, H.J. Res. 131 and S.J. Res. 91, to reject unlawful regulatory overreach.

The implementation of the Biden administration's 2024 Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision, ROD, locked away nearly 75 percent of the Coastal Plain, also known as the 1002 Area, including lands that are projected to have substantial resources beneath them, from responsible oil and gas leasing--completely undermining the explicit and express will of Congress and ignoring the needs and input of local residents. Passing this joint resolution will disapprove this Record of Decision and prevent this circumvention of Federal law from happening again.

Alaska has a strong record of responsible resource development. The footprint of drilling pads on the North Slope has declined by 80 percent since the 1970s, while new and safer technology has expanded the reach of underground drilling by a significant margin. The result is that less land is being used to develop resources than ever before, as many modern sites cover just a few acres and are miles apart. These technological advancements have played a significant role in reducing impact to surrounding ecosystems. For example, the Central Arctic Caribou herd, which ranges throughout Prudhoe Bay, has seen its population grow for sustained periods alongside responsible development on the North Slope.

The prospect of oil and gas development within ANWR has a long history that dates back to before Alaska joined the Union as a State in 1959. In 1943, the Federal Government withdrew all the lands on the North Slope by Public Land Order, PLO 82, to prevent certain types of development. In 1960, the Department of the Interior, DOI, issued PLO 2214, setting aside 8.9 million acres to establish the Arctic National Wildlife Range for the purpose of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreation values, withdrawing the lands from ``all forms of appropriation . . . including mining but not the mineral leasing laws.'' PLO 2214 intentionally left open the possibility of the development of certain resources, including oil and gas.

Under the landmark 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, ANILCA, the Range was expanded to its present size of 19.3 million acres--an area nearly as large as South Carolina--and renamed the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Section 1002 of ANILCA directed the Department of the Interior to study the oil and gas potential of the 1.57-million-acre Coastal Plain, a designated area of ANWR that held great promise of oil and gas resources. However, section 1003 prohibited oil and gas production or leasing in ANWR unless authorized by an Act of Congress.

Over the following years, DOI completed assessments of the area's oil and gas potential and recommended that Congress lease the Coastal Plain area. The Coastal Plain showed remarkable prospects for oil development. The U.S. Geological Survey concluded in 1998 that the Coastal Plain held at least 4.3 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil, reporting: ``Technically recoverable oil within the ANWR 1002 area (excluding State and Native areas) is estimated to be between 4.3 and 11.8 billion barrels (95- and 5-percent probability range), with a mean value of 7.7 billion barrels.'' In 2005, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that over 3 billion barrels were technically and economically recoverable in the Coastal Plain. Based on estimates such as these, DOI projected in 2024 that ANWR drilling would generate around $29 billion in revenue for the Federal Government through 2050.

Despite numerous efforts by Congress and the leadership of Alaska's congressional delegation to realize this potential, it was not until the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, TCJA, that the groundwork for authorizing drilling in ANWR was laid. Within this budget reconciliation bill, Congress directed the creation of the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program for the express purpose of generating revenue and offsetting the tax cuts included in the Act.

That was why, when Congress passed the TCJA, it included very clear and specific terms to make the lease sales successful and the exploration and development program economically feasible. Section 20001 of the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act, TCJA, expressly mandates that the Department of the Interior, DOI, shall issue a competitive oil and gas program for the leasing, development, production, and transportation of oil and gas in and from the Coastal Plain. It amended ANILCA to add this purpose for ANWR, set specific royalty rates for leases, and directed that 50 percent of receipts for the oil and gas program and operations on Federal land be deposited in the U.S. Treasury with the State of Alaska receiving the remainder. The bill further directed at least two Coastal Plain lease sales within 10 years of enactment, the first by December 2021 and the second by December 2024, offering the areas with the highest hydrocarbon potential, with lease offerings of not fewer than 400,000 acres.

Congress left little discretion to DOI. DOI's role was only to establish and administer a competitive program and incorporate TCJA requirements to instill success and economic feasibility, including granting any easements or rights-of-way across the Coastal Plain for exploration, development, production, and transportation in the Coastal Plain that were necessary to carry out the terms of section 20001.

To implement Congress' directive, DOI conducted a National Environmental Policy Act process and issued a Final Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Environmental Impact Statement, Final EIS, in September 2019 that closely followed congressional intent. In 2020, the Bureau of Land Management, BLM, under the first Trump administration, issued its ``Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision,'' based on Alternative B from the 2019 Final EIS that made all of the approximately 1.6 million acres of the program area available for oil and gas leasing. In January of 2021, a competitive lease sale was held and multiple bids were received by prospective developers as intended under the TCJA, raising millions of dollars for the United States. Congress had set out terms and conditions of the program, to give it a sound opportunity to succeed, and DOI followed its statutory directive.

However, following the election of President Biden, DOI reversed direction in 2021. On June 1, 2021, DOI issued a Secretarial Order temporarily halting all activities in the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program. In August 2023, DOI issued a new Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program and selected a much more restrictive plan for development, Alternative D. The new alternative's restrictive terms were contrary to the lease sale requirements set out in the TCJA and Congress' intent that DOI establish a competitive program designed for success and economic feasibility. In a Secretarial Order issued in September 2023, DOI imposed a blanket moratorium on development and canceled the lawfully purchased oil and gas leases in the Coastal Plain, an action the Alaska District Court subsequently found to be unlawful.

Then, in November 2024, BLM issued a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Final SEIS, that moved even further away from the TCJA. DOI selected a new preferred Alternative D2, which was so draconian that it was effectively a ``No Development'' plan and made nearly 1.2 million acres unavailable for leasing or exploration. On December 9, 2024, DOI issued its 2024 ROD selecting Alternative D2's terms and conditions for the oil and gas program. The December 2024 ROD's terms were so limiting that they would make leasing, exploration, and development on the Coastal Plain economically infeasible. Much of the Alternative D2 highest hydrocarbon potential area would essentially be off limits, as it would be subject to No Surface Occupancy or Controlled Surface Use stipulations. DOI offered only 995 acres of Surface Disturbance Area, less than half of the maximum 2,000 Surface Acres of Federal Land for Production and Support Facilities that the TCJA allowed. Alternative D2 contained so many limitations, restrictive stipulations, and Required Operating Procedures that it made leasing and development economically infeasible. As a result of this blatant attempt to undermine and disregard Congress' direction for a competitive oil and gas leasing program within the Coastal Plain, the DOI received zero bids and never truly held a competitive oil and gas lease sale. As I said at the time, January 20, 2025, and the inauguration of President Trump could not come soon enough.

Permit terms can undermine the program's economic feasibility in indirect ways, such as limiting the location of future drill pads and other infrastructure. As an example, one stipulation prevented use of areas near the shore, which would usually be used as a critical staging area for loading and unloading barges. The stipulation preventing use of that area requires staging to be pushed further inland, which in turn requires construction of ice or gravel roads to reach the barges-- a higher economic, logistic, and environmental impact. Other stipulations are redundant with existing State requirements. These are just some of the many examples of 2024 ROD terms that make the program economically infeasible. These terms and conditions in the 2024 ROD are part of why the Senate should pass this joint resolution to prohibit similar restrictions in the future.

The clear intent of Congress in the TCJA was that the Coastal Plain would produce billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas which Alaska and the Nation need for energy security and revenue. Not only is it impossible for a competitive oil and gas leasing program to be administered through piecemeal offerings of land tracts which exclude areas known to have proven potential for significant hydrocarbon reserves, but in doing so, the 2024 ROD ignored explicit instructions put forth by Congress in the TCJA. Congress clearly stated the Secretary ``shall establish and administer a competitive oil and gas program for the leasing, development, production, and transportation of oil and gas in and from the Coastal Plain,'' that the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Program ``shall'' be supported by lease offerings of ``not fewer'' than 400,000 acres, and the 400,000 acres ``shall'' consist of ``those areas that have the highest potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons.'' The Biden DOI's sabotage of the program went directly against the policy and purposes of the TCJA.

When an agency fails to follow mandates from Congress, Congress has the tool of the Congressional Review Act, CRA, to correct those actions. DOI must follow the statutory mandates from Congress and allow meaningful and reasonable economic development of the Coastal Plain. No other law or detailed terms and conditions imposed by DOI can destroy the clear statutory direction given by Congress in the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act. If the Biden administration's onerous terms and conditions were allowed to stand, there would not be any ``program for the leasing, development, production, and transportation of oil and gas'' from any of the most prospective leases in the Coastal Plain.

In its selection of Alternative D2, the Biden administration claimed to be listening to the concerns of indigenous voices when this could not be further from the truth. In practice, the Biden administration deliberately ignored the only communities who live near and within the boundaries of ANWR and was instead beholden to radical environmental interests which, in contrast to local communities, supported a moratorium on ANWR development and led to the creation of the 2024 ROD. Fortunately, elections have consequences, and on January 20, his first day in office of his second term, President Trump signed Executive Order 14153, ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential,'' which called for the rescission of Biden's illegal cancellation of the ANWR leases and the 2024 SEIS, review of the 2024 ROD, and a reinstatement of the 2020 Final EIS and 2020 ROD issued during the first Trump administration.

This past summer, Secretary of the Interior and Chairman of the National Energy Dominance Council Doug Burgum flew to Alaska and held a townhall on the North Slope with regional leaders and listened to their concerns, showing respect for the Alaska Native people who live there. During the townhall, the Secretary heard the testimony of Charles Lampe, a resident of Kaktovik--the only community located fully within ANWR--and the President of Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, KIC. KIC is a village corporation established by the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. KIC owns approximately 92,000 acres of surface lands, but is completely enveloped within ANWR and hampered from developing these acres to their fullest potential. Mr. Lampe shared the continuous efforts undertaken by KIC in order to open ANWR to oil and gas operations. He highlighted the fact that pursuing oil and gas endeavors in ANWR is essential to realizing self-determination within Kaktovik. In testimony on Coastal Plain oil and gas development delivered to the House Committee on Natural Resources in 2023, Mr. Lampe objected to radical environmental interests that support turning the community and its surrounding land into a giant national park, claiming such an action ``literally guarantees us a fate with no economy, no jobs, reduced subsistence, and no hope for the future of our people.'' In front of those gathered, Secretary Burgum committed to rectifying this injustice.

Because of the opportunities provided by oil and gas operations, this industry has provided thousands of good-paying jobs to Alaskans, become the primary driver of my State's economy, and transformed many of our rural communities. Oil and gas revenues fund education, essential infrastructure, and community services across the State, making responsible resource development truly a matter of life or death for Alaskans. In 1954, the Interior Department, with the help of the University of Pittsburgh, conducted a study of the health of Alaska Natives. Many of our communities in rural Alaska all had some of the lowest levels of life expectancy in the entire world. Between 1980 and 2014, the average lifespan increased by 13 years across the region, largely due to oil and gas revenue providing the opportunity to install what we consider to be basic and essential community infrastructure. To say these operations have had a positive impact on the local communities is a gross understatement, an ideal that is reflected in the testimony of Mr. Lampe.

This Congress has already taken decisive steps to reassert its authority over the Coastal Plain. In the ``Working Families Tax Cut Act,'' P.L. 119-21,

Congress mandated lease sales to be offered under the same terms and conditions set forth in the August 2020 ROD for the FEIS of the original Coastal Plain leasing program. In October, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum made good on his commitments to the people of Kaktovik and issued a new Coastal Plain Leasing Program based on the 2020 ROD. Passage of this joint resolution would durably protect against another rogue administration promulgating a substantially similar anti-development leasing program for the Coastal Plain as contained in the 2024 ROD. It will prevent actions that aim to inhibit the self-determination of the people of Kaktovik and other North Slope communities by attempting to turn Alaska into one giant national park while denying access to the abundance of readily available natural resources needed to advance energy security, economic opportunity, and community development.

Congress' direction that DOI establish and administer a competitive lease program was nondiscretionary and much more limited than the action DOI took in the 2024 ROD. To the extent DOI, or any other Agency, imposes permit terms or operational requirements that impede the economic feasibility of the program, they undermine the primary purpose of the TCJA: to establish a competitive program that will actually generate the billion dollars in revenue anticipated. The Act specifically states that DOI must grant easements or rights-of-way across the Coastal Plain that are necessary for exploration, development, production, and transportation in the Coastal Plain to carry out the terms of section 20001, and DOI's permit operating procedure terms must be consistent with Congress' intent in the same way to be consistent with law. Those permit and operational terms can be identified, revised, and readopted to conform to the TCJA intent.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Congressional Record a Statement of Administration Policy from the Office of Management and Budget, dated November 17, 2025; a letter of support from Charles Lampe, President of the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, dated December 3, 2025; and a briefing sheet from the Bureau of Land Management on the explaining the differences between the 2024 Biden administration Record of Decision for the ANWR Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program and the 2020 ROD issued during the first Trump administration and the implications of using the Congressional Review Act.

I urge my colleagues to reject this blatant contravention of congressional directives and unlawful regulatory overreach, reinforce American energy dominance, and listen to Alaska Native voices by supporting the Alaska congressional delegation and voting for this joint resolution of disapproval and rescinding this Record of Decision.

Mr. President, I am coming down on the Senate floor, once again, to talk about another Congressional Review Act resolution that I am encouraging all of my colleagues, Democrats, Republicans--by the way, our last one on the National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska, right here, was bipartisan. I want to thank Senator Fetterman for his support here.

This is a really big one, and some people are like: Geez, Senator Sullivan, Senator Murkowski, you are down here a lot on these CRAs. We are down here a lot on these Congressional Review Act resolutions because of this. All right? I have trotted out this chart a lot, but it bears repeating. The Biden administration decided, because the far- left, radical environmental groups say: Hey, when Democrats get in power--that will mean the minority leader, if he ever became majority leader, that would include him--when they get into power, what do they do? They want to make sure they shut down the great State of Alaska. I won't go into all of the reasons, but they do it, and they are aggressive on it.

So, as I have said before, during the 4 years of the Biden administration, we had this last frontier lockup. Here is the actual list. It is shocking. I don't think, in the history of America, the Federal Government, the White House, ever used its powers so much to try to crush one State. They did it during the 4 years of the Biden administration with the support of my friends on the other side of the aisle--70 Executive orders and Executive actions, singularly and exclusively focused on the great State of Alaska--by the way, 10 on day one.

So when Joe Biden got inaugurated, man, he was raring to go to crush Alaska, kill thousands of jobs--by the way, great union jobs, by the way. Nobody ever talks about that. These are all great union jobs to develop resources for the great State of Alaska. So that was it. Seventy--can you imagine any other State in America having their own Federal Government crush them? We got sanctioned more than Joe Biden sanctioned Iran and Venezuela, and they are terrorist states. But that is what we dealt with.

So the reason I am down here so often on these CRA, Congressional Review Act, resolutions is, it is our chance--it is the Republican Senate, with a Republican President and a Republican House--to say: Now, wait a minute. We don't think the power of the Federal Government should be used to crush any State like this, especially one with all these great resources and great Native people.

I am going to get to all of this, but the Democrats do that.

So I am asking my colleagues on one of these--I can't remember which one;

there are several dealing with ANWR--to rescind the Biden rule, get it over to the President, and sign it into law.

Now, I am going to talk about the ranking member from New Mexico who just came down and spoke against this. He is the No. 1 guy in the Senate who loves to crush Alaska. But I am going to go into a little bit about his State and maybe something--the word called ``hypocrisy'' that we are going to get to here in a minute.

But this one is really big. The CRA that the Biden administration did to lock up ANWR--because out of all of the CRAs, a lot of these were illegal. They are illegal. They go against what Congress says the law is, and the executive branch just wouldn't do. It wouldn't follow suit. But the ANWR one was particularly illegal.

So, in 2017, in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the Congress of the United States, after debating this topic for almost 40 years, said the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is going to be open for resource development--responsible resource development. We have the highest standards on resource development in the world in Alaska.

So the Congress, in a law, didn't ``suggest'' that we do it. The Congress mandated two lease sales--have to do it, Executive branch-- offering no fewer than 400,000 acres in this area, what we call the 1002 area. That is named after section 1002 of ANILCA. We finally got it done.

This is a hugely bipartisan issue in Alaska. We know how to develop our resources. By the way, the Native people, great, heroic Native people, Inupiat Natives who live on the North Slope of Alaska in NPR-A, in ANWR-I just did a townhall, by the way, with the great people, our North Slope Borough, and the one community actually lives here, just last night. They all, the leadership almost unanimously, wanted this resource development.

I am going to get into that in a minute.

So the law of the United States--the President signed the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Section 1 was about tax cuts and jobs. Section 2 was about opening ANWR. That is what it said: Shall do it, must do it. OK? That was the law.

So imagine when the Biden administration came in, and they started saying: Eh, we are not going to follow the law. As a matter of fact, the Secretary of the Interior of the Biden administration, she announced at a press conference that through a regulation--that we are going to rescind today--they were going to lock up and shut down ANWR. No lease sales. They were going to cancel the lease sales of the Trump administration.

This is blatantly illegal. None of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said: Wait a minute. You can't do that. You are violating the law.

They talk about a lot of administrations violating the law, but when it came to Alaska, Joe Biden violated the law every day almost.

So this is a quote from Secretary Haaland. Despite the law--she was a former Congresswoman--saying you have got to develop this--shall, must, Congress is telling you--she said that ``with today's action'' on an Executive order ``no one will have the rights to drill'' in this area.

Whoa. Well, that is pretty darn illegal when the Congress said: No, you have do that.

So it is not just me saying that. In 2025, after litigation by the State of Alaska against the Biden administration, one of our Federal judges in Alaska, Judge Gleason, wrote that the ``Federal Defendants'''--that is the Biden administration--``cancellation of the [ANWAR] leases,'' which they did illegally, ``was not in accordance with the law.'' I am quoting the judge. The Department of the Interior error is serious. The Department of the Interior canceled these leases without following congressionally mandated procedure.

So there you go. It is not just me, one Senator, saying that what Joe Biden did was illegal. It was a Federal judge.

This vote today is actually to vindicate the rule of law. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle like to talk about the rule of law a lot. So I certainly hope that we can do that.

To Senator Heinrich, the senior Senator from New Mexico, and his colleague Secretary Haaland, I think they need special recognition on what I would just refer to as hypocrisy, because as soon as that 2017 law was passed saying, ``hey, you can now develop this area,'' the senior Senator from New Mexico led a letter with dozens of Democrat Senators, writing to all the investment banks and all the insurance companies, saying: We are a bunch of Senators. We have a lot of power. Don't invest in Alaska. Don't invest in ANWR--don't.

I mean, I could threaten businesses and stuff. We are a bunch of powerful Senators. Don't do it.

Could you imagine if every Senator in the Senate decided, ``hey, I am going to pick on New Mexico; I am going to make it my point in life to just go after New Mexico, shut down their economy, kill thousands of jobs''? This place wouldn't work at all.

But the senior Senator from New Mexico has made it a career of shutting down my great State. In one of those letters, he said: We have to do this. Shut down Alaska. Don't invest in Alaska.

He is down here on the floor arguing against voting for this CRA because he said we have to ``meet America's climate goals.'' So that is one of his arguments: Let's shut down the great State of Alaska so we can ``meet America's climate goals.''

So here is how I am talking a little bit about hypocrisy. During the time of the Biden administration and these 70 Executive orders--right there, to crush my State, kill thousands of jobs--what was going on with New Mexico, where the senior Senator is from and where Secretary Haaland is from? Well, the press never writes this story. I have given a speech on this many times. It was ``drill, baby, drill'' in New Mexico--``drill, baby, drill.''

You want to talk about climate goals? You want to talk about a climate bomb?

My State barely has 500,000 barrels a day of production. New Mexico, under Joe Biden and Secretary Haaland and the senior Senator from New Mexico, they went from a million barrels a day to 2 million barrels a day, all on Federal lands. Was that hypocrisy or what?

There were 9,366 applications for permits to drill during the first 2 years of the Biden administration. My State got zero from these guys. Over half of all permits to drill on Federal lands in the first years of the Biden administration went to what State? Oh, shoot, New Mexico. ``Drill, baby, drill.'' Climate bomb.

But the senior Senator is going to come down here and continue what he has done throughout his career, which is try to shut down my State. It is outrageous. It is outrageous.

Like I said, New Mexico has increased oil production since 2019 from 1.2 million barrels a day to 2 million barrels a day, all on Federal lands. They are the second most oil-producing and climate-producing State in the country. Last year, the New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee took the tax receipt from all its ``drill, baby, drill'' oil, and do you know what they are doing with the money? Free college, tax cuts, infrastructure, childcare, healthcare, you name it. Yet this guy wants to shut down my State--hypocrite, hypocrite.

Mr. President, let me end with one final point because I heard the senior Senator from New Mexico coming down to say: Well, the Native people really want to keep this area locked up.

That is so wrong. That is not correct at all. It is frustrating as can be when I hear another Senator try to speak on behalf of the Native people I have the privilege of representing. The vast, vast majority of the people who live on the North Slope of Alaska, the Inupiat Natives, they want to develop the resources. Why? For the same reason that New Mexico is giving healthcare and childcare and infrastructure from oil revenues to their people.

I find it very frustrating when I have Senate colleagues, particularly the senior Senator from New Mexico, come down on the floor and say: Well, we have to shut down Alaska. We have to keep them from developing. We will kill thousands of good union jobs. But, hey, don't look. It is ``drill, baby, drill'' in my State--which it is. It has been.

I will submit to the Record the Native voices of my State who want to develop their resources. There are a lot of reasons for that. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle love to talk about how there are poor people of

color, indigenous people, minority communities. But there is a big asterisk--not if it is Native Alaskans, no way. They love to keep them down, keep their economic prospects limited, and take away opportunity.

That is why, Mr. President, I would like to submit this letter for the Record in support of this CRA, in support of this Senate resolution. This is from the trilateral group of the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope. This is the Tribe--all the Tribes on the North Slope of Alaska, right here. They are for it, the North Slope Borough.

I did a townhall and presentation in front of them. That is the borough here, the North Slope Borough. That is the elected officials. Almost all are Alaska Natives. Maybe all of them are Alaska Natives, including the mayor, including the president of the borough--good friends of mine. By the way, that borough, I think, is about the size of Montana. So it is pretty big. And there are the Alaska Native corporations too. This is the trilateral. They say this is a really important Senate resolution.

These are the Native people of my State who live where this action that we are taking here on the Senate floor is going to take place. They are saying this is absolutely critical to their sovereignty, to their economic development, to their cultural heritage. It is a very powerful letter.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record.

There is also what we call the VOICE of the Inupiat, another group similarly situated--all Alaska Natives, all from this area. They were established to speak with a unified voice for the Native people on the North Slope, to preserve the advancement of the Inupiat culture and economic self-determination. All of the members of the board of directors of this organization unanimously support this resolution.

I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record.

Finally, Mr. President, it is important to know that the Trump administration is also fully supportive of our Senate resolution in terms of this CRA. This is a statement of administrative policy, where it States:

The Administration strongly supports passage of H.J. Res.

131.

I ask unanimous consent to have that statement printed in the Record.

Why do our Alaska Native people so strongly support this CRA and the one that we did on the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska a couple of weeks ago? Why? I talked about this many times, but I am going to do it again because it is really important. Yes, it is jobs. Yes, it is economic self-determination. All of those are really important. It is having the Federal Government actually work with them and listen to them.

By the way, on the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, Biden shut down. The Native people from the Tribe, from the ANC, from the Bureau came to Washington, DC, eight times. They flew 4,000 miles, eight times, to meet with Secretary Haaland to say to her: Don't do this. We are the people of the region. We are the Native people of the region. Don't issue this regulation that is going to lock up opportunities for us, going to lock up healthcare, going to lock up healthier living.

And you know what? She never even met with them. She never met with them. They flew here eight times, and she never even met with them. Talk about canceling Native voices.

But why does it matter? Well, I think this chart explains a lot. I have brought it on the Senate floors many times, but it bears repeating. I want my colleagues--I want the senior Senator from New Mexico, as his State spends billions of dollars from their ``drill, baby, drill'' oil revenues, climate bomb revenues--that is fine for them, right? I have nothing against that. But I do when that State is doing it, and then they try to shut down my State. He leads the charge, by the way, almost every time, which really frustrates me.

Here is a really important study from the American Medical Association, from 1980 to 2014--so a 25-year period. It said: Let's look at America, and where are people's lives increasing, and where are people's lives decreasing?

That is horrible. We don't want that as Americans.

So when you look at this chart and you see a kind of yellow, orange, and red, those are actually places where the life expectancy of American citizens went down. That is very unusual for us. We don't want that. Unfortunately, that has been in places like West Virginia, Southern Ohio. That is primarily opioid epidemic stuff, which is horrible.

Then, where has life expectancy increased? You see the green, blue, and then purple. The increases are dramatic. It is 13 years where the purple places are. Well, guess which State increased life expectancy the most over that period, from 1980 to 2014: Alaska. Guess which parts of Alaska: the parts with predominantly Native populations--the North Slope Borough, Northwest Arctic Borough, Aleutian Islands chain, some here in southeastern Alaska. Life expectancy went up by 13 years.

I have said this many times when I am debating my Democratic colleagues. Give me an indicator of policy success more important than that the people you are representing are living longer. There isn't one. No one ever came to me and said: Here is better. We are putting out less emissions.

That is not a better indicator of policy success.

So the people of my State, particularly in the North Slope Borough region, Northwest Arctic Borough region, Aleutian Islands chain region--they are living longer. That is great. Everybody should applaud that.

Why do you think they are living longer? Here is why they are living longer. It is responsible resource development. On the North Slope, starting around 1980, we discovered and started developing the largest oil field in North America, Prudhoe Bay. In the Northwest Arctic Borough, they discovered and started developing the biggest lead-zinc mine on the planet.

By the way, this is all great for America. It makes us stronger. But it is really great for the people of the region.

In the Aleutian Islands chain, because of Federal law, the Magnuson- Stevens Act, we started developing our own fisheries--American fisheries--out to the 200-mile limit. In all of these areas, people started living longer. Why? They got good jobs. They got revenues for schools, for health clinics, for running water and flushed toilets. A lot of these places don't even have running water and flushed toilets. Yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are going to block this kind of development.

For the senior Senator from New Mexico, his State is ``drill, baby, drill,''--2 million barrels a day. They are now using that oil money for everything under the Sun--infrastructure, childcare, healthcare-- but for Alaska, no way. We are going to shut you down.

Do you know what? You are going to actually make the people I represent not live as long.

So that is why I come down to the Senate floor. I get a little bit hot under the collar because I just see this blatant hypocrisy on the other side. I just need one Democrat beyond Senator Fetterman to vote with the people of Alaska, the Native people--for their livelihoods, for an increase in how long they live. That would be a courageous vote. That would be the right thing to do.

I hope that all of my Republican colleagues will stand strong with us on voting yes on this important resolution, and I hope that maybe one or two of my Democratic colleagues will. By the way, they know it is the right thing to do. This resolution will help people live longer. It will help our country be stronger in terms of American energy. It will vindicate the rule of law after Joe Biden and Secretary Haaland blatantly violated it.

I hope all of my colleagues will join me in supporting ``yes'' on this important resolution for the Native people of Alaska, for my State, and for our great Nation.

With that, I yield the floor.

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.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 3426 and the papers with respect to H.R. 3426 be returned to the House of Representatives at their request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 228, S. 2741.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, 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 ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 229, S. 2878.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent 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 ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 230, S. 3022.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent 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 ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions, which are at the desk: S. Res. 507, S. Res. 508, S. Res. 509.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 11 a.m. on Thursday, November 20; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed, and the Senate proceed to the consideration of H.J. Res. 130, with all other provisions of the previous order remaining in effect.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague Senator Blumenthal and the Presiding Officer for his great service. We do know the Marine Corps is part of the Department of the Navy, so we are all related here. I won't say what I used to say to my father, who was a Navy officer, in response to that, but it is an honor to be on the Senate floor here with Senator Blumenthal, my colleague and fellow marine.

You know, there is a lot of frustration going on here in the Senate. We are trying to get this government reopened and pay our workers and people are suffering, but I do think it is also important to switch gears and come down here, in a bipartisan fashion, to agree to S. Res. 124, by Senator Blumenthal and me, on commemorating the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Marine Corps, a truly remarkable milestone by one of America's most remarkable institutions. That happens tomorrow, on November 10--our birthday, the Marine Corps' birthday.

Now, we marines--Mr. President, you know this--take our November 10 birthday very seriously. No matter where marines are anywhere in the world, deployed, they always take time to celebrate the birthday of our beloved Corps on November 10. Everybody in the Marine Corps wishes each other happy birthday.

We also are kind of proud of the fact that we are the only military service that was founded in a bar. Yes, that is true. Tun Tavern in Philadelphia, PA, is where the Marine Corps was founded.

At our celebrations, we do a lot. They are great celebrations. If you haven't been to one, anyone watching, I encourage you to go to a Marine Corps birthday ball. You will have the time of your life. You will come away filled with a sense of patriotism and pride whether you served in the military in the Marine Corps or not. You will love it.

At these birthday celebrations, we, of course, as Senator Blumenthal mentioned, remember our fallen. We recommit ourselves to keeping the marines the world's finest fighting force, which it is and has been for decades. We take time to recognize not just the marines present but, in particular, the oldest and youngest marines present.

We have a very solemn cake-cutting ceremony. In fact, after the birthday cake is cut with a Mameluke sword, the guest of honor presents the first piece of cake to the oldest marine present, and then he hands that piece of cake off, after he takes a bite, to the youngest marine present, signifying the passing of heritage and culture and tradition from one generation to the other.

Last night, there were two special Marine Corps balls that I cared a lot about. One--the one I really care about--was in Anchorage, AK, hosted by Delta Company, 4th Law Enforcement Battalion. I was very honored and set to be there as a guest of honor last night. This is the Alaska Marine Corps ball. We have such a great time. I have been going to that ball for years with my wife, my daughters, friends, fellow marines. Alas, given the work we are doing here in the Senate to reopen the government, I was not able to attend--a huge disappointment for me. I really, really wanted to be in Alaska with my fellow marines and my family.

There was also another Marine Corps ball last night. It was actually in DC here, the Commandant's ball. At the last minute, I thought, hey, if I can't be in Anchorage, I am going to at least celebrate the 250th with the Commandant, some top generals, top enlisted marines, a couple of my Senate colleagues--Senator Ernst and Senator Daines. Vice President JD Vance was a guest of honor. By the way, he is the first marine Vice President ever, so he got a lot of shouts and recognition last night.

But the marine who stole the show last night was the oldest marine, Cpl Nils Mockler--99 years old; born in 1926; Iwo Jima combat marine, D1; looking as strong as he did when he was an 18-year-old corporal storming the beaches of Iwo Jima. Last night, he was there. The place went nuts when he was recognized--a 5-minute standing ovation for this great American hero. What a moment.

Finally, at every Marine Corps birthday ball throughout the world for the last hundred years, this message that I am going to read right now is read. It is the message delivered to the marines on the birthday of the Marine Corps by the Commandant of the Marine Corps.

The 13th Commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. John Lejeune, in 1921 issued this message, and ever since then, since 1921, every single Marine Corps birthday celebration for over a hundred years has had this proclamation read. It was read last night in Anchorage; it was read last night in DC; and for the Marine Corps balls today and tomorrow on November 10, it will be read there. Here is what it says--remember, this is from 1921, but it kind of gives you a sense of how we feel about our illustrious Corps. It is a message from the Commandant of the Marine Corps, republished in the U.S. Marine Corps Manual, edition 1921:

On November 10, 1775, a Corps of Marines was created by a

resolution of the Continental Congress. Since that date many

thousand men have borne the name Marine. In memory of them it

is fitting that we who are marines should commemorate the

birthday of our corps by calling to mind the glories of its

long and illustrious history.

The record of our corps is one which will bear comparison

with that of the most famous military organizations in the

world's history. During 90 of the 146 years of its existence

the Marine Corps has been in action against the Nation's

foes. From the Battle of Trenton to the Argonne, marines have

won foremost honors in war, and in the long eras of

tranquility at home generation after generation of marines

have grown gray in war in both hemispheres, and in every

corner of the seven seas that our country and its citizens

might enjoy peace and security.

In every battle and skirmish since the birth of our corps

marines have acquitted themselves with the greatest

distinction, winning new honors on each occasion until the

term marine has come to signify all that is highest in

military efficiency and soldierly virtue.

This high name of distinction and soldierly repute we who

are Marines today have received from those who preceded us in

the corps. With it we also received from them the eternal

spirit which has animated our corps from generation to

generation and has been the distinguishing mark of the

marines in every age. So long as that spirit continues to

flourish marines will be found equal to every emergency in

the future as they have been in the past, and the men of our

Nation will regard us as worthy successors to the long line

of illustrious men who have served as ``Soldiers of the Sea''

since the founding of the corps.

Mr. President, you have heard that before. That is the message of the Marine Corps birthday from the Commandant of the Marine Corps, John Lejeune, issued in 1921. Every marine hears this every year, and it is still incredibly relevant.

I want to thank Senator Blumenthal again for leading this effort on the 250th birthday resolution that we are going to pass here in the Senate in commemoration of the Marine Corps' founding.

We have a long tradition of being the service that is most ready when our Nation is least ready.

Again, to all the marines out there, ``Semper Fi,'' happy birthday, and here is to 250 more years for our Corps.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, thank you to my colleague from Wisconsin Senator Johnson. I have been proud to work with him on this bill over the last couple weeks.

The way this came to the floor--Senator Johnson and I were making the case in the conference. I had a bill that actually was a bill about paying our troops. Imagine that--we want to pay our military during a shutdown, including the Coast Guard.

Senator Johnson came to me and said: Dan, I have a broader bill. Let's pay everybody who is required to work to keep us safe in America.

I said: Great idea. Let's do it.

So this is the Shutdown Fairness Act. Senator Johnson already talked about what it does. It is very, very simple. If you are required to work because your job is important--primarily because you are keeping Americans safe--then you should be paid.

We have a great example right here. All these Capitol Police officers right now keeping us safe right here in the Capitol--they are not getting paid. Air traffic controllers and TSA are keeping us safe right now in America. Senator Cruz is going to talk about what they have been going through. They are not getting paid. They should be paid. Of course, our military. President Trump has worked magic to keep them getting paid, but that is going to run out soon.

So this is a very simple bill. There is nothing more American than paying people for their hard work, especially when the Federal Government is requiring them to work.

So what happened?

Oh, by the way, Senator Johnson mentioned that it is well over 200 groups now. I have a long list of public employee unions, the Teamsters, private sector unions--all kinds of organizations across America are saying to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Pass the short-term CR but also pass this bill.

So what happened? When we worked this 2 weeks ago, there were a number of Democrat Senators who came to us and were very interested in doing that because it makes sense. How could you not be interested in doing it?

We can negotiate healthcare and these other issues, but the men and women in the Federal Government who are working without a paycheck--you have been hearing stories about the FAA guy driving an Uber because he has to feed his family. He is not getting paid. And he has a really important job as an air traffic controller.

So we thought our bill was going to pass. A number of Democrat Senators were like: Hey, we agree with this.

That was 2 weeks ago. So what happened? Here is what happened--the same thing that has been happening every night. The minority leader, Senator Schumer, and the Democratic leadership are pressuring the other Democrat Senators: Don't do it. Don't do it.

The pressure comes on them. It is happening right now. The pressure comes on.

Don't do it. We have to make sure the left wing of the party is happy.

You heard Senator Schumer recently, that ``we are winning the shutdown.'' I will tell you who is not winning the shutdown--by the way, I have no idea who he is talking about when he says ``we,'' but I will tell you who is not winning the shutdown: the men and women in America who work for the Federal Government who aren't getting a paycheck and are required to work.

So that is what happened last time. Senate Democrats were going to vote for our bill, and the leadership on the Democratic side, because they want to use these people as leverage, convinced them, pressured them not to vote for it.

So I hope my Democrat colleagues, at least nine of you--actually, it is eight of you--have the courage to look at your leader and go: You know what, Chuck, sorry. I am going to pay the marines. I am going to pay the Navy. I am going to pay the FAA. I am going to pay TSA. And we are certainly not going to use them, as Senator Johnson said, as pawns.

Right now, they are being used as pawns.

So here is the deal. To my Democratic colleagues, 2 weeks ago, a number of you were going to do this--we had discussions--and then you kind of got pressured to not.

Show some courage. Walk up and vote with us to pay the men and women in America, Federal workers who are keeping us safe and haven't gotten a paycheck. There is nothing more American than that. Have the courage to do it.

I yield back to my colleague from Wisconsin.

I want to thank Senator Johnson for coming to the floor and making this very strong case. It is about safety, and it is about the American way. There is nothing more American than paying people for the work that they do. We all know that.

Again, Senator Johnson's bill is a simple bill. It is about paying the Federal workers who are required to work to keep us safe. All these jobs we are talking about are jobs that keep the American people safe.

Of course, the military is a big part of this bill. They epitomize the Federal workers who are keeping us safe, and they epitomize courage. So do many of our Federal workers as well. I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle just show a little bit of the courage that our military displays every day all over the world--just a tiny bit of that courage.

Again, to my Democratic colleagues, we know you are getting a lot of pressure from your leadership. Senator Cruz did a great job explaining the origins of that. By the way, it has nothing to do with healthcare. It has nothing to do with anything. It has everything to do with appeasing the far left of the Democratic Party, which is rising. So we get that you are under pressure.

But you all know that voting for this bill is the right thing to do. I know my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. They are good people. As Senator Johnson just said, have a little bit of conscience and a little bit of courage, the kind of courage that our military displays every day, and vote for the Shutdown Fairness Act right now. Every one of you knows it is the right thing to do. I hope you do it.

Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to reject the Biden administration's sweeping plan to lock down nearly half of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska to responsible oil and gas development in contradiction to congressional mandates. I urge my colleagues to support the Alaska delegation's joint resolution of disapproval, S.J. Res. 80, to protect Alaska's rights and future.

The implementation of the Biden administration's National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, NPR-A, Integrated Activity Plan, IAP, Record of Decision, ROD, locks away more than 6 million acres previously made available for responsible oil and gas leasing and restricts infrastructure across 8 million acres--completely undermining the intent of Congress and ignoring the needs and input of local residents. Passing this joint resolution will disapprove this Record of Decision and revert management of the NPR-A back to the previously approved Integrated Activity Plan promulgated during the first Trump administration.

I have long said that Alaskans are some of the foremost conservationists in the world, with a long-standing record of balancing conservation with responsible resource and infrastructure development. Our oil fields on Alaska's North Slope offer a world-class example of what it means to responsibly produce energy in a harsh and demanding environment. The environmentally conscious way in which Alaskans have applied cutting-edge technology is second to none, utilizing ice roads and a winter construction season to minimize impact on Alaska's tundra.

Because of the opportunities provided by oil and gas operations, this industry has provided thousands of good-paying jobs to Alaskans. It has become the primary driver of my State's economy. Oil and gas revenues fund education, essential infrastructure, and community services across the State, making responsible resource development truly a matter of life or death for Alaskans. In 1954, the Interior Department, with the help of the University of Pittsburgh, conducted a study of the health of Alaska Natives. Many of our communities in rural Alaska all had some of the lowest levels of life expectancy in the entire world. Between 1980 and 2014, the average lifespan increased by 13 years across the region, largely due to oil and gas revenue providing the opportunity to install what we consider to be basic and essential community infrastructure. To say these operations have had a positive impact on the local communities is a gross understatement.

The North Slope of Alaska contains some of the greatest hydrocarbon potential of any place on the planet. It is home to the Prudhoe Bay oil field, the largest conventional oil field in North America, which has produced over 13 billion barrels of oil since production began in 1977. On either side of Prudhoe Bay are two Federal areas, one being the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the other being the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, the subject of today's legislation. The U.S. Geological Survey this year reported that half of the estimated undiscovered technically recoverable oil lying below Federal lands was in Alaska, 14 billion barrels of it being on the North Slope of Alaska. Importantly, the North Slope of Alaska is also the ancestral lands of the Inupiat people, who have lived, subsisted, and called the Arctic home for thousands of years. This is an area the size of Minnesota, wholly above the Arctic Circle, with none of the communities connected by a permanent road system, necessitating all supplies needing to be flown or barged in. Like much of rural Alaska, it has some of the highest costs of living anywhere in the Nation.

The discovery of Prudhoe Bay in 1968 could not have come at a more crucial time for the United States, which was right at the height of the Arab Oil Embargo. The barrels of crude oil from Prudhoe and subsequent North Slope discoveries have helped ensure the American people are not held hostage by adversarial powers seeking to use energy as a tool of coercion. The discovery of Prudhoe Bay did not come in a vacuum. In fact, it was long known that the North Slope of Alaska had oil potential. In the early 1900s, as the U.S. Navy began transitioning from coal to oil-burning engines, the Federal Government became increasingly concerned about the supply of oil reserves in the event of war or national emergency. In response, the Federal Government made multiple withdrawals of public land to ensure a stockpile of fuel supplies for the Navy remained available. The largest of these reserves was on the Alaska North Slope and was designated by President Warren G. Harding in 1923 as the Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 4, Alaska.

Following the discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay and the ongoing oil embargo, Congress passed the 1976 Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act, NPRPA, transferring jurisdiction of the Reserve from the Navy to the Department of the Interior and redesignating the area as the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, a 23-million-acre area roughly the size of Indiana. A 1980 amendment to the NPRPA directed the Secretary of the Interior to undertake ``an expeditious program of competitive leasing of oil and gas'' in the NPR-A and also set up revenue sharing provision between the Federal Government and the State of Alaska that prioritized the subdivisions of the State most directly severely impacted by oil and gas development, ensuring the people who live in Alaska could provide for essential services.

While initial interest in the NPR-A was tepid, new oil finds closer to the NPR-A boundaries led to a number of successful lease sales generating millions of dollars in Federal revenues. Among the most successful was the 2016 lease sale, which came following the discovery of the Willow field. The Bureau of Land Management, BLM, estimates the Willow Project will produce 576 million barrels of oil and non-gas liquids over 30 years and generate $5.9 billion in revenue for the Federal Government through 2053.

In 2012, the Obama administration, issued the first integrated activity plan, IAP, addressing management for the entire NPR-A, but only made available 11.8 million acres of the Reserve for oil and gas leasing. Beginning in 2017, during the first Trump administration, the Department of the Interior took steps to revise the IAP and Environmental Impact Statement, EIS, that would strike an appropriate balance of promoting development while protecting surface resources as was required in the NPRPA. In December 2020, BLM released the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan Record of Decision, the culmination of thousands of comments, over a dozen public meetings, and the continuous involvement of the North Slope Borough, the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope, the State of Alaska, and relevant Federal Agencies. The Record of Decision selected an alternative that made available an additional 6.8 million acres, for a total of 18.6 million acres or 82 percent of the NPR-A's subsurface estate, available for oil and gas leasing while ensuring lands were made available for pipelines and other essential oil and gas infrastructure and community infrastructure. The 2020 plan also provided important protections for surface resources, particularly subsistence uses by providing adequate protection for sensitive bird populations and the Teshekpuk and Western Arctic Caribou Herds. All in all, it was a phenomenal achievement by some very dedicated BLM employees and an example of Federal Agencies working hand-in-hand with Alaskans to understand our unique conditions, producing results that protect both our environment and our way of life.

However, following the 2020 election, President Biden announced plans to immediately review all Agency actions taken during President Trump's term, and the Department of the Interior identified the 2020 IAP/EIS as warranting review, one of the 70 Executive actions the Biden administration took targeting Alaska. BLM determined that the existing 2020 IAP/EIS and associated evaluations were adequate, and no additional analysis was necessary for the Department to select a different alternative from the range analyzed. In April 2022, BLM released a new record of decision that selected the No Action Alternative identified in the 2020 IAP that effectively reverted management of the NPR-A back to the Obama administration's 2013 IAP ROD. The Biden IAP greatly expanded special areas within the Reserve, prohibiting leasing on 11 million acres or 48 percent of the Reserve, and prohibited infrastructure on approximately 8.3 million acres. The ROD altered and expanded the Special Areas designated under the NPRPA and established performance-based required operating procedures and lease stipulations that applied to oil and gas leasing and development and to some non-oil and gas activities within the Reserve. It is this sweeping plan by the Biden administration that the passage of this joint resolution would invalidate.

I have long said that when we shut down production in Alaska, we weaken America's hand on the global stage. Every time the Federal Government curtails the production of oil and gas in Alaska, it strengthens the position of OPEC and our adversaries while undermining America's geostrategic leverage, the very outcome Congress sought to prevent by opening up the NPR-A in the first place.

The issuance of Biden's new highly restrictive IAP was widely condemned as egregious by Alaskans. Our entire Alaska congressional delegation slammed the decision as contrary to good science, in contravention of congressional directives in Federal law, and foolish, as the Biden administration implored OPEC+ members to produce more oil. Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy said the plan ``is another sign of the federal government turning its back on Alaska and hampering domestic energy production.'' The Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, ASRC, one of the 12 land-owning Alaska Native corporations created under the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, ANCSA, and representing the interests of more than 13,000 Inupiat shareholders, echoed those concerns. In testimony before the Alaska Legislature, ASRC Vice President of External Affairs Bridget Anderson explained, ``despite our sustained efforts and our willingness to work with the federal government, our perspectives are often drowned out by entities who have no ties to our region nor have any understanding of the nuances of the ANCSA model of indigenous representation. The choice by members of Congress and the administration to overlook our voices is not only frustrating, it is insulting.'' The Alaska Legislature passed a resolution unopposed, sponsored by the legislator representing the North Slope, an Inupiat himself, urging BLM to maximize the area available for oil and gas leasing and development in the NPR-A and to take into account the long history of safe and responsible oil and gas development on the North Slope. All these Alaskan voices were ignored.

Importantly, my joint resolution is supported by the North Slope Regional Trilateral, which is made up of the elected leaders of the North Slope Borough, the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope, which is the regional tribe, and ASRC. The members of the North Slope Regional Trilateral voiced their opposition to the Biden administration's overbearing restrictions during his 4 years in office. Yet, despite their opposition, they were ignored--a repeated offense of the Biden administration, who repeatedly disregarded Alaska Native voices. In fact, North Slope leaders from my State flew thousands of miles eight separate times to DC to request a meeting with Secretary of the Interior Haaland to oppose her lock-up of the North Slope. Eight times, she refused to meet with them. The Trilateral's letter of support for the disapproval resolution notes that the 2022 IAP put in place by the Biden administration imposes ``sweeping restrictions that curtail responsible development, undermine congressional intent, and disregard the well-being of the people who depend on these lands for both subsistence and livelihoods'' and ``disregards the economic needs of North Slope communities, and creates unnecessary obstacles to infrastructure, energy, and community health across the North Slope of Alaska.''

Fortunately, elections have consequences, and on his first day in office of his second term, President Trump signed Executive Order 14153, ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential,'' which called for the rescission of the 2022 Integrated Activity Plan Record of Decision and a reimplementation of the IAP issued by the first Trump administration in 2020. This past summer, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum flew to Alaska and held a townhall on the North Slope with regional leaders and listened to their concerns, showing respect for the Alaska Native people who live there. Under his leadership, he has already advanced steps to rescind Biden's other disastrous restriction on the NPR-A: the 2024 Management and Protection of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska final rule.

In March of this year, Alaska's congressional delegation requested that

the Government Accountability Office, GAO, determine whether the 2022 NPR-A IAP ROD constituted a ``rule'' under the Congressional Review Act, CRA. GAO issued its legal opinion in July, concluding that the 2022 NPR-A IAP ROD is a rule under the Administrative Procedures Act and subject to the CRA and congressional disapproval, the action we are taking with S.J. Res. 80.

Further, this Congress has already taken decisive steps to unlock the NPR-A. In the ``One Big Beautiful Bill Act,'' P.L. 119-21, Congress mandated lease sales to be offered under the same terms and conditions set forth in the 2020 IAP. Passage of S.J. Res. 80 would durably protect against another rogue administration promulgating a substantially similar anti-development management plan for the NPR-A as contained in the 2022 IAP ROD.

In addition to the Trilateral, this resolution of disapproval is supported by the Alaska Support Industry Alliance, the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, the Resource Development Council for Alaska, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, the American Exploration and Production Council, the National Federation of Independent Business, the American Petroleum Institute, Americans for Prosperity, the Alaska Chamber, as well as by the Trump administration.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Congressional Record a letter from the Resource Development Council for Alaska, dated October 30, 2025, expressing strong support for S.J. Res. 80 and H.J. Res. 124.

I urge my colleagues to reject unlawful regulatory overreach, reinforce American energy dominance, uphold Federal law, and listen to Alaska Native voices by supporting the Alaska congressional delegation and voting for this joint resolution of disapproval and rescinding this Record of Decision.